A38584	----	The popes dreadfull curse being the form of an excommunication of the Church of Rome : taken out of the leger-book of the Church of Rochester now in the custody of the dean and chapter there / writ by Ernulfus the Bishop. Ernulf, Bishop of Rochester, 1040-1124. 1681 Approx. 5 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 2 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2007-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A38584 Wing E3241 ESTC R31440 11981773 ocm 11981773 51865 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A38584) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 51865) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 1008:8) The popes dreadfull curse being the form of an excommunication of the Church of Rome : taken out of the leger-book of the Church of Rochester now in the custody of the dean and chapter there / writ by Ernulfus the Bishop. Ernulf, Bishop of Rochester, 1040-1124. 2 p. Printed and are to be sold by L.C. ..., London : 1681. Caption title. Attributed to Ernulf by Wing and NUC pre-1956 imprints. Imprint from colophon. Reproduction of original in the Huntington Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Catholic Church -- Discipline. Excommunication. 2006-11 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2006-11 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2006-12 Mona Logarbo Sampled and proofread 2006-12 Mona Logarbo Text and markup reviewed and edited 2007-02 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion THE POPES Dreadfull Curse . BEING The FORM of an EXCOMMUNICATION OF THE Church of Rome . Taken out of the Leger-Book of the Church of Rochester now in the Custody of the Dean and Chapter there . Writ by Ernulfus the Bishop . BY the Authority of God Almighty the Father , Son and Holy Ghost , and of the holy Canons , and of the undefiled Virgin Mary , the Mother and Patroness of our Saviour , and of all the Celestial Virtues , Angels , Arch-Angels , Thrones , Dominions , Powers , Cherubins and Seraphins , and of the holy Patriarchs , Prophets , and of all the Apostles and Evangelists , and of the holy Innocents , who in the sight of the Holy Lamb are found worthy to sing the new Song , and of the holy Martyrs and holy Confessors , and of the holy Virgins , and of all the Saints , and together with all the holy and Elect of God ; We Excommunicate and Anathematize him or them , Malefactor or Malefactors , — and from the Thresholds of the Holy Church of God Almighty We Sequester them , that he or they may be tormented , disposed and delivered over with Dathan and Abiram , and with those who say unto the Lord God , Depart from us , We know not thy wayes . And as Fire is quench'd with Water , so let the light of him or them be put out for evermore , unless it shall repent him or them , and make satisfaction . Amen . May the Father who Created Man Curse him or them . May the Son who Suffered for us , Curse him or them . May the Holy Ghost who was given to us in Baptisme , Curse him or them . May the holy Cross whom Christ for our Salvation Triumphing over his Enemy ascended . Curse him or them . May the Holy and Eternal Virgin Mary Mother of God Curse him or them . May St. Michael the Advocate of holy Souls , Curse him or them . May all the Angels and Arch Angels , Principalities and Powers , and all the heavenly Host , Curse him or them . May the Laudable Number of the Patriarchs and Prophets , Curse him or them . May St. John the Chief fore-runner and Baptist of Christ , Curse him or them . May St. Peter and St. Pa●l , and St. Andrew , and all other Christs Apostles , tog●ther with the res● of the Disciples and the four Evangelists , who by their Preaching converted the Universal World , Curse him or them . May the holy and wonderful Company of Martyrs and Confessors , who by their holy Works are found pleas●ng to God Almighty , Curse him or them . May the holy Quire of the Holy Virgins who for the Honour of Chirst have despised the things of the World , Curse him or them . May all the Saints who from the beginning of the World to Everlasting Ages are found to be the Beloved of God , Curse him or them . May the Heavens and Earth , and all the holy Things remaining therein , Curse him or them . May him or them be Cursed where ever he or they be , whether in their House or in their Field , or in the High way , or in the Path , or in the Wood , or in the Water , or in the Church . May him or them be Cursed in Living ; in Dying , in Eating , in Drinking , in being Hungry ▪ in being Thirsty , in Fasting ▪ in Sleeping ▪ in Slumbring , in Waking ▪ in Walking ▪ in Standing , in Sitting , in Lying , in Working , in Resting , in Pissing , in Shitting , in Blood-letting . May he or they be Cursed in all the Faculties of their Body . May him or them be Cursed inwardly and outwardly . May he or they be Cursed in the hair of his or their head . May he or they be Cursed in his or their Brain . May he or they be Cursed in the top of his or their Head , in their Temples , in their Forehead , in their Ears , in their Eye-browes , in their Cheeks , in their Jaw-bones , in their Nostrils , in their fore-Teeth or Grinders , in their Lips , in their Throat , in their Shoulders , in their Wrists , in their Arms , in their Hands , in their Fingers , in th●ir B●●ast , in their Heart , and in all the interior parts to the very Stomach ▪ In their Reins , in the Groins , in the Thighs , in the Genitals , in the Hips , in the Knees , in the Legs , in the Feet , in the Joynts , and in the Nayles . May he or they be Cursed in all their Joynts , from the top of the Head , to the sole of the Foot : May there not be any Soundness in him or them . May the Son of the Living God with all the Glory of his Majesty , Curse him or them ; and may Heaven with all the Powers which move therein , rise against him or them to Damn him or them , unless it shall repent him or them , or that he or they shall make Satisfaction . Amen , Amen . So Be it . THE Publication of this is to shew what is to be Expected from the Pope , if he come to be Supream Head of the Church in this Nation . London , Printed and are to be Sold by L. C. on Ludgate-Hill . 1681. 
A56165	----	Foure serious questions of grand importance, concerning excommunication and suspension from the Sacrament propounded to the Reverend Assembly and all moderate Christians to prevent schismes, and settle unity among us in these divided times / by a lover both of peace and truth. Prynne, William, 1600-1669. This text is an enriched version of the TCP digital transcription A56165 of text R212447 in the English Short Title Catalog (Wing P3959). Textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. The text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with MorphAdorner. The annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). Textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. This text has not been fully proofread Approx. 14 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 3 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. EarlyPrint Project Evanston,IL, Notre Dame, IN, St. Louis, MO 2017 A56165 Wing P3959 ESTC R212447 12362205 ocm 12362205 60273 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A56165) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 60273) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 222:23 or 2176:13) Foure serious questions of grand importance, concerning excommunication and suspension from the Sacrament propounded to the Reverend Assembly and all moderate Christians to prevent schismes, and settle unity among us in these divided times / by a lover both of peace and truth. Prynne, William, 1600-1669. [4] p. s.n., [London : 1644?] Caption title. Attributed to William Prynne. Cf. BM. Imprint suggested by Wing. Item at reel 2176:13 incorrectly identified as Wing P3960. Reproductions of original in Harvard University Libraries. eng Excommunication -- Early works to 1800. A56165 R212447 (Wing P3959). civilwar no Foure serious questions of grand importance, concerning excommunication, and suspention from the Sacrament; propounded to the Reverend Assem Prynne, William 1645 2340 14 0 0 0 0 0 60 D The rate of 60 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the D category of texts with between 35 and 100 defects per 10,000 words. 2002-03 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2002-04 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2002-05 TCP Staff (Michigan) Sampled and proofread 2002-05 John Latta Text and markup reviewed and edited 2002-06 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion Foure serious Questions of Grand Importance , Concerning Excommunication , and Suspention from the Sacrament ; propounded to the Reverend Assembly , and all Moderate Christians , to prevent Schismes , and settle Unity among us , in these divided Times ; by a Lover both of Peace and Truth . THe businesse of Excommunication , and Sequestration from the Sacrament , now in publike Agitation , is a matter of great moment , much difficulty , and very circumspectly to be handled , established , to prevent Prophanation and Scandall on the one hand ; and Arbitrary , Tyranicall , Papall Domineering over the Consciences , the spirituall Priviledges of Christians , on the other ; which will necessarily follow , if it fall into indiscreet , over-severe , ambitious , passionate or revengefull hands , as we felt by wofull experience under the Papacy and Prelacy : ( Nam paucis res illa tutò committi potest : Mox solet subrepere Dominandi studium , & sub praetextu Pietatis suunt paenas ob privata odia , aut Dogmata , vel Talia ; as (*) Aretius well observes ; who debating this question ; An hodiè restitui possit Excommunicatio ? Resolves thus . Sunt qui disciplinam hanc etiam hodiè reducere velint , in eamque rem toti incumbant ; Alii in eo videntur desperare : Et quanquam despera●dum non putem , tamen perquam arduum judico , nec non impossibile praesentibus moribus , col●a submittere ejusmodi disciplinae : For which among other reasons , he renders this . Accedunt exempla corum , qui idem conati , cum risu destitêre , aut quibus pessimè cessit : magno studio in Germaniae quibusdam ecclesiijs instituta fuit ; sed cecidit in spongiam natus ridiculus mus : as some feare it nay now do among us , unles it be setled with great wisdome , caution , moderation , certainty , and as little as possible herein left to any mans discretion ; The serious consideration whereof hath induced me to propound these ensuing Questions to our Venerable Assembly , and all other moderate Christians , who ought in all things ( especially in this ) to avoyd Extreames , and the seeming affectation of any greater lording power over the Consciences or Priviledges of their Christian Brethren , then of right belongs unto them ; least they approve that in , or usurpe that to themselves , which they have so vehemently heretofore declaimed against in , denied to , and quite taken away from the Pope and Prelates . 1. Whether Mathew 18. 16. 17. Let him be to THEE , ( not to the whole Church , and all others ) as a Heathen , and a Publican , ( meant only of personall privat trespasses betweene man and man , not publique scandalous sins against the Congregation , as is cleare by v : 15. If thy Brother shall trespasse against THEE , &c. not the Church : and Lu. 17. 3. 4. ) Or 1. Cor. 5. 5. 11. 1. Tim. 1. 20. To deliver such a one to Satan , &c. with such a one no not to eat , &c. be properly meant of Excommunication , or suspention from the Sacrament only ? And what warrant there is in Scripture for Ministers or others to suspend men from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper only , and not from the Congregation and all other publique Ordinances , together with it ? since 1. Cor. 5 7. 9 13. Iohn 9. 22 32. 33 chap. 12 , 42 , chap. 16. 2. 2 Thes. 3 , 14. 2 Iohn 16. 11. 3 Iohn 10. Numb. 12. 14. Deut. 23 1 , 2 , 3 with all other Scriptures alleaaged for the proofe or practise of Excommunication ; speake only of putting , casting out , and excluding men wholly from the Congregation , Syragogue , and all publique Christian Communion ; but not one of them of excluding , or suspending men only from the Sacrament , and not from 〈◊〉 publique Ordinances , as Prayer , Preaching , and the like : And since in the primitive times , ( is is evident by Tertulians Apollogy : c. 39. De Paenitentia Lib. and others ) scandalous persons , were ever excommunicated and wholy cast out of the Church ( extra Gregem dati ) not barely sequ●stred from the Sacrament : Whence all the Canonists and Schoole-men determine : (b) Excommunicatus non possit interesse divinis Officiis in Ecclesia , vel extra cum aliis : and define Excommunication to be , An Ecclesiasticall censure , which deprives a man from the Communion of the Church , Sacraments , and all publike Ordinances : and A●etius defines it , to be , A●icuius professi Religionem nostram , à consortio fidelium , in sacris et prophanis rebus exclusio , &c. which excludes men totally from the Church , and all publique Ordinances , not from the Sacrament only . 2. By what Divine Authority or Scripture Text , can any Minister lawfully keepe backe any Christian from the Sacrament , ( not actually Excommunicated and cast out of the Church for some notorious scandall upon a legal Conviction ) who earnestly desires to receive it , though in his owne private judgment hee deemes him unfitting or unworthy ? since we read of no circumcised person in the old Testament , ever debarred from the Passeover by the Priests , that was willing or desirous to eat it , though perchance not altogether so prepared to ea●e it , as God requi●ed , Exod. 12. 3. 4. &c. 44 , to 58. 2 Chron. 30. 13. to 21. Since Christ himselfe admitted Iudas to it , though he knew him to bee a Devill , a Traitor ; Iohn 6. 70. 71. as is cleare by Math. 26 20. to 31 Mar : 14. 18. &c. Luke 22. 14 &c. Iohn 13. 31. And since Paul in the 1. cor. 11. 20. to 36 : usurped no other Authority to himselfe , nor gave any power to others , to keep unworthy receivers from the Sacrament , but only admonished them of the danger of unworthy receiving , and thereupon advised every Receiver , to examine HIM SELFE before hee came to receive ? And whether the Minister by admonishing his Flock , of the danger of unworthy receiving , and seriously dehorting such as hee deemes unworthy not to receive the Sacrament til they become more fit to participate , under paine of eating and drinking their owne damnation , and other judgments that will ensue thereon , hath not thereby discharged his full duty and conscience , as this text of the Corinths . Ezech. 33. 1. to 10. Acts 20. 26. 27. with the Liturgyes of our own and the French Churches , in their Exhortations before the Sacrament , both intimate and resolve ? 3. Whether the unprofitable , and unworthy hearing of the word , be not as great , as dangerous , as damning a sinne , as the unworthy receiving of the Sacrament , as Math. 10. 14. 15. Mar. 16 , 15 , 16 , Luk 8. 18 Heb 2 1 , 2 , 3. c. 3. 7 , 8 , 1● . c. 6. 6. 7. 8 : assert ? Whether Ministers upon the selfe same grounds and pretences ( of partaking of other mens sins , of being guilty of their damnations , of not giving holy things to Dogges and casting Pearles before Swine ; Math. 7. 6. meant principally of preaching the Gospell to such as shall contemne it , not of the Sacrament , as is cleare by Math : 10 , 14 , Mar. 16 , 15. 16. Acts 13 46 , 51 ) may not as well keepe their people from preaching of the word , and refuse to preach unto them , least it should not profit them for want of faith , Hebr. 4 2. but increase , or aggravate their sins , and become unto them the Savour of death unto death , 2 Cor 21 5. 16 Iohn 12 : 4● . as from the Sacrament ? And what substantial difference they can produce , warranted by Scripture , why they may not deny to preach the word to such Christ●ans whom they deeme unprofitable under , or unfit to heare it , as the Sacrament to those whom they judge unmeet to receive it ? 4. Whether , seeing God only knowes the Secrets of all mens hearts , and who are his , 2 Chron. 6. 30. 2 Tim. 2. 19. not Ministers ; who may oft times deeme those Worthy Communicants , who are not ( as close Hypocrites , &c. ) and those unworthy who are not , 1 Samuel 16. 5. to 14. S●eing hee can sodainly change notorious sinners hearts , lives , and bring them to repentance in a moment , before Ministers can take reall notice of it , Act. 9. 3. to 28. Seeing wee must not censoriously judge one another , because wee fall or stand to our owne Master , Matth. 7. 1. Luk. 6. 37. Rom. 14. 4. to 15. Seeing none must quench the smoking flax , nor breake the bruised Reed , nor discourage weake Christians by overmuch rigor , or indiscretion , Matth. 12 20. Rom 14. Seeing every Communicant is bound to examine HIMSELFE , which he best knowes , ( not others peremptorily to examine him ) 1 Cor. 11. 27. 28 , 29. 2 Cor. 13 5. Gal. 6. 4. 5. And every man is only to beare his owne sinne , not anothers , in which he is no partaker , Gal 6. 4. 5. Ezec. 33. 1. to 10. Ezec. 18 4 to 21. And seeing every Christian when he is invited to the Sacrament , is bound under paine of sin and contempt to receive it , 1 Cor. 11. Heb. 10. 29. Whether can any Minister in point of Conscience refuse any Christian , not actually excommunicated , the Sacrament , if he desires to receive it , in case hee professe his sincere repentance for his sins past , and promise newnesse of life for time to come , though in his own private opinion , he may chance to judge him a person unfit or unworthy to communicate ? If yea , let him shew his charter for it in Scripture : This I am certain hee cannot doe : If he alleage , hee cannot do it in point of Conscience , because hee should bee paraker of his sin , if he eate and drink damnation by unworthy receiving : The Apostle resolves the contrary ; that hee eates and drinkes damnation only to HIMSELFE , not to the Minister , or the other Communicants ; that he shall only beare his own burthen , and give an account of himselfe to God , Gal. 6. 4 , 5. Rom. 14. 12. And the administration being onely the Ministers act , which is a holy and divine institution , the unworthy participation the parties owne iniquity , ( as is his unworthy hearing , praying &c. ) not the Ministers ; it can no more involve the Minister in the guilt of it , then his unprofitable hearing ; of which no Minister holds himselfe guilty , who with care and conscience faithfully dispenceth the Word unto his Auditors , Eze. 33. 1. to 10. Acts 20. 26. 27 ; which (*) Lucas Osiander proves at large against the Anabaptists . Seeing therfore there is as much danger to peoples Soules in their unworthy , unprofitable hearing of the word , as receiving of the Sacraments ; and since Ministers are and may be unto God a Sweet savour of Christ , as well in them that perish , by unworthy receiving the Sacrament as in them that are saved , by worthy participation thereof ; as they are in the preaching of the Gospell , 2 Cor. 2. 14 , 15 , 16. I cannot discerne any shadow of reason , why any godly Ministers should over-earnestly contest for such a large or unlimited Ecclesiasticall power , to exclude their Christian Brethren from the Sacrament ( when not actually excommunicated from the Church and other Ordinances ) as some pretend to ; much lesse , why any of them should resolve to give over their Ministery to which Christ hath called them , in case they cannot obtaine such a power from the Parliament , as neither Christ , nor his Apostles , nor the Primitive Christians in the purest times did ever exercise ; or why any shold forwardly seperate from our Church , in case such an unlimited arbitrary power be not established in our new Presbiteries , as our very Lordly Prelats never durst to claime . Moderata durant . Wherefore my earnest request to all Ministers and people shall be , to rest fully satisfied with such a limited Iurisdiction in this kind , as our Honourable , Parliament upon serious debate , shall in their Piety and Wisdom thinke meete to settle , for the prevention of scandall , Prophanesse in the people , of Tyranny and oppression of mens consciences in the Presbytery ; the only desirable boundary betweene these two Extremities , which must be avoyded with all speciall care . FINIS . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A56165e-30 (*) Theologiae Problemat , Locus , 112. De excommunicatione , p. 340. (b) 〈…〉 (*) E●chi●dian Contro . ver. ●um Anabap. De Ecclesia . c. 6. Quaest. 3. 
A47967	----	A letter concerning the matter of the present excommunications Owen, John, 1616-1683. 1683 Approx. 36 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 19 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2005-12 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A47967 Wing L1353 ESTC R9567 13111182 ocm 13111182 97647 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A47967) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 97647) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 744:22) A letter concerning the matter of the present excommunications Owen, John, 1616-1683. [2], 34 p. Printed for Benjamin Alsop ..., London : 1683. Errata: prelim. p. [2]. Attributed to John Owen. Cf. NUC pre-1950. Reproduction of original in Huntington Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Excommunication. 2005-03 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2005-04 SPi Global Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2005-05 Mona Logarbo Sampled and proofread 2005-05 Mona Logarbo Text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-10 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A LETTER Concerning the MATTER of the PRESENT Excommunications LONDON : Printed for Benjamin Alsop , at the Angel and Bible in the Poultry , over-against the Church . 1683. ERRATA . Page 5. line 17. read these Excommunications . p. 10. l. last . r. this Work. p. 11. l. 17. for by them r. to them . p. 13. l. 1. for by r. in . p. 20. l. 6. r. demands . l. 16. for this r. the. p. 27. l. 5. for these Ordinances , r. these Excommunications from those Ordinances . p. 32. l. 11. r. as much as . A LETTER Concerning the Matter of the Present EXCOMMUNICATIONS . SIR , YOU judg aright , That at my last being in London , I did consider the unusual hurry of Excommunications against those called Dissenters ; and because of the novelty of the proceedings therein , I did moreover endeavour my own satisfaction , as unto the design , causes , and ends of them : And I found it a thing easily attainable , without difficulty , or curiosity of enquiry . For whereas there is no covering of Religion , nor any thing appertaining thereunto , save only a Name or Title cast upon them , they openly discover themselves of what sort they are , and what they belong unto . And among many other indecencies wherewith they are accompanied , one seemed to me to be very notable ; and this is , the collection of whole droves together by Summons and Citations ; then dealing with them in such a clamorous manner as makes a representation of a Publick Market or Fair for chaffering about Souls . But that , I found , which did principally affect the minds of men , was the event which these proceedings do tend unto , and will produce ; and they generally concluded , that they would be highly prejudicial , if not ruinous unto all Trust and Trade , among the peaceable Subjects of the Kingdom . For they said , that if the Commissaries would do as in the old Roman Proscriptions in the time of Sylla , and of the Triumvirate afterward , and set up the Names of all that were to be proceeded against , in Publick Tables , to be exposed to the view of all ; those concerned , might shift for themselves , as well as they could , and the residue of mankind might be at liberty to follow their own occasions ; but whilst they retain an unmeasurable reserve in their own breasts , as unto persons to be ruined by them , so as that they know not whose names , their own , or of those with whom they are concerned , they shall see the next day affixed on the Church Doors , in order unto Excommunication , it deprives them of all repose in the Law of the Land , or Publick Justice , and breaks all their Measures about the disposal of their Affairs . How far this is already come to pass , you that are in the place , know better than I ; but sure I am , that the very Rumor of it gives a general discomposure unto the minds of Men. Hearing no other discourse of these things , I was somewhat surprized with your Letter , wherein you required my thoughts what influence these Excommunications may have on the Consciences of them who are so excommunicated ; for I did not think there would have any question been made about it : But since you are pleased to make the enquiry , I shall for the satisfaction of my respects unto you , ( tho as unto any other end I judg it needless ) give you a brief Account of my Judgement concerning these proceedings , which is the same for the substance of it , with that of all sober persons with whom I ever conversed . Excommunication is the Name of a Divine Institution of Christ , wherein , and in whose due and just administration , the consciences of Christians are , or ought to be highly concerned ; And this , as for other causes , so principally because it is the only sure representation of the future Judgment of Christ himself ; he did appoint it for this end , that so it might be . Providential dispensations are various , and no certain Judgment can be made on them , as unto the final and eternal determination of things and causes ; No man knoweth love or hatred by the things of that nature that are before him ; But this is ordained by the Law of Christ to be a just Representation of his future Judgment , with a Recognition of the causes which he will proceed upon : Therefore it is divinely instructive , in what he himself will do in the great day ; it is futuri judicii praejudicium : But he will scarcely be thought well advised , who shall send men to Doctors-Commons , to learn the way and manner of Christs Judgment of his Church , with the causes which he will proceed upon . He giveth himself another account of it , Mat. 25.32 . unto the end of the Chapter ; of what he there declares , there is neither name , nor thing found among the men of these practices , which we treat about . The mentioning of them , would be looked on as a sedition against their Authority ; or else make them ashamed , as a thief when he is found : But for any sort of person to undertake the administration and execution of the sentence of Excommunication against others , not making it their design to represent the Judgment of Christ towards impenitent Sinners , is to bid defiance to him and his Gospel . Wherefore no person whatever , wise or unwise , good or bad , can be concerned in the Excommunication , in conscience , or on a Religious account ; I speak not only of them who are forced to suffer by them , but of them also by whom they are administred and denounced : For it is impossible that men should be so far forsaken of all understanding , as to imagine that the proceedings thereins , do belong unto the Gospel , or Christian Religion , any otherwise but as a debasement and corruption of it ; neither is any man ever the less of the Communion of the Church of England , by these Excommunications ; tho he may by force be debarred from some advantages that belong thereunto . Neither is the Communion of any Church to be valued , from which a man may be really and effectually expelled by such means : For this Excommunication is not only null as to the efficacy of its sentence on the account of its mal-administration ; but it is not in any sence that which it is called , and which it pretends to be . Idols are called Gods , but we know they are nothing in the World : So is this proceeding called Excommunication , but is no such thing at all . If a man should paint a Rat , or an Hedg-hog , and write over it , that it is a Lion , no man would believe it so to be , because of its magnificent Title . All that it can pretend unto is a political Engine , used to apply the displeasure of some , upon an accidental advantage , unto them whose ruin they design ; and therein a satisfaction unto Revenge , for discountenancing their supposed Interest . That there is any acting in it of the Authority of Christ , any Representation of his love , care , and tenderness towards his Church , any thing that is instructive in his Mind or Will , any praeludium of the future Judgment , no man I suppose does pretend ; nor I am sure can do so , without reflecting the highest dishonour imaginable on Christ himself , and the Gospel . To make these things yet more evident , and to show how remote the present Excommunications are , from all possibility of affecting the Consciences of any , I shall briefly pass through the consideration of these things , which principally belong unto them , and whereunto all their efficacy is resolved ; and that which first offereth it self , is the Persons by whom they are administred : The truth is , there is such a variety of Scenes in this Tragedy , and such different Actors in it , from Apparitor , with whom it begins , unto the Jailor with whom it ends , that it seems not easie , whom to ascribe the animating power and authority that is in it , unto : But yet on a little consideration the matter is plain enough . The Ministers of the Parishes wherein the Excommunicated persons are supposed to dwell , by whom the sentence of Excommunication is rehearsed out of a Paper from the Court , have no coneernment herein ; for they know nothing of the causes , or reasons of it , nor of the process therein , nor do pretend unto any Right , for the cognizance of them ; nor do for the most part know the persons at all , on whose qualifications alone , the validity or invalidity of the sentence doth depend ; nor can give an account to God or man of what is done , as to right and equity ; and therefore I no way doubt , but that these who are learned and pious among them , do hardly bear the yoke of being made such properties those acts and duties which appertain unto their Ministerial function ; but it is known who they are , who begin the work , and carry on the process of it unto its final execution ; and I shall say no more concerning them , but this alone , That how meet soever they may be for the transaction of Civil Affairs , or for the skilful managing of that work herein , which they suppose committed unto them ; yet as unto any thing wherein conscience may be affected with the Authority of Jesus Christ , they can be of no consideration in it . If any man can but pretend to believe , that our Lord Jesus by any Act , Grant , Law or Institution of his , by any signification of his Mind or Will hath committed , or doth commit , the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven , the power of binding and loosing , of expelling out of , and admitting into his Church , unto these or such persons , he hath assuredly confidence enough to pretend unto a perswasion of whatever he pleases . They do not believe it themselves ; nor among themselves , pretend unto any such thing ; but only a power to execute their own Laws or Canons . They do not judg that any personal , moral or spiritual qualifications , are required unto Ecclesiastical Administrations ; which yet to deny , is to undermine all Religion , without which they may be fit for all Church Duties , who are no better than that Arch-Deacon of Oxford , who being charged with Immoralities in his Conversation , justified himself by the soundness of his faith , affirming that he believed Three Gods in one Person ; and besides he believed all that God himself did believe : Let a man out of interest , or fear , or ignorant superstition , strive never so much to affect his Conscience with the Excommunications of such men , he will never be able to effect it . But be the personal qualifications of those intended , what they please , the Question is , How they came by that Power and Authority herein , which they pretend unto ? They are Chancellors , Archdeacons , Commissaries , Officials , with their Court Attendants , of whom we speak . I confess these horrid Names , with the reports concerning them , and their power , are enough to terrifie poor harmless men , and make them fear some evil from them . But Excommunication is that which no man knows on what grounds to fear , from these Names , Titles , and Offices : For that is the Name of a Divine Ordinance instituted by Christ in the Gospel , to be admininistred according to the Rule and Law thereof ; but these Name , and those unto whom they do belong , are utterly forreign unto the Scriptures , and as unto the Work , to the practise of the Church for a Thousand Years ; what therefore is done by them of this kind , must of necessity be utterly null , seeing that as such , they have no place in the Church themselves by the Authority of Christ. But however it be undeniably evident , that they have no relation unto the Scripture , nor can have any Authority from Christ , by vertue of any Law or Institution of his , nor countenance given unto them by any practise of the primitive Church ; yet what they do in this kind , being pretended acts of Power and Authority , an Authority for them must be pleaded by them : But then it may be justly demanded of them , What it is ? of what nature and kind ? how it is communicated unto them , or derived by them from others ? This is that which those who are Excommunicated by them , are principally concerned to enquire into , and , which themselves in the first place are obliged to declare and evince : Unless men are satisfied in conscience , that those who act against them have just authority so to do , or in what they do , it is utterly impossible they should be concerned in conscience in what is done against them , or be any ways obliged thereby : Here therefore they abide until they are satisfied in this just and necessary demand . But here all things are in confusion ; they can declare neither what Authority is required unto what they do , nor how they come to possess that which they pretend unto . If it be from Christ , how comes it to operate on the outward concerns of men , their Liberties and Estates ? If it be meerly of man , whence do they give the Name , and pretence of a Divine Ordinance unto what they do ? If any should follow the clew in this Labyrinth , it is to be feared that it would lead them into the Abyss of Papal Omnipotency . As they exercise this power in Courts of External Jurisdiction , and forms of Law , they will not deny , I suppose , but that it is from the King ; but why do they not then act that power in the Kings Name ; For what is not done by his Name , is not done by his Authority . Ministers do not preach , nor administer Sacraments in the Name of the King , for they do it not by his Authority , or by Vertue of Authority derived from him ; nor do Parents govern their Children or Families in his Name , but their own ; because Authority for it , is their own by the Law of God and Nature ; but that exercise of Power which externally affects the Civil Rights and Liberties of men , must be in the Kings Name , or the foundations of the Government of the Nation are shaken — But I make it not my concernment what Name or Stile they use in their Courts . Let it be granted for their own security , that they have all their Power and Authority from the King , it must be therewithal granted of what Nature it is , namely , Civil , and not Spiritual , but why then doth what they do , not go under the name of a Civil Order , Constitution , or Penalty , but of an Ordidance or Institution of Jesus Christ ? Are not these things in their own Nature everlastingly distinct ? and is not conscience hereby fully absolved from any respect unto it , as such an ordinance ▪ which in this supposition it neither is , nor can be . It is easily discernable , how these things tend unto the utter confusion of all things in Religion . If it be said , That the Power of it , as it is Excommunication , is originally seated in the Prelates , by virtue of their Office , and is communicated unto this sort of Persons , by Commission , Delegation , or Deputation , under their seals ; it will yield no relief : For this fiction of the delegation of office-power , or the power of office , unto any , without giving them the office it self , whereunto that power belongs , is gross and intolerable . Let it be tried , whether the Bishops can delegate the power of Ministerial preaching the Word , and Administration of the Sacraments , unto any persons , without giving them the office of the Ministry . If Excommunication be an act of office-power , Authority to administer it , cannot be delegated unto any without the office it self , whereunto it doth belong ; for these things are inseparable . I certainly believe it is the duty and concernment of some men , to state proceedings of this nature on better foundations , that the exercise of such solemn duties of Christian Religion be not exposed to utter contempt , nor men led by a discovery of false pretences of Divine Institutions , to despise the things themselves that are so abused . It were easie from many other considerations , to demonstrate the nullity of these mens pretended Authority , with respect unto Excommunication , as it is an Ordinance of the Gospel , in which respect alone , the consciences of men are concerned ; and as unto their power over the Civil Rights and Interests of men , those troubled by them , must shift as well as they can . But yet further , the manner of the administration of the present Excommunications doth evidence their invalidity and nullity . That which they pretend unto , as hath been said , is a Divine Ordinance , an Institution of Jesus Christ ; and this declares in general how it ought to be administred by them who have authority for it , and are called thereunto : For it hence followeth , that it ought to be accompanied with an humble Reverence of him and his Authority , diligent attendance unto his Law , and the Rule of his Word in all things , with solemn reiterated invocation of his holy name , for his Presence , Guidance , and assistance : Where these things are neglected in the Administration of any Divine Ordinances , it is nothing but the taking the Name of God in vain , and the profanation of his Worship . It may be some will despise these considerations ; I cannot help it , they do it at their utmost peril ; it is Conscience alone which I respect in this Discourse ; they who have any such thing , will think these things reasonable . Again , the especial nature of this Institution doth require an especial frame of mind in its administration ; for it is the cutting off of a member of the same body with them , which cannot be without sence and sorrow . To cut off any from a Church , who was never a member of it by his own consent , nor doth judg himself so to be , is ridiculous ; hence St. Paul calls the execution of this censure , bewailing , ( 2 Cor. 12.21 . ) Denominating the whole action from the frame of mind wherewith it ought to be performed ; and he that shall dare to decree or denounce this sentence without sorrow and compassion for the sin , and on the person of him that is excommunicated , plays a game with things Sacred for his advantage , and shall answer for his Presumption . Besides , as was before observed , it is an instituted Representation of the Lord Christ , and his Judgment in , and of the Church at the last day . If the consideration hereof , be once out of the minds of them by whom it is administred , they must unavoidably err in all that they do ; much more if it be never once in them ; but this they ought to take on their souls and consciences , that what they do , Christ himself if present would do , and will do the same at the last day ; for so he will deal with all impenitent sinners , he will denounce them accursed , and deliver them to Satrn . There is undoubtedly required from hence a reverential care and circumspection in all that is done herein : to make a false representation of Christ in these things , that is , his Wisdom , Authority , Holiness , Love , and Care towards the Church , is the worst and most deformed image , that can be set up : What higher indignity can be offered to his Gracious Holiness , than to act and represent him as Furious , Proud , Passionate , Unmerciful , and delighting in the Ruine of those that openly profess Faith in him , and love unto him ? God forbid that we should think that he hath any concern in such ways and proceedings . Whereas also the next end of this Censure is not destruction , but edification , or the repentance and recovery of lapsed sinmers , it ought to be accompanied with continual fervent prayers for this end . This the nature of the thing it self requireth , this the Scripture directs unto , and such was the practise of the primitive Church . If we are Christians , we are concerned in these things as much as we are in the glory of Christ , and the salvation of our own souls . If we only make a pretence of religious Duties , if we only erect an image of them for our own advantage , we may despise them , but at our peril . How well these things are observed in the present Excommunications , is notorious . Once to mention them , is to deserve a second Thunderbolt : An account of them as to matter of fact , will be shortly given ; at present I shall only say , That there is not any transaction of affairs in any kind amongst men civilized , wherein there is a greater appearance and evidence of turbulent passions , acting themselves in all manner of irregularities , more profaness of expression , more insolent insultations , more brawling , litigious proceedings , more open mixtures of money demanded in pretended administrations of Right and Equity , than there are in the publick proceedings about them : Shall any Christian suppose that the Holy Spirit of God , on whom alone depends the efficacy of all Divine Ordinances unto their proper end , will immix his holy Operations in or with this furious exertion of the lusts of men ? If this be looked on as the Complement of Christian Discipline , or the last and utmost actings of this Authority of Christ towards men in this World , it must needs be a temptation unto men of atheistical inclinations : certainly greater scandal cannot be given ; and it is the interest of some , at least for the preservation of a veneration to their Office , to dispose of proceedings in this case , in such a way and manner , as may administer occasion of consideration unto them concerned , and not be carried on as at present , with Laughter , Indignation and Confusion ; and if Dissenters are to be destroyed , it is desired , that the work were left unto the Penal statutes , which as now prosecuted and interpreted , are sufficient for it ; rather than that the name of Religion , and a Divine ordinance , should meerly for that end be exposed to contempt . The last thing that I shall trouble you with at present , is the consideration of the persons against whom the present Excommunications are blustered , with the pretended causes of them . These are they whom they call Dissenters , concerning whom we may enquire what they are , and the cause of this pretended Ecclesiastical severity towards them . And as unto the first part of the enqury , They are such as believe and make open profession of all the Articles of the Ch●istian Faith ; they do so , as they are declared in the Scripture ; nor is the contrary charged on them . There is nothing determined by the ancient Councils to belong unto Christian Faith , which they disbelieve ; nor do they own any Doctrine condemned by them : They profess an equal interest of Consent in the Harmony of Protestant Confessions , with any other Protestants whatever . They own the Doctrine of the Church of England as established by Law , in nothing receding from it ; nor have they any novel , or Uncatholick Opinion of their own . It is therefore utterly impossible to separate them from the Communion of the Catholick Church in Faith ; or to cast them from that Rock whereon they are built thereby . They do also attend unto Divine Worship in their own assemblies ; and herein they do practise all that is agreed on by all Christians in the world , and nothing else ; for they do not only make the Scripture the sole Rule of their Worship , so as to omit nothing prescribed therein to that purpose , nor to observe any thing prohibited thereby ; but their Worship is the very same with that of the Catholick Church in all ages nothing do they omit that was ever used by it , nothing do they observe that was ever condemned by it ; and this must be the principle and measure of Catholick Union in Worship , if ever there be any such thing in the Earth ; to expect it in any other observances , is vain and foolish . Offering Prayers and Praises to God in the Name of Jesus Christ , reading the Holy Scripture , and expounding of it ; singing of Psalms to God , preaching of the Word , with the administration of the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper ; in a Religious Observation of the Lords Day , unto these ends ; all according as God doth enable them by his Spirit , is the Sum and Substance of the Worship of the Catholick Church , wherein all Christians are agreed : These things the Scripture doth prescribe , and these things the Church in all ages hath observed : All differences about this Worship which have filled the World with inhumane contentions , arose from mens Arbitrary Addition of Forms , Rites , Modes , Ceremonies , Languages , Cringings , Adorations , which they would have observed in it , whereof the Scripture is silent , and Primitive Antiquity utterly ignorant — And it may be it will be one day understood , that the due observance of this Catholick Worship , according as God enableth any thereunto , leaving others at liberty to use such helps unto their Devotion , as they shall think meet ; is the only Communion of Worship in the Church , which the Scripture requires , or which is possible to be attained : About the imposition of other things , there ever were , since they were , and ever will be , endless contentions . Wherefore these Dissenters practising nothing in the Worship of God , but what is approved by all Christians , particularly by the Church of England , omitting nothing that either the Scripture or Catholick tradition directs unto , they are , notwithstanding this pretended Excommunication , secure of Communion with the Catholick Church in Evangelical Worship . Moreover , they plead , that their conversation is unblamable ; that they are peaceable in the Civil Government , and useful among their neighbours ; if they do evil in these things , let them that prosecute them , bear witness of the evil ; but if they do well , why are they smitten ? If they can be charged with any immoralities , with any disobedience unto the Rule and Precept of the Gospel ; those by whom they are thus prosecuted , are highly concerned , if not in Conscience , yet in Honour and Interest , to manage the charge against them , that some countenance may be given unto their Proceedings : For the Law is not made ( as penal ) for a righteous man , but for the lawless , and disobedient ; for the ungodly , and for sinners ; for unholy and profane ; and if it be otherwise with the Laws about these Excommunications , they neither belong to , nor are derived from the Law of God. There are indeed great clamours against them , that they are Schismaticks and Separatists , and things of the like nature ; that is , that they are Dissenters : But in this case the whole force of any inference from hence , is built on this supposition , That it is the Will of Christ , that those who profess Faith in him , and Obedience unto him , unblameably , should be excluded from an interest in , and participation of these Odinances of Divine Worship , which are of his own Institution , who will not comply with , and observe such rights and practises in that Worship , as are not so , but confessedly of humane invention . But no colour of proof can be given hereunto ; for it is directly contrary unto express Scripture-Rule , to the Example of the Apostolical Churches , and unheard of in the world , before the branded Usurpation of Victor Bishop of Rome : An Assertion of it , is to prostitute the Wisdom , Authority , and Love of Christ towards his Disciples , unto the wills of Men , oftentimes pre-possessed with Darkness , Ignorance , and Superstition , and other lusts , as shall be more fully manifested , if there be occasion . Let any colour be given unto this supposition from Scripture or Antiquity , and the whole cause shall be given up ; yet thus is it , and no otherwise , in the matter of the present Excommunications ; Persons of all sorts , every way found in the Faith , unreprovable in the Catholick Worship of the Gospel , professing Love and Obedience unto Jesus Christ , without blame , are excluded , what lies in them , who manage these Ordinances , of Divine Worship , which the Lord Christ hath appointed and injoyned , without pretence of any other cause or reason , but only their not observance , in that Worship , of what he hath not appointed . He that can believe this to be the Will of Christ , neither knoweth him , nor his Will as it is revealed in his Word ; and the Consciences of men are sufficiently secure from being concerned in that , wherein such an open defiance is bid unto Evangelical Precepts and Rules , with Apostolical Examples . And further , to manifest the iniquity of these Proceedings , whilst these Dissenters are thus dealt withal , all sorts of Persons , ignorant , profane , haters of Godliness , and openly wicked in their lives , are allowed in the full communion of the Church , without any disciplinary admonition or controul : But as this serves to acquit them from any concernment in what is done against them ; so nothing can be invented that tends more directly to harden men in their sins and impenitency ; for whilst there is a pretence of Church-censures , they will be apt to think , that they are sufficiently approved of Christ and the Church , seeing their displeasure is no way declared against them ; so they are not Dissenters , they have reason to judg that they are safe here , and shall be so to Eternity ; let them look to themselves who deserve to be excommunicated . Is this the Rule of the Gospel ? Is this the Discipline of Christ ? Is this the representation of his future Judgment ? Is this the way and manner of the exercise of his Authority in the Church , a declaration of what he owns , and what alone he disavows ? God forbid that such Thoughts should have any countenance given unto them . Ecclesiastical Laws have been always looked on as cobwebs , that catch the smaller Flies , whilst the greater break them at their pleasure , but amongst those lesser , to spare those that are noxious or poysonous , and to cast the net over the innocent and harmless , is that which the Spider gives no pattern of , nor can imitate . I shall not mention the avowed end and design of these present Excommunications ; only I shall say , They are such , as many good men tremble to consider the horrible prophanation of things sacred , which they manifest to be in them . There are also many other things which evidence the nullity of these Proceedings , which may be pleaded if there be occasion ; what hath already been spoken , is abundantly suffitcien to satisfy my engagement unto you , Namely , That the Consciences of men are not at all concerned in the present Excommunications . It may be it will be said , That all this while we have been doing just nothing , or that which is to no purpose at all , as not concerning the present case ; for these of whom we treat , pretend no power in Foro interiore , or the Court of Conscience , or unto nothing that should immediately affect it . Their Authority is only in Foro exteriore , in the Court of the Church , which it seems is at Doctors Commons : Wherefore by their sentence of Excommunication , they oblige men only unto their outward concernments ; as unto what concerns conscience , they leave that unto the Preachers of the Word : It may be it will be so pleaded ; but before they quit their hands well of this business , they will understand , that Excommunication it self is nothing but an especial way of the application of the Word unto the consciences of sinners , unto their Edification ; and that which is not so , pretend what it will , is nothing at all ; unto the dispensers , therefore , of the Word , it doth alone belong ; and whereas the Apostle tells us , that the weapons of our Christian Warfare , are not carnal , but mighty , through God , to bring into captivity every thought unto the obedience of Christ ; they seem herein to say , that the Weapons of their warfare are carnal , and mighty through the aid of some body , to cast men into prison , or to bring their persons into captivity : And indeed this outward Court of theirs , is part of that Court without the Temple , which is trodden down by the Gentiles , and shall not be measured in the Restauration of the Worship of God ; yea the distinction it self is silly , if any thing be intended by this outward Court , but only the outward declaration of what is , or is supposed to be effected in the inward , or the mind and consciences of men . But let it be what it will ; those who have neither Name , nor Place , nor Office in the Church by Divine Institution , who attend not at all in what they do unto any rule of the Scripture ; nor can , nor do pretend any Authority from Christ , in and for what they do , are no way to be heeded in this matter , but only as the instruments of external compulsion , which for the sake of the publick peace , is to be submitted unto with quietness and patience . I find , I confess , by the books with me , sent us weekly into the Country , that in this state of things some of the Reverend Clergy do manifest great compassion towards the Dissenters , in writing and publishing many discourses containing Persuasives unto , and Arguments for Conformity , whereby they may be freed from their troublesome circumstances : But I must needs commend their Prudence in the choice of the season for this work , as much their Charity in the work it self : For the Conformity they press , needs no other recommendation at this time ; nor need they use any other arguments for it , but only that it is better than being hanged , or kept in perpetual durance , or stifled in Prisons , or beggar'd , they and their Families ; or be starved in Exile . And it hath been always observed , that arguments which march with Halberts , Bills , Staves , Serjeants , Bailiffs , Writs , Warrants , and Capiasses , are very forcible and prevalent . But I have done , and shall leave it unto others to declare what mischiefs do ensue on these Proceedings , on civil accounts , and what an inroad is made by them on the Government of the Kingdom . For a new Tenure is erected by them , whereon all men must hold their birthright priviledges , especially that which is the root whereon they all do grow , namely , their Personal Liberty . They hold them no longer by the Law of the Land , nor can pretend unto security , whilst they forfeit them not by that Law ; they are all put into the power of Chancellors , Archdeacons , Commissaries , and Officials ; they may deprive them of them all at their pleasure , aganst the protection of that Law under which they are born , and which hath been looked on as the only rule and measure of the Subjects Liberties , Priviledges , and Possessions . These things tend not only to the disturbance , but the ruine of all peace and trust amongst men , and of all good Government in the World. And if they should Excommunicate all that by the Law of Christ are to be excommunicated on the one hand , and all that are to be so by their own Law on the other , and then procure Capiasses for them all , it is to be feared , the King might want Subjects to defend his Realms against his Enemies , unless he should do as they did of old at Rome in great distresses , open the Goals , and arm the Prisoners ; or it may be the lesser part would at length find it troublesome to keep the greater in prison . But these things concern not you nor me . I beg your excuse , as not knowing whether you will judg this hasty Writing too little for the Cause , or too much for a Letter . As it is , accept it from FINIS . 
A91138	----	The antidote animadverted, by P. Prynne, William, 1600-1669. This text is an enriched version of the TCP digital transcription A91138 of text R200269 in the English Short Title Catalog (Thomason E301_16). Textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. The text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with MorphAdorner. The annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). Textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. This text has not been fully proofread Approx. 3 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 1 1-bit group-IV TIFF page image. EarlyPrint Project Evanston,IL, Notre Dame, IN, St. Louis, MO 2017 A91138 Wing P3890 Thomason E301_16 ESTC R200269 99861075 99861075 113203 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A91138) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 113203) Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 49:E301[16]) The antidote animadverted, by P. Prynne, William, 1600-1669. 8 p. s.n., [London : 1645] P. = William Prynne. Caption title. Imprint from Wing; foot of page 8, above "Finis", reads: Printed according to order. A reply to "An antidote against foure dangerous quæries" (Wing A3493), which was a reply to Prynne's "Foure serious questions of grand importance" (Wing P3959). Annotation on Thomason copy: "Septemb: 17th 1645". Reproduction of the original in the British Library. eng Chuch of England -- Discipline -- Early works to 1800. Antidote against foure dangerous quæries -- Early works to 1800. Excommunication -- Early works to 1800. Lord's Supper -- Early works to 1800. A91138 R200269 (Thomason E301_16). civilwar no The antidote animadverted,: by P. Prynne, William 1645 553 18 0 0 0 0 0 325 F The rate of 325 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the F category of texts with 100 or more defects per 10,000 words. 2007-06 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2007-06 Aptara Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2008-03 Elspeth Healey Sampled and proofread 2008-03 Elspeth Healey Text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-09 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion strained there is in it much of the letter , plain common reading to be understood see the end of its quoting here , Mat. 12. 20. Christ cha●ged the great multitude that followed him , that they should not make him known , ( He knew fame made his adversaries malice rise , and so indangered his person to their wrath before the time . ) Now for end , a charge from Christ to them now , the Evangelist brings a Text ( Esay 42-beginning ) It 's said by Esay the Prophet ( the mouth of God ) Gods servant , chosen , beloved , shall not strive , nor cry , neither shall any man heare his voice in the streets , a bruised reed shall he not break , and smoking flax shal he not quench , until he bring forth judgment to victory . Which I thus understand , Christ shall not make himselfe known , he sh●ll not strive , neither like a champion with a shout rush on , and overco●…e vide I●…sh . 6. 18. he shall not break a reed already bruised , quench flax already smoking , as a snuf at the extinguishing of a candle , Esay 43. 17. untill he shall judge victoriously . vid. Esay . 42. 4. Rev. 19. 11. 17. Object . 8. If the men would fairely frame that part remaining of the Question into an Objection , it should be thus , H●w Ministers shou'd not c●n●est for such a large and unlimited power to exclude poor Christian brethren from the Sacram●nt , when not actually excommunicated from the Church , and from other Ordinances , as some pretend to , since of Christians receive unworthily , the iniquity ( as your selves bold when any hear the word unworthily , unprofitably ) is their own , not the Ministers . And is this most prophane ? as your Answerer saith the objection is ▪ but I hold the Emperick cals that ( now I minde it ) o●j●ction prophane , which is of his own compounding , which he answers ( briefly ) thus In preaching the word to them who are hardned by it ▪ the Minister seeks and hopes to doe good : but in giving the Sacrament to sc●ndal●…us impenitent persons they know they give that which will certainly bring iudgement . Truly , ( in a word ) the man hath lost the chace , he hath forgot ( or wilfully mistakes changes ) the Question . For the Querist endevours nor ( as is apparant ) to have scandalous sinners and impenitent receive the Sacrament ( he wo●ld have such actually excommunicated from the Church , and from all other ordinances besides and as well as this ) but would have Christian Brethren ( those not excommunicated ) to p●rticipate of this Ordin●nce . Next the Answerer concludes , ( I professe ) like himselfe , as w●nt , he bestows , on his adversary , Antagonist , Pride ; Antechristianisme d●●g●●ous opposition &c. On his arguments , most absurdity , ●●…ationality contrariety to m●nifest truth . And thus Exit like the creatures of billings-gate ashore — Railing . Printed according to Order . FINIS . 
A42764	----	A late dialogue betwixt a civilian and a divine concerning the present condition of the Church of England in which, among other particulars, these following are especially spoken of ... Gillespie, George, 1613-1648. This text is an enriched version of the TCP digital transcription A42764 of text R15751 in the English Short Title Catalog (Wing G753). Textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. The text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with MorphAdorner. The annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). Textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. This text has not been fully proofread Approx. 83 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 23 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. EarlyPrint Project Evanston,IL, Notre Dame, IN, St. Louis, MO 2017 A42764 Wing G753 ESTC R15751 11926352 ocm 11926352 51035 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A42764) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 51035) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 230:E14, no 17) A late dialogue betwixt a civilian and a divine concerning the present condition of the Church of England in which, among other particulars, these following are especially spoken of ... Gillespie, George, 1613-1648. [2], 42 p. Printed for Robert Bostock ..., London : 1644. Particulars spoken of: "1 The sinne and danger of delaying reformation. 2 That there is a certain form of church-government jure divino. 3 That there was an ecclesiasticall excommunication among the Jewes. 4 That excommunication is an ordinance in the New Testament. 5 Concerning the toleration of all sects and heresies. 6 Some answer to a late book come from Oxford." The "late book come from Oxford" is John Maxwell's An answer by letter to a worthy gentleman. Attributed to George Gillespie. cf. NUC pre-1956. Reproduction of original in Thomason Collection, British Library. eng Maxwell, John, 1590?-1647. -- An answer by letter to a worthy gentleman. Reformation -- England -- History -- 17th century. Excommunication. A42764 R15751 (Wing G753). civilwar no A late dialogue betwixt a civilian and a divine, concerning the present condition of the Church of England. In which, among other particular Gillespie, George 1644 15245 255 15 0 0 0 0 177 F The rate of 177 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the F category of texts with 100 or more defects per 10,000 words. 2003-05 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2003-06 SPi Global Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2005-01 Ben Griffin Sampled and proofread 2005-01 Ben Griffin Text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-04 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A LATE DIALOGUE BETWIXT A CIVILIAN and a Divine , concerning the present condition of the Church of ENGLAND . In which , among other particulars , these following are especially spoken of . 1 The sinne and danger of delaying Reformation . 2 That there is a certain form of Church-Government Jure Divino . 3 That there was an Ecclesiasticall Excommunication among the Jews . 4 That Excommunication is an Ordinance in the New Testament . 5 Concerning the Toleration of all Sects and Heresies . 6 Some Answer to a late Book come from Oxford . 1 Thes. 5.21 . Prove all things : hold fast that which is good . Published by Authority . LONDON : Printed for Robert Bostock , dwelling in Pauls Church-yard at the Signe of the Kings Head . 1644. A LATE DIALOGVE Betwixt a Civilian , and a Divine , concerning the present condition of the CHURCH of ENGLAND , &c. Divine . GOOD Morrow to you good Sir . Civilian . I am glad to see you Sir , will you take a walk with me this morning , and tell me what good newes yee have heard , for I have not yet been in Westminster Hall , the place most infected with the Athenian disease . Divine . I can tell you no newes at this time . Civilian . You look as you were not well pleased to day , pray you tell me , have you heard any bad newes from the North or from the West . Divine . None truly , but this I confesse , that though I cannot but allow those who from their affection to the Cause , are inquisitive of newes from severall quarters , and labour to make some good use of what they heare ; yet for mine own part , one thing sticks with me , which suffereth me not either to be so curious in seeking , or so joviall in hearing newes , as many others are . The truth is , I am more afraid and apprehensive of our owne , then of our enemies victories . Civilian . This is a most strange paradox , what can you mean by it ? I hope you are not turned malignant . Divine . If it be Paradoxall , yet I am sure it is Orthodoxall , I remember judicious Calvin said the same of the German warres in his time . There is more danger , said he , like to come by our owne then by our enemies victory . I desire his words may bee well observed , and applyed . I dare say , God is more gracious to us in continuing this war of ours , then if he should answer our desires in putting an end to it presently . When God blesseth our forces with any great successe , nay when hee doth but draw back his afflicting hand a little , and giveth us some lightning of our eyes , O how doe we by and by forget God , and slight both Hu●iliation and Reformation . * Then Iesurum forsook God which made him , and lightly esteemed the rock of his ●alvation . * But , when he slew them , then they sought him , and returned and inquired after God early . There were never serious and deep thoughts , either in the Parliament , or in the Kingdome , of fasting and praying , of covenanting with God , of purging our hearts , our lives , our families , of reforming the Church , according to the word , of building the Temple according to the patterne , of caring for the things of Jesus Christ more then for their own things ; never but when we felt Gods hand smart and heavy upon us . And if now the sword of the Lord should be still , and England a quiet habitation , every man sitting under his own vine , and under his owne figtree : I verily believe our great State-Physitians should heale the wound of the daughter of Sion slightly , and daube the wall with untempered morter , and the Church of God in this Kingdome should have dry breasts , and a miscarrying wombe , instead of bringing forth the manchild of Reformation , now sticking in the birth , but having no strength to come forth , till some new pains and pangs quicken and carry through the work . Civilian . I must confesse the Reformation of our selves and our families hath been , and is still , too much neglected . But for Nationall and Church-Reformation , I doe not know what can be more done then is done , considering our intestine divisions among our selves , which as Mr. Fox observeth was the undoing of the Church and of Religion in King Edwards dayes , and is like to prove the bane of Religion and Reformation in our dayes . Ita dum singuli pugnant universi vincuntur : as Tacitus speaketh of the ancient Brittish . Divine . Sir , I desire that first of all this may be laid downe as a sure Principle , that the purity and liberty of the Gospel , and of the Ordinances of Jesus Christ , is to bee more esteemed of , and sought after then all or any thing in this world . That it is said as well to States and Parliaments , as to particular persons : Seek yee first the Kingdome of God and the righteousnesse thereof , and all these things shall be added unto you . The setling of Religion is to be looked upon , as causall , not as consequent to the peace and prosperity of the Kingdom . Doe but prove the Lord now herewith , and see if he will not appoint salvation for walls and b●●●marks , if he will not honour those that honour him , if he will not be zealous for those that are zealous for him . The Trojans believed that Troy could not be taken except their idoll Palladium were taken away from them which being once taken away by Vlysses and Diomedes , they observed that shortly thereafter their Town was destroyed . Arno●ius tells us that when the I●age of Iupiter was throwne down in the Capitoll , and was lying upon the ground , the heathenish So●th-savers did foretell sad and heavy things which should never be removed till Iupiter were set in his owne place ; whic● i● it were no done , that they did in vain hope for the preservation of the lawes , or the healing of their homebred divisions . Shall those Pagans rise up in judgement against us Christians , who doe so overly and slightly goe about the building of the house of God , and the erecting of the throne of Jesus Christ ; who care for something else more then for his Church and Kingdome , his glory and his ordinances , who seek our owne things , not the things which are Jesus Christs . Civilian . No man can say against this , that true Religion is the Alpha and Omega of a Kingdomes happinesse , and that it is their surest foundation and strongest bullwark of Peace , Liberties , and Lawes . And I trust the Parliament will ever be most tender and carefull of it , and put it in its own place as they have frequently professed in their Declarations , and really manifested in calling and keeping together an Assembly of learned and pious Div●nes , the results of whose debates and consultations t●ey will take to their consideration in due time , for setling the government of the Church , and the worship of God . Divine . If you would really and carefully indeavour , to doe what you professe to intend , I have no more to say , but that the successe is to be committed to God , you having done your duty . But assuredly the practises doe not answer to the professions , nor the performances to the promises . Civilian . For that I must tell you a story which I remember that I have read , in Diodorus Siculus of Pharnabazus who after many slow preparations , did at last lead forth Artaxerxes his Army against the Egyptians . This man being asked by Iphi●rates , why he was so nimble and ready in discourse , and so slow in action , why he did promise so much , and performe so little : answered , because hee was master of his words but King of his actions : meaning that actions were not so much in his power as words . Divine . All things are possible to him that believeth . Doe not say with the sluggard , There is a Lyon in the way . If you would but doe your duty in going about the thing , trust God with the event . Now assuredly it is your duty to carry on the cause of Religion in the first and principall place , which that I may the more presse upon you , I will adde unto that which hath been said , the notable example of Solomon , 1. King. 6.37 , 38. & 7.1 . In the fourth year was the foundation of the house of the Lord laid , in the moneth Zif , and in the eleventh year in the moneth Bull ( which is the eight month ) was the house finished throughout all the parts thereof , and according to all the fashion of it . So was ●e seaven yeares in building it . But Solomon was building his own house thirteen yeares . Neither did he begin to build his own house , till those seven yeares were ended , and the house of the Lord fully perfected , as appeareth clearly by 2. Chron. 8.1 . and it came to passe at the end of twenty yeares , wherein Solomon had built the house of the Lord , and his owne house . After all which ( as followeth in that place ) hee took care for store-Cities , and fenced Cities , for tribute , and for his navy . Tostatus and other Interpreters observe , that Solomon looked first to the Lords matters , and afterwards to his owne matters . And Iosephus his observation is very much to be taken notice of . The building of the Temple ( saith he ) which did continue for seven yeares being finished , he went about the building of the Palace , which in the thirteenth yeare , he did scarcely finish , for hee did not take so much care of this work , as of the building of the Temple , which though both large and more glorious then can be beleeved , was through Gods assistance perfected in the foresaid space : but the Palace though very farre inferiour to the magnificence of the Temple , yet the materialls thereof not being so long before prepared , and the house being to be builded for the King , not for God , it was the more slowly brought to perfection . Civilian . But I beseech you where is the fault with us ? and what could be more done then is done ? Divine . O but my heart bleeds to think how it goeth for the present , and how it is like to goe for the future with this distracted unsetled Church , what fruits have wee yet reaped of our many petitions and indeavours for reformation of Religion , of our solemn Covenant , of the learned debates and long consultations of the Assembly of Divines , Meethinks that which was said of Ephraim , Hos. 13.13 . agreeth too too much to England . The sorrows of a travelling woman shall come upon him , he is an ●nwise Son , for he should not stay long in the place of the breaking forth of children . I wish we may beware of that which some stories have observed to have been a most unhappy errour in the Emperour Frederick 3. who did so far connive at all things , that when he was put in mind to look to this or that , to prevent this or that danger , hee was wont to answer as Faelix did , the time of amending those things was not yet come , hee would wait for a more convenient season ; which season hee could never see ? I am perswaded it lyeth heavy upon the spirits of thousands beside my selfe , to know that every man doth now in Religion what seems good in his own eyes , Errors and Schismes doe multiply , in most places of the Kingdome ; there is a darknesse instead of divination , and people are like sheep that have no shepheard : and for ought I can see , betwixt our forsaking of the old , and finding of a new way , wee are fallen in a wildernesse where there is no way , O when shall I once see Religion setled ? Civilian . When the warre shall be husht , the State ordered and composed , the Peace of the Kingdome socured ; it is not to bee expected till then that the Parliament can have much leisure to look to Church matters : yet they will no doubt , doe the best that may be for the interim . Marvell not if I say more , that the Parliament doth wisely in moving so slowly . The slow and wary motions of Fabius did overcome Ha●●db●● , whereas the heat and suddennesse of Minutius did indanger the Common-wealth . Suddain courses ( I doubt ) shall not so much glad us in the beginning , as grieve us in the end . Divine . I have read in some Polititians , that though that of Augustus . — Festina lente , doe well agree to calme and peaceable times : yet Alexander his {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} nihil cunctando , is fitter for times of trouble and warre , and so they reconcile the one with the other ▪ Kekerm . discurs . de consilio quaest. 7. It is not safe to dispute long , in the time of a present combustion , nor to consult long about the cure , when the patient lyes a dying ; But I desire to argue from the principles of my owne profession : God did of old reprove his people , because they said , The time is not yet come , the time that the Lords house should be builded . This they said at that time when Iudah and Benjamin had powerfull adversaries , when the land was not secured , nor the walls of Ierusalem built . They might have pleaded for themselves enough of this kind , but all this could not excuse them at Gods hands : he would have them build the Temple before the walls of Ierusalem . And in this they harkened to the Prophets of God , and did so . Thereafter God taketh themselves to witnesse , whether he had not blessed them from that very day when they laid the foundation of the Temple : Nay I dare say it is not only good Divinity , but good Policy , that the Parliament should mind the things of Christ , more then their own things : for if ( as I suppose ) you will believe Matchiavell , hee teacheth you that the setting up of the ordinances of Christ , is the best way to make a Kingdome flourish in prosperity and peace . I conclude therefore that procra●tinations in reforming Religion may prove very pernitious aswell to the Common-wealth , as to the Church . And for my part I must confesse , I am afraid that the Parliament hath felt , and shall yet feel Gods hand against them i● other things , because of their doing the work of the Lord so negligently , and at the best by halfes . I wish the Honourable House of Commons may remember what they were about at that instant , when the sad newes of the dispersion of the Army in the West , were brought to them : And if they shall inquire at God , as Iob did , Show mee wherefore thou contendest with me . I doubt not but they shall heare the voice of his servants , the voice of his rods , and the voice of their owne Consciences telling them that he hath somewhat against them : that hee healeth not the breaches of the land , because they heal not the breach of the daughter of Sion : that hee makes the successe of the warre to halt , because they halt betwixt two , or rather many opinions . Civilian . I doe fully agree with you if all this be understood of the fundamentals of Faith and Religion , and the power of godlinesse . But if so be , you meane of the government and discipline of the Church , then you make Mountaines of mole-hills , and put Hercules sh●e upon an infants foot , whiles you hold that God is not pleased , and that the Kingdome cannot be blessed , unlesse the order and discipline of the Church bee established so and so as you would have it . I doe not acknowledge either the Episcopall way , or the Presbiteriall , or the C●ngregationall , to be Iure divino , But that all things of that kind are left in such an indifferency , that they may bee moulded and fashioned diversly according to the different formes and constitutions of Common-wealths , and altered as much and as often , as each State shall find most convenient for it selfe . If you can convince me that I am in an error , go to , let me heare your reasons . Divine . I shall indeavour by Gods assistance to satisfie you . But first of all let me use this humble liberty with you , once to put you in mind of the Apostles premonition , Let no man deceive himselfe : if any man among you seem to be wise in this world , let him become a foole that hee may bee wise . Hee that most denieth his owne naturall judgement in supernaturall verities , and is not conformed to this world , but is transformed by the renewing of his mind ; shall best prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God . Absque te sapere , est desipere . O Lord , faith Augustine , to be wise without thee , is to be mad . Do not therefore measure Scripturall truths , by Politicall principles , but contrariwise , and let your judgement be unbyassed and unprejudiced , when light is set before you . And whereas it seemeth to you a veniall thing , if not altogether lawfull to take a latitude in all such things as are not substantiall ( though Scripturall ) truths , and may ( you conceive ) admit a variation upon State-considerations . Remember I beseech you that it is the pleasure of God to take notice of , yea purposely to try our obedience , Etiam in minimis : For hee that is faithfull in that which is least , is faithfull also in much , and he that is unjust in the least , is unjust also in much . How was the Lord offended with Ieroboams setting up of Altars at Dan and Bethel : yea even with the Kings of Iudah , for not taking away the high places , though Ieroboam migh have pleaded that it was extreamly dangerous ( in regard of the warre betwixt him and Rehoboam ) that his subjects should goe up to Ierusalem to sacrifice unto the Lord there . And the Kings of Iudah might plead , that it was too burthensome for all the people to be tyed to go to Ierusalem with their Sacrifices : that God would have mercy and not sacrifice ; especially considering that they held the foundation , and sacrificed to the Lord only ; And this variation from the law of Moses , being in no substantiall thing , but only in the circumstance of place . In like manner Ieroboam thought not fit to have the feast of Tabernacles upon the fifteenth day of the seventh moneth , but upon the fifteenth day of the eight moneth , when the fruits of the earth were more fully gathered in : he would observe the feast according to the law in all the substantialls , but would not bee tyed to the circumstance of time . But God doth utterly reject his worship , because Ieroboam had devised it of his owne heart . If therefore the will of Jesus Christ can be made to appear from his word , even concerning the form of Church-government and Discipline , and ceremonies of worship , that thus and thus he would have us to do , will you then quarrell at these things , because stamped with a I● divinum ? Will you draw out your neck from this yoke , because it is Christs yoke ? Will you submit and obey because these things are ordinances of Parliament , and you will not submit because they are ordinances of Christ . Civilian . You say right , if you can make it appeare that Jesus Christ hath revealed his will and Commandements , not only concerning faith and manners , but how he would have his Church governed and ordered . Now this is it which you have yet to prove . Divine . For that , I shall desire you to consider , that Jesus Christ is the only Head and King of his Church , that the government of his Church is a part of his Kingly office : that the Government is committed into his hand , and the key of the house of David is laid upon his shoulder ; that the Father hath set him as a King upon his holy hill of Zion , to raign over the house of Iacob for ever , and of his Kingdom there shall be no end . As therefore he hath fully and faithfully executed his Priestly office in making attonement for our sins by the sacrifice of himselfe , and still making intercession in heaven for us . And his Propheticall office in revealing the whole Counsell of God , and teaching his people by his word and spirit , what he would have them to do . So he hath no lesse fully & faithfully executed his Kingly office and Legislative power , in providing by his Statutes and Ordinances for all the necessities of his Church ; and appointing by whom and after what manner he will have his house governed , what spirituall Courts and Judicatories hee would have erected , how he would have them constituted , by what rules to proceed , how to censure offences . It is an old observation , they are the best lawes , which leave least to the power of the Judge to doe as he list . It were a bad administration of the supreame power in any Kingdom , if no certaine kinds of subordinate officers , nor no certain kind of government were appointed , but all this left to the liberty of every Country or City . Now Jesus Christ is more wi●e , and provident , and faithfull , in the government of his whole Church , then ever King or Parliament was in the government of an earthly Kingdome ; and hath therefore appointed Officers , Courts , Censures , and Lawes , for the right ordering thereof ; and hath not left these things to bee determined by th●● or that State at their pleasure . I should wish you and all that are of your mind , to study better the Kingly office , and prerogative Royall , of Jesus Christ . Civilian . I conceive the Kingly office of Christ to consist in this , that he preserveth , strengtheneth , and delivereth the Church invisible , and all the members of his mysticall body from the malice of the Divell , and the wicked world , and also ruleth and commandeth their hearts by his spirit , to walk in the wayes of his obedience . But that the Kingly office of Christ reacheth so farre , as to the externall government and order of a visible politicall ministeriall Church , that I still doubt of . Divine . You observe not that my argument did conclude this very thing , at which you stick , that Christ hath appointed a certain policy and government , and certain kinds of officers for the Church , because hee hath fully and faithfully discharged his Kingly office in providing for all the necessities of his Church . And that hee raignes and rules in his Church , not only mystically , but politically considered ; I suppose you cannot deny , if you observe that otherwise a visible politicall Church is a body without a head , and subjects without a King . Therefore it is the ordinary expression of our Divines against Papists , that the government of the Church is partly Monarchicall in regard of Christ our King and Law-giver ; partly Aristocraticall in regard of the Ministers and Officers , and partly Democraticall in regard of certaine Liberties and Priviledges belonging to people . Civilian . I would understand whether the Reformed Churches hold the forme of their Ecclesiasticall government to be jure divino , for I have heard , that it was introduced among them only in a prudentiall way . Divine . I shall give you some cleare instances of their judgement , such as come to my remembrance . In the Book of the policy of the Church of Scotland , I read thus . This power and policy of the Church should lea●e upon the word immediately , as the onely ground thereof , and should bee taken from the pure fountaines of the Scriptures , the Church hearing the voice of Christ , the only spirituall King , and being ruled by his Lawes . In the French confession it is said , we beleeve that this true Church ought to bee governed by that Regiment or Discipline , which our Lord Iesus Christ hath established . ●n the Belgick Confession , I find words to the same purpose ▪ We beleeve , say they , That this Church ought to be ruled and governed by that spirituall Regiment , which God himselfe hath delivered in his word . See Harm ; Confes. Sect. 11. If the question were only this , whether the Divine right of this or that form of Church-Government is to be mentioned and held forth in the ordinance of Parliament , for my part I should not contend much for that , the businesse going right otherwise . But it belongeth at least to the Assembly of Divines to satisfie the consciences of men by holding forth the institution and ordinance of Jesus Christ : which if it bee not done , our proceedings shall not be conformable to those of other Churches . Civilian . Well then , goe on ; you did bring an argument from the Kingly office of Jesus Christ . Let me heare what other arguments you have to make it appeare that God hath in his word descended so farre into paricularities with us , as to appoint a certain forme of Church-government . Divine . This will appeare best , when the particular forme of Church-government with the Scripturall grounds of it , shall be taken into consideration . This government is Iure divino . Ergo , a government is Iure divi●● . This were too large a subject for our conference . But I ●●mit you to what is largely written concerning it . I shall only put you in mind , that in all ages God hath by positive Lawes descended into many particularities with man . Take for instance beside the positive Law before the fall , the Commandement not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evill , other positive Law● before the Law , such as that of the distinction of clean and uncleane beasts , Gen. 7. the Law not to eat blood , Gen. 9. the Law of circumcision , Gen. 17. Under the Law , beside morall and forensicall observances , there were many ceremoniall Statutes . And under the Gospell , Christ and his Apostles have left another Law , which though it lay opon us , neither many nor burthensome performances , yet bindeth us to such and such things in Ecclesiasticall policy . The particulars we find in the Acts of the Apostles , and in the Epistles , especially to Timothy and Titus , and Rom. 12. and 1. Cor. 12. Civilian . Many particulars of that kind there are in the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles . But that those things were intended as perpetuall and binding ordinances , is a great question . And beside I have heard some learned men make a distinction betwixt Ius di●inum ; and Ius Apostolicum . Divine . This distinction was used by those that denyed the jus divinum of the Lords day . But surely i● i● an i●● grounded distinction , and those that make most use of it , are forced also to distinguish betwixt Ius divinum , and Ius Mosaicum , holding that though God was the Author of the morall Law , yet Moses ( no● God ) was the Author of the judiciall and ceremoniall Law : as the Apostles did write some things as Christs Heraulds : other things as Pastors or Bishops of the Churches ; that they were Authors of the latter , promulgators only of the former , and that therefore the former only were Iure divino . Thus saith Salmeron , but hee is in this contradicted by Bellarmine , Maldonat , Suarez , and others . Lorinus in Psal. 88.32 . noteth , that it was one of the errors of Valentinus and of the Gnosticks , that the Decalogue only was from God ; and other Lawes from Moses and the Elders of Israel . But what saith the Apostle himselfe after hee hath given rules concerning the policy of the Church , Let the Prophets speak two or three , and let the other judge ; and the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets . Let your women keep silence in the Churches , &c. Then he addeth , 1. Cor. 14.37 . If any man think himselfe to be a Prophet or spirituall , let him acknowledge , that the things that I writ unto you , are the Commandements of the Lord . Doe wee not also find , the laying on of hands reckoned among those cat●cheticall heads which the Apostles did deliver as perpetuall to all the Churches , Heb. 6.2 . Papists understand the Episcopall confirmation . Dwerse of our writers understand ordination of Ministers , and the severall kinds of Church officers . However it is agreed on both sides , it is a thing belonging to the policy of the Church , not to the foundation of faith or piety . I adde that the directions given to Timothy and Titus are standing ordinances for all the Churches , as may be proved from 1. Tim. 3.15 . and 6.14 . and 2. Tim. 2.2 . Civilian . But Ratio mutabilis facit praeceptum mutabile . The reason why there were ruling Elders and Deacons , and Church-censures at that time was , because there was no Chri●●ian Magistrate . So that under a Christian Magistrate there is no necessity of such officers , government , or censures in the Church . Divine . I answer , First there is no ground at all in Scripture for such a distinction , for the Scripture holds not out one form of Church-government , for times of persecution , another for times of peace . But rather one form to bee perpetuall and continued , till the second coming of Jesus Christ . Rev. 2.24 , 25. That which ye● have already , hold fast till I come . So 1. Tim. 6.14 . before cited , and the like . 2. Chrysostome Hom. 12. in 1. Cor. doth shew diverse sinnes for which the best Law-givers had appointed no punishment . And where there are Christian Magistrates , yet there are no Lawes nor civill punishments for somethings which must needs fall within the compasse of Church-discipline , such as ignorance of God , neglect of family worship , living in malice , or envy , &c. 3. And though the civill or municipall Lawes should reach to all offences which are supposed to fall under the verge of Church-discipline , yet there is still a necessary use of both . For instance , a Traitor , or a Murtherer being excommunicated by the Church , is by the blessing of God gained to true repentance , humiliation , and confession , whereupon hee is loosed and remitted , and again received into the bosome of the Church : neverthelesse the civill sword falleth upon him ; were hee never so penitent , shall such a one either escape the civill sword because reconciled to the Church , or shall he after God hath given him mercy , and a great measure of repentance , die under the dreadfull sentence of excommunication , because Justice must bee done by the Magistrate . There is no way of avo●ding great inconveniences on both sides , but by holding the necessary distinct uses both of the sword of the Magistrate , and censures of the Church . 4. And when they are most coincident , it is but materially or objectively , not formally : one and the same man must bee civilly punished , because justice and the law of the land so requireth , and that the Common wealth may bee kept in Peace and Order ; he must also bee Ecclesiastically censured , that his soule may be humbled , that hee may bee filled with godly sorrow , and with shame and confusion of face , and drawn to repentance , ( if possible ) which the Church , not the Magistrate , driveth at . Civilian . I have heard it asserted by some learned men , that among the Jewes , there was no government nor discipline in the Church distinct from the government of the State , yea , that there was no such distinction as Church and State , but that the Jewish Church was the Jewish State , and the Jewish State the Jewish Church ; and if it was so among them ( whose formes you take in many particulars for patterns ) I would fain know why it may not be so among us . Divine . Though the Jewish Church and Common wealth were for the most part not different materially , the same men being members of both , even as in all Christian Republickes , yet they were formally different one from another , in regard of distinct Acts , Lawes , Courts , Officers , Censures , and Administrations . For , 1. The Ceremoniall law given was given to them as a Church , the Judiciall law given to them as a State . 2. They did not worship , doe sacrifice , pray , praise , &c. as a State ; nor did they kill malefactors with the sword as a Church . 3. As the Lords matters and the Kings matters were distinguished , so there were two different Courts for judging of the one and the other , 2. Chron. 19.8.11 . Fourthly , when the Romans took away the Jewish State and Civill government , yet their Church did remain . 5. The government of the State and the constitution thereof was not the same under the Judges , under the Kings , and after the captivity : shall we therefore say that the Church was altered and new moulded , as oft as the Civill government was changed . 6. Learned Master Selden hath rightly observed , that those Proselytes who were called Prosiliti justitiae , though they were initiated into the Jewish Religion by Circumcision , Baptisme , and Sacrifice ; and were free not only to worship God apart by themselves , but also to come into the Church or Congregation of the Israelites , and did get to themselvs the name of Jews : yet were restrained and debarred from Dignities , Magistracies and preferments , as also from some marriages which were permitted to the Israelites . He addeth a simile of strangers initiated and associated into the Church of Rome , who yet have not the priviledge of Roman Citizens : whence we gather most apparently a distinction of the Jewish Church and the Jewish State ; for as much as those Proselytes were imbodied into the Iewish Church , and as Church-members did communicate in the holy ordinances of God , yet they were not properly members of the Iewish State , nor admitted to Civil privileges . Civilian . But I find no censure nor punishment of offences in the Iewish Church , except what the Civill power did inflict , no such censure as excommunication or separation from the Temple , Synagoue or ordinances . And since you have cited Master Selden for you , I will cite him against you , for he saith in his late Book , that hee who was separate or excommunicated among the Jewes , was not excluded from the Temple , Sacrifices or holy Assemblies , but only debarred from the liberty of Civill worship , so that he might not sit within foure cubits of off his companion or neighbour . Divine . I shall doe M. Selden so much right as to appeal from him to himself , for in another place where he writeth at greater length of the Jewish excommunication , he describeth it to have been a separation , not only from the former civill commerce and company in regard of that distance of foure cubits , but also from communicating together in prayer and holy Assemblies . And that it was so , it is not only the most received opinion of Protestant Divines , but even of those who have devoted themselves to the study of the Jewish Antiquities , such as Drusius , Iohannes Couh , L'Empereur , and others . Brughton also in his Exposition of the Lords prayer , pag. 14. &c. tells us that the Jewish Church and the Apostolike Church , though they differed about traditions and about the Messiah , yet for government they agreed . He giveth instance in these particulars , the rulers of the Synagogue , the readers of the Law , and the Prophets , the qualities of a Bishop , or Elder , the providing for the poor , the maner of excommunication and absolution , the laws to bridle Elders from Tyranny : All these are the same in both , saith he . Now these men were most exquisitely acquainted with those studies and their Testimonies may serve instead of many more that may be added . Hereunto that distinction of 3. kinds of excommunication received from Elias in Thesbyte , Niddui , Herem , & Sammatha , whether we understand as some doe , that Niddui was a separation according to the ceremoniall law , and Herem the devoting of one to death , and capitall punishment ; or whether we distinguish betwixt Niddui & Herem ( which two only are mentioned in the law ) as we use to doe betwixt excommunicatio minor , and major ; which is the opin●on of others . Civilia●. It may be there was a separation or ejection from the Temple , Synagogue , & worship , but I deny that this was done judicially or by the sentence of a Court , for as M. Selden observeth , the very letter of the law , not any judiciall sentence did exclude the unclean from the Temple . Divine . I answer , men were excluded from the Temple and worship , either for ceremoniall or morall uncleanes , the former is particularly determined in the law , the latter not so , but left as a necessary consequence from the law , for if God would have men kept back for ceremonial uncleanes , it may be for touching ( though casually and unwillingly ) a vessell , a seat , a cloth , a body , or somewhat else that was unclean ; surely it was much more his will that such as are morally unclean by a prophane or scandalous life , should not be admitted . However it was necessary that matters of fact should bee examined by a Court , whether they did fall within the verge of the law or not . But what will you say , if I give you scripture for excommunication , by a judiciall sentence . Ezra 10.8 . we read of a mixed meeting of the Princes , Elders , Priests and Levites , where it was decreed that whosoever would not come to Ierusalem within 3. dayes , should be punished , with the forfeiture of all his substance ; and himselfe separated from the congregation of those that had been carried away . A double punishment Civil and Ecclesiastical , forfeiture and excommunication , according as that extraordinary occasion made a conjuncture and concurrence of the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim at that time , Lyra , Hugo Cardinalis , Cajetan , and of ours Diodati , and Lavater , all upon the place ( beside others who cite the place occasionally ) do agree that the separation from the congregation ( {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as the 70. read it , it is Kahal in the Hebrew ) is meant of excommunication from the Temple and worship : even as that casting out mentioned , Isa 66.5 . So in the new Testament this iniquity was established by a law , that whosoever should confesse that Jesus was the Christ , should be cast out of the Synagogue , 10.9.22 . and 12.42 . and 16.2 . Civilian . But there is not in all the law of Moses any syllable of such an excommunication as you speak of , except you take that to be it , which is often repeated in the law , that soule shall be cut off from among his people . Now that may be expounded either of capitall punishment and cutting off by the hand of the Magistrate ; or ( as Ainsworth and M. Selden following the most part of the Hebrewes expound it ) of cutting off by the hand of God , that is , th●● God would not suffer such a one to live out halfe his dayes , but take him away by an untimous dea●h . Divine . I know that both Jewish and Christian Interpreters have much differed among themselves , in expounding that commination of the Law . But I shall only offer my reasons against these two Glosses which you have mentioned , and then tell you what I conceive to be the true meaning . To expound all those places of the Magistrates cutting off men by death , were to make the Laws of God more bloody then Draco's : I appeal to your self , doe you thinke it at all credible , that God would have men put to death for eating of the fat , or the blood , though by chance , for making a perfume like the Preistly perfume to smell , for touching a dead body , or a grave , or a Tent , wherein a man had died , or for touching something which he that was uncleane had touched , and not being sprinkled thereafter with the water of seperation : yet for these and the like ceremomoniall defilements and tresspasses , men were to be cut off from the Congregation of Israel Now for that other Exposition , of cutting off by the hand of God , that which they take for the ground and foundation of it , that is , that the cutting off , mentioned in the Law , is understood only of private sinnes , known to God only , and which could not be proved by witnesses , this I say , if it could be proved , would indeed make good their Interpretation , but the truth is , it is a meere conjecture , for which they have no warrant in the Word . Nay , the Word is against it : for the end of that cutting off , w●s that the Children of Israel might feare to doe that , which they s●● so sore punished , Levit. 17 4.5 . Which use they could not make of a divine judgement inflicted for a private sinne . I know they doe further object from Levit. 17.10 . & 20.5.6 . that the cutting off , was a work of God , not of men ; But to that I say , it was not so , except in extraordinary cases , when men , who should have cut off the wicked ; did it not : and this appears plainly from Levit. 20.4 , 5. And if the people of the land hide their eyes from the man , when he giveth of his seed unto Molech , and kill him not : Then ( marke then , and in that case ) I will set my face against that man , and against his family , and will cut him off . Wherefore I conclude , that the cutting off in the Law , and especially , in the Ceremoniall Law , can be nothing else but Excommunication from the Church , and Communion in the holy things . Which as it is most received among our Expositors , so the Apostle . 1 Cor. 5. doth give us a hint of it : for as it is plaine from vers . 6 , 7 , 8. that he alludes to the history of the Passover , Exod. 12. so when he saith , vers. 13. Put away from among your selves that wicked person , he hath respect to , Exo. 12.19 . Where it it is said , Whosoever eateth that which is leavened , even that soul shall be cut off from the Congregation of Israel . All this I conclude with a Passage of Mr. Williams his bloody Tenent , cap. 121. where though he doth not acknowledg a spirituall excommunication in the Jewish Church , yet he acknowledgeth such a coercive power in cutting off , as hath for the antitype and paralell of it Excommunication in the Ghristian Church . Out of that blessed temporall estate , ( saith he ) to be cast or carried captive , was their Excommunication or casting out of Gods sight . 2 Kings 17.23 . Therefore was the Blasph●●●● the false Prophet , the Idolater , to be cast out , or cut off ●●●m this holy land : which punishment cannot be parrallelld by the punishment of any State or Kingdome in the world , but only by the excommunicating or out-casting of person or Church from the fellowship of the Saints and Churches of Christ Iesus in the Gospel ; For this spirituall cutting off , he citeth 1. Cor. 5. Gal. 5. Behold he who hath pleaded most for the liberty of conscience , is forced to acknowledge the censure of Excommunication . Civilian . But can you show any warrant fro● the New Testament for Church Censures and Excommunication , as an Institution and Ordinance of Christ . I know your Magna Charta , which you pretend to , is Mat. 18.17 . Tell the Church , and if he heare not the Church , let him be unto thee , as an Heathen man , & a Publican . But the sence of that place , I take to be that which was given by Erastus and Bilson , that is , That in the case of private and civill injuries , the injured party should first of all seek right and reparation of the wrong , of the injuring party , which if it take not effect , then to doe it before witnesses , and if that also prevaile not , then to tell the Church , that is the Sanedrim of the Jewes , which was a civill Judicature , and if the man that hath done wrong , will not stand to the sentence of the Sanedrim , that then one should deale with him as with an Heathen , or a Publican , that is , complain of him to the Roman Emperor or his Deputies . Mr. Prynne , in his late Booke called Independency examined , pag. 10. following Master Seldens judgement , holdeth , that by the Church , Matth. 18.17 . is not meant any Ecclesiasticall Judicatory , but the Civill Court , or Sanedrim of the Jewes , Even as Ib. pag. 11. he holdeth the Assembly of the Apostles Elders and Brethren , Act. 15. to be an undeniable Scripture Authority , for Parliaments as well as for Synods , to come together upon all like occasions . And as for these words , let him be thee as an Heathen and a Publicane , he understandeth the meaning to be , that not the Church , but the party offended , is to avoid his company : taking the same to be meant , 2 Thes. 3.14 . a place which I have also heard alledged for Church Dicipline , and Censures . Divine . Though Mr. Prynne be a man much esteemed by me , both for his sufferings , and much good service done by him in the Church , yet I must say , he wrongs both the Truth and himself , in taking upon him to goe against the whole current of Interpreters , antient and moderne , without any evidence of reason : and he must remember , that in these particulars , hee doth not so much oppose the Independents , as all the Reformed Churches , while as he goeth about to throw out of their hands the chief Scriptures upon which they ground Church Discipline . Now all the circumstances of the Text , make against that Exposition , and prove , That it is not a Civill , but a Spirituall Court , which Christ there establisheth . For 1. those words , If thy Brother trespasse against thee , are not ment of personall or civill injuries ( of which our Saviour Christ would not be Judge , Luke 12.14 . ) but as Augustine , Tostatus , and others doe rightly expound them , they are to be understood , of all manner of scandalls , by which we trespasse against our Brother , in as much as we trespasse against the law of Charity , which commandeth us to edify one another , and to promote the spirituall good one of another : now when a Christian doth not only not edify , but scandalize , which is a deterioration ; yea , ( so farre as lieth in him ) a destruction of his brothers soule ; this is undeniably a great trespasse against his brother : which kind of trespasse , as the King , and head of the Church , Jesus Christ , whose Kingdom is not of this World was to take speciall notice of : so the coherence and depend●nce of the Text , giveth further evidence , that this , and no other kinde of trespasses is here intended , there being so much spoken of scandalls in the preceeding passages of that Chapter . 2. As the case supposed , so the end proposed is spirituall , that is , that the offended brother should reprove the offanding brother ; and tell him his fault , and that for the good of his soul : If he shall heare thee , thou hast gained thy brother ; that is , thou hast rescued his soule by Repentance , from sinne , and so from the wrath of God : wherein Christ had respect to that Law . Lev. 19.17 . Thou shalt not hate thy Brother in thy heart : thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour , and not suffer sinne upon him . 3. The persons judging , are not civill but Ecclesiasticall , Tell it unto the Church , now in all the New Testament , the name of the Church is not given to any Civill Magistrate . Nay Christ himself doth immediately give us notice , that by the Church there he means the Ministers and Rulers of the Church , for thus he applyeth it unto the Apostles , and their successors , Whatsoever ye shall binde , &c. and if two of you shall agree , &c. And here by the way , I must tell you , that if the Jewish Sanedrim were here mean● ( as it is not ) you could not thence conclude that a civill Court is meant , for there was an Ecclesiastical Sanedrim , distinct from the civill , as beside many other great Authors is proved by Constantinus , l' Emp. Annot. in C●● . Middoth , p. 188. and de Rep. Iud. p. 389. Which Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim were the rather to be understood in this Text , because the other Sanedrim was destroyed by Herod . 4. The way and manner of proceeding , is also Ecclesiasticall , not civill ; when Church Governours meet about those things , it must be with Prayer , vers. 19. and it must be in the Name of Christ , vers. 20. which places , though they well agree to all holy Assemblies and meetings for Worship , yet the context sheweth , that they are principally intended concerning Assemblies for Discipline and Church censures ; and so Tostatus , Hugo Cardinalis , with our own Divines , doe expound the Text . 5. The censure is spirituall , as appeareth both by the ●llusion to the Jewish Excommunication ( of which I have spoken before ) in those words , let him be unto thee as a Heathen , or a Publican , and by the phrase of binding the soule , or retaining of sinnes , vers. 18. which power , our Lord elsewhere giveth to his Apostles , Mat. 16.19 . Io. 20.23 . formes of speech , which no where the Scripture useth of any civill power : only it is to be observed , that in these two places last cited , the Apostles get power to binde and loose by their Doctrine and Preaching , but here , Mat. 18. to binde and loose by Discipline , as appeareth by the use to be made of witnesses , vers. 16. that is , potestas clavium doctrinalis : this potestas clavium disciplinalis . That is misticall : this politicall . And whereas it is objected , that the Text saith not , let him be to the Church , but , let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican . I answer , it is supposed , that he must be such in the judgement of the Church , before he be such to me . This Pareus upon the place , proveth from the words that follow , Whatsoever ye shall bind , &c. therefore saith he , the Church is first to bind him , that is , Excommunicate him , and then he is to be to me as an Heathen , and a Publican . Beside , if it were not so , horrible confusion should follow , while as any private man may Excommunicate and cast off whomsoever he judgeth to be disobedient to the Church , though peradventure he hath no just cause to judge so . 6. It was very farre from the minde of Jesus Christ , that his Disciples should for private injuries prosecute one another , before the Roman Emperour or his Deputie : This being so much blamed by the Apostle Paul . 1 Cor. 6.1 . Dare any of you , having a matter against another , got to law before the unjust , vers. 6 , 7. Brother go●th to law against Brother , and that before the unbeleavers . Now therefore , there is utterly a fault amongst you . Civilian . Can you shew any example or practice of such an Excommunication in the New Testament : for that place , 1 Cor. 5.5 . I doubt shall not prove , there being not only great Authors , but great reasons for another Exposition , as Mo●li●s sheweth in his V●tes . l. 2. tc . 11. namely that this delivering to Sathan , was for bodily afflictions and torments , which was not in the power of ordinary Ministers to doe , but was a Prerogative of the Apostles . Divine . If you will , I can debate that with you , both from that very Text , and from other reasons , that this delivering to Sathan , was an act not of the Apostle alone , but of the Presbytery of Corinth , whereby is meant Excommunication , which is a cutting off from the Fellowship of the Church , and so co●sequ●ntly . ● delivering to Sathan , who reignes without the Church , and holdeth captive at his pleasure the children of disobedience . Or if you will , I can take a shorter course with you . For whatsoever may be the meaning of that phrase , tradere Satana , it is most plaine , that Excommunication is in that Chapter , vers. 6 , 7. Know ye not , that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe , purge out therefore the old leaven , verse 11. If any man that is called a Brother , be a fornicatour , &c. with su●h an one , no no● to ●●●e . vers. 12. doe not ye ●udge them that are within , vers. 13. Therefore put away from among your selves that wicked person . 2 Cor. 2.6 . Sufficient to such a man , is this punishment or censure ) inflicted by many . But I suppose , I shall not need to prove Church-censures , and Excommunication in the Church of C●rin●h : which Moulins himself doth fully acknowledge to be held forth in that same place . Civilian . I will thinke further upon these things . Devine . You may doe so , and withall , read what 〈◊〉 hath written against Erastus , and Wala●● against Wite●●ogardus . Civilian . But tell me now your opinion of another matter , and that is concerning liberty of Conscience , and toleration of Hereticks and Se●taries for which there are so many bookes written of late , and so few against i● ▪ I doe not know what you will pronounce of it , from the Principles of your Profession , but I beleeve , that as in Germany , France , Holland , Poland , yea under the Turkish Tyranny , contrary religions , and opposite professions and practises , have been , and are tolerated upon State-principles , so it shall be Englands unhappinesse , though not to chose , yet to be necessitated to grant such a tolleration , for avoiding a rupture in the Kingdome , and for preserving an Union against the common Enenmy . Divine . This Question about the Toleration of those whose way is different from the common rule which shall be established , must be both stated and resolved , cum ●rano salis . We must remember to distinguish person● from Corporations or Churches , and both these from errors . Againe , to distinguish persons , wh●ther godly and gratious , or loose and libertin , whether moderate and peaceable , or ●actious and turbulent ; whether such as have deserved well o● the publike , or such as have done either no service or a disservice . To distinguish Corporation , whether the Qu●stion be of such onely as have a present existence , or of all who shall joyne to such a way afterward . To distinguish err●rs , whether Practicall or Doctrinall onel● ▪ whether fundamentall , or circafundamentall , or neither of the two . To distinguish Toleration , whether absolute , or Hypotheticall and conditionall , whether anywhere , or in som● few certaine places onely , whether indifinite and generall , or limited and bounded , and if bounded , how far and how much : Whether ●uch Toleration as may stand with the solemne league and Covenant , or such as is inconsistent therewith ; whether such as is profitable for the publike peace , or such as is apparently destructive thereto . These and the like particulars I doe not intend to fall upon at this instant . Only this I say , that to open a wide doore , and to grant an unbounded liberty unto all sort of Hereticks and Sect●ries , ( which is the thing that the good Samaritan , and Iohn the Baptist , the blood , Tenent , and others of that kind do plead for as it is inconsistent with the solemne league and Covenant of the three Kingdomes , by which we are obliged to endeavour the extirpation of Popery , Prelacie , Superstition , Heresie and Schism● , least we partake in other mens sinnes , and thereby be in danger to receive of their plagues : So it is in the owne nature of it , an error so pernicious , so abominable , so monst●ous , that it maketh all learned men to stand amazed , and taken with horrour , in so much that they can not at first gather their thoughts to put pen to paper against it . I know this liberty and Toleration was maintained by the Donatists of old and by the Socinians , Arminians , and Anabaptists of late ▪ but it hath beene constantly opposed by all that were sound and orthodoxe , both Ancient and Moderne , who have asserted the lawfull use of a coercive powe● against those things , whereby ( though under pretence of conscience ) God is openly dishonoured , soules ensnared and destroyed , faith or piety subverted and overthrowne : and further , the compelling of the outward man , though not to the practise of things indifferent ( which compulsion I doe not allow ) yet to the practise of necessary duties , and to the externall use of meanes and ordinances , by which through the blessing of God , mens hearts and consciences may be savingly affected and wrought upon . And I beseech you what else meaneth Asa's Covenant , That whosoever would not seeke the Lord God of Israel should be put to death whether small or great , whether man or woman . And what else meaneth Iosiahs Covenant , whereof it is said , he caused all that were present in Ierusalem and Benjamin , to stand to it . And what else is that in Ezra , that whosoever would not come to Ierusalem to make a Covenant , and to put away the strange wives , all his substance should be forfeited , and himselfe separated from the Congregation of those that had beene carried away , that is , Excommunicated . And what else is that other act of Iosiah in putting downe the Priests of the high Places . And what say you to the Law of stoning those who did intice the people to turne out of the way wherein the Lord commanded them to walke , saying , Let us goe after other Gods and serve them . Civilian . I would rather heare some Arguments from the New Testament , for I doubt these from the Old Testament shall be more subject to exception . Divine . To me it is plaine , that these things doe as much concerne us now , as the Jewes of old , which whosoever denieth , must shew , that either we may take no rules nor patternes from the Old Testament : or that the foresaid Lawes and practises were not intended by the holy Ghost to binde us , ( as other things in the Old Testament doe ) but were ceremoniall and typicall , intended to bind the Jewes onely . Mr. Williams in his bloody Tenant ( though I doe not remember that anywhere he answereth to those particular passages which I have cited , yet ) perceiving that such arguments from the Old Testament can not be taken off without this answer , that all these were typicall and figurative : he therefore goeth much upon that ground , and so deviseth more types and figures in the Old Testament then ever any body did before him , and pleaseth himselfe with such fancies and conjectures therein , as I dare say , will satisfie no indifferent Reader : and in effect making void by his principles all arguments from the Old Testament , so that we may not from the examples of the godly Kings of Iudah , teach Christian Magistrates what their duty is , nor argue thus , God commanded that the Kings of Iudah should have a copy of the Book of the Law by them , and read therein , that they should not multiply wives , &c. Therefore Christian Princes should search the Scriptures , should not multiply wives , &c. or thus . The Priests and Levites had a sufficient maintenance . Therefore so should the Ministers of the Gospell : or thus ; The Jewes were commanded to rest from all servile labour on the Sabbath day . Therefore so should Christians on the Lords day : or thus ; Warres were lawfull in the old Testament ; Therefore they are lawfull still . Or the like . All these shall be cast aside , upon this ground , they were tipicall , therefore no patterns to us . But because you desire an Argument from the New Testament : I will convince your judgement from thence also : Sure I am , I have better grounds in the New Testament , against the Toleration now in question , then Master Iohn Goodwin hath found for it , in his Text , Act. 5.38.39 . He holdeth that we may build upon Gamaliels speech , as Authorised by God , there being nothing in all this speech ( excepting only the Historicall Instances , the truth of which , it seems was generally known , and is attested by Iosephus their great Historian ) but what is fully consonant with the Word of God , saith he . And so he approveth the Sceptik Principles of that Nullifidian , who razeth the very foundation of the Christian Faith , and maketh it a very doubtfull case whether the Apostles Doctrine was from God , or from men . But I proceed to my Arguments . First , you shall doe well to remember what I said concerning Church censutes , from Matth. 18. under which scandalous and obstinate delinquents , doe fall , the pretence of Conscience , being no exception for them . The Ministers of the Gospel have in readinesse to revenge all disobedience , 2 Cor. 10.6 . The Angel of the Church of Ephesus is commended , because of his zeal , in that he could not beare those who called themselves Apostles and were not . Revel. 2.2 . Contrariwise , the Angel of the Church of Perga●●● is blamed , for this reason , because then hast there them that teach the doctrine of Balaam , &c. so hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans . Revel. 2.14.15 . that is , because thou hast tolerated them , and hast not cast them out . It is thy fault , that they are there in the Church . The like challenge is sent to the Angel of the Church of Thyatira , vers. 20. I have a few things against thee , because thou sufferedst that woman Iezebell , who calleth her self a Prophetesse , to teach , and to seduce my servants , &c. That chapter is so cleare for the point , that Master Williams acknowledgeth it proves fully , that Christ hath endued the Ministers and Governours of his Church , with power to suppresse Heresy and errour , and the spreaders thereof , be who they will be . See the bloody Tenent . c. 57. So Iohn the Baptist . pag. 63. confesseth that the Church of Thy●●ra was justly taxed , not only for not controuling and reproving Iexebel , but also , in that they permitted her to seduce weak Christians , without cutting her off by the sword of the Spirit , the power of excommunication . Civilian . I was about to answer the same , that if those places prove any thing , it is onely the suppressing of Hereticks and Schismaticks by Church censures , not at all by the civill coercive power of the Magistrate . Divine . I thought with my selfe , I should neede say no more , having proved that Heriticks and Shismaticks , though miscarrying with so much opinion of conscience , as to thinke themselves Apostles or Prophets , may be censured and cast out of the Church ( which is the case , Revel. 2. ) I did never imagine but where the soule is punished with the greatest punishment which can be inflicted on earth , that is , Excomunication ; much more may the body be punished by the Magistrate , as the degree of the offence shall require : especially considering that the Magistrat is a nursing father to the Church , and is to protect and assist her , not to suffer her authority and censures to be despised and set at nought . But to satisfie you yet more touching the Magistrats part , consider well that passage Rom. 13.4 . For he is the Minister of God to thee for good , but if thou doe that which is evill be afraid , for he beareth not the sword in vaine : for he is the Minister of God , a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evill . Civilian . This place and all that you can say in that kind doth not warrant nor iustifie persecution , for the cause of conscience , but onely the punishment of all such evill doers as doe disturbe the peace of the Kingdome , or the course of civill justice , oppose Magistrats or lawes , traitors , rebells , murtherers , felons , and the like . Iohn the Baptist pag. 57. saith , If a breach of peace , the civill powers ought to redresse it . 1. Tim. 2.1.2 . But for the Magistrate to interpose in matters meerly Ecclesiasticall , otherwise then spiritually , and as a Minister of the Gospell , I find no warrant for it , in all the Gospel . Divine Now you are come to your last refuge wherein I know you put great confidence : but I am as confident it cannot serve your turne , which I prove thus , 1. By this Tenent you give a more dangerous wound to the power of the civill Magistrate then you are aware of , for in stead of m●king him keeper of both Tables you make him keeper of the second Table on●ly , at least vindex of ● onely , whereas God hath made him as well vindex as Custos utriusque Tabula . 2. In t●e place I last cited , the Apostle maketh no exception nor restriction , but will have all evill doers ( to which category I suppose Heretickes and Sedu●ers doe belong to be afraid of vengeance by the hand of the Magistrate . 3. The Apostle there doth once and againe call the Magistrate , The Minister of God , as it were purposely putting him in mind , that he judgeth not for man but for the Lord , and that he is to looke most to things pertaining to God . 4. There may be a coincidencie of those things which you put assunder : for example , suppose a Jesuite killing a Magistrate ▪ or some other Hereticke killing one who hath beene most opposite to him ; or as sometime the case was ) suppose men causing their children to goe through the f●re as a sacrifice to their God Molech , all these ( though murthers ) ye●●re done for Conscience sake , men being perswaded in their conscience , that they are doing good service to God , as it is said of those that killed the Apostles . What say you to that case ▪ shall the punishment of those be persecution for the cause of Co●science . 5. I cannot marvell enough , that it should be heard from the mo●th of any Christian , that the Magistrate is to pun sh injuries done to the State , but not injuries done to the Chur●h ▪ that he is to punish those who destroy mens bodies , but not those that destroy mens soules : that whosoever will draw away people from the obedience of the Magistrate , and of the law of the Land , must not be suffered : but they who will draw away people from the truth of the Gospel , and from the wayes of God , such as Hymeneus and Philetus , who overthrow the faith of some , and their word will eat , as doth a canker , must escape unpunished . And so Christian Magistrates and States , shall take up the maxime which Tacitus tells was holden by Tyberius Caesar , Deorum injurias Diis cura esse : but for their part , they shall stand by as Gallio did , and care for none of those things . Be astonished at this , O ye heavens . Civilian . But in the meane time I can tell you one thing , that it is a mighty prejudice that lies in the mindes of many against the Prysbetery , that tyranny and rigour doe accompany it . And this now bringeth into my minde some other prejudices . I have seene a Booke come from Oxford , entituled , An Answer by Letter to a worthy Gentleman , who desired of a Divine some reasons , by which it might appeare how inconsistent Presbyteriall Government is with Monarchy . In which I finde many things which breed an Odium of that Government . Among other things , it tells me , that this is one of the Articles of the Presbyterian faith . No Minister preaching in Publike , sedition or Treason or railing at King , Councell , the Prince , Iudges , is accountable , or punishable by King , Parliament , Councell , or any Indicature whatsoever . But from all hee may appeale to the Sanhedrum or Consistory , as the sole and proper competent Iudge . And as if this were a small thing not to subject to the Magisteate , they will have the Magistrate subject to them , insomuch that they may excommunicate the Magistrate , even the King himselfe if he obey them not : That the Presbytery hindereth the liberty of trade and commerce , disgraceth and desameth young women for conversing familiarly with men , suffereth not Land-Lords to sue for their rents , and the like . That they bring all cases and causes under their cognition and judgement , sub formalitate scandali , under the notion of scandall , and for the glory of God . It tells also a number of Stories and practicall examples for confirmation of those particulars . What say you to that ? Divine . I have seen and read the book , which surely was written by the speciall inspiration of the father of lies , that the ●mple people who never yet sawe a Presbytery , may be made afraid of it , as of some hellish monster , as the French Friars made the people beleeve , that the Hugonots were ugly monsters with Swines faces , and Asses eares . But men of understanding will not be taken with such bold and shamelesse calumnies as come from the pen of that son of Belial . I could name both the Author , and the lying Records of a persecuting Prelate , whence he borrowed his stories , in which there are many known untruths ; and where there is any truth in the matters of fact which he relates , there is such addition of his own Interpretations of mens actions , such variation of circumstances , and such concealing of the true grounds , ends , and circumstances of such actions , as maketh them to appear quite another thing then they were . And if his stories of the speeches , actions , or opinions of particular men were all true ( as they are not ) yet how doth that prove that Presbyteriall government is inconsistent with Monarchy . Magistracie , Laws , Trading , Peace . &c. This must be proved from the principles or necessarie concomitants of Presbyteriall government , not from the actions or speeches of this or that private man , especially they having so said or done not in any reference to Presbyteriall Government , but occasionally in reference to such or such persons or purposes . As now if I should rake up the dunghill of all the Treasons , Conspiracies , Oppressions , Persecutions , Adulteries , Blasphemies , Heresies , Atheisticall opinions , Superstitions , Prophanities of such or such Prelates , ( of which the Histories of former times and late experience are full ) and thence conclude that Episcopall government is inconsistent with Monarchy , with the safety of the Kingdome , with the liberty of the Subject , with the peace of the Church , with piety , &c. Surely that same Author would be ready to answer me , that this must be proved from their received principles , nor from particular practises . Now that Ministers preaching Treason , or committing any other trespasse punishable by the law of the land , is not to be judged by the Civill Magistrate , nor any Civill Court , but may appeale from all these to the Ecclesiasticall Judicatory , is none of our principles : but it is a Popish and Prelaticall usurpation , as appeareth by the Brittish Ecclesiasticall constitutions , collected by Spel●●an . So that the Oxfordian missed his mark extreamly when he charged it upon Presbyterians , who hold that Ministers are as much subject unto , and as punishable by the Magistrate , as any other of the Subjects . And as Ministers are subject to every ordinance of man , so we suppose the Christian Magistrate will not take it ill to be subject to all the ordinances of Jesus Christ , I shall give you a short but clear account of our judgement concerning both these , in the words of the second book of the Discipline of the Church of Scotland , Chap. 1. As Ministers are subject to the judgement and punishment of the Magistrate in externall things , if they offend : so ought the Magistrates to submit themselves to the Discipline of the Church , if they transgresse in matters of C●●science and Religion . And lest you should think this proper to the Classicall and Synodicall government : M. Cotton will tell you it is just so in the Congregationall government , of the keyes of the Kingdome of heaven , pag. 53. As the Church ( saith he ) is subject to the sword of the Magistrate in things which concerne the Civill Peace : so the Magistrate ( if Christian ) is subject to the keyes of the Church , in matters which concerne the peace of his conscience , and the Kingdom of heaven . The latter cannot bee denied in thesi , no more then the former : and when it comes to the Hypothesis , there is much to bee trusted to the prudence and discretion of Pastors and ruling Elders ; and when all comes to all , the failing is more like to be in the defect , then in the excesse . But to say , that a Magistrate , because a Magistrate , is not bound in conscience to submit himselfe to the ordinance of Discipline , though he shedde innocent blood , commit adultery , bl●spheame the name of God , &c. may inferre for ought I know , that a Magistrate is not bound to be subject to any of all the ordinances of Jesus Christ . It is condemned as an error in Plato , that he held it lawfull for a Magistrate to make an officious lie , for the good of the Common-wealth ; but not lawfull for a Subject . The error of our Civilians is greater , who will have Magistrates so to rule us , that Christ shall not rule them . Civilian . I suppose it is high time to adjourne , till we 〈◊〉 another occasion of amicable and free confe●e●● which time it is like enough our opinions ●●y●● 〈◊〉 accord . The points of which we have talked a●● 〈◊〉 many and weighty , which therefore I will take to 〈◊〉 second thoughts . And so much for this time , Far - 〈◊〉 . Divine . Consider what I say , and the Lord give you understand●●● in all things . FINIS . Errata . PAg. 12. l. 20. country , read County . p. 15. l. 13. op●●r . up●● p● l. 2. 3. civill worship , r. civill fellowship . Ibid. l. 15. C●●●● , r , 〈◊〉 Ibid. in Marg. redbat , r. redibat . p. 21.10 . that , r. adde that . p. 〈◊〉 l. 13. care , r. law . Ibid. ex , r. & . p. 30. l. 17. Witen●ogurdus , r. 〈◊〉 bogurdus . Smaller errors and punctations , and the like , the 〈◊〉 der will pardon . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A42764e-220 * Deut. 23.15 . * ●●al . 78.34 . Caiv. Opuse . de S●andalis gu●s Evang●l● pro 〈◊〉 la●●● in Germanian 〈◊〉 , & ●●●zae adbuc e●sent corum 〈◊〉 , qu● ad tuendam bonam causam videbantur animati , ha●que f●●ucia susceptum esset luctuosum b●c bellum , quodque , insel●c●ter● 〈◊〉 : ●rectis ● magnas spes , p●rt●s nostrae animis ; d●xi al quando publ●è , plus à nostra , quàm hostium victoria , nobis instare pericul●●● eque enim tam● m●tuenda● esse ullas clades , quàm n●m●s triumpha●e , ●t ita loquar , Evangelium , quod nos adinsolentiam efferret . No● vero me i●ius voc●s bod●e quoque paenites . Nisi prophanae licentiae Dominis matu . e obviam ●●sset , morbus fu●sset temporis successis procemodum incurab●lis . Nulle dollrinae piisgu● monitionibus fuisset authoritas , &c. Act. & Monu vol. z. p. 1373. edit. 1583. In vit. Iul. agri● . Matth. 6.33 . M●l 3.10 . Isa. 2● . 1.1 . 〈◊〉 ● . 30 . 〈…〉 . 〈…〉 P●●l . 2●● . Antiqd . 8 c. 2. Hag. 1.2 . De Repub. l. ● . c. 12. Quicunque Principes atque Re●pub . Semet ipsas conservare cupiunt , in id unum prae caeteris , incumbere debeu● , ut verum religionis cul●umrecte instituant & vanerentur . Et infra , quod si haec tam d●ligens cura divini cultus , à Reipub. Christian● Princip●bus observata esset , secundum primā institutionem , & praecepta ejus , qui illam nobis primum tradidit : longe majori faelicitate , a● pace in orbe Christi●●● frueremur . Valerius Maximus l. 1. c. 2. gives us fix instances of examplarie judgements among the Romans ; which were observed to fall upon such as despised Religion , & the honour of the Gods . Iob. 10.2 . 1. Cor. 3.18 . Rom. 12.2 . Luk. 16.10 . 1. King. 12.33 . Isa 22.21 , 2● . Luk. 1.33 . Tr●ct . 62. in Acta . De jure natur . & Gentium . l● . 2. cap. 4. Proselytus Iustitiae , utcunque nova●o patriae nom●ne Iudaeus d●c●●tur , no● tam quidem ●●vis Iudaicus simpliciter censendus esset quam peregrinus semper cu● jur● quamplirima ●●ter cives . S●lden . loc. citat . De anno civili Iudaeor cap 18. Neque enimà Templo , Sacrificiis , aut Conv u●ib●s sacris om●ino quis apud cos ex sententia ●liqua Excommunicationis , sive sivensi , sive alia hum●na arcendus er●● . Solden de Ihre natur . & Gent. li. 4. c. 9. Atque 〈◊〉 plane à communicatione orationis , & conventus , & omnis sancti commerci● relegabatur , ●●●madmodum ae hujusmodi an●themate , sub i●itii● Ecclesiae Christianae loquitur Tertullianus . Drusius Quast. & Resp. lib. 1. quaest. 9. Solcbant autem vet●res ( Judaei ) si qui● gravius deliquerat , primum eum mavere caelu Ecclesiastico : si non emendabat se , tum feritbant anathemate : quod si ne tum quidem redbat ad frugem , ultimo at postremo loco sa●●tizaba●t . Iohannes Coch. annot. in Exc Gemar . Sanedrim . cap. 1. Qui simpliciter excommunicatu● est ( menud●e ) est ille quidem separatus à caetu , it a ut provero membro Ecclesiae non habeatur . Dr. Buxt●rf . dissert. de literis Hebraeor . th . 49. hath observed a notable passage in Pirke , and in Iela●●●d●un , which maketh much for this po'nt in hand . It is concerning the Samaritans , who being circumcised by two Elders of Israel sent to them , and having received the book of the Law , were afterwards upon just causes excommunicated by Ezra . Quid secit Esr●● & Zerubbabel filius Shealtiel , & Iehosua filius Iehozadek ? Convocaverunt totum caetum in Templum Domini , & ve●●re fecerunt trecentos Sacerdotes , tr●centos pueros , trecentas buccinas , & trecentos libros legis i● manu ●orum , qui elangeba●t , Levitae ●●o canebant & psallebant , & excommunicabant ( i● lelammeden● {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that is , they did excommunicate in all the three degrees or kinds of excommunication ) Cutheos per secretum nominis Tetragrammati , & per Scripturam quae scripta suit in Tabulis , & per anathema domus Iudicii superioris , & per anathema judicii inferioris ; Ne quis unquam ex Israele comederet panem Cuthaei , unde dixerunt ; Quisquis comederit carnem Cuthei , perinde est ac si comederet carnem perei : it●● ne quisquam Cuthaeum faceret proselytum , h. c. in Iuda snum reciperet , &c. Whereby it is manifest , that the Jewish excommunication was a shutting out as well from sacred as from civill communion , and that by publick Authority . De anno civili , cap. 18. Exod. 30.38 Lev. 7.15.17 . Num. 29.13 . 20. C●rtum quid●m e●t , Pa●lum ve●l● bun● incestum ●overi c●mmunion● Ec●lesia : ● d i● vu't fier● ab i●sa Ecclesia : Cori●t●iaca , dice●s , vers. 13. Tollite ilium s●●leratum de medio vestrum v●lt ●nim id fieri mi●i●terii ordinarii ●●●h●rit●te M●lia . uttes , lib. 2. ●ap . 11. 2 Chro. 15.13 . 2 Chro 34.32 . Ezra 10.8 . 2 Kings 23.5 . Deut. 13.5 . 6. Deut. 17.17 , 18 , 19. Isay 49.23 . 2 Chro. 19.6 . ●o . 16. ● . 2 Tim. 2.17 , 18 Act. 18.17 . Pag. 76. Pag. 26. Pag. 13 , 14.15 . ●●●el . ●●●●aen . , tom . 1. pag. 413 Nullus au●em Rex bab●t porestatem constituend . prectium super aliquem Ecclesiasticum sacris or denibus obligatum , vel super membra , vel sanguinem , vel Saraed ejus , vel super aliquem de suis , qu●a quisque Ecclesiast : cus ut praedictus , babet potest●tē per leg●m Ecclesiasticam orob . and in Synodo , quodl●be : nocum●atum vel da●mum qued ei l●icus sa●iat , aut Rex aut alius . Item nu●rtenus tales Ecclesiasticus potest compells ad re●pond●●●●● ali●●●i extra Synodum , de delict is s●bi oppositis . Du●●nus de sacr. ecci . minist ●i 1. c. 2. canfesseth that de causes civilibus Clericorum , nan Sacerdotes elim , sed Praesi●es & mgis Magistratus ●●● s●●●ant , &c. Verum Constitutiones Romanorum Pontisicum , hu●e juri uon parum derogevorun● quibus ca●cum est n●n so'um ut clevici ad Mag str●t●s tribunal i●●viti non trabantur , s●d ut ●● v●lo●tes ●uidem jurisdictioni Magstratus se subj●cere pas●●nl , s●ve civ●lis sit , sive criminal●s camsa . 
A61546	----	A discourse concerning the power of excommunication in a Christian church, by way of appendix to the Irenicum by Edward Stillingfleet ... Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699. 1662 Approx. 91 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 19 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2004-08 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A61546 Wing S5583 ESTC R38297 17288836 ocm 17288836 106329 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A61546) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 106329) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 1103:8) A discourse concerning the power of excommunication in a Christian church, by way of appendix to the Irenicum by Edward Stillingfleet ... Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699. Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699. Irenicum. [2], 31 p. Printed for Henry Mortlock ..., London : 1662. Reproduction of original in the Cambridge University Library. Includes bibliographical references. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Church of England -- Government. Excommunication. Church polity. 2004-02 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 SPi Global Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2004-06 Melanie Sanders Sampled and proofread 2004-06 Melanie Sanders Text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A DISCOURSE Concerning the POWER OF EXCOMMUNICATION IN A Christian Church ▪ By way of Appendix to the IRENICUM . BY EDWARD STILLINGFLEET , Rector of Sutton in Bedfordshire . LONDON , Printed for Henry Mortlock , at the sign of the Phoenix in St. Pauls Church-yard , neer the Little North-door . 1662. A DISCOURSE Concerning The Power of Excommunication IN A Christian Church . IT is a matter of daily observation and experience in the world , how hard it is to keep the eyes of the understanding clear in its judgement of things , when it is too far engaged in the dust of controversie . It being so very difficult to well manage an impetuous pursuit after any opinion , nothing being more common then to see men outrun their mark , and through the force of their speed to bee carryed as farr beyond it , as others in their opinion fall short of it . There is , certainly , a kind of ebriety of the mind , as well as of the body , which makes it so unstable and pendulous , that it oft times reeles from one extream unto the quite contrary . This , as it is obvious in most eager controvertists of all ages , so especially in such , who have discovered the falsity of an opinion they were once confident of , which they think they can never after run farr enough from : So that while they start at an apparition they so much dread , they run into those untroden paths , wherein they lose both themselves and the truth they sought for . Thus wee find it to be in the present controversie , for many out of their just zeal against the extravagancies of those who scrued up Church power to so high a peg , that it was thought to make perpetuall dis●ord with the Common-wealth , could never think themselves free from so great an inconvenience , till they had melted down all Spiritual power into the Civil State , and dissolved the Church into the Common-wealth . But that the world may see I have not been more forward to assert the just power of the Magistrate in Ecclesiasticalls , as well as Civills , then to defend the fundamental Rights of the Church , I have taken this opportunity , more fully to explain and vindicate that part of the Churches power , which lies in reference to offenders ? It being the main thing struck at by those who are the followers of that noted Physitian , who handled the Church so ill , as to deprive her of her expulsive faculty of Noxious humours , and so left her under a miserere mei . I shall therefore endeavour to give the Church her due , as well as Caesar his , by making good this following principle or hypothesis , upon which the whole hinge of this controversie turnes , viz. that the power of inflicting censures upon offenders in a Christian Church , is a fundamentall right , resulting from the constitution of the Church , as a society by Jesus Christ , and that the seat of this power is in those Officers of the Church , who have derived their power originally from the Founder of this society , and act by vertue of the Laws of it . For the cleare stating of this controversie , it will bee necessary to explain , what that Power is , which I attribute to the Church , and in what notion the Church is to be considered as it Exerciseth this Power . First , concerning the proper notion of Power , by it I cannot see any thing else to bee understood , then a right of Governing , or ordering things which belong to a Society . And so Power implies only a moral faculty in the person enjoying it , to take care ne quid civitas detrimenti capiat , whereby it is evident that every well constituted Society must suppose a Power within its self of ordering things belonging to its welfare , or else it were impossible , either the being or the rights and priviledges of a Society could bee long preserved . Power then in its general and abstracted notion , doth not necessarily import either meer authority , or proper coaction , for these to any impartial judgement , will appear to bee rather the severall modes whereby power is exercised , then any proper ingredients of the specifick nature of it ; which in generall , imports no more then a right to Govern a constituted Society , but how that right shall bee exercised , must bee resolved not from the notion of Power , but from the nature and constitution of that particular Society in which it is lodged and inherent . It appears then from hence to bee a great mistake and abuse of well natured readers , when all Power is necessarily restrained , either to that which is properly coercive , or to that which is meerly arbitrary and onely from consent . The originall of which mistake is , the stating the notion of Power from the use of the Word , either in ancient Roman authors , or else in the Civil Laws , both which are freely acknowledged to bee strangers to the exercise of any other Power , then that which is meerly authoritative and perswasive , or that which is Coactive and Penal . The ground of which is , because they were ignorant of any other way of conveyance of Power , besides external force and arbitrary consent , the one in those called Legal Societies or Civitates , the other Collegia and hetaeriae . But to us that do acknowledge that God hath a right of commanding men to what duty hee please himself , and appointing a Society upon what terms best please him , and giving a Power to particular persons to govern that Society , in what way shall tend most to advance the honour of such a Society , may easily bee made appear , that there is a kind of power neither properly coactive nor meerly arbitrary , viz. such a one as immediately results from Divine institution , and doth suppose consent to submit to it as a necessary Duty in all the members of this Society . This Power , it is evident , is not meerly arbitrary either in the Governours or members , for the Governours derive their Power , or right of Governing from the institution of Christ and are to bee regulated by his Laws in the execution of it , and the members , though their Consent bee necessarily supposed , yet that consent is a Duty in them , and that duty doth imply their submission to the Rulers of this Society : neither can this power bee called coactive , in the sense it is commonly taken , for coactive power , and external force are necessary correlates to each other , but wee suppose no such thing as a power of outward force to bee given to the Church as such , for that properly belongs to a Common-wealth . But the power which I suppose to bee lodged in the Church , is such a power as depends upon a Law of a superiour , giving right to Govern , to particular persons over such a Society , and making it the Duty of all members of it to submit unto it , upon no other penalties , then the exclusion of them from the priviledges , which that Society enjoys . So that supposing such a Society , as the Church is , to bee of Divine institution , and that Christ hath appointed Officers to rule it , it necessarily follows , that those Officers must derive their Power , i. e. their right of Governing this Society , not meerly from consent and confederation of parties , but from that Divine institution , on which the Society depends . The want of understanding the right notion of power in the sense here set down , is certainiy the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Erastianisme , and that which hath given occasion to so many to question any such thing as Power in the Church , especially , when the more zealous then judicious defenders of it have rather chosen to hang it upon some doubtful places of Scripture , then on the very nature and constitution of the Christian Church , as a Society instituted by Jesus Christ. This being then the nature of power in general , it is , I suppose clear , that an outward coactive force is not necessary in order to it ; for if some may have a right to govern , and others may bee obliged to obedience to those persons antecedently , to any civil constitution ; then such persons have a just power , to inflict censures upon such as transgress the rules of the society , without any outward force . It is here very impertinent to dispute , what effects such censures can have upon wilful persons without a coactive power ; if I can prove , that there is a right to inflict them in Church officers , and an obligation to submit to them in all offenders , I am not to trouble my self with the event of such things as depend upon divine institutions . I know it is the great objection of the followers of Erastus , that Church censures are inflicted upon persons unwilling to receive them , and therefore must imply external and coactive force , which is repugnant to the nature of a Church . But this admits ( according to the principles here established ) of a very easie solution ; for I deny not , that Churchpower goes upon consent , but then it s very plain here was an antecedent consent to submit to censures in the very entrance into this Society , which is sufficient to denominate it a voluntary act of the persons undergoing it ; and my reason is this , every person entring into a Society , parts with his own freedome and liberty , as to matters concerning the governing of it , and professeth submission to the rules and orders of it : now a man having parted with his freedome already , cannot reassume it when hee please , for then hee is under an obligation to stand to the Covenants made at his entrance ; and consequently his undergoing what shall bee laid upon him by the Laws of this society , must bee supposed to bee voluntary as depending upon his consent at first entrance , which in all societies must bee supposed to hold still , else there would follow nothing but confusion in all Societies in the world , if every man were at liberty to break his Covenants when any thing comes to lye upon him according to the rules of the Society , which hee out of some private design would bee unwilling to undergo . Thus much may serve to settle aright the notion of power ; the want of understanding which , hath caused all the confusion of this controversie . The next thing is , in what notion wee are to consider the Church , which is made the subject of this power ? As to which wee are to consider ; This power either as to it 's right or in actu primo , or as to it's exercise , or in actu secundo : Now if wee take this power as to the fundamental right of it , then it belongs to that universal Church of Christ , which subsists as a visible Society , by vertue of that Law of Christ , which makes an owning the profession of Christianity the duty of all Church members . If wee consider this power in the exercise of it then ( it being impossible that the universal Church should perform the executive part of this power relating to offences ) I suppose it lodged in that particular Society of Christians , which are united together in one body in the community of the same Government ; but yet , so as , that the administration of this power , doth not belong to the body of the society considered complexly , but to those officers in it , whose care and charge it is , to have a peculiar oversight and inspection over the Church , and to redress all disorders in it . Thus the visive faculty is fundamentally lodged in the soul , yet all exterior acts of sight are performed by the eyes , which are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Overseers of the body , as the other are of the Church , so that the exercise and administration of this power , belongs to the special Officers and Governours of the Church , none else being capable of exercising this power of the Church as such , but they on whom it is setled by the founder of the Church it 's self . This Society of the Church may bee again considered , either as subsisting without any influence from the civil power , or as it is owned by , and incorporated into a Christian state . I therefore demand , whether it bee absolutely necessary for the subsistence of this Christian society , to bee upheld by the civil power or no ? And certainly none who consider the first and purest ages of the Christian Church , can give any entertainment to the Affirmative , because then the Church flourished in it's greatest purity , not only when not upheld , but when most violently opposed by the civil power ; if so , then it 's being united with the civil state is only accidental , as to the constitution of a Church ; and if this bee only accidental , then it must bee supposed furnished with every thing requisite to it 's well ordering , antecedenty to any such union , and abstractly from it . For can wee imagine our Blessed Saviour should institute a society , and leave it destitute of means to uphold it's self , unless it fell into the hands of the civil power ? or that hee left every thing tending thereto , meerly to prudence , and the arbritrary constitutions of the persons joyning together in this society ? Did our Saviour take care there should bee a society , and not provide for means to uphold it ? Nay , it is evident , hee not only appointed a society , but officers to rule it ; had those officers then a Right to Govern it or no , by vertue of Christs institution of them ? if not , they were rather Bibuli than Caesares , Cyphers than Consuls in the Church of God. If they had a power to govern , doth not that necessarily imply a Right to inflict censures on offenders ? unless 〈◊〉 will suppose that either there can bee no offenders in a Christian Church , or that those offenders do not violate the Laws of the society , or there bee some prohibition for them to exercise their power over them ( which is to give power with one hand , and take it away with the other ) or that this power cannot extend so far as to exclude any from the priviledges of the Church , which is the thing to bee discussed . Having thus cleared our way , I now come to the resolution of the question its self , in order to which I shall endeavour to demonstrate with what evidence the subject is capable of these following things . First that the Church is a peculiar Society in its own Nature , distinct from the Common-wealth . Secondly , that the power of the Church over its members doth not arise from meer confederation or consent of parties . Thirdly , That this power of the Church doth extend to the exclusion of offenders from the priviledges of it . Fourthly , That the fundamental rights of the Church do not escheat to the Common-wealth upon their being united in a Christian State. If these principles bee established , the Churches power will stand upon them , as on a firm and unmoveable basis . I begin with the first . That the Church is a peculiar Society in its own nature , distinct from the Common-wealth , which I prove by these arguments . 1 Those Societies , which are capable of subsisting apart from each other , are really , and in their own nature , distinct from one another , but so it is with the Church and Common-wealth . For there can bee no greater evidence of a reall distinction than mutual separation ; and I think the proving the possibility of the souls existing , separate from the body , is one of the strongest arguments to prove it to bee a substance really distinct from the body , to which it is united ; although wee are often fain to go the other way to work , and to prove possibility of separation from other arguments evincing the soul to bee a distinct substance ; but the reason of that is for want of evidence as to the state of separate souls , and their visible existence which is repugnant to the immateriality of their natures . But now , as to the matter in hand , wee have all evidence desirable , for wee are not put to prove possibil●●y of separation , meerly from the different constitution of the things united , but wee have evidence to sense of it , that the Churh hath subsisted when it hath been not onely separated from but persecuted by all civil power . It is with many men as to the union of Church and State , as it is with others , as to the union of the Soul and Body , when they observe how close the union is , and how much the Soul makes use of the Animal Spirits in most of its operations , and how great a sympathy there is between them , that , like Hyppocrates his Twins , they laugh and weep ' together , they are shrewdly put to it , how to fancy the Soul to bee any thing else then a more vigorous mode of matter ; so these observing how close an Union and Dependence there is between the Church and State in a Christian Common-wealth , and how much the Church is beholding to the civil power in the Administration of its functions , are apt to think that the Church is nothing but a higher mode of a Common-wealth , considered as Christian. But when it is so evident that the Church hath , and may subsist supposing it abstracted from all Civil Power , it may bee a sufficient demonstration that however neer they may be when united , yet they are really and in their own nature , distinct from each other . Which was the thing to bee proved . 2 Those are distinct societies , which have every thing distinct in their nature from each other , which belong to the constitution or government of them ; but this is evident , as to the Church and Common-wealth , which will appear , because their Charter is distinct , or that which gives them their being as a society : Civil societies are founded upon the necessity of particular mens parting with their peculiar Rights , for the preservation of themselves , which was the impulsive cause of their entring into societies , but that which actually speaks them to bee a society , is the mutual consent of the several parties joyning together , whereby they make themselves to bee one Body ; and to have one common interest . So Cicero de Repub. defines populus , to bee caetus multitudinis , juris consensu et utilitatis communione sociatus . There is no doubt , but Gods general providence , is as evidently seen in bringing the World into societies and making them live under Government , as in disposing all particular events which happen in those societies ; but yet the way , which providence useth in the constitution of these societies , is by inclining men to consent to associate for their mutual benefit and advantage : So that natural reason consulting for the good of mankinde , as to those Rights which men enjoy in common with each other , was the main foundation upon which all civil societies were erected . Wee finde no positive Law enacting the beeing of civil societies , because nature it's self would prompt men for their own conveniencies to enter into them . But the ground and foundation of that society , which we call a Church , is a matter which natural reason and common notions can never reach to ; and therefore an associating for the preserving of such , may bee a Philosophical Society , but a Christian it cannot bee : And that would make a Christian Church to bee nothing else but a society of Essens or an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Pythagorians , who do either not understand or not consider whereon this Christian society is founded ; for it is evident they look on it as a meerly voluntary thing , that is not at all setled by any Divine positive Law. The truth is , there is no principle more consistent with the opinion of those who deny any Church power in a Christian state , then this is , and it is that , which every one , who will make good his ground must bee driven to ; for it is evident , that in matters meerly voluntary , and depending only on consideration , such things being lyable to a Magistrates power , there can be no plea from mutual consent to justifie any opposition to supream authority in a Common-Wealth . But then , how such persons can bee Christians , when the Magistrates would have them to bee otherwise , I cannot understand ; nor how the primitive Martyrs were any other then a company of Fools or Mad-men , who would hazard their lives , for that which was a meer arbritrary thing , and which they had no necessary obligation upon them to profess . Mistake mee not , I speak not here of meer acts of discipline , but of the duty of outward professing Christianity ; if this bee a duty , then a Christian society is setled by a positive Law , if it bee not a duty , then they are fools who suffer for it : So that this question resolved into it's principles , leads us higher than wee think for , and the main thing in debate must bee , whether there bee an obligation upon conscience for men to associate in the profession of Christianity or no ? If there bee , then the Church , which is nothing else but such an association , is established upon a positive Law of Christ ; if there bee not , then those inconveniencies follow , which are already mentioned . Wee are told indeed by the Leviathan with confidence enough , that no precepts of the Gospel are Law , till enacted by civil authority ; but it is little wonder , that hee , who thinks an immaterial substance implies a contradiction , should think as much of calling any thing a Law , but what hath a civil sanction . But I suppose all those , who dare freely own a supreme and infinite essence to have been the Creator , and to bee the ruler of the World , will acknowledge his Power to oblige conscience , without being beholding to his own creature to enact his Laws , that men might bee bound to obey them . Was the great God fain to bee beholding to the civil authority hee had over the Jewish Common-Wealth ( their government being a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) to make his Laws obligatory to the consciences of the Jews ? What , had not they their beings from God ? and can there bee any greater ground of obligation to obedience , than from thence ? Whence comes civil power to have any Right to oblige men more , than God , considered as Governour of the World , can have ? Can there bee indeed no other Laws according to the Leviathans Hypothesis , but only the Law of nature and civil Laws ? But I pray whence comes the obligation to either of these , that these are not as arbitrary , as all other agreements are ? And is it not as strong a dictate of nature as any can bee ( supposing that there is a God ) that a creature which receives it's being from another , should bee bound to obey him , not only in the resultancies of his own nature , but with the arbitrary constitutions of his will : Was Adam bound to obey God or no , as to that positive precept of eating the forbiden fruit , if no civil Sanction had been added to that Law ? The truth is , such Hypotheses as these are , when they are followed close home , will bee found to Kennel in that black Den , from whence they are loath to bee thought to have proceeded . And now , supposing , that every full Declaration of the Will of Christ , as to any positive institution , hath the force and power of a Law upon the consciences of all , to whom it is sufficiently proposed : I proceed to make appear , that such a divine positive Law there is , for the existence of a Church , as a visible body and society in the World ; by which I am far from meaning such a conspicuous society , that must continue in a perpetual visibility in the same place ; I finde not the least intimation of any such thing in Scripture ; but that there shall alwaies bee some where or other , in the world , a society owning and professing Christianity , may bee easily deduced from thence ; and especially on this account , that our Saviour hath required this , as one of the conditions in order to eternal felicity , that all those who beleeve in their hearts , that Jesus is the Christ , must likewise confess him with their mouths to the world : and therefore , as long as there are men to beleeve in Christ , there must bee men that will not bee ashamed to associate , on the account of the Doctrine hee hath promulged to the world . That one Phrase in the New Testament , so frequently used by our blessed Saviour , of the Kingdome of Heaven ( importing a Gospel state ) doth evidently declare a society , which was constituted by him , on the principles of the Gospel Covenant . Wherefore should our Saviour call Disciples , and make Apostles , and send them abroad with full commission to gather and initiate Disciples by Baptism ; did hee not intend a visible society for his Church ? Had it not been enough for men to have cordially beleeved the truth of the Gospel , but they must bee enter'd in a solemn visible way , and joyn in participation of visible Symbols of bread and wine , but that our Saviour required external profession and society in the Gospel as a necessary duty , in order to obtaining the priviledges conveyed by his Magna Charta in the Gospel . I would fain know , by what argument wee can prove , that any humane Legislator , did ever intend a Common-wealth to bee governed according to his mode , by which wee cannot prove that Christ by a positive Law , did command such a society , as should be governed in a visible manner , as other societies are ? Did he not appoint officers himself in the Church , and that of many ranks and degrees ? Did hee not invest those officers with authority to rule his Church ? Is it not laid as a charge on them , to take heed to that flock over which God had made them Overseers ? Are there not Rules laid down for the peculiar exercise of their Government over the Church in all the parts of it ? Were not these officers admitted into their function by a most solemn visible rite of imposition of hands ? And are all these solemn transactions a meer peece of sacred Pageantry ? and they will appear to bee little more , if the Society of the Church bee a meer arbitrary thing , depending onely upon consent and confederation , and not subsisting by vertue of any Charter from Christ , or some positive Law , requiring all Christians to joyn in Church Society together . But if now from hence it appears ( as certainly it cannot but appear ) that this Society of the Church doth subsist by vertue of a Divine positive Law , then it must of necessity be distinct from any civil Society , and that on these accounts , First because there is an antecedent obligation on conscience to associate on the account of Christianity , whether Humane Laws prohibit or command it . From whence , of necessity it follows , that the constitution of the Church is really different from that of the Common-wealth ; because whether the Common-wealth bee for , or against this Society , all that own ir are bound to profess it openly , and declare themselves members of it . Whereas were the Church and Common-wealth really and formally the same , all obligation to Church Society would arise meerly from the Legislative Power of the Common-wealth . But now there being a Divine Law , binding in conscience , whose obligation cannot bee superseded by any Humane Law , it is plain and evident , where are such vastly different obligations , there are different Powers ; and in this sense I know no incongruity in admitting imperium in imperio , if by it wee understand no external coactive power , but an internal power laying obligation on conscience , distinct from the power lodged in a Common-wealth considered as such . An outward coactive power was alwayes disowned by Christ , but certainly not an internall Power over Conscience to oblige all his Disciples to what Duties hee thought fit . Secondly I argue from those Officers , whose rights to govern this Society are founded on that Charter , whereby the Society its self subsists . Now I would willingly know why , when our Saviour disowned all outward power in the world , yet he should constitute a Society and appoint Officers in it , did hee not intend a peculiar distinct Society from the other Societies of the world . And therefore the argument frequently used against Church-power , because it hath no outward force with it by the constitution of Christ , is a strong argument to mee of the peculiarity of a Christian Society from a Common-wealth , because Christ so instituted it , as not to have it Ruled at first by any outward force or power . When Christ saith his Kingdome was not of this world ; hee implies , that hee had a Society that was governed by his Laws in the world , yet distinct from all mundane Societies : had not our Saviour intended his Church to have been a peculiar Society , distinct from a Common-wealth , why our Saviour should interdict the Apostles the use of a civil coactive power : Or why instead of sending abroad Apostles to preach the Gospel , hee did not imploy the Governours of Common-wealths to have inforced Christianity by Laws and temporal edicts , and the several Magistrates to have impowred several persons under them to preach the Gospel in their several Territories ? And can any thing bee more plain , by our Saviours taking a contrary course , then that hee intended a Church Society to bee distinct from civil , and the power belonging to it , ( as well as the Officers ) to bee of a different nature from that which is settled in a Common-wealth . I here suppose , that Christ hath by a positive Law established the Government of his Church upon Officers of his own appointment ; which I have largely proved elsewhere , and therefore suppose it now . Thirdly , I argue from the peculiar rights belonging to these Societies . For if every one born in the Common-wealth , have not thereby a right to the priviledges of the Church ; nor every one by being of the Church , any right to the benefits of the Common-wealth ; it must necessarily follow , that these are distinct from one another . If any one by being of the Common-wealth , hath right to Church priviledges , then every one born in a Common-wealth may challenge a right to the Lords Supper without Baptism or open professing Christianity , which I cannot think any will bee very ready to grant . Now there being by Divine appointment the several rights of Baptisme and the Lords Supper , as peculiar badges of the Church as a visible Society , it is evident , Christ did intend it a Society distinct from the Common-wealth . Fourthly , I argue from the different ends of these societies , a Common-Wealth is constituted for civil ends , and the Church for spiritual : for ends are to be judged by the primary constitution , but now it is plain , the end of civil society is for preservation of mens rights as men ( therefore Magistracy is called by St. Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) but this Christian society doth not respect men under the connotation of men but as Christians . The answer given to this is very short , and insufficient when it is said , that every man in a Common-Wealth , is to act upon spiritual accounts and ends : For there is a great deal of difference between Christianities having an influence upon mens actings in a Common-Wealth , and making a society the same with a Common-Wealth . To argue therefore from one to another , is a shortness of discourse I cannot but wonder at : unless it could bee proved , that Christianity aimed at nothing else but regulating men in the affairs of a Common-Wealth , which is a taske I suppose will not bee undertaken . Lastly , I argue from the peculiar offences against this society , which are , or may bee distinct from those against a Common-Wealth , I deny not , but most times they are the same ; but frequently they differ , and when they are the same , yet the consideration of them is different in the Church and Common-Wealth , for which I shall suppose the six arguments produced in the last Chapter of the first part to stand good , which will strongly hold to excommunication in the Christian Church , though there produced only for the Jewish . I would fain know what is to bee done in many offences , known to bee against the Laws of Christ , and which tend to the dishonour of the Christian society , which the civil and Municipal Laws , either do not , or may not take cognizance of ? Thus much may serve , as I think to make evident , that the Church in it's own nature is a peculiar society distinct from a Common-Wealth , which was the first proposition to bee proved . The second is , That the power of the Church over it's members in case of offences , doth not arise meerly from confederation and consent , though it doth suppose it . This Church power may bee considered two waies . Either , first , as it implies the right in some of inflicting censures . Or secondly , as it implies in others , the duty of submitting to censures inflicted ; now as to both these , I shall prove that their original is higher than meer confederation . 1. As to the right of inflicting censures , on these accounts . First , what ever society doth subsist by vertue of a divine constitution , doth by vertue thereof derive all power for it's preservation , in peace , unity , and purity ; but it is plain , that a power of censuring offenders , is necessary for the Churches preservation in peace and purity ; and it is already proved , that the Church hath it's Charter from Christ , and therefore from him it hath a power to inflict punishments on offenders , suitable to the nature of the society they are of . I am very prone to think that the ground of all the mistakes on this subject have risen from hence , that some , imprudently enough , have fixt the original of this power on some ambiguous places of Scripture , which may , and it may bee , ought to bee taken in a different sense ; and their adversaries , finding those places weak and insufficient proofes of such a power , have from thence rejected any such kinde of power at all ; But certainly if wee should reject every truth that is weakly proved by some who have undertaken it , I know no opinion would bid so fair for acceptance as Scepticisme , and that in reference to many weighty & important truths ; for how weakly have some proved the existence of a Deity , the immortality of the soul , and the truth of the Scriptures , by such arguments , that if it were enough to overthrow an opinion to bee able to answer some arguments brought for it , Atheism it's self would become plausible . It can bee then no evidence , that a thing is not true , because some arguments will not prove it ; and truly , as to the matter in hand , I am fully of the opinion of the excellent H. Grotius , speaking of excommunication in the Christian Church : Neque ad eam rem peculiare praeceptum desideratur , cum ecclesiae caetu , a Christo semel constituto , omnia illa imperata censeri debent , sine quibus ejus caetûs puritas retineri non potest . And therefore men spend needless pains to prove an institution of this power by some positive precept , when Christs founding his Church , as a particular society , is sufficient proof hee hath endowed it with this fundamental Right , without which the society , were arena sine calce , a company of persons without any common tye of union among them ; for if there bee any such union , it must depend on some conditions , to bee performed by the members of that society , which how could they require from them , if they have not power to exclude them upon non-performance ? 2. I prove the divine original of this power from the special appointment and designation of particular officers by Jesus Christ , for the ruling this society . Now I say , that Law which provides there shall bee officers to govern , doth give them power to govern , suitable to the nature of their society : Either then you must deny , that Christ hath by an unalterable institution appointed a Gospel Ministry , or that this Ministry hath no Power in the Church , or that their Power extends not to excommunication . The first I have already proved , the second follows from their appointment , for by all the titles given to Church Officers in Scripture ; it appears they had a Power over the Church , ( as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) all which as you well know , do import a right to govern the Society over which they are set . And that this power should not extend to a Power to exclude , convict offenders , seems very strange , when no other punishment can bee more suitable to the nature of the Society than this is ; which is a debarring him from the priviledges of that Society , which the offender hath so much dishonoured . Can there bee any punishment less imagined towards contumacious offenders then this is , or that carries in it less of outward and coactive force , it implying nothing but what the offender himself freely yeilded to at his entrance into this Society ? All that I can find replyed by any of the Adversaryes of the opinion I here assert , to the argument drawn from the institution and titles of the Officers of the Church , is , that all those titles which are given to the Ministers of the Gospel in the New Testament , that do import rule and government , are all to bee taken in a spirituall sense , as they are Christs Ministers and Ambassadors to preach his Word and declare his will to his Church . So that all power such persons conceive to lye in those titles , is onely Doctrinal and declarative ; but how true that is , let any one judge , that considers these things . 1. That there was certainly a power of discipline then in the Churches constituted by the Apostles , which is most evident not only from the passages relating to offendors in Saint Pauls Epistles , especially to the Corinthians and Thessalonians , but from the continued practice of succeeding ages , manifested by Tertullian , Cyprian , and many others . There being then a power of discipline in Apostolical Churches , there was a necessity it should be administred by some persons who had the care of those Churches ; and who were they but the several Pastors of them ? It being then evident that there was such a power , doth it not stand to common sense it should be implyed in such titles which in their natural importance do signifie a right to govern , as the names of Pastors and Rulers do ? 2. There is a diversity in Scripture made between Pastors and Teachers , Ephes. 4.11 . Though this may not ( as it doth not ) imply a necessity of two distinct offices in the Church , yet it doth a different respect and connotation in the same person ▪ and so imports that ruling carries in it somewhat more then meer teaching , and so the power implyed in Pastors to be more then meerly doctrinal , which is all I contend for , viz. A right to govern the flock committed to their charge . 3. What possible difference can be assigned between the Elders that rule well , and those which labour in Word and Doctrine , ( 1 Tim. 5.17 . ) if all their ruling were meerly labouring in the Word and Doctrine ? and all their governing nothing but teaching ? I intend not to prove an office of rulers distinct from teachers from hence ( which I know neither this place , nor any other will do ) but that the formal conception of ruling , is different from that of teaching . 4. I argue from the Analogy between the primitive Churches and the Synagogues , that as many of the names were taken from thence where they carried a power of Discipline with them , so they must do in some proportion in the Church ; or it were not easie understanding them . It is most certain the Presbyters of the Synagogue had a power of ruling ; and can you conceive the Bishops and Presbyters of the Church had none , when the Societies were much of the same constitution , and the Government of the one was transcribed from the other , as hath been already largely proved ? 5. The acts attributed to Pastors in Scripture , imply a power of Governing , distinct from meer Teaching ; such are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , used for a right to govern , Matth. 2.6 . Revel . 12.5 . — 19.15 . which word is attributed to Pastors of Churches in reference to their flocks . Acts 20.28 . 1 Pet. 5.2 . and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is applyed to Ministers , when they are so frequently called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which notes praesidentiam eum potestate ; for Hesychius renders is by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at Athens had certainly a power of Government in them . 6. The very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is attributed to those who have over-sight of Churches , 1 Cor. 12.8 . by which it is certainly evident , that a power more then doctrinal is understood , as that it could not then be understood of a power meerly civil . And this I suppose may suffice to vindicate this argument from the titles of Church-officers in the New Testament , that they are not insignificant things , but the persons who enjoyed them had a right to govern the Society over which the Holy-Ghost hath made them Over-seers . 3. I argue that Church power ariseth not meerly from consent , because the Church may exercise her power on such who have not actually confederated with her ; which is in admitting members into the Church : For if the Church-officers have power to judge whether persons are fit to be admitted , they have power to exclude from admission such whom they judge unfit , and so their power is exercised on those who are not confederated . To this it may be answered , That the consent to be judged , gives the Church power over the person suing for admission . I grant it doth , as to that particular person , but the right in general of judging concerning admission , doth argue an antecedent power to an actual confederation . For I will suppose that Christ should now appoint some Officers to found a Church , and gather a Society of Christians together , where there hath been none before : I now ask , Whether these Officers have power to admit any into the Church or no ? This I suppose cannot be denyed , for to what end else were they appointed ? If it be granted they have power to admit persons , and thereby make a Church , then they had power antecedently to any confederation ; for the confederation was subsequent to their admission ; and therefore they who had power to admit , could not derive their power from confederation . This argument , to me , puts the case out of dispute , that all Church-power cannot arise from meer confederation . And that which further evidenceth that the power of the Church doth not arise from meer consent , is that Deed of Gift whereby our Blessed Saviour did confer the Power of the Keyes on the Apostle Peter , as the representative in that action of the whole Colledge of the Apostles and Governours of the Church , of which power all the Apostles were actually infeoffed , John 20.23 . By which Power of the Keyes is certainly meant some administration in the Church , which doth respect it as a visible society , in which sense the Church is so frequently called , as in that place , the Kingdom of Heaven ; and in all probability the administration intended here by the Power of the Keyes , is that we are now discoursing of , viz. the Power of Admission into the Church of Christ in order to the pardon of the sins of all penitent believers , and the shutting out of such who were manifestly unworthy of so holy a communion . So that the Power of the Keyes doth not primarily respect exclusion out of the Church , and receiving into it again upon absolution , but it chiefly respects the Power of Admission into the Church , though by way of connotation and Analogy of reason it will carry the other along with it . For if the Apostles as Governours of the Church were invested with a power of judging of mens fitness for admission into the Church as members of it , it stands to the highest reason that they should have thereby likewise a power conveyed to them , of excluding such as are unworthy after their admission , to maintain communion with the Church . So that this interpretation of the power of the Keyes , is far from invalidating the power of the Church , as to its censuring offendors ; all that it pretends to , is only giving a more natural and genuine sense of the power of the Keyes , which will appear so to be , if we consider these things . 1. That this power was given to Saint Peter before any Christian Church was actually formed , which ( as I have elsewhere made manifest ) was not done till after Christs resurrection ; when Christ had given the Apostles their commission to go preach and baptize , &c. Matth. 28.19 . Is it not therefore far more rational that the power of the Keyes here given , should respect the founding of a Church and admission into it , then ejection out of it ( before it was in being ) and receiving into it again ? And this we find likewise remarkably fulfilled in the person of the Apostle Peter , who opened the door of admission into the Christian Church , both to Jews and Gentiles . So the Jews by his Sermon at Pentecost , when about 3000. souls were brought into the Church of Christ. So the Gentiles , as is most evident in the story of Cornelius , Acts 10.28 . who was the first fruits of the Gentiles . So that if we should yield so far to the great inhancers of Saint Peters power , that something was intended peculiar to his person in the Keyes given him by our Saviour , we hereby see how rationally it may be understood without the least advantage to the extravagant pretensions of Saint Peters pretended successors . 2. The pardon of sin in Scripture is most annexed to Baptism and Admission into the Church , and thence it seems evident that the loosing of sin should be by admitting into the Church by Baptism , in the same sense by which Baptism is said to save us , and it is called the washing of regeneration , respecting the spiritual advantages which come by admission into the Church of Christ ; and so they are said to have their sins bound upon them , who continue refractory in their sins , as Simon Magus is said to be in the bonds of iniquity . 3. The Metaphor of the Keyes referrs most to admission into the house , and excluding out of it , rather then ejecting any out of it , and re-admitting them . Thus when Eliakim is said to have the Keyes of the house of David , it was in regard of his power to open and shut upon whom he pleased . And thus Cyprian , as our learned Mr. Thorndike observes , understands the power of binding and loosing in this sense , in his Epistle to John , where speaking of the remission of sins in Baptism , he brings these very words of our Saviour to Peter as the evidence of it ; That what he should loose on earth should be loosed in heaven ; and concludes with this sentence . Vnde intelligimus non nisi in Ecclesiâ praepositis & in Evangelicâ lege ac Dominicâ ordinati●ne fundatis licere baptizare , & remissam peccatorum dare ; foris autem nec ligari aliquid posse nec solvi , ubi non sit qui ligare possit aut solvere . That which I now inferr from this discourse is , that the power of the Church doth not arise from meer consent and confederation , both because this power doth respect those who have not actually consented to it , and because it is settled upon the Governours of the Church by divine institution . Thus it appears that the right of inflicting censures doth not result meerly ex confederatâ disciplinâ , which was the thing to be proved . The like evidence may be given , for the duty of submitting to penalties or Church-censures in the members of the Church : which that it ariseth not from meer consent of parties , will appear on these accounts . 1. Every person who enters this Society , is bound to consent , before he doth it , because of the obligation lying upon conscience to an open profession of Christianity , presently upon conviction of the understanding of the truth and certainty of Christian Religion . For when once the mind of any rational man is so far wrought upon by the influence of the Divine Spirit , as to discover the most rational and undoubted evidences which there are of the truth of Christianity , he is presently obliged to profess Christ openly , to worship him solemnly , to assemble with others for instruction and participation of Gospel-Ordinances ; and thence it follows that there is an antecedent obligation upon conscience to associate with others , and consequently to consent to be governed by the rulers of the Society which he enters into . So that this submission to the power of Church-officers in the exercise of Discipline upon offendors , is implyed in the very conditions of Christianity , and the solemn professing and undertaking of it . 2. It were impossible any Society should be upheld , if it be not laid by the founder of the Society as the necessary duty of all members to undergo the penalties which shall be inflicted by those who have the care of governing that Society , so they be not contrary to the Laws , nature , and constitution of it . Else there would be no provision made for preventing divisions and confusions which will happen upon any breach made upon the Laws of the Society . Now this obligation to submission to censures , doth speak something antecedently to the confederation , although the expression of it lies in the confederation its self . By this I hope we have made it evident that it is nothing else but a mistake in those otherwise learned persons , who make the power of censures in the Christian-Church to be nothing else but a lex cenfederatae disciplinae , whereas this power hath been made appear to be derived from a higher original then the meer arbitrary consent of the several members of the Church associating together : And how far the examples of the Synagogues under the Law , are from reaching that of Christian Churches in reference to this , because in these the power is conveyed by the founder of the Society , and not left to any arbitrary Constitutions , as it was among the Jews in their Synagogues . It cannot be denyed but consent is supposed , and confederation necessary , in order to Church power , but that is rather in regard of the exercise , then the original of it ; for although I affirm the original of this power to be of Divine institution , yet in order to the exercise of it in reference to particular persons ( who are not mentioned in the charter of the power its self ) it is necessary that the persons on whom it is exerted , should declare their consent and submission either by words or actions , to the rules and orders of this Society . Having now proved that the power of the Church doth not arise from meer consent of parties , the next grand inquiry is concerning the extent of this power , Whether it doth reach so far as to excommunication ? For some men who will not seem wholly to deny all power in the Church over offendors , nor that the Church doth subsist by divine institution , yet do wholly deny any such power as that of excommunication , and seem rather to say that Church officers may far more congruously to their office inflict any other mulct upon offendors , then exclude them from participation of Communion with others in the Ordinances and Sacraments of the Gospel : In order therefore to the clearing of this , I come to the third Proposition . That the power which Christ hath given to the officers of his Church , doth extend to the exclusion of contumacious offendors from the priviledges which this Society enjoyes . In these terms I rather choose to fix it , then in those crude expressions , wherein Erastus and some of his followers would state the question , and some of their imprudent adversaries have accepted it , viz. Whether Church-officers have power to exclude any from the Eucharist , Ob moralem impuritatem ? And the reasons why I wave those terms , are , 1. I must confess my self yet unsatisfied as to any convincing argument , whereby it can be proved that any were denyed admission to the Lords Supper , who were admitted to all other parts of Church-society , and owned as members in them . I cannot yet see any particular reason drawn from the nature of the Lords Supper above all other parts of divine worship , which should confine the censures of the Church meerly to that ordinance ; and so to make the Eucharist bear the same office in the body of the Church , which our new Anatomists tell us the parenchyme of the liver doth in the natural body , viz. to be colum sanguinis , to serve as a kind of strainer to separate the more gross and faeculent parts of the blood from the more pure and spirituous ; so the Lords Supper to strain out the more impure members of the Church from the more Holy and Spiritual . My judgement then is , that excommunication relates immediately to the cutting a person off from communion with the Churches visible society , constituted upon the ends it is ; but because communion is not visibly discerned but in administration and participation of Gospel ordinances , therefore exclusion doth chiefly refer to these , and because the Lords Supper is one of the highest priviledges which the Church enjoyes , therefore it stands to reason that censures should begin there . And in that sense suspension from the Lords Supper of persons apparently unworthy , may be embraced as a prudent , lawful and convenient abatement of the greater penalty of excommunication , and so to stand on the same general grounds that the other doth ; for qui potest majus , potest etiam minus , which will hold as well in moral as natural power , if there be no prohibition to the contrary , nor peculiar reason as to the one more then to the other . 2. I dislike the terms ob moralem impuritatem , on this account , because I suppose they were taken up by Erastus ▪ and from him by others as the controversie was managed concerning excommunication among the Jews , viz. whether it were meerly because of ceremonial , or else likewise because of moral impurity . As to which I must ingenuously acknowledge Erastus hath very much the advantage of his adversaries , clearly proving that no persons under the Law were excluded the Temple-worship because of moral impurity . But then withall I think he hath gained little advantage to his cause by the great and successful pains he hath taken in the proving of that ; my reason is , because the Temple-worship or the sacrifices under the Law were in some sense propitiatory , as they were the adumbrations of that grand sacrifice which was to be offered up for the appeasing of Gods wrath , viz. the blood of Christ ; therefore to have excluded any from participation of them , had been to exclude them from the visible way of obtaining pardon of sin ( which was not to be had without shedding of blood , as the Apostle tells us ) and from testifying their faith towards God , and repentance from dead works . But now under the Gospel those ordinances , which suppose admission into the Church by baptism , do thereby suppose an alsufficient sacrifice offered for the expiation of sin , and consequently the subsequent priviledges do not immediately relate to the obtaining of that , but a grateful comemmoration of the death of Christ , and a celebration of the infinite mercy and goodness of God in the way of redemption found out by the death of his Son. And therefore it stands to great reason that such persons , who by their profane and unworthy lives dishonour so holy a profession , should not be owned to be as good and sound members of the society founded on so sacred a foundation , as the most Christian and religious persons . To this , I know nothing can be objected , but that first , the passeover was commemorative among the Jews ; and secondly , That the priviledges of that people were then very great above other people , and therefore if God had intended any such thing as excommunication among his people , it would have been in use then . To these I answer . 1. I grant the passeover was commemorative as to the occasion of its institution ; but then it was withall typical and annunciative of that Lamb of God who was to take away the sins of the world , and therefore no person who desired expiation of sins , was to be debard from it ; but the Lords Supper under the Gospel hath nothing in it propitiatory , but is intended as a Feast upon a sacrifice and a Federal rite , as hath been fully cleared by a very learned person in his discourse about the true notion of the Lords Supper . 2. I grant the Jews had very many priviledges above other Nations : Nay so far , that the whole body of the people were looked upon as Gods chosen , and peculiar and holy people ; and from thence I justly infer that whatever exclusion was among the people of the Jews from their society , will far better hold as an argument for excommunication under the Christian Church , then if it had been a meer debarring from their Levitical Worship . And that I should far sooner insist upon , from the reason assigned , as the ground of excommunication , then the other infirm and profligated argument ; and so the exclusion out of the Camp of Israel and the Cerith among the Jews ( whatever we understand by it ) may à pari hold to a ground of exclusion from the Christian Society : In imitation of which , I rather suppose that exclusion out of the Synagogues was after taken up , rather then as a meer Out-lawry , when they were deprived of Civill power . The question then being thus clearly stated , it amounts to this , Whether under the Gospel , there be any power in the Officers of the Church by vertue of divine institution to exclude any offenders out of the Christian society , for transgressing the Laws of it ? And according to our former propositions , I suppose it will be sufficient to prove that power to be of divine institution , if I prove it to be fundamentally and intrinsecally resident in the society its self . For what ever doth immediately result from the society it self , must have the same original which the subject hath , because this hath the nature of an inseparable property resulting from its constitution . For the clearing of which , I shall lay down my thoughts of it as clearly and methodically as I can ; and that in these following hypotheses . 1. Where there is a power of declaring any person to be no true member of the society he is in , there is a formal power of excommunication : for this is all which I intend by it , viz. an authoritative pronouncing virtute officii , any convict offender to have forfeited his interest in the Church as a Christian society : and to lose all the priviledges of i● : So that if this power be lodged in any Church officer , then he hath power formally to excommunicate . 2. Where the enjoyment of the priviledges of a society is not absolute and necessary , but depends upon conditions to be performed by every member , of which the society is judge , there is a power in the rulers of that society to debarr any person from such priviledges , upon non-performance of the conditions . As supposing the jus civitatis to depend upon defending the rights of the City ; upon a failing in referente to this in any person admitted to Citizen-ship , the Rulers of the City have the same power to take that right away , which they had at first to give it ; because that right was never absolutely given , but upon supposition that the person did not overthrow the ends for which it was bestowed upon him . 3. The Church is such a society in which communion is not absolute and necessary , but it doth depend on the performance of some conditions , of which the Governours of it are the competent Judges : And that appears , 1. Because the admission into the Church , depends upon conditions to be judged by Pastors , as in case of adult persons requiring Baptism , and the Children of Infidels being baptized : in both which cases it is evident that conditions are prerequisite , of which the Pastors are Judges . 2. Because the priviledges of this Society do require a separation from other Societies in the world , and calls for greater holiness and purity of life ; and those very priviledges are pledges of greater benefits which belong only to persons qualified with suitable conditions ; it would therefore be a very great dishonour to this Society , if it lay as common and open as other Societies in the world do , and no more qualifications required from the members of it . 3. We have instances in the sacred Records of Apostolical times , of such scandals which have been the ground of the exclusion of the persons guilty of them from the priviledges of the Christian Society . And here I suppose we may ( notwithstanding all the little evasions which have been found out ) fix on the incestuous person in the Church of Corinth . As to which I lay not the force of the argument upon the manner of execution of the censure then , viz. by delegation from an Apostle , or the Apostolical rod , or delivering to Satan ; for I freely grant that these did then import an extraordinary power in the Apostles over offenders ; but I say the ground and reason of the exercise of that power in such an extraordinary manner at that time , doth still continue , although not in that visible extraordinary effect which it then had . And whatever practice is founded upon grounds perpetual and common , that practice must continue as long as the grounds of it do , and the Churches capacity will admit ; ( which hypothesis is the only rational foundation on which Episcopal Government in the Church doth stand firm and unshaken , and which in the former discourse I am far from undermining of , as any intelligent Reader may perceive ) now I say that it is evident that the reasons of the Apostles censure of that person , are not fetched from the want of Christian Magistrates , but from such things which will hold as long as any Christian Church : which are the dishonour of the Society . 1 Corinth . 5 , 1. the spreading of such corruptions further , if they pass uncensured . 1 Corinth . 5.6 . and amendment of the person , 1 Cor. 5.5 . Upon these pillars the power of censures rests it self in the Church of God , which are the main grounds of penalties in all Societies whatsoever , viz. the preservation of the honour of them , and preventing of further mischief , and doing good to the offending party . And that which seems to add a great deal of weight to this instance , is , that the Apostle checks the Corinthians that before the exercise of the Apostolical rod , they were not of themselves sensible of so great a dishonour to the Church as that was , and had not used some means for the removing such a person from their Society . And ye are puffed up , and have not rather mourned that he that hath done this deed may be taken away from among you , 1 Corinth . 5.2 . Therein implying , that whether there had been such a thing in the Church , or no , as the Apostolical rod , it had been the duty of a Christian Society to have done their endeavour in order to the removing such a person from their number . But further , I cannot understand , how it should be a duty in Christians to withdraw from every brother who walketh disorderly , and Church-officers not to have power to pronounce such a person to be withdrawn from , which amounts to excommunication . It is not to me at all material , whether they did immediately relate to Civil or Sacred converse , ( concerning which there is so much dispute ) for in which soever we place it , if Church-officers have a power to pronounce such a person to be withdrawn from , they have a power of excommunication ; so we consider this penalty as inflicted on the person in his relation to the Society as a Christian ; and withall , how nearly conjoyned their civil and spiritual eating were together , 1 Corinth , 11.20 , 21. and how strongly the argument will hold from Civil to Sacred , viz. à remotione unius ad remotionem alterius , not from any fancyed pollution in Sacris from the company of wicked men , but from the dishonour reflecting on the Society from such unworthy persons partaking of the highest priviledges of it . Thus from these three Hypotheses this Corollary follows , that where any persons in a Church do by their open and contumacious offences , declare to the world that they are far from being the persons they were supposed to be in their admission into the Church , there is a power resident in the Pastors of the Church to debar such persons from the priviledges of it , and consequently from Communion in the Lords Supper . 1. Because this expresseth the nearest union and closest confederation , as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Grecian Common-wealths did . 2. Because this hath been alwayes looked on with greatest veneration in the Church of God ; and therefore it is least of all fit those persons should be admitted to the highest priviledges of the Church , which are unworthy of the lowest of them . There remain only some few objections which are levelled against this opinion concerning the power of excommunication , which from the Question being thus stated and proved , will be soon removed . The first is that this excommunication is an outward punishment , and therefore belongs not to Church-officers , but to the Magistrate . 2. Because it neither is nor ever was in the power of any Church-officer to debar any offending member from publick worship , because any heathens may come to it . 3. It cannot lie as to exclusion from the Lords Supper , because Christ is offered as spiritual food , as well in the Word Preached as in the Sacrament . To these I answer . 1. I do not well understand what the Objectors mean by an outward punishment ; for there can be no punishment belonging to a visible Society , ( such as the Church is here considered to be ) but it must be visible , i. e. outward , or a thing to be taken notice of in the world ; and in this sense I deny that all visible punishment belongs only to the Magistrate ; but if by outward , be meant forcible punishment , then I grant that all coactive power belongs to the Magistrate ; but I deny that excommunication formally considered , is a forcible punishment . 1. Because every person at his entrance into this Society , is supposed to declare his submission to the rules of the Society ; and therefore whatever he after undergoes by way of penalty in this Society , doth depend upon that consent . 2. A person stands excommunicate legally and de jure , who is declared authoritativly to be no member of the Society , though he may be present at the acts of it ; as a defranchised person may be at those of a Corporation . 3. A person falling into those offences which merit excommunication , is supposed in so doing , voluntarily to renounce his interest in those prviledges , the enjoyment of which doth depend upon abstaining from those offences which he wilfully falls into ; especially if contumacy be joyned with them , as it is before excommunication ; for then nothing is done forcibly towards him ; for he first relinquisheth his right , before the Church-Governour declares him excluded the Society . So that the offendor doth meritoriously excommunicate himself , the Pastor doth it formally , by declaring that he hath made himself no member by his offences and contumacy joyned with them . To the second I answer , That I do not place the formality of excommunication in exclusion from hearing the Word , but in debarring the person from hearing tanquam pars eoclesiae , as a member of the Church , and so his hearing may be well joined with that of Heathens and Infidels , and not of members of the Church . To the third I answer , That exclusion from the Lords Supper is not on the accounts mentioned in the objection , but because it is one of the chiefest priviledges of the Church , as it is a visible Society . Having thus cleared and asserted the power of excommunication in a Christian Church , there remains only one enquiry more , which is , Whether this power doth remain formally in the Church , after its being incorporated into the Common-wealth , or else doth it then escheate wholly into the Civil power ? The resolution of which question mainly depends on another spoken to already ; viz. Whether this power was only a kind of Widows estate , which belonged to it only during its separation from the Civil power , or was the Church absolutely infeoffed of it as its perpetual right , belonging to it in all conditions whatsoever it should be in ? Now that must appear by the Tenure of it , and the grounds on which it was conveyed , which having been proved already to be perpetual and universal , it from thence appears that no accession to the Church can invalidate its former title . But then as in case of marriage , the right of disposal and well management of the estate coming by the wife , belongs to the husband ; so after the Church is married into the Common wealth , the right of supream management of this power in an external way doth fall into the Magistrates hands . Which may consist in these following things . 1. A right of prescribing Laws for the due management of Church-censures . 2 A right of bounding the manner of proceeding in censures , that in a settled Christian State , matters of so great weight be not left to the arbitrary pleasure of any Church-officers , nor such censures inflicted but upon an evident conviction of such great offences which tend to the dishonour of the Christian Church , and that in order to the amendment of the offendors life . 3. The right of adding temporal and civil sanctions to Church-censures and so enforcing the spiritual weapons of the Church , with the more keen and sharp ones of the Civil state . Thus I assert the force and efficacy of all Church-censures in foro humano to flow from the Civil power , and that there is no proper effect following any of them as to Civil rights , but from the Magistrates sanction . 4. To the Magistrate belongs the right of appeals in case of unjust censures ; not that the Magistrate can repeal a just censure in the Church , as to its spiritual effects ; but he may suspend the temporal effect of it : in which case it is the duty of Pastors to discharge their office and acquiesce . But this power of the Magistrate in the supream ordering of Ecclesiastical as well as Civil Causes , I have fully asserted and cleared already . From which it follows , That as to any outward effects of the power of excommunication , the person of the Supream Magistrate must be exempted , both because the force of these censures doth flow from him in a Christian State , and that there otherwise would be a progress in infinitum , to know whether the censure of the Magistrate were just or no. I conclude then , that though the Magistrate hath the main care of ordering things in the Church , yet ( the Magistrates power in the Church being cumulative , and not privative ) the Church and her officers retain the fundamental right of inflicting censures on offenders : Which was the thing to be proved . Dedit Deus his quoque Finem . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A61546-e100 §. 1. §. 2. §. 3. §. 4. §. 5. §. 6. §. 7. §. 8. §. 9. §. 10. §. 11. §. 12. Apud . Agust . de Civit. de l. 2. c. 21. §. 13. §. 14. §. 15. §. 16. Iren. p. 2. c. 3. Iren. p. 1. c. 8. §. 4. §. 17. in Luk. 6.22 §. 18. §. 19. Matth. 16.19 . Iren. p. 2. ch 5. §. 5. p. 212. Acts 2.41 . 1 Pet. 3.21 . Tit. 3.5 . Acts 8.33 . Isa. 22.20 . Cypr. Ep. 73. sect . 6. §. 20. §. 21. Heb. 9.22 . §. 22. 1 Cor. 5.11 . 2 Thess. 3.14 . §. 23. Iren. p. 1. c. 2. sect . 7. 
A96917	----	A brotherly and friendly censure of the errour of a dear friend and brother in Christian affection, in an answer to his four questions lately sent abroad in print to the view of the world. Published according to order. Walker, George, 1581?-1651. This text is an enriched version of the TCP digital transcription A96917 of text R212426 in the English Short Title Catalog (Thomason E265_4). Textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. The text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with MorphAdorner. The annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). Textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. This text has not been fully proofread Approx. 40 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 7 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. EarlyPrint Project Evanston,IL, Notre Dame, IN, St. Louis, MO 2017 A96917 Wing W355 Thomason E265_4 ESTC R212426 99871050 99871050 123448 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A96917) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 123448) Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 44:E265[4]) A brotherly and friendly censure of the errour of a dear friend and brother in Christian affection, in an answer to his four questions lately sent abroad in print to the view of the world. Published according to order. Walker, George, 1581?-1651. [2], 10 p. Printed for Nathaniell Webb, London, : 1645. Attributed to George Walker by Wing. A reply to: Prynne, William. Foure serious questions of grand importance (Wing P3959). Annotation on Thomason copy: after brother in title: "Mr Prin"; "By Mr George Walker"; "Sep: 20". Reproduction of the original in the British Library. eng Prynne, William, 1600-1669. -- Foure serious questions of grand importance. Presbyterianism -- Early works to 1800. Lord's Supper -- Early works to 1800. Excommunication -- Early works to 1800. A96917 R212426 (Thomason E265_4). civilwar no A brotherly and friendly censure of the errour of a dear friend and brother in Christian affection,: in an answer to his four questions lat Walker, George 1645 7171 13 0 0 0 0 0 18 C The rate of 18 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the C category of texts with between 10 and 35 defects per 10,000 words. 2007-05 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2007-05 Aptara Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2007-07 Angela Berkley Sampled and proofread 2007-07 Angela Berkley Text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A Brotherly and Friendly CENSURE OF THE ERROVR Of a dear Friend and Brother in Christian affection , IN An ANSWER to his four Questions lately sent abroad in print to the view of the world . PROV. 27. 5 , 6. Open rebuke is better then secret love . Faithfull are the wounds of a friend ; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitfull . Published according to Order . LONDON , Printed for Nathanael Webb , 1645. To the Reader . CHristian reader , I will take it as a great favour from thee , if in reading this my Answer thou wilt judge me to be , as indeed , and in truth I am , an adversary of the cause , and not of the person . He who is commonly reported to be the Author of the foure questions in hand , is one whose person I have , from my first knowledge of him , dearly loved , honoured , and admired , for his excellent parts , profitable paines for the publike good , and his unwearied labours , and patient sufferings in the cause of Christ . If he hath but once in all his life stumbled upon a bad cause , and pleaded for it , ( which is a common , and in some sort a necessary evil , hardly to be avoided by men of his vocation : ) let not this blemish his great learning , nor his judgement , sound in all other points , and least of all his approved piety and zeale for true religion . His name , which was happily concealed , and not annexed to these foure questions , shall ever be precious with me , and I hope with all Gods people also , who truly feare the Lord , long for the peace of Zion , and unfeignedly seek the reformation of Christs Church , in all these three Kingdomes . It is no small griefe to me , that I am compelled to move my pen in writing against any paper , published by an hand so deare to me : But in the cause of Christ , and in a point so prejudiciall to the peace and pure reformation of the Church , Who can be silent ? The nearest relations of love which one Christian can have to another in this world , must not hinder us , nor stay our hands , tongues or pens from performance of any duty , in which we all stand obliged to the Lord Christ our Redeemer , and to his Church our deare mother . And wherein can we be more necessitated to shew our duty to both , then in resisting with all our power whatsoever tends to the common and continuall prophanation of the holy Sacrament of Christs body and blood ? which cannot possibly be avoided , if the power of the keys , which Christ hath given to his Apostles and their successors , with a promise to be with them to the end of the world , be taken , under any pretence , out of the hands of the Pastors and Presbyters of the Church , and no power left unto them to put by any sinners , openly scandalous and impenitent , from the holy Communion nor to exclude such spirituall lepers , most loathsome and infections , from the sacred meeting at the Lords holy Table . Who doth not see that the maine cause of the Schismes and separations of divers godly and zealous Christians from our Communion , is the mixture of the prophane among the pious and godly , and the admission of persons openly scandalous to the holy Sacrament ? This is that which hath moved many out of their blinde zeale to proclaime our Church , a whore a strumpet , a Synagogue of Antichrist ; and our faithfull Ministers , Baals Priests , and limmes of the beast . All true Christians , and most of all the Ministers of the Word , are bound to put to their hands and shoulders for the removing of this stumbling-block and rock of offence out of the way : And I especially more then others , by reason of that singular love I bear to this deare brother erring in this point , and least I should offend against that commandement , Lev. 19. 17. Thou shalt not have thy brother in thine heart : thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour , and not suffer sin upon him , or bear sin for him . His paper is gone forth in publike , private rebuke will not hinder the hurt which it may doe : It hath given such publike wounds , as cannot be cured but by a publike remedy . The Lord , the great healer of soules , give a speedy cure to the maladies of his Church , and all our soule-sicknesses : to him be praise for ever and ever . A brotherly and friendly Censure of the errour of a dear friend and brother in Christian affection , In an Answer to his foure Questions lately sent abroad in print , to the view of the world . The Inscription . Four serious Questions of grand Importance , concerning Excommunication and Suspension from the Sacrament ; propounded to the Reverend Assembly and all Moderate Christians , to prevent Schismes , and settle Vnity among us , in these divided times ; by a lover both of Peace and Truth . The Answer to the Inscription . WHen I did first meet with this paper of foure serious questions , fleeing abroad in print into every Book-sellers shop in London , and ready upon the wing to take flight into all parts of the land ; That flying toll , which appeared to the Prophet Zecharie ( presently upon my viewing of the matter and scope thereof ) came to my minde , which is said to be a curse going forth over the face of the whole land , Zech. 5. 3. For as that was a curse to punish , cut off and consume even to the timber and stones of the houses , into which it entered : So I feared this would be a corrupting curse in the heart , house and family of every one that entertained it with approbation , and did welcome it with applause , seeing it proclaims liberty for all sinners , though openly scandalous and impenitent , to come boldly to the Lords supper , and to eat and drinke their own damnation , without controll of the Pastors and Presbyters of the Church , whom Christ hath ordained to have the rule over them , and to watch for their soules , Heb. 13. 17. And whereas the questions are by the Author professed to be serious , and of grand importance , propounded to the Reverend Assembly , for the setling of unity among us , in these divided times : First , I must professe that I am much grieved , that any learned Christian brother should seriously urge such arguments ▪ so weak , so fallacious , and of so little strength , to maintaine so bad a cause as this , even the opening of a wide gap to Libertinisme , and prophanation of the holy Sacrament of Christs body and blood , and giving this liberty to carnall and prophane men , of dissolute and scandalous life , that they without repulse may intrude themselves among godly Communicants , to the just offence and scandall of the whole Congregation : which they may have opportunity to doe at severall times , before the sentence of Excommunication , can in a way of orderly proceeding ( especially when there are appeales made to higher Consistories one after another , by obstinate and contentious offenders ) come forth against them , and be put in execution . Secondly , I hope it will be made to appeare by this , and other Answers of more able brethren , that here is no matter of grand importance in these questions , except encouragement of men to live in scandalous sins , without feare of suspension from the Lords table , and to intrude boldly thereunto , which is a power of grand tyranny , and oppression of the Consciences of Ministers , may in any but an evil sense , be called a matter of grand importance . Thirdly , I wish with all my heart , though now too late , that these questions , as in the title is pretended , had first been propounded to the venerable Assembly . For I doubt not but they then should have received such a solid and satisfactory Answer , as would have staid the publishing of them in print , and prevented the infection of the mindes of the vulgar people of weak judgement , and saved us the labour of composing Antidotes against them . Fourthly , I pity the Author , in that he hath so erred from his intended scope of these questions : for his handling and carriage of them , is so farre from preventing Schismes , and setling unity among us in those divided times : that on the contrary we finde by experience to our griefe , that they worke strongly in corrupt and perverse mindes , to the breeding , and increasing of Schismes , to the disturbance of the desired reformation , in a point of greatest concernment , and to the raising up of divisions and dissensions , not onely among others , but also betwen the Parliament and Assembly , which is a strange practice , in a lover of peace and truth . The Preface . The businesse of Excommunication and Sequestration from the Sacrament , &c. The Answer to the Preface before the questions . 1. The businesse appeares plainely to be of no difficulty , unlesse men will be difficult , and through their owne averseness ▪ hardly perswaded to grant and establish that which Gods Word expressely holdeth forth and commendeth , and which we hope , and humbly pray , that the Honourable Houses of Parliament will be willing to doe without difficulty . You your selfe doe quote divers texts of Scripture which establish Excommunication , and you presuppose it , in this your paper severall times , where you say none is to be suspended from the Sacrament but such as are excommunicated , and in your Excommunication ( for which you cite Tertullian , Schoolemen , and Canonists , ) you are more rigorous then any Presbyterians , whom you closely intimate to be indiscreet , passionate , oversevere and revengefull : which is a point of unchristian jealousy , and uncharitable surmise . For they dare not by excommunication exclude obstinate offenders from all ordinances , but suffer them to heare the Word , though not in communion as members of the Church , but as infidels may doe ; or else what hope can we have of an illiterate person excommunicated , that he will ever repent and be restored ? As for suspension from the Sacrament , it is a thing more easy , in it selfe , and may be done orderly with lesse labour then excommunication , and with great ease and facility , and more frequently , and with good successe is practised in all the best reformed Churches , which also our late abolished liturgy did allow largely to all Pastors and Church-wardens : and it had been more easy to them that were godly , and also more usuall in our Congregations , if the proud Prelates , fathers of prophanenesse , had not taken that power wholly to themselves : Which intolerable usurpation of theirs , we hope is with themselves quite taken away : but not the power from the Church , nor the lawfull exercise of it according to the rules of Christ . Secondly , Whereas you make no medium between prophanation and scandall on the one side , and Arbitrary , tyrannicall , papall domineering over the Consciences and spirituall Priviledges of Christians on the other , herein passion and partiality seem to blinde you : For there is a plain open way between the two extremes , that is , the lawfull power which Christ hath given to Ecclesiasticall rulers , Pastors and Elders in his Church , which all godly Ministers , and all orthodox members of the Assembly stand , plead , and petition for , that it may be backed and confirmed to them by civill sanction , even power to prove and try who are fit , and who are unworthy to come to the Lords Table , and by admitting the one , and puting back the other , after strict triall , and due proofe and examination , prophanation and scandall may easily be prevented , and Arbitrary , tyranicall , papall domineering over the consciences of Pastors , and godly Christian people shall have no place in Gods Church ; Scandalous proud impenitent sinners shall not come desperately to out-face Christ and his Ministers at his own table , nor have an action against Ministers , who out of tender conscience , and fear of God , refuse to reach to them judgement and damnation , and so to partake with them in the guilt of Christs body and blood ; The Congregation of the godly shall not be scandalized , nor tyrannically forced either to countenance and harden the impenitent in their open wickednes ▪ by communicating with them , or to separate from our Congregations , and abhor the ordinance of the Lord , as men did in old Eli's daies , when his wicked sons made them to abhor the offering of the Lord , 1 Sam. 2. 17. But on the contrary , let scandalous , obstinate sinners have liberty to intrude and come boldly to the Lords table , and the Pastors and Elders have no power to keep back from them the holy signes and scals , which belong not to them , this is more then arbitrary , tyrannicall , papall domineering over the consciences of Pastors , Elders , and godly people . 3. But here me thinks you speak very untowardly , to the great offence of all godly people , against all Christs Ministers and ecclesiasticall rulers ; for in these words ( If it fall into indiscreet , over-severe , ambitious , passionate , or revengefull hands ) you either suppose that generally the hands of Ministers and Elders of Christs Church are such , and therefore they ought not to be trusted with power of Suspension and Excommunication ; which if you do , your heart is not f●ee from malignity against their holy calling , and the Lord Christ , who hath trusted them , will finde you out . Or else your meaning is , that , as in the daies of the Papacy and Prelacy , so now it may again under Presbyteriall Church-government happen , that some of the rulers Ecclesiasticall may act with such hands . What then ? Do you infer thence that all of that high calling are to be abridged of that power ? A desperate inference , striking at the prerogative and power of Parliaments , and all civil Judges , and Courts of Justice . For upon the same grounds , viz. because under the Papacy , Parliaments made Laws for suppressing true religion , and establishing Idolatry and superstition , you may go about to abridge them . And under the late domineering Prelacy and tyranny , Judges wrested laws to take away the Subjects birth-right and liberty , and to maintain oppression , and they made ( you know whose ) will and lust , law . And Lawyers soothed them , and you know when , not one ( in all the bunch ) could be found , nor hired to plead in the just cause of an innocent . And even then many Presbyters and Ecclesiasticall persons stood out couragiously , and feared no persecutions , bonds or losses , in the cause both of religion and justice . Why then will you not take away all power also of judging from Judges , and of pleading and expounding the Law from Lawyers , and leave all civil government in the hands of the common people ? Take heed , Sir , you be not partiall and unequall to one side more then another . Aretius hath given you a very good caveat , not to strive so earnestly against this point of Christian discipline , in those words of his by you cited ( impossibile praesentibus moribus colla submittere ejusmodi disciplinae ) which words tell us , That the corrupt manners and profane lives of men desperately bent , in these evil times , to continue in their lewd and scandalous courses , make it impossible to bring them to submit their stiff necks to this discipline of Excommunication , and Suspension from the holy Communion , which is Christs light yoke to tractable Christians . If you proceed to take part with such refractory opposers ( which , I hope , your religious heart will not permit you to do ) and spend your strength in so unworthy a cause , in hope by justifying these Questions , to prevail against the votes of your best friends , and most faithfull lover which you have in this world , who truly honour you , and wish all good to you : I trust in God , you shall fail of your hopes , as Aretius did in his judgement , where speaking of this discipline set up by some in the Churches of Germany , he seems to deride it in those words by you rehearsed , Cecidit in spongiam ridiculus mus ; For now this despised mouse is become an high mountain in all the best reformed Churches of Germany . 4. As for your addresse to the Assembly , whom you charge unjustly with falling into extreams , and indeed calumniate them , as if they seemed to affect a great lording power over the consciences and priviledges of their Christian brethren , which of right belongs not unto them , usurping that to themselves , which they vehemently declaimed against , and caused to be taken quite away from the Pope and Prelates . To this I answer , that you utterly mistake the matter . For they abhorre all affectation and usurpation of lording power over the consciences of any Christians , but have condemned it in the Pope and Prelates ; and their humble Petition to the Houses of Parliament is ; That none may usurp lordly power , as the proud Prelates did , over them , and the people of their flock , compelling them either against their consciences , and with great offence and scandall to the godly , to admit scandalous sinners to the Lords table , and to profane the Sacrament of Christs body and blood , by giving the seals thereof to them , or else to decline the administration of that holy ordinance , and their Ministerie , chusing affliction rather then iniquity . In plain truth , this is the lordly tyrannicall power over their consciences , and the iron yoke which you in your Question seek to lay on them . After the Preface answered , I proceed to your Questions ; The first of which is , Quest . 1. Whether those places of Scripture , Matth. 18. 16 , 17. & 1 Cor. 5. 5. 11. & 1 Tim. 1. 20. Joh. 9. 22. 32. & 12. 42. & 16. 2. & ●Thess . 3. 14. & 2 Joh. 10. 11. & Joh. 3. 10. & Numb. 12. 14. & Deut. 23. 1. be properly meant of Excommunication , which you take upon you to prove from Fathers , School-men and others , to be an exclusion from all ordinances , or of Suspension from the Lords Supper onely . The first you hold , and we will grant it to you . The latter you deny , and I affirm , that it is here also meant inclusively , but not only . The first place you seem to weaken and enervate , by intimating that our Saviour speaks of private personall trespasse between man and man , and not of publike scandalous sins against the Congregation , and that the censure is private not publike , because it is said , Let him be ( not to the whole Church and all others , but ) to Thee , as an Heathen man and a Publican ; and you quote , Luk. 17. 3 , 4. to prove that such private trespasses must be forgiven , if seventy times seven : which no man will deny , if the trespasser repent , as often as he offends . But now suppose be stand out and persist in his sin , and scorn private admonition ; yea , when he is convented before the Church , he will not hear nor obey publike admonition , doe you not think that this is publike scandall against the Cong●egation , and deserves Excommunication ? Surely , if it were not so , our Saviour would not have passed against it that dreadfull censure of Excommunication , saying , Let him be to Thee as an Heathen man and a Publican . And if to the private person for his private wrong , much more to all others in the Congregation , for publike contumacy and scandalous obstinacy in his sin against the Church . It is a dangerous doctrine to teach any private person to censure and judge a brother to be in the state of an Ethnike , and as a Publican , for a private trespasse ; if for his contumacie against the whole Church , and obstinacie in that sin , the sentence of Excommunication be not by the Church publikely given against him . Whereas you make it a branch of your Question . What warrant there is in Scripture for Ministers to suspend men from the Lords Supper only , and not from the Congregation , and all other publike ordinances with it . I answer this very easily : That because Suspension from the Sacrament is a step , yea the next degree to Excommunication ( as reason , and the practice of all the best Churches of Christ doe teach us ) the Scriptures which warrant Excommunication , do also warrant it as a profitable and necessary means , either to prevent that dreadfull sentence by bringing the sinner to repent and be ashamed , or to make his impenitency more evident and notorious , and to justifie the more the Excommunication of him . But I marvell , that you should thinke it so strange and unwarrantable a thing to suspend a man from a Sacrament , who hath communion in all other ordinances of the Church , seeing it was the practice of all the ancient Churches to exclude the Catechumeni from Baptisme , till by catechising and hearing the Word publikely preached they were better instructed . And how dare you dispute against that which is resolved in this present Parliament ? To wit , That ignorant , and some scandalous persons shall not be admitted to the Lords table . Q● . Your second Question is the same which you propounded last before as a branch of the first : belike you are well pleased and affected with it , and have some thing more to say in urging it . I omit what I have answered before ; and here I doe first adde , That Christian compassion , and moderation in dealing with perverse men is commended and commanded in the Scripture , 2 Tim. 2. 24 ▪ 25 , 26. & Jude 22 , 23. And this is a maine point of compassion and moderation in Ecclesiasticall rulers , to try all inferiour meanes ; whereof suspension from the Lords Table is one ; before they proceed to the last and greatest censure of excommunication . Though the Popes and Prelats excommunications , which belike doe still runne in your minde , were brutish thunderbolts thrown out upon every small occasion presently , and like the fooles dagger which is out to stab , at every crosse word , and makes but a word and a blow : yet Gods Word teacheth godly wise Pastors and Presbyters more meeknesse and gravity , in proceeding to the utmost censure , that is , first to reprove , admonish and rebuke , and if those more gentle meanes doe not prevaile , then to suspend from the Sacrament ; which by experience is often found to humble stubborne offenders , and bring them to repentance , and so prevent cutting off from the Congregation ; And all godly Christians doe here see a double warrant of divine Authority . First , from Gods Word : secondly , from his blessing of this proceeding with good successe . This is my first answer . Secondly , to your bold assertion , That in the Old Testament we reade of no circumcised person ever debarred from the passeover by the Priests , that was desirous to eat it . I Answer , that it is as void of truth , as full of boldnesse : For Levit. 22. 3. & Numb 9. 5. and divers other places . Every circumcised person who was legally unclean , is forbiden to eate of the passeover , or any holy thing , under pain of being cut off , and might not eat of it till he was cleansed and rightly prepared as appeares , 2 Chron. 30. 3 the very chapter by you quoted , according to the expresse words of the law , Numb. 9. 11. And therefore much more ought baptized persons , now under the Gospell , who are manifestly unclean with the spirituall defilement of scandalous sin , be suspended from the more holy Sacrament of Christs body and blood , untill he be cleansed by repentance . Thirdly , to the instance of Judas whom our Saviour knew to be a devil and a traytour . I Answer first , that Judas was not admitted to the Sacrament , for Judas went out before the Supper was ended , immediatly upon his receiving of the sop , Joh 13. 30. But our Saviour did not ordaine this Sacrament till after Supper , Luk. 22. 20 When he had supped , 1. Cor. 11. 25. Secondly , if Judas had been admitted , it makes nothing to the matter , for Judas professed faith in Christ , and in his outward conversation appeared so unblameable , that when our Saviour told them , that one of them twelve should betray him , they did not suspect Judas more then themselves , but every one asked , saying , Master , is it I ? And indeed let a man be an hypocrite , traytor or devil inwardly , the Minister is not to judge of such secret things which belong to God , but to looke to the outward profession , life and conversation , and accordingly deal with them . Fourthly , S. Pauls admonishing of the Corinthians of the great danger of unworthy receiving , namely , that it was eating damnation to themselves , and making them guilty of Christs body and blood ; and thereupon enjoyning a strict examination of every one before he eat of that bread , and drinke of that cup , doth sufficiently instruct the elders , to put back all such as did outwardly appeare to be scandalous impenitent sinners , and so most unworthy to receive the holy signes and seales of the Lords body and blood . Fifthly , To that question of yours , Whether a Minister hath not discharged his full duty and conscience , if he doth admonish his flock of the danger of unworthy receiving , and seriously dehort such as he deemes unworthy , from receiving the Sacrament , till they become more fit to participate , under paine of eating and drinking their own damnation and other judgements ? I answer , that this is no full discharge , neither doe those Scriptures which you quote , Ezek , 33. 1 , 2 , &c. Act. 20. 16. or ours and French Liturgies prove any such thing in this case . For they who suspend scandalous persons , doe also admonish all others to examine themselves , and mention the danger of unworthy receiving , that none unprepared may presume . It is a discharge of a Ministers duty , when he admonisheth onely of the danger of a sin , in which when it is committed , the party admonished hath onely an hand : But here the Minister is partaker of the sin , and as much guilty by giving , as the other by receiving . I pray you tell me , Sir , if you have a cup in your hand which will poyson and kill a sick distemperd man if he drinke of it , will you give it unto him if he desires it ? and doe you thinke it enough to admonish him that it is deadly poyson ? and first dehort him from drinking of it , and then immediatly reach it to him , with intent , that he shall drinke of it ? I perswade my selfe , that as he shall perish , so his blood shall be required at your hands , and that you shall as guilty hold up your hand at the barre for it . Quest . 3. The third Question intimates that you conceive unworthy hearing of the Word to be as great , as dangerous , as damning a sin , as unworthy receiving of the Sacrament : That Ministers are no more partakers of other mens sins , not more guilty of their sins , and of giving holy things to doggs , and casting pearles before swine , by giving the Sacrament of Christs body and blood to unworthy receivers who are openly scandalous , then by preaching the Word to unprofitable hearers , to whom he is the favour of death unto death . And hereupon you would inferre , that Ministers may as well refuse to preach the Word unto their people , lest it should not profit them , as they may refuse to give the Sacrament to scandalous persons , who eat their own damnation . To this I answer ▪ that there is vast difference between these two , preaching the Word to unprofitable hearers , and giving the Sacrament to persons openly scandalous , impenitent and prophane receivers . First a Minister preacheth the Word to many that are unprofitable hearers , not knowing them to be such , and in hope to convert and profit them , if there be any such in the auditorie , and so also he gives the Sacrament to some unworthy receivers , unwillingly , not knowing them to be such : and in such cases he is blamelesse : but if he gives the holy seales of Christs body and blood to scandalous impenitent persons , he knowes that he gives them damnation to eat and drink , and he is halfe sharer with them in the sinfull act . And therefore though the sin of unworthy hear●●● of the Word is as dangerous and damning , as unworthy receiving of the Sacrament , to the hearen and receivers : yet to the Minister in the one , to weet , preaching without knowledge of the hurt which some receive by it , there is no fault ; but in giving to the scandalous receiver he wittingly acts and partakes of the profanation of the holy ordinance . Secondly , The Lords holy Table in the holy communion , is for the time a place of Gods more speciall presence then the common Auditory , and there we come neerer to God , and receive with the word and promises particularly applyed to us , the seales of our communion with Christ , and of our right and interest in him and all his benefits . But preaching to a common Auditory , is only a generall propounding of the word and promises to all , not a particular applying of it to any , especially that hear unprofitably : for that were giving holy things to doggs : therefore there is more danger and greater sinne in admitting unworthy receivers to the Lords Table . A small errour in such an holy ordinance doth provoke the Lord to wrath , who will be sanctified in them that come neere to him , as appears in Aarons two sonnes , Levit. 10. ● , 2 , 3. & Vzza● , 2 Sam. 6. 7. Thirdly , Preaching the Word to such as are openly knowne to be scorners of the Gospell , and persecutours of the Preachers , and doe more rage and are hardened thereby , is a prophanation of an holy thing , and a casting of pearles before swine , which our Saviour expressely forbids , Matth. 7. 6. & Matth. 10. 14. Bids his Apostles turne from such , and shake off the dust from their feet , as a testimony against them ; and so Paul and Barnabas did , Act. 13. 51. Fourthly , In preaching the Word , the Minister of Christ propounds the truth to many wicked men generally , but doth not particularly apply any word of comfort , or promise of blessing to any but profitable hearers , and upon condition of repentance : But in giving the Sacrament to known impenitent persons , he preacheth most palpable lyes against his own conscience , when he saith . The body of Christ was broken for you , and his blood wasshed for you : And therefore the points urged in this Question are very dangerous , and divers Scriptures herein quoted , are wrested and grossely perverted . Quest . 4. The fourth Question ( upon that received truth , That God only knows the secrets of mens hearts , which Ministers doe not , but mistake hypocrites for worthy receivers , and more honest simple weak men , for unfit Communicants ) would inferre , That Ministers ought not to have power to judge or censure . I● which reasoning ; First , I finde grosse absurdity : for what can be more ridiculous then to argue , that because Ministers know not secret things which belong to God , therefore they know not revealed and manifest things , as open scandalous sins , and impenitency professed in the face of the Church , and by consequent may not judge and censure them by the Word of God , which doth plainly reveal their wickednesse to them and the whole Consistory . Secondly , Observe how the Scriptures , which forbid rash judgement concerning mens estate before God , which is secret , or concerning mens last end , and the like , as Matth. 7. 1. Luk 6. 37. Rom. 14. 4. are wrested to overthrow all judging and censuring in generall , both civil and ecclesiasticall . Thirdly , How vainly the power of God is abused , to prove that he will in the midst of a profane wicked act change notorious sinners hearts in a moment , which if he should doe , how shall these sinners manifest their repentance in a moment to the Church , which they have offended , that they may he admitted orderly , and not rashly without just ground or satisfaction ? Fourthly , The breaking of a bruised reed , and quenching of smoking flax , is most miserably applied to the suspending of proud , refractorie , impenitent sinners from the holy Sacrament ; between which two sorts of persons and actions there is as vast a difference as between heaven and hell , light and darknesse . For the bruised reed signifies men of broken heart and contrite spirit , groaning under the burden of their sins , and fleeing to Christ for ease : And smoking flax signifies such as have a weak but true faith , which like a spark in flax sheweth by smoking that there is fire , striving to break forth , and to shew light of holy life . Now how contrary these are to proud , scandalous impenitent sinners , let reasonable men judge ; the first are such as the Publicans and sinners , who came to Christ repenting and confessing their sins , and by him were received , cherished and comforted ; the latter are like those trees which brought forth no good , but bad fruit , unto the root of which the axe was laid , to hew them down , and cast them into the fire . The not breaking nor quenching the first is a point of mercy , and a work of Christ ; the tolerating of the other and cherishing and encouraging them in their scandalous sins , by admitting them to the holy Communion of Christs body and blood , is a point of great impiety , and a diabolicall act of profanation . Here therefore the Scriptures are dangerously abused and wrested , where scandalous , impenitent and refractory persons are confounded with humble penitent sinners , breathing after comfort and communion with Christ . Fifthly , Here is a strange supposition , that all , bearing the name of Christians , even scandalous , impenitent sinners , are invited to the Sacrament , and are bound to come and receive it under pain of sin and contempt . I am sure the French and our Liturgies before cited doe admonish all impenitent persons to abstain , lest they eat and drink their own damnation . And the Scriptures here quoted , 1 Cor. 11. & Heb. 10. 29. do shew that unworthy wicked sinners doe by unworthy receiving count the blood of the Covenant an unholy thing . Therefore to inferre that no Minister in point of conscience can refuse to give the Sacrament to such , is to conclude , quidlibet ex quolibet . But whereas it is added , that Ministers may not refuse any Christian , not actually excommunicated , the Sacrament , if he desires to receive it , in case he professe sincere repentance for sins past , and promise newnesse of life for the time to come : this we embrace with all our hearts , and if he obtrude on us no other but only such , we will not be so uncharitable as to judge them unworthy , neither need we fear to partake of their sin , or suspect their unworthy receiving . For our rule is to proceed with men according to that which manifestly appears , whether it be in truth or in hypocrise ; if any so professing doth eat unworthily , he eats damnation to himself , not to the Ministers , who therein doe nothing against their consciences , but proceed according to the judgement of charity , and he shall bear his own burthen . The Ministers act of administration to them who professe sincere repentance , is an holy and divine institution ; but to open scandalous impenitent persons , it is a manifest profanation , and they are partakers in the guilt and punishment . The Conclusion being the result of the former arguments , which are plainly shewed to be weak and of no strength , doth of it self fall to the ground and vanish . For I have shewed , that unworthy hearing and unworthy receiving are equally sins in the hearers and receivers ; but in the Preachers of the Word and the givers of the Sacraments it is farre otherwise : the Preacher doth onely propound the Word generally , and not falsely apply the promises of blessing and life to any particular scandalous persons , but upon condition of their beleeving repentance and obedience . If he knows any in the auditory , who are scorners of the Word , and haters and persecutours of him and his doctrine , he denounceth a curse from God against them , and desires them to keep away , and holds himself guilty of sin , if he should cast the pearl of the Gospel before such swine , when they are alone and separated from other hearers : he will not wittingly be to any the savour of death unto death . But the Minister who gives the Sacrament to open scandalous sinners in their impenitency , doth wittingly profane Gods holy ordinance , and lyeth against his conscience in saying that Christs body was broken , and his blood shed for them , and makes himself guilty of their blood , while he gives them wittingly to eat and drink their own damnation , as is before shewed . Whatsoever power takes from Christs Ministers the lawfull and necessary liberty to exclude from the Lords table scandalous sinners openly impenitent , that is such a transcendent arbitrary , unlimited power , as lordly Prelates sometimes exercised , and no lesse then tyrannie and oppression of the consciences both of Ministers and their godly people . And therefore here the Divines of the Assembly are charged most unjustly and calumniously , who have humbly desired , by way of Petition to both the honourable Houses of Parliament , that their consciences may not have this yoke of oppression laid on them , which will force them either to profane the Sacrament of Christs body and blood , by giving it to unworthy persons , or to decline their Ministery and administration of that holy ordinance , chusing affliction rather then iniquity . FINIS . 
A01221	----	A lerned epistle of M. Iohn Fraser: Bachler of Diuinitie to the ministers of Great Britanie Wherin he sheweth that no man ought to subscribe to their confession of faith. And that their presumed authorite to excommunicate anie man, especially Catholiques, is vaine and foolish. Fraser, John, d. 1605. 1605 Approx. 132 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 54 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2008-09 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A01221 STC 11335 ESTC S118714 99853921 99853921 19324 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A01221) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 19324) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1475-1640 ; 1097:16) A lerned epistle of M. Iohn Fraser: Bachler of Diuinitie to the ministers of Great Britanie Wherin he sheweth that no man ought to subscribe to their confession of faith. And that their presumed authorite to excommunicate anie man, especially Catholiques, is vaine and foolish. Fraser, John, d. 1605. 98, [2] p. Printed by L. Kellam] Permissu superiorum, [Douai : 1605. Publication place and printer's name from STC. Running title reads: An epistle to the ministers of great Britanie. Reproduction of the original in the British Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Church of England -- Controversial literature. Church -- Early works to 1800. Excommunication -- Early works to 1800. 2006-12 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2007-01 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2007-04 Emma (Leeson) Huber Sampled and proofread 2007-04 Emma (Leeson) Huber Text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A LERNED EPISTLE OF M. IOHN FRASER : BACHLER OF DIVINITIE TO THE MINISTERS OF GREAT BRITANIE . Wherin he sheweth that no man ought to subscribe to their confession of faith . And that their presumed authorite to excommunicate anie man , especially Catholiques , is vaine and foolish . Permissu Superiorum . 1605. TO THE ●VRITAINE MINISTERS OF GREAT BRITANIE HIS COVNTREYMEN Iohn Fraser vvisheth vpright mynd tovvarde bothe God and Prince . HEARING of your extraordinarie dealing , according to the nature of your extraordinarie calling , in outward shew onely gainst Catholique men , In very deed against o the God & Prince . I thought it my duetie or the publike good , to write some thing ouching that subiect where by ye might nderstand how ye deceaue your selues , and buse others in that mater ; which is this : ●e labour by al meanes to constraine men , ●ho at Catholique ( for as to others men ye ● not very careful ) to approue sweare and ●bscribe your confession of faith ; and in case they refuse , ye take vpon you to excōmunicat them . Wherefore with Godds grace we shal latt you see , that no honest man , true subiect or good Christian with safe conscience , can approue sweare or subscribe your forsaid confession : & that ye haue no power at al to excōmunicat any man : and although ye had , yet could ye not excommunicat Catholique men . 2. As a plaine dealer without further preface I wil enter in the matter . Thē to the first head , it is certaine that whosoeuer wil sweare and subscribe your new confession , contrarie to the duetie of an honest man , putteth him self in hazard to be mensworne , and that in the very entrie of his othe : for thir be your words , if I rightly remember : vve al and euerie one of vs vnder vvritten protest , that after long and devv examination of our ovvne consciences in maters of true and false religion , ar novv throughly resolued in the trueth by the vvord and spirit of God. Many faltes in fewe wordes , if men would long tyme , and duely examine them in their consciences before they approue , subscribe or sweare them to be true : for first euery man here answereth for his companion & fellow saying : vve al & euerie one of vs &c. where if any of the nōber hath spoken against the veritie or his conscience , al the rest ar lyers . Nixt , what examination can be long in so weghtie a matter ? certainely not fourtie dayes , yea not fourtie yeares . When these thinges cometh in controuersie we may wel say without reprehension Deliberandum est diu , quod statuendum est semel . Thirdly , how can any man duely examine his conscience in matters of true and false religion , seing that his conscience or iudgement can not be a iust square of religion , because it surmounteth al humaine reason , & is comprehended onely by faith , not of our owne forgeing , but of Goddes free gift ? or how can he duely iudge vpon true and false religion who neuer hath seene , heard , or reade the reasons of al parties ? For as a tēporal iudge , not without great reason , may be thought to iudge very rashly , if he pronunce his sentence & decreit before he heare bothe the parties , not withstāding the matter be of smal importance and value , and that he haue iudged according to the right , because he hath iudged before he knew the ground of the matter , and so if he hath done wel , it was more by happe then good reason . So the spiritual iudge may be esteemed rash and foolish , if in matters of religion and faith he decreit any thing , except ▪ al reasons be wel discussed . Wherefor he who would duely examine his conscience in maters of tr●w and fals● religiō ( seing he take●h vpō him the charge & place of a iudge ) should with great discretiō , quyet spirit & humble mynd , without any passiō trye both the true & false , read al books touching that subiect , weighing the reason diligently : because the profit is great to them that goeth right , and the danger likewise to them who goeth wronge . Now how the greater part of your sweares and subscribers can do or execute this charge truely I see not , yea can not gesse , seing that a good nomber of your selues , who ar ministers , and should be best armed at destitute bothe of bookes and good learning . Certainly ye can not iustly aske of gentilmen , or others of meaner degree making profession of armes or housbandry , that which , ye your selues who do make profession of letters can not do : ye may easely iudge that gentilmen and commone people for lacke bothe of learning and bookes can not duely , and for lacke of tyme can not long and vvorthly examine their conscience in sic things their affaires ay hol●ing them occupied otherwise ; meikilles to sweare that they haue done that , which neither haue they done , nor could they do at any tyme. Albeit there were no othere reason but this , yetafter my iudgement , it were most iust & sufficient for any man to refuse your subcription and swearing , and should moue you not to vrge men there to , except perhapes ye seeke only their vtter ruine and damnation , for doubtles they ar mensworne who sweareth that to be true ▪ which in their cōscience they knowe to be false , or ar not assured if it be true , of which nature ar theis thinges which ar conteined in your confession , seing they proceede of men who ar subiect to errour and false opinion , and so can gif no good assurance , where vpon men may establish their faith . Which cannot be certaine and firme except it haue an infallible ground and fondament free frome all suspiciō of errour . I may with many weightie reasons proue that honestie could not stand with sic maners ▪ and shall bring them if it be needfull . 3 ▪ For the feconde head it is ●ar against the duetie of a true subiect towardes his Prince and liege lord , to whom he is obliged from the first moment of his birth to his last breath , wherefor can not gif his band of māred , no● othe of fidelitie to any other but with exceptiō of his soueraigne , which notwithstanding ye desire of your subscribers : for speaking of the worde of God ( for so ye call your interpretations ) and doctrine of your reformed kirk , ye say thus , to the vvhich vve ioyne ourselues vvillingly in doctrine , faith , religion , discipline and vse of th holie sacraments as liuely mēbers of the same in Christ our head , promising and svvearing , by the Great name of the Lord , that vve shall continue in the obedience of the doctrine and discipline of this kirk , and shall defend the same according to our vocation and povver all the dayes of our liues , vnder the paines conteined in the lavve , and danger bothe of body and soule , in the day of Goddes fearfull iudgement . There be here an absolute othe and without any exception , made to you and your reformed kirk , not onely in matters of religion and doctrine , but also in gouerment and discipline . It is not my intent at this present to examine the manyfold absurdities of this new forme of othe , in passing I say onely , that it shal be very hard to any of your swearers to behaue him sel●e well with other protestant ki●kes , who are bothe in doctrine and discipline far different from you : shall he enter incontinent in desence of your reformation ? shall he trouble all states where he doeth come ? Truely all men ha●e that opinion of your religion , that it bringeth euerie where seditions with it , as the most turbulent sect that euer yet was inuented in our contrey . Ne longe exempla petantur Betonio primi maduerunt sanguine muri . Or shall he following the maxime of your faith call all in doubt not withstanding of his othe , ●ecause ye are but men and may erre , except ●e may gif some good and sure reason , why ●e onely say true , and all the rest of the world false , and that nothing can procede out of your mouth , but veritie : for your othe importeth no lesse with it . And certainely without that pretogatiue of assured veritie bound to your heads and tounges , to astrict men to your doctrine and discipline formed or reformed by you , neglecting the authoritie of your reformed kirk in generall , may seeme somewhat against reason , and very preiudiciable to the Prince and common wealthe . For by this othe all must depend vpon you as vpon the soueraigne magistrat , the solemne othe & absolute promise beinge made in fauour of your doctrine & discipline , which ye haue in your hands and ministration . This may be easely seene by the othe made to the Kinges Maiestie , or rather against him , which ye sett downe in this forme . And because we perceaue that the quyetnes and stabilitie of our religion and kirk doeth depend vpon the safetie , and good behauiour of the Kinges Maieste as vpon a confortable instrument of Goddes mercie graunted to this countrey sor the mainteining of his kirk and ministration of iustice among vs. VVe protest and promise with our heartes vnder the same othe , handwrit , and paines , that we shall defend his persone and Authoritie , vvith our geir , bodies , and liues , in the defence of Christes Euangell , libertie of our countrey ministration of iustice , and punishment of iniquitie , against all enemies vvithin this realme or vvithout , as vve desire our God to be a strong and mercifull defender to vs in the day of our death , and comming of our lord Iesus Christ to vvhome vvith the father and the holie spirit be all honour & glorie eternally Ai●● Lat vs consider the partes of this new othe . Because ( say ye ) vve perceaue that the quyetnes and stabilitie of our religiō and kirk doeth depēd vpon the safetie and good behauiour of the Kinges Matie ? &c. Well begoune truely ; that ye mistak not your selues , ye lay downe the cause why ye will do or at lest appeare to do some seruice to his Maiestie , as long as ye perceaue thinges that please you , that is as long , as al thinges at donne according to your fantasie , ye wil be good and obedient subiects , or rather maisters , seing ye prescribe conditions to him who truely is your Maister : and reasons why ye will bestow any thing vpon him . What if any reformed imaginations take you , or some extraordinarie zeall of your heauenly discipline trouble your braine , and make you perceaue according to your passion ( as drounken men doeth see two candels where there is but one ) any other thing in his Maiestie ? What if ye find not that good behauiour ye looketh for ? Must he dresse all his actions to your fantasies and good pleasure ? will ye be censours and comptrollers of his doings if he vse not your counsell and aduys● ? If your perceauing of thinges to you agreable be the ground & cause of your promise & protestation , how soone ye preceaue in your fantasie the contrarie , ye ought him nothing ( I meane according to your opinion ) sublata causa ●ollitur effectus if I serue you because ye nurish me , if ye cease to nurish me , I am no further obliged to serue you . what shall become here of your hearty promises and protestations when your sight shal be changed ? to what state shal the cōmen wealth be brought when your foolish affections shewe a rule to the Kinges Maiestie and honorable con●ell to gouerne his realme ? many thinges appeares to vs otherwise then they ar : and reasons being knowen , they ar found good , that seemed ill before : we say cōmonly there should no hyndman half work see . ye do many things in your house perhapes well & honestly , which were neither expediet nor decent to be deuulgated to euery man : as also ye haue some secret counsell touching your affaires , which ye should loosse , if your intention were publikly knowen . Think also that King●s & Princes according to their great rankes haue secrets , which should not nor can not be published without preiudice of bothe Prince & state , the which can not be cōserued sometymes without the euident domage and hurt of some particulare men ( as by the losse of one member some tyme we preserue the rest of the body ) by which we should not esteeme & mesure the princes actions but by the publik vtilitie , which they procure better then we can see or vnderstand : because their authoritie and experience gifeth them the wisdome & knowledge which we can not haue Caesaribus virtus contigit ante diem . There be certaine arcana imperij whereto we can not penetrate , & therefor lyke fooles oft tymes we do iudge rashly , & condemne thinges which we vnderstand not . Wherefor we should do well not to enter in iudgement of so high matters . Quam quisque nouit artem in ea se exerceat . but your extraordinarie calling maketh you maisters in all craftes , and your new discipline will not suffer you to haue so long patience . Ye who enter in Goddes cabinet when ye list , must know all things at the first instāt : nothing should be hid to you . ye haue receaued the spirite of discretion , nothing should be donne without your approbation . Ye ar in the chaire of veritie , ye may speak what ye will ; iudge whom ye please , comptroll whome ye list : approue or improue as ye think good or ill : ye haue taken the power : ye haue receaued the othe : all men ar your subiects , so the Prince is subiect to your perceauing , the principall rule of your new populaire tribuna● . But ye will say that my cōclusion followed not vpō your antecedēt . I wold be glad it were so & that I were deceaued in my opiniō , so willing I am to heare that there were no traittour in our countrey . But if we will consider the solemne othe passed before in fauour of your new reformatiō , to defend and obserue the doctrine and discipline thereof vnder so horrible a promise , or rather imprecations & execrations as we haue noted before , it followed very necessarily : for ye may extend ( as ye do when it pleased you ) the borders of your discipline , as far as it seemed good to you , and interpret your doctrine as ye thinke most expedient , and so perceaue what ye please , where ye shall acknowledge or not , his Maiestie as ye shall think it most fit for your present place , or proper for the aduancement of your reformed kirk , to whome ye will haue all men obliged with so terrible othes without any exception or restriction . A very hard obligation and lawe , principallie being at the execution and will of tippertin witted young fellowes ( who commonly at rash and foolhard●e in all their doings ) or in the hands of ambitious and seditious men , who willingly do trouble all to come to their de●yre , to which by good meanes they can not easely atteine . your holie poets Buchanans pamphelet , hath many notable maximes to thi● purpos , where vpō men may builde a world o● seditions and discords : But if your poetes authoritie ( whose aduise not the lesse ye haue so skilfully followed that ye may seeme ●ather maisters then disciples or prentises ) can be no preiudice to your pretended innocencie and good mynd , at lest your prophe●s words may serue for witnes of your vpright intentions . Ye shall haue the argument of the second blast of the trompette written and sett out by him selfe 1558. at your holie citie of Geneua foster mother of all seditious spitites and vnquyet heads . Heare then your good Apostle : ●ecause many are offended at the first blast of the trompette ( behold how this holie sainct is become penitente of his former offence ) in whiche I affirme that to promote a Woman to beare rule or empire aboue any realme nation or citie is re●ugnant to nature , cont●mel●e to God , and a thing most contrariouse to his reuealed and approued ordinance : and because also , that some hath promised ( as I vnderstand ) a consutation of the same ● haue delayed the second blast , till suche tyme as their reasons appere , by the whiche I either may be reformed in opinion , or els shall haue further occasion more simplie and plainly to vtter my iudgement . yet in the meane tyme for discharge of my conscience ( behold the holinesse of this ex●raordinarie patriarche , who thinketh him selue greatly burdened in his conscience if he trouble not the whole state of the commō wealth ) and for auoyding suspition , whiche might be ingendred by reason of my silence , I could not cease ( ô the good nature of this man , who can not cease from ill doing , sed quis Deus in fraudem ? ) to notifie these subsequent propositions whiche by Gods grace I purpose to entreate in the second blast promised . 1. It is noth birth only nor propinquitie of blood that maketh a king lawfully to reigne aboue a people professing Christe Iesus and his eternall veritie ; but in his election must the ordinance , which God hath established in the election of inferiour iudges be obserued . autos epha . all princes shal be subiect to the peoples iudgement , and the people to the ministers . 2. No manifest Idolater , nor notoriouse ●ransgressor of Gods holie precepts ought to be promoted to any publike regiment , honour , or dignitie in any realme , prouince or citie , that hath subiected it self to Christe Iesus and to his blessed Euangil . 3. Neither can othe nor promisse bynd any s● people ( call you these your hearty protest●tions othes and promises ) to obey and main●●●● tyrannes ( so ye call all Kinges that will not follow your fantasie ) against God and against 〈◊〉 trueth knovven . that is your new forged faith . 4. But if either ra●hly they haue promoted 〈◊〉 manifest vvicked persone , or yet ignorantly haue ch●sen suche a one , as after declareth him self vnvvorth● of regiment aboue the people of God ( and suche be a● Idolaters and cruel persecutors ) moste iustly may th● same men depose and punishe him that vnaduysedl● before they did nominat appoint and electe . Is no● this a moste notable argument to be handle● by a true subiect , and a man affectionat to the quyetnes of his natiue countrey ? yet goo● sire Iohn Knoxe being in his owne opinion a prophete could not haue wanted many texts of the scripture to proue the mater . According to this exemplere and paterne of ● chosen or rather imaginarie King , ye haue formed your othe : for neglecting birth and blood , ye will that the Prince be made by election , at lest subiect to obserue the ordenance that God hath established to be obserued in inferiour iudges and magistrats , who may be deposed and punished if he passe the rules prescribed by you . For ye will the people be free from all obedience , promise and othe to haue no place if the Prince go frome your religion , or as ye call it , refo●med kirk , the declaration where of depended vpon your discretion & wisdome seing ye ar made iudges aboue all men . ●owbeit good reason wold gif libertie to the Prince as well to leaue you , as ye haue left the Catholik kirk if ye hade not alreddie occupied the place to commād ouer all without appeall . I will not further insist in the examination of this blast of winde , seing it sauoureth so ill that no true & modest subiect can abyd it . I say only that your othe is as lyk this proiecte as euer dauther was lyk the mother , and lacketh but thinges which may very easely be vnderstood as we shall shew after . 4. But ye will say that I am ●alignus alien● voluntatis interpres a maliciouse interpreter of other mens myndes . What was your meaning , I pray you , when ye took your Prince , emprisonated and at last chased hir out of hir owen realme and pursued to the death ? What was your meaning when during his Maiesties minoritie ye caused strick money , marked with a sword and this inscription pr●●e , in me s● mereor ? What was your intent now of late yeares when ye beseeged the toulbrigh of Edenburgh ? was it the blad● of rebelliō or sword of Gedeor that was drawen out that day ? Why did ye cry at that tyme God and the kirk , if it was not to withdraw the peopl● ▪ hartes and obedience from the Kinges M●iestie to for ti●ie your plottes ? a course mo●● ▪ dangerouse where the Prince & whole common wealthe were put in hazard vpon your ●olie reformed worde . If I be not deceaued , ye would haue signified by God and the kirk your doctrine and discipline , to which ye will haue all men subiect , with no further obedience to others then ye think expedient , and so no place for the Kinges Maiestie and his officers till it please you to employ them to execute your plottes , which onely charge ye would leaue to them , and that because ye ar not able of your selues to execute sundry thinges that ye haue inuēted ▪ But ye will say , reason wold that all thinges should be subiect to God : It is moste true : But ye ar no Gods , yea not haue no charge nor command of God , as we shall shew here after and although ye hade , why should ye , vnder pretense of your new forged or reformed discipline , ●rouble the whole state to the vtter ruine of the common wealth . Think ye that God and a King can not be in one realme to gether ? or that God is accoustumed to destroy Kinges , where he cometh ? if your reformation proceded of God , we might very iustly so think ▪ seing it troubles all Princes where it hath any credit . It was well sayd by an ancient Scottish priest twelue hondred yeares since : Non ●ripit mortalia , qui regna dat caelestia . but he was a priest of the Romaine kirk , and not a brother of your reformation mother of your detestable paritie , grandmother of your present confusion , where vpon is builded your sinagoge : permitt me to say so seing ye force men to enter therein , because your calling hath no power nor strenght to inuite them . This can not stand with Princes lawfull authoritie . Heare Iesus Christe him self saying : date Caesari , quae sunt Caesaris , & quae Dei , Deo. Certainely all mē of quyet spirite should esteeme them enemies bothe to God and good reason , who thinketh the one contrarie to the other . There were never yet any people that hade a religion without ciuil gouuerment : we haue seene in all common wealths these two ioyned together , but most perfectly where Kinges haue ●ade the s●ueraigne power , because the vnitie is greater . Ye wold perhapes gladly say here ( if ye hade the Christian liber tie , that ye so earnestly desyre , that is licence to do as ye will ) that ye at all priests and Kinges , and as ye haue cast out the priests of the kirk for their misbehauiour , so wold ye cast Kinges out of their throanes & realmes for lyk cause . assay againe the play . assure your selfs that knauery will not ay haue good successe ▪ If I be not deceaued ye shall now find Kinges more vigilāt , admonished by others mens exēples , then ye found the priests whom ye violently cast out , not by your vertue & strenght , but by their fault & negligence . God will cast the schourge in the fyre , when he shall think it good . 5. But to retourne againe to your words , As vpon a confortable instrument of Goddes mercie , graunted to this countrey for the mainteining of his kirk and ministration of Iustice among vs. With what reuerence obedience and modestie ye haue receaued that instrument , I leaue it to his Maiesties memorie and your consciences : and if a few of you ministers gaue him not more paine and trouble then all the rest of the realme . If I see you ouer forgetfull I may well call some thinges to your memorie , although your daylie behauiour might very well release me of that labour . Truely I think there be no subiects in Europe more obliged to their Prince then ye ar to his Maiestie considering your de●●●tes : nor no Prince who haue hade more rebelliouse subiects then he hath hade of some of you , so far as it did ly in your power . ye will do well in tymes comming to mend this , for feare ye be constrained to render compt of all together , giftes abused may iustly be called beak : Your dayly railling against the present forme of policie in England sheweth well that your sicknes do increasse . VVe protest and promise with our heartes ( good and friendly words truely ) vnder the same othe , handwritt , and paines ( quid dignum tanto foret hic promissor hiatu ? ) that we shall desend his persone and Authoritie with our geir , bodies , and liues . Parturiunt montes nascetur ridiculus mus . good Sires will not your new Euangell suffer you to do more for the Kinges Maiestie ? onely to desend his personne & authoritie ? I praise your wisdome to aduertise what ●e may looke for at your hāds : yet sure I am , that ye your selues wold not be content to haue a seruant in your house with so small seruice , as ye offer here to your soueraigne whome ye wold seeme to haue greatly obliged . But at the lest may his Maiestie assure him self of your assistence in defence of his persone & authoritie ? No truely but in certaine cases , which ye lny downe to him by writt that he may craue no further , to Witt , in defence of Christes Euangell ( I think as it is now reformedly preached and interpreted by you the discipline hauing it sull course ) libertie of our countrey ( euery ministe● being maister ) ministration of iustice ( in chasing away sic as will not acknowledge you in all affaires ) and punishment of iniquitie : principally if any man gainesay you . Nothing at all for the Prince ? Nothing surely , if there cometh none of thes thinges in question the Prince may stand alone for you , so far as I can see . Onely when ye haue a do , he shal be assisted to do you seruice , otherwise he may do for him self , if he thinketh it good . But if he touch your Euangell , yea with the vttermoste of his finger , ye will put bothe persone and Authoritie in hazard , ye ar so mightely gouerned by the reformed spirite . I will not gesse further your myndes . Which beareth witnes , who so well does . But ye will suffer me to say that the subiect not onely is obliged of duetie ciuil , but also in conscience before God to defend his Princes persone without any exception because he is vnctus Domini and one of the chief magistrates established by God him self . Therefore we never did reade that the Christians were blamed for defending of the Emprours personnes , not withstanding that sundry of them were most cruell persecutors of the Christian and Catholik faith , and did seeke by all meanes to destroy the veritie . The Christians refuseth onely to be executers of these detestable designes of the Emprours : yea I think it shall never be found that the Ancient Godly fathers did lay to any Christians charge as a cryme , that he hath garded and keapt the personne of Iulian the Apostata ▪ for that neuer was against God , nor reason ; seing they were obliged there to , as to a thing bothe honest and Godly , which they could not neglect without a great blame . These onely were accused as cursed & misch●euouse men , who were instruments of his abominations . Certainely the Princes personne should be holie and inuiolable ; and we more carefull there of , then of our owne lines . Lykwise we may say of his Authoritie which cometh of God , and hath ay God for reuenger , if any man be so bold as to touch it irreuerently . Ye mesure the Princes persone and Authoritie according to your fantasie , making them great or small , to be obserued or dispysed , as ye think proper to your purpose and passion . But ye will say that it is well donne to defend the Princes personne & authoritie . that is very true . who so euer is owing a hondred crownes , doeth well to pay one crowne , but not inough except he pay the whole somme , so your duetie is not complete in these few heads . These fashions of othes a● inuented onely to exempt by litill and litill the people frome the due obedience oght to the Prince ▪ for the people thinking that the othe is the onely sure rule of their due obligation toward , their soueraigne : and that they ar not further bound then the othe sheweth : if in their opinion any thing passe that boundes , they may think them sel es free and discharged from further obedience as not conteined in their othe . For when I haue donne that , where to I am obliged , it is in my hād if I will do any further : If I do more , I merite thankes ; if not , I merite no reprehension , nor blame , much lesse punition . Ye will not be offended , if I say some what yet of your othe , which hath beene formed either with a great malice or extreme simplicitie ( which of these two be most proper for your sect I leaue the iudgement to others ) which will be more cleerely seene if we shew the true forme of othe which should be geuen to the soueraigne Prince . The subiects of Emprour or King being as va●●●les ( which we call cōmonly lieges ) should make to their Prince the othe simplie and without any condition , yea so farre that swearing fidelitie against al men they should not except them selues . And therefore the othe of fidelitie which the lawyers call sacramentum fidelitatis should be made without any condition or restriction : for if any sic thing be put in the forme of othe deceitfully , or craftelie couuert with words , where by the subiects may with draw them selfs from the fidelitie towards their Prince or attempt what so euer thing against him , vnder what so euer pretext , they should be accompted as rebelles , lacking reithe● occasion , then an euill mynd . And for that same cause it is not law fall to put the reason in the othe , that he , who sweareth , may haue no cloake nor excuse to break his othe : E●t enim forme fidelitatis actus legitimus conditionem non recipiens . when the othe of fidelitie is made to him who is onely lands lord and not soueraigne , the vassall puteth no condition although he put an exception of the Emprour or King , as may be seene in this forme . Ego Titius iuro super haec sancta E●angelia , quod ab hac hora in antea vsque ad vltimum diem vitae meae , ero fidelis tibi Ca●o Domino contra omnem hominem , excepto Imperatore vel Rege . But the forme of fidelitie and othe made to ●he Emprour or King , or any other soue●aigne Prince , should be sett downe in most ●imple plaine and cleere words , without any ●eceit fraud or guyll . For as the Kinges Em●ire is free and absolute , subiect to no other , ● the othe of the subiects should be ●ltoge●er simple and without any restriction . I ●ay all good and true subiects , not onely for their duetie , but also for their conscienc● cause , compare this with our new reformed or reither deformed forme of othe , and consider if it rasted not of rebellion and conspiracie against the law●ull Prince , and if this be not a beginning and foundament to bring in the Swisers common wealth where the soueraigne magistrate at the yeares end is answearable to the people , by whome he is chosen . Doubtles these craftesmen haue had before their eies Bruti vindicias , Buchanans precepts , Knoxes blasts of the trompette of sedition , Goodmans discours how superior powers ought to be obeyed of their subiects ▪ Knoxe histories of treasons &c. or els the King of Poles othe , Si sacramentum violauer● nullam nobis regni incolae obedientiam praestar● debebunt . the Poloniens may desyre of their future Prince , what othe they please seing he is at their election and choise . But to prescribe to your selues , how and what ye will sweare to your Prince , to whome ye , your fathers and posteritie ar allreddie obliged whether ye will or not , I know not how ye can be excused except ye ministers esteeme your selues in the same rank with the ancien● arrogant Aragoniens , who in reception o● their king were wount to say in this maner Nos , qui valemos tanto comme vos , y podem● m●s que vos , vos elegimos Re , con estas & estas conditiones intra vos y nos , vn que manda mas , que vos . We , who ar as good as ye , and may more then ye , choose you our king , with sic and sic conditiones betwixt you and vs that one may commande more then ye ▪ wold ye not think your selues braue men , if ye might truely vse ●ic speech to his Maiestie . But ye do meikill ●orse , seing in eff●ct ye gif him no thing but assistence to do you seruice , without any further honour or profit . A great seruant truely , if ye were wo●●hie m●isters . Certainly if the King were at your choise ( as God forbid he were ) ye could gif him no lesse then ye do here by your othe : yea what lesse can ye gif to your moderator of one day , then defend his persone and authoritie , as long as he is in charge , for ye do nothing therein , but mainteine your selues . The Mu●iners in the warres offer no lesse to their new choisen head , not for his cause , but for their owne . I am assured that there is no people in the worlde so seditiouse or rebelle , but wold bestow more vpon their Prince o● head whatso euer , then ye b●stow here vpon his Maiestie : In promptu ratio est , his Maiesties forces can not agree with your folies . But ye will say perhapes that the Kinges Maiestie doeth acknowledge him self to be made for the people and not the people for him . he speeketh lyk a noble wise and moste worthie Prince acknowledging what he oweth to God , in whose place he is established , whose persone he doeth present , and in whose authoritie he doeth command . On the other part , why will ▪ ye not lyk true and good subiects acknowledge ▪ your duetie , towards him , to whome ye ar obliged , as to Goddes lieutenant aboue you ? or ar all men obliged to you , and ye to no man ? it is lawfull to you to be more familiar with his Maiestie , then he is with him self . More ouer ye ar not the wholl people being but onely the tribunes at your owen making , and albeit ye were , yet should ye not presume so farre of your selues , as all should be donne by you , and at your appetite . It is certaine that the head is made for the body ( as also the body for the head ) yet should not the body be maister and command aboue the head nor yet prescribe lawes or conditions to it , but should obey it in all thing without contradiction as being subiect and not superior . The physiciens do teach , and ( as I think ) not without good reason that the wholl strenght of the body , and all the functions thereof cometh of the head , where the senses at chiefly , & wittes ar onely . If we would credit you & your reformation , we should shortly see a deformed gouerment through all the world . I am assured that it wold be better dwelling among the antient Cyclops , if there were any , then among you : and if ye be curiouse to know why , I shall mak you a description of your selues , where ye may see a part of your beauties with out a mirrour : Ye haue bene so impudent and shamelesse , as to aske for your ●eformed kirk an absolute othe of all the Kinges Maiesties subiects , yea of him selfe ( whome in his tender age ye did ci●cumuent ) that he should defend your doctrine and discipline , that is , embrace your inuentions and execute your plottes , so that his Maiestie and all his subiects of what so euer qualitie or condition . should onely be vestrae voluntatis imo tyrannidis ministri , to trouble and persecute all theis that will not obey you , albeit it were bothe against his Maiesties honour and state . Which I think his Maiestie will suffer no longer to be donne , because of the danger that may eusue there vpon . For what can be more perniciouse within a realme , where obedience and modestie ar moste necessarie , then to suffer the subiects to be corrupted either by monopoles or periuries or damnable opinions tending to a new forme of gouerment and state ? or to permitt a ●orme of common wealth within an other , as a cotadaill or fortresse within a towne , to hold the Prince and all his subiects bound s●aues to yow . A thing , I know not whether more dishonorable to the Prince , or more dangerouse . I say onely that the mo●e his Maiestie beareth with you the more ye at presumptiouse and the reddier to attempt some new interprise . Ye contented your selues before to raill against the state and gouerment of Scotland ; now , as if your iurisdiction were amplified with his Maiesties empire , ye ar entred in England , all Britaine is fallen to your lot : ye will comptroll all mens actions there , ye will assist your brethren of that nation , defend them , their doctrine and discipline according to your reformed ministeriall othe , for why should any man be so bolde as to touch in any wise your inheritance ? or medle with your affaires ? or command within your iurisdiction ? A surplice , a square cappe , or a Bishoppe may serue you for a most iust reason to trouble all , so liuely is your faith finding Idolatrie in any thing that mislyketh your humour . O tribus Anticris caput ins●nabile . It were best his Maiestie sent you to the vnfound lands , where there is no man yet , that ye might forme a common wealth at your owne fantasie without other mens griefe or trouble . Certainely if ye were sent ouer sea fiue , or sixe yeares to seek your meate as others haue donne , ye wold perchance be more modest , and vnderstand how bontifull and patient his Maiestie is suffering you so long to reigne and raill without ryme or reason : Coge●is aliquando per vestrum scelus iracunda louem sumere sulmina . But ye the Saincts of God , his elected people , assured inheritance , indued with only faith voide of all good workes , destitute of free will , and yet willfull in all your opinions , predestinated to the heauens how so euer emptie of honestie , and covered with vice , ye zealouse brethren , I say , ar aboue all Kinges and Princes , they at but your officers , executers of your good pleasiurs and will : otherwise to no purpo● in this world . To conclude this matter I will tell you the Catholik opinion herein , which is this . As we ar wholly and without any exception obliged to God in matters of faith and conscience , so at we absolutly and without any exception or restriction obliged & bound to our Prince with all fidelitie and obedience in temporall affaires , that is in matters nether repugnant to God nor good reason , how soeuer they be to our dommage and hurt in worldly thinges , or to out paines and against our repose . There is no reason , why the foote should refuse to trauaill ▪ when the head haue a doe , how hote that euer it be : wearinesse can serue for no excuse : at the nodde of the head , the rest of the membres should be reddie : at sic tymes excuses ar but disguised rebellions : the want of commodities maketh the way more difficill but not impossible . To the foote thes thinges may seeme very hard and iniust , because of the great paines and many incommodities it must suffer , oftentymes not knowing the reason why , except that it is a member subiect to the head , and therefor obliged to obey according to the office and due function of a member , as it shall please the head to command . Wold ye that men should goe as Iugling tumblers doe , their feete vp , and their head downe ? ye haue some reason so ●o desyre in maters of state ( although there be no reason , why it should be graunted to you ) seing by that meanes sundry of you myght hope for the highest place , as being in all degrees the very dregges of the people , yet being promoted without order or extraordinairely ( for all is one in your personnes ) ye at found worthie of the charge ye haue , ye become so perfect raillers : but how proper ye be to gouuerne Kinges and realme ( which ye will to ●●pend vpon you in maters of greatest consequence ) I leaue the iudgement to others ; and principallie when it is question of your zealouse brethren , who ordinairely ar caried away rather by passion and opinion , th●n guided by disc●eti●n and wisdome : where vpon ar founded an infnite nomber of rash iudgements that they haue made vpon other mens actio●s . I think it not needfull that I specifie any ▪ the ex●mples being so frequent● and common . A n●w sorte of tyrannie me●kill to be lamented ▪ if we ●ere not oppressed with a mor● grieuouse , ●her by it is fre● to no mā to vse his naturall aire and inioye ▪ the sight of his friends and kinnesmen , except ●e sweare him ▪ self your slaue , foreswearing bothe God and Prince for a reformed folie : Ouer high a price truely ▪ and ouer great subiection , for the small reward that any mā can look for at your-hand . What so euer banishment were more to be desyred , then that dwelling at home : for accepting that condit●on , men incu●reth the danger of double treason , diuine and humaine , which being donne , they were vnworthie not onely to be esteemed his Maiesti●s subiects , but to ●e suffered to liue vpon the earth , if that come of their proper consent and desyre . And what fidelitie , I pray you , can his Maiestie look for of you , who requires of other men sic othes as cutt away all assurance of fidelitie towards the Prince ? ye pre●erting your vaine opinions ( that I say nothing more displeasant ) to the whol antiquitie , yea to all ages passed and present , in maters of religion , and your iudgement to all magistrates of what so euer authoritie or experience in maters of state , and your interprises to peace and quyetnesse , ar good Christians and true subiects , well at your case in honour and Authori●ie , although the greatest part of you be the first honest men of your race , or rather the worst that euer was of your race , shewing the common say to be very true . Asperius nihib est humili cum surgit in altum , ●et a beggar on horseback and he will ride ● gallop . But peiceable men , who haue not that turbulent presomptious spirite , because they prefer the authoritie of the vniuersall ki●k , and iudgement of the ancient pastours and Ca●holik consent to their priuat and particula●e opinion , respecting the magistrates as Gods officers and law●ull instruments , they at Idolaters , papists , traitours to his Maiestie enemies to the cōmon wealth , excōmunicat incōtinēt ▪ put to the horne ▪ their goods confiscated , them selues banished out of the countrey : what rank or qualitie that euer they be of , they ar not worthie to be faluted by the worst rascal fellow of your sessions although they be composed ordinairely of the very sinke of the people . But honest men must take patience , seing ye gif so litill reuerence to them , to w●ome ye ar more obliged 6. where I will no●e a thing very remarcable , that neither riches , good traict●ment , dignities , nor honours can mak you quyet and peaceable men ; neither iniuries , indignities , banishment , losse of goods nor freinds can moue the Catholiks to leaue their duetie towards the Prince : which I doubt not but his Maiestie some day will consider when it shall please God to haue pitie of our mise●ies . Abyding which tyme , I pray you all good and Godly Catholiks ( s●sfer me good sites to turne my speeche a litill to them ) to behaue your selues towards his Maiestie with due obedience and modestie , se●king no pre●●xt no● excuse to withdraw your selues : suffering paciently persecutions if any be . Mixe no worldly respectes with heauenly bl●slinges , God is highly offended when we mak● to our particulare passions a cloake of his name , his honour and our affaires ar not of lyk rank , they should not be mingled together ▪ If any harme cometh to you in his seruice , your reward wil be th● greater , soing ye haue ●r●uailled for his glorie , and haue stand stoutly to his ryght , vnder whose banner to die , is to triomphe for euer : feare no damnage ▪ not losse , ye haue a most sure promise of a honderdfold profit & the lyfe eternall . we should bestow our goodes w●llingly in his seruice who rccompenseth so liberally . The lesse of our priuat affections we midle here in , the better is outs , the more ample shal be our lords goodnes towards vs : because his glorie the more cleerly doeth shine , when it is allone . But when his veritie is blamed for our misbehauiour , what can we look for at his hands , but for a iust punition for abusing his authoritie and name ? It were very hard to suffer sundry thinges that occurre in thes spirituall wat●es , if our captaine were not inuincible , and we assured how long we stand with him . We lack no good examples bothe of head and membres . We can not be first in this batai●l where so many thowsands lossing the earth haue conquised the heauens ▪ there ar passed before vs infinite nomber of champions off all dignities ages and qualities , Kinges , Quyenes , nobles & meane men , learned and ignorant , men , wemen , ould men and babes , poore and riche , who haue borne armour vnder this standart , & after the losse of all worldly goods haue shead their bloode with ioy to their eternall blesse , because they had only Goddes glorie before their eyes , which principally in this tyme so dangerous we should do , that our vice be not obiected to the Catholik religion , as if our faul●es came of that which we professe , and not of ou● selues ; to which sorte of calumnies and craftie accusations , our aduersaries haue ost recourse , taking argumēts from ou● liues and behauiour , which they can not haue frome our religion . We should not mixe the religion with matters of state , they apperteine to diuerse magistrates ; God will haue vs here obedient to bothe , because they a● his lieutenants , established in his name and authoritie we should not serue our selues with the command of the one , to disobey the other in his charge . Who so euer hender any of the two , can not serue him s●lfe with excuse of the other : we must follow bothe their commands according to their place & rank : they at ordained by God to keepe one another , and not to distroy each other . If standing to the true saith , to the defence of our soueraigne , we be persecuted either in lyf body or goods , after the bataill , we shal be restored to ou● owne , or to meikill better . he who receaueth a prophete in name of a prophete , shall receaue the reward of a prophete yea he who giueth a cuppe of cold water in the name of a Disciple shall not loose his reward , what shall he receaue I pray you , who willinglie , w●en occasion se●ueth , gifeth his lyf to God in Gods name to declaire his veritie or mainteine his iustice in defence of religion or his Prince , so highly recommended to vs by God him selfe ? lat vs not infect this gift & oblation with our priuat plottes and passions , he who heard Sainct Paul in his weaknes , will graunt vs strenght to susteine all aduersities : he will say to vs also sufficiat vobis gratia mea : the more we loosse here , the more we shall winne in heauen . Seing this patience sure I am that the Kinges Maiestie will not be so farre offend●d , when he shall vnderstand that thereis onely conscience that do stoppe you to condescend to many thinges , and no rebellion nor contempt of his lawes , or ordainances : for in that case ye prefer onely God to him , and that because your fi●st obligation moueth you thereto . Byding in this resolution , the victorie shal be yours , and ye shall obteine , if not mans , at lest Goddes fauour , otherwise ye may look to loosse bothe : surther we may hope that his Maiestie being better informed of the matter , wil be more gra●ious to his true and humble subi●cts then to punish them by death , banishment or priuation of their goods in fauour of the ministers who byding at the ground●s of their doctrine can neither be good Christians nor true subiects as we haue sha●● alreddie , and shall sh●w more euiden●ly here after if this be not thought sufficient . Yet if our sinn●s be so great that God will haue vs punis●ed with all tigour and extremitie in this present lyf , lat vs receaue the same not onely with patience because we haue deserued meikill more , but also with gladnesse and thankes giuing as comming o● his hand , who will gif vs the strenght to beare it , seing that his quartell is mixed with our paines , lat vs crye for his helpe ▪ and succo●re who hath the heartes of Princes in his hand , that he may dispense their actions to his glorie , to their and our saluation and publik peace and quietnesse . how that shal be donne , we must leaue it to his infinitie wisdome and prouidence hauing alwaies in our heartes and mouthes , thy will be donne in earth as it is in heauen . Now to retourne to you againe ( good sites ) it is not onely very dangerouse , but also farre against the duetie of a good Christian man to sweare according to your desyre , os reither command and force , to witt that they abhorre and detest all contrario●● religion and doctrine ( to your reformation ) but cheiflie all kynd of papistrie in generall and particulere heades ▪ Because the most chief heads of the Catholik Apostolik and Romane doctrine ( w●ich ye of your great humanitie and courtesie doe call papistrie at all occasions and propos ) a● conteined in the symbol of faith m●de by the Apostles , if ye haue any thing to say there to ye may . But as to vs , as we beleef in the symbol that there is one God omnipotente Fat●er , Sonne , & holie Ghost , w●o hath created , redeemed , & sanctified vs by his infinite goodnes & mercy ; so do we beleef that there is one holie Catholik kirk , by whose mouth we ar instructed in all theis thinges , that we should beleef , or do ; because shee is the spouse and mysticall body of Iesus Christ , of whome as of hir head shee hath grace and power , and we command to obey . Theis at the generall heades of that which ye call papistrie ( seing it pleased you so to terme it ) where vpon ar biulded all particuler heades professed by the same kirk , and all hi● children remaning in due obedience within hi● bosome . To detest and abhorre theis thinges , ye may easely iudge your selues ( if passiō commād not aboue your ●ittes ) how hard a thing it wil● be to ●any Christian man , w●o hath Christs spouse in good estimation and as it becometh him to haue hi● who is guided with so nobell a head : But ye will say that ye condemne not that which is good , but our errours : I answeare to you in one word , so farre as I can see ye haue as litell iudgement to discerne vpon an errour , as ye haue power to condemne it . But this doth require a more ample discours . Moreouer to haue the Catholik religion in greater horrour and detestation then te Iewdaisme , Turcisme , heresie , or at heisme I can not think that it cometh of a good and holie spirite ; but rather of him , who vnder the figure & shape of a black dogge gaue a purse with siluer to the forger of your confession . But I vnderstand well how the matter standed : he who hath fled a way for knauerie , had rather serue any man then retorne back to his owne maister . It is not my intent at this present to refu●e your negations of the faith : ye will gif occasions , as ye haue giuen matter to answear by the groundes of your owne doctrine and maximes of your chief ministers , which I graunt ye may deny , as ye haue donne many better thinges , by reason of your Christian libertie , where by ye may ●udge and condemne whome and what ye please if it agree not with the scriptures interpreted by you , that is , with your opinion ▪ where to ar subiect all thinges , by vertue of the spirite which guideth you as supreme iudges without appealle , for otherwise thinges can not stand with your credit : ye hold as the chief foundament of your detestations and refusals , that the Pape is the Antichrist : which point no man of iudgement can passe with , meikilles to subscribe or sweare it to be true . Sundry cunning and learned men hath most sufficiently confuted this blasphemous reuerie , so I may be excused if I enter no further in the matter , yet for other mens contentement , who haue not seene , or could not vnderstand these bookes , I will bring here some reasons why that can not be . And first the Pape acknowledgeth not onely God to be aboue him , to whome all honour and glorie iustly doeth apperteine because he is maker and authour of all thinges ; but also he acknowledgeth the Angels and Sainctes ( although in different degree & maner , God for his owen causes and them for Goddes cause ) who ar in heauen ; and for that cause prayet● to them as being Gods in time and most deare friends to interced for him ; where as the Antichrist if ye will gif credit to Sainct Paul , shall prefer him self to all thing that is called God , where no exception is made . Secondly we reade of no Pape who hath slaine either Elias or Eno●h , or any other excellent men indued with supernaturall giftes , principallie at Ierusalem seing there hath beene there no Pape thes many hondred yeares . Further the Papes successiuely haue raigned th●s s●xteine hondred yeares not witstanding of the great varietie and trouble of the ●yme . The An●ichrist should reigne onely three yeares and an half . Moreouer there was never yet any Pape receaued by ●he Iewes for their true M●ssias , because the Pape doeth teach that the true Messias is alreddie come : the Antichrist should be receaued , Si alius venertt in nomine suo ●um recipietis . of contrarie there is no man they hate so meikill as they hate the Pape , because he is the greatest obstacle thes 1600. yeares . ye being yet in lumbis in●isibilis Ecclesiae . The Euāgell should be receaued through all before the Antichrist come : The Euangell is not yet receaued through all : and if the Pape be not yet come why preach ye against him ? The Pape with all diligence and ●a●e hath keaped and yet do keape Iuge saecrific●um the perpetuall sacrifice which onely is accep●able and pleasant to God : & therefore the Antichrist will labour to tak it away : where in ye trauell as ye can . The pape mainteineth the religion of his forfathers , for he cond●mneth all thing as errour that is contrarie to the doctrine of the primitiue kirk and venerable an●iquitie ; because Iesus Christ being the veri●ie it self , the religion founded vpon him , and published by his deare spouse at his command , can neither be variable nor false . the Antichrist shall mispryce the religiō of his fathers wherein ye imitat him perfectly well . The pape sitteth at Rome and hath so donne thes many ages . The Antichrist should sit at Ierusalem . The Pape adoreth with all humilitie and reuerence the Trinitie , teacheth and commandeth all true Christians to doo the same . The Antichrist openeth his mouth with all sorte of blasphemie against the holie Triniti● . The Pape ●alleth him self Seruu● seruorum Dei , acknowledging that the honour he receaueth of men , is because of his office that he hath of God , and that he is institute Pastour here in earth to serue the wholl flock of Iesus Christ out lord whose seruant he is and chief minister : And therefor before all mortall men in dignitie seing he representeth Christ our soueraigne Lord , yet subiect to serue all men , helpe and assist them because of his office and charge , certainely the lest of the realme is to be prefered to the greatest , how lōg he represented the Kinges Maiesties personne . The Antic●rist shall call him self God. There hath beene two hundred and thirtie Papes and more : there should be but one Antichrist contrarie to Christ in all thinges : for we speak here of the great Antichrist . The religion professed by the Pape hath dured ( with your owm prophetes confessions ) more thē twalf hundred year●s : the religiō or rather impietie of the Antichrist should dure short space , as he him selfe . The Antichrist should be an Apostate & go out of the kirk of God , where by that his wickednes may be the greater being ioyned with rebelliō ▪ The Pape remaineth yet still in the house of God. There hath beene great number of heresies & heretikes during theis 1600. yeares that we haue hade so many Papes . But the Antichrist should be the last of the heretiks , because all wickednesse should be compleit in him , all heretiks seruing to him as foreriders , where of Simon Magus was the first a detestable magicien and a traiterous apostate , who not withstanding hath found ouer many cōpanions to follow him . Iesus Christ should slay the Antichrist with the spirite of his mouth , that is , as ye interprete it , with the preaching of the Euangell , that hath he never donne to any Pape , albeit ye haue imaginated to your selfs , that ye haue slaine the Pape by your preachinges , o● rather taillinges , the Pape never hath had one houres sicknes for all your crying ; assure your selues that his infirmities cometh of other causes . Luther in spirite of prophicie as he thought made this most notable verse Pestis eram viuus , moriens tu● mors ero Papa : he knew very well the first part to be true , and therefore myght say it confidently , the last part was lyk the authour , false and vntrue , he being deade and his doctrine bothe , it being changed partly by him self during his lyf , partly by his disciples and followers after his deathe , where as the Papes Authoritie , because it is founded vpon God , doth remaine , & shall remaine till the worlds end . The Antichrist should oppose him self to our lord in all thinges and abolish his name and honour so farre as he can : for so the name of Antichrist doth signifie . The Pape doeth the plaine contrarie . The Antichrist should come after Gog & Magog : howbeit that the Papes hath beene so many ages , yet know we not , what Gog and Magog ar , nor what place of the world they dwell in . The Pape honoreth the Sainctes as Gods vndoubted friends and desyreth them to pray for him . Where vpon maliciously ye preach to the people that we gif Christs honour to the Saincts & yet we acknowledge them as seruants onely , who hath credit to pray and not to command . The Antichrist should haue in his name the number of 666. to find this number your brethren , further different frome you in doctrine and discipline then in place or habites , haue taken great paines tourning the Papes names , but all in vaine , it could not be found the holie spirite hauing so prouided against your calumnies . Many thousands ar saued in the Catholik kirk , which ye call the papist kirk , for otherwise all your forfathers ar condemned , yea all the ancient fathers , martyres , and doctours of the kirk , seing that they haue acknowledged the pape for their superior , and chief vicare to Iesus Christ , and a great part of you were baptised by the membres of the Antichrist , in whose kirk no man can be saued . The Pape armeth him self & al men so far as he can for Iesus Christ , with reasons , scriptures , generall counceilles , authorities of fathers , exēples of martyres , consentement of the wholl Catholik kirk of all ages . The Antichrist shall arme him selfe and his followers with force and violence against Iesus Christ . The Pape conserueth , and haue conserued at all tymes the scriptures : The Antichrist if he do according to his name and profession , should destroy the scriptures . The Pape hateth and condemneth all sort of rebellions and nouelties in religion : The Antichrist should embrace them as most proper & conuenient instruments for his auancement of perdition . The Pape came so quietly , and peaceablye ( yea according to your owen ●ellowes saying ) that ye can not yet goodly-tell , when , or how he first entred in the kirk , ye ar so troubled to tell well your new forged fable . The Antichrist should come with sic trouble and mischief as neuer was since the beginning of the world , where in he shal be more lyk to you , then to the Pape , seing we can well tell when ye came , and may yet shew ouer euident markes of your vnquiet intré . And to be short the Antichrist should be filius perditioni● the sonne of perdition , chief instrument of satan , that is , so possessed and assisted with the deuill , that he shall do all thinges in the deuils power and for his cause , and shal be so perfect and accomplished ( if I should so say ) in all vice and iniquitie , that no man can equall him , meikilles to surpasse him , and principallie in pryde , as our maister and lord Iesus Christ did excell in all vertue , & chiefly in humilitie discite à me , quia mitis sum & hu●●lis corde . Wherefor not without reason sundry learned men haue repported the seuen montains to the seuen deedly sinnes which shal be in the Antechrist in most high degree that he may iustly answeare to his name , The Pape can no wayes be thought so wicked : I call to witnes all sort of Protestantes of what so euer nation , saction , or opinion who haue beene at Rome before or since the Iubile , and haue seene the Pape who now sitteth Clement the eight a man worthie of that name , if any of them may say in his conscience , that he is so wicked and desperate a mā , as the Antichrist is described to be in the scriptures . Sure I am that there is none of them so far drounkē in the ministeriall humour , that will say so , if he speak according to that he hath seene . It is so far from that the Pape can be the Antichrist that his most excellente Maiestie a Prince of rare iudgement and learning , doth acknowledge the Pape to be a temporall Prince , to whom he is obliged and to whome in all good offices he wil be correspondent . ●hat wordes may be said to your opinion who maketh our Kinge to haue obligation from , and commerce with the Antichrist ? I may say with your pardon and licence sessionall , that he is a better & more honest man , then any ministers that either is or euer was in Scotland without exception of your chief pontifs first or last , Iohn or Robert. I am assured that he who knoweth the Pape an● your ministers will say the same , principally if it were question of humilitie and humanitie : and if I be put to my proues , I hope easely to discharge my selfe litill to you● honours . If this be true as it is most certaine why should any man sweare the Pape to be the Antichrist , that is the most wicked and detestable man that euer was , is , or shal be , seing that there is none of your companie how godly brethren that euer ye be , but i● meikill worse , then he ? or if they sweare a thing so farre out of all reason and verit●e as thinking it true , why should they follow or acknowledge you for true and lawfull pastours sent by God to reforme the world , if ye be worse then the Antichrist , who must be the most detestable and abominable instrument that euer Satan hath employed ? If ye say that it is but simulation and hypocrisie in the P●pe to deceaue men , I answeare you , that if we graunt your foolish affirmation , ye must also graunt to vs that the deuill hath donne more good with the Pape , & his hypocrisie , pretēded , or fained holinesse , then euer the holie spi●ite , which is in you , I say , could do by ●ou and your pietie and reformed Godlinesse : your actions may beare witnes if I lie . O Sanctas gentes quibus ha● ●●s●untur in ●ortis minima . Whose best workes a● so litill worthe . Certainely ye ar very greatly obliged to theis , who will not sweare a thing so preiudiciable to your honour and reputation , which necessarilie followed vpō your doctrine , if it were once admitted . Truely I haue not so hard opinion of you : for notwitstanding I esteeme you in all degrees farre inferior to the Pape : yet think I not that ye ar so low & abiect , or so wicked and abominable as the Antichrist , meikilles to think you worse . Acknowledge the obligation ye haue to them , who doing according to their consciences toward the Pape , hath donne so meikill for your honour . But ye will say that ye ar not so wicked as the Pape . I doubt not but ye will winne your cause , if it be referred to your saying or othe . If the boundes of this epistle wold suffer , or if it were my principall butte to traict that matter , I should mak a comparison betwix the Pape and you , where I should mak you ashamed ( if ye haue any shame in your forhead ) of your selues , the merueillous differēce being seene . I maruell how a minister can look to his companions vnlaughen when he seeth the people beleef a thing so ridiculous . And in cōsciēce beleef ye that the Antichrist shal be a litill hypocrite or simple heretik ? ●e shal be more furiouse then any that euer came to trouble the kirk . Because ye cannot shew that the Pape is come with force and violence , as our Lord hath aduertised vs he shall come , ye wold mak the world beleeue that the Antichrist should come to continue lyk a lamb . Iesus Christ sayeth the contrarie of him . It wil be an ill reformed faith to gif our lord the lie : how can ye think , that he who shal be instructed and fullie inspired wi●h the spirite of Satan , will in any wise , ether follow or conter●ect our maister and lord Iesus Christ ? ye deceaue your selues and all others , who credits you if ye beleef so . The heretiks , who ar onely his foreruners hath entred in the kirk of God lyk Woulfes and Tigres , and ye your selues came with so great modestie and quietnes , that the earth did tremble and shake vnder your feete ( I know nōt if it was for gladenesse of your cōming ) so mightelye that the whole policie & publik buildings thr●ugh out all Scotlād did fall downe as if it had beene a generall earth quake . verelie according to his nature and dignitie , he must be more violent and cruell then all the rest . Is it possible that ye think the Antichrist will vse onely persuations , faire words , & li●ill hen wyles , seing that ye vse all s●rt of violences and compulsions ? he wil be more cruell then ye in all respectes , more craftie and more mightie : he will bring with him all mischiefs that can be inuented , & for that cause God will shorten his tyme. Think ye that that deuill ( if I ●hould so say ) wil be lyk Clemē● the 8. Are ye so ignorant or so foolish ? Truely Pape Clement is so wicked , that it were better haue ten thowsand lyk him , then one lyk ●ny of you , and his death more to be sorrowed thē the death of a hundred thousand of you , howbeit ye haue a better opinion of your selfs . Think not also that the modestie that is in the Pape , cometh of any feare he hath of you or yours . Ye slay him euery yeare with your tounges , but so softlie , that he perceaueth it no more , then ye did the first Papes entring . How can ye beleeue that the Pape or Papes , ar , or can be the Antichrist , seing they haue condemned all the heresies that hitherto hath risin against ether the diuinitie or humanitie of Iesus Christ ( as may be proued by your owen fellowes ) yea they haue condemned the errours risin now of late yeares amonge your selues , as the new heresies of Gentilis , Stancharus , Blandrata , and other good disciples of Caluin , against the holie Trinitie , whose errour ye approue not although bred among you . How can it be that they shal be the Antichrist , who so stoutly , so constantlie , with so great expenses and danger doeth defend the dignitie of Iesus Christ ? for they onely whome ye in your reformed language call the Antichrist , hath holdin , approued , & yet doth defend & approue , all & wholl the generall councelles where Christs honour , authoritie , and diuine Maiestie haue beene lawfully defended and keeped : yet can ye not shew any sic thing donne by you , who calles your selues true Christians and lawfull pastours . What shall we think of these Antichristes , & of you zealous Christians ? They keept the bible from corruption of heresies , when ye could not be found , yea when none of your reformed brethren could be seene , at what tyme your inuisibilitie excused you from sic charitable offices . It apperteneth to him onely whome ye call the Antichrist to defend Christs name , keepe the bible , distroy heresies , confute errours , conuert infideles , send to all partes to cō●ort the faithfull , to assure them , who ar in brangle , to reduce them , who ar gone astray , and that in Europe , Asie , and Afrik . Which is donne yet in the new found Ils , where there is more Christians now , then heretikes in all Europe , yea a great deal more : O good & diligēt Antichrist who onely hath watched & laboured in the viniard of our Lord as it becometh a true & faithfull seruāt . And o ye wicked negligēt , sluggish & disloyall pastours who haue sleeped like as many Endymious thes 1500. years past in some obscure caue , till the moune of false & foolish imaginations haue wakned you , to embrace againe the cloudes of errour in place of that heauenly Iuno of veritie Haue we not iust occasion to wish of God to haue in your place so good and godly an Antichrist ? which if we hade in euery toune , we should not now haue beene in paine to refell your follies . We may bouldly say that this Antichrist is meikill better reformed , then your kirk , and lesse to be feared , then your reformation . I doubt not but ye wold here willingly answeare , that ye contribu●e with no lesse good will for the diliuerance of Geneua , which ye make the people beleeue is besieged by the Duk of Sauoye ( where I will remark a great folie in you to beleeue a thing so mani●estly false , & a malice in them , who haue abused so farre your simplicitie and rash crudelitie ) for their reformed faith . I wold also willingly know of you , why your reformed charitie extendeth it self onely to sic as haue rebelled against their lawfull Prince reither then to them , who round about you ar in great need and distresse ? If ye did helpe your holie citie because of their necessi●ie , I wold think it well done , if ye could do well with out preiudice to your onely faith . But to mainteine their rebellion against their iust and lawfull Prince , is but an open and euident argument of that which is secretly hid in your breastes as we haue said here before . I was almost here deliberat to shew that a great nomber of the qualities which should be in the Antichrist may be easely found in you , as in his sorriders : but I will keep that to your answere , if perchance ye persist in your Antichristian opinion . For then we shall see God willing , whither ye can better apply the markes to the Pape , or we to you . 8. Now to your excommunication , a thing truely meikill to be wished of many , and to be embraced of all men : for who should not desyre to be out of their followship , who ar ioyned together by periuries , treason , & errours ? Honest true and faithfull men should seek by all meanes to deliuer them selues of sic companie if either willingly , rashlie , or by force they haue entred there in . Yet lat vs see what power ye haue to excommunicate any man. Onely true and lawfull pastours ( which ye can not be , lacking as ye do , the law●ull vocation ) haue power and authoritie to excommunicate : where vpon it followeth that ye haue no power nor authoritie at all . we haue brought manv reasons in our offer printed , why your calling can not be good , w●ich for the present we will not repeate , because your owen reformation will furnish vs good store of reasons to proue the same , which we will employ here because they ar your owen and that most foundamentall . Ye will graunt me if I be not deceaued that the office and dignitie of a pastour is so great and excellent , that it properly conuiueth only to Iesus Christ , and is cōmunicated , to sic as it pleased him to call there to , either by ordinarie meanes , or extraordinatiely that is immediatly by him self . And for that cause no man should be so hardie or reither temerarie as to medle there with of him self , if he wold not incurre the cryme of lesmaiestie diuine , in taking the office of Iesus Christ out of his hand . For this cause Luther , seing he could not well serue him self with the ordinarie vocation of the Catholik kirk , where he was nurished and brought vp , took him to the extraordinarie , alledging he was sent immediatly by God to reforme the world Frome this extraordinarie power g●fin to Luther , ye haue receaued your ordinarie calling , which I must shew to be false with most euident reasons , to proue that ye haue no authoritie to excommunicate any man. Luther was sent ( if we will credit him and you ) by God him self to teach the trueth , the which might serue vs for a sufficient warrand of his assured true vocation , that the true doctrine he broght with him , might force vs to acknowledge his power . I will for the present ( albeit against the veritie ) suppose all as true and good , because out of theis principels and groundes we shall easely prooue , that ye haue no lawfull vocation , and consequently at no true Pastours , where vpon followeth the millitie of your pretended excommunication . Luthers doctrine ( say ye ) was true , ergo his vocation was good , and he a lawfull Pastour . I say on the other syde ( by the maxime of your owen doctrine ) if his doctrine w●s false his vocation was not good , nor yours receaued frome him , and consequently neither ●e , nor ye lawfull pastours : or if your doctrine be false , your vocation ( if ye hade any of him ) is loste and ye no pastours , becaus● the true doctrine onely ( as ye alledge ) is the sure proofe of true vocation . If Luthers doctrine was true and of the holie Spirit , doub●les yours is ●alse , seing ye teach doctrine not onely farre different frome his doctrine , but also in many heads plaine contrarie as may be easely shewen by bothe your writtinges Heare , I pray you what one o● your Lutherian breth●en sayeth H●nc●gitur inter omnes piè eruditos constat Luth●rum non Vertumni aut Eceboli instar in veritate semel agnita & professa varillasse , sed in ●a per Dei grat●am vsque ad extremum vitae halitam permansisse : Caluinistas verò , in hoc & alijs articulis sibi nunquam constare ex Zuinglij , Martyris , Bu●eri , Philippi , Victorin● , Hemmingy , profugorum VVitebergentium & aliorum libris & actionibus docers & d●m●nstrari potest . And in the inscription of the same book he speaketh very plainely howye agree together and with the veritie . Theologiae Caluinistarum libri tres , in quibus ceu in tabella quadam , quasi ad oculum plusquam ex 223 ▪ sacramenta●iorum publicis scriptis , pagellis , verbis proprijs , & auth●orum ●onibus indicatis , demonstratur , eos de null● ferè doctrinae Christianae articulo rectè sentire : addita simul verae sententiae ass●rtione , & contrariae opinionis refutatione : collecti opera & studio M. Conrad● Schluss●lburgij , dioeceseos Rareburgensis , superintendentis & coniunctarum Megapolensium Ecclesiarum generalis inspectoris . In his cataloge of heretikes he cōpteth the Caluinists , against whome he writteth the third book that he concludeth thus . Epilog . de secta Caluinistarū . Cum igitur ex enumeratis nostrae doctrinae rationibus , & falsis sacramentariorum fundamentis conscientiam anxiā semper in dubio relinquentibus , luce meridiana clarius apparea● imp●os & blasphemos esse Caluinistarum errores ; Nos secundum Dei verbum ( ye see how this mā alledgeth against you the word of God for his warrand ) Augustanam confessionem veterem , scripta viri Dei Lutheri , librum concordi● atque apologiam eiusdem , à sacramentarijs ( he speaketh of your sect ) tanquam blasphemis hareticis nobis caueamus , & ipsorum opinionem impiam tanquam prasentissimum & noxium animae venenum toto pectore execremur . Further ye may see what Hunnius hath writtin not only against all the Caluinists in generall , but also in particular against Caluin in a book intituled Caluinus Iudai Zans . In the other part it will not be difficill to you to know what Zuinglius , Caluin , Beza , Lauatherus and the rest of that band haue writtē against Luther and Lutherians , and with what dispyte and iniuries they treate one another , Scires ● sanguine natos , which may euidently proue the diuersitie of their doctrine . If the one haue the trueth , necessarily the other can not haue it , seing they agree not : so if the one haue the true vocation the other can not haue it , they being of repugnant doctrine . 9. But ye will say that Luther did onely beginne the holie reformation which then was so necessarie in the kirk , that God was moued to send him extraordinarily for that cause : yet hade he not the strength to performe it , as it was needfull ; which worke Caluin with his followers , but principally ye , haue done by your reformatiō : changing all thinges , that no thing can be better , tourning af●irmations in to negations , faire buildings in to kellyards or corne land , good order in to confusion , charitie in to particular profit , obed●ēce in to rebelliō , superioritie in to a foli she paritie , assu●āce in to mistrust &c. because he & ye haue bene most fullie instructed with the holie spirite . If we receaue this for a good answeare , we must say that this hath bene dōne by a n●w cōmission that God ha●h gifin to Caluin and you , farre different from the commission gifin to Luther and his ●ollowers : for the Lutherians according to this saying , hade only charge to beginne the matter , and ye to end it ; but beginning and ending should agree to gether , and not like aegri somnia or worse . They should agree I say , if they be of one spirite , except they come of that spirite , who neuer yet could agree with him selfe . The holie spirite who is the sp●●ite of vnion and concorde could not haue condemned by your mouth , which he hath approued by Luthers or Lutherians mouthes ▪ I doubt not but ye trust al that ye haue the holie spirite , yet the diuersitie of your opinions assure me the contrarie , seing that the spirit , who approueth and authoriseth the one and his doctrine , condemneth and dischargeth the others and their doctrin . If ye say that the errours hade takin so deepe roote that it was not possible to take them out of mens hartes in short space , and therefore we should not maruell if there be many ●hingis in Luthers doctrine not agreable with the veritie . But , I pray you , hade it not beene more seemely and as easie to Luther ( if he was sent by God , whose asistence he could not want in that case ) to haue told the veritie at the beginning as to haue preached new errours so detestable , as ye say , and so contrarie to Godds worde and our saluation ? what spirite moued him so to doe ? If he ●ad winked at some or many of these poinctes that ye call errours , which he found in the kirk before him because of the inueterate opinion cōfi●med by long vse , there might be some apparent excuse in your answere , but to bring in errour for errour , or to put out one to take in two ( the people being so docill to ●eceaue what so euer impression at that tyme Luther wold or cold haue giuen them ) or to confirme obstinatly an ancient errour is no worke of the holie spirite , who should haue guided your extraordinat●e prophete and new sent pastour . Or was the holie spi●ite so weake in Luthers mouth , that he could not teach him the veritie ? or Luther so hard harted , ●hat he could not receaue , nor conceaue the veritie mekilles teach it to others ? or hade the holie spirite since that tyme found Caluin a more proper instrument to instruct the world truely and plainely in all thinges ? Then why was he a lying spirite in Luthers mouth , seing it was o● him , ye haue your extraordinarie calling , which now is so ordinairie and established that no man may preach without it ? 10. I see not what can be answered here . or shal we tourne ba●ke againe to the first foundament of Luthers extraordinarie vocation ? where of the marke was the true doctrine , which ye ar constrained to denye and disauow , if ye wold proue your owen good : for he condemneth you and your doctrine , and ye condemne him and his doctrine ; which if ye denye obruam vos aduersarum & ves●rarum partium voluminibus scriptisque contrarijs . what shal become here of your vocatiō ? for lack of true doctrine it wil be null , either in him , or you , or ( if ye say bothe true in your mutuall accusation ) in you both ? what shal become of your ministerie if this false thunder be shaken out of your hands ? ye will haue hard escapping out of this snare , wherein ye haue feltred your selues , fleing frome the Catholik kirk . For if ye say that it is ynough that ye agree in the groundes and foundaments of faith and religion which ar necessarie altogether for mans saluation , and in these ye agree with Luther and Lutherians , & they with you . I wolde gladly vnderstand what ar these groundes and foundaments of faith and religion necessarie for mans saluation . Is it to beleeue that there is but one God ? Iesus Christ to be God & Gods Sonne ? That our saluation cōsisted in Godes mercy & other sic thinges as sayeth Caluin ? Or in the Creed , Lordes prayer , & ten commands as thinketh Beza ? Or shal they be in the inuocatiō of our lord Iesus Christ as teacheth du Plessis ? Or shal these foundaments be the negation and detestation of the Catholik doctrine , or ( as ye call it ) papistrie according to your mēswearing of the true fai●h ? If ye wil hold you at your owen groūd , I say onely that a negatiue faith , is no faith properly , and so your negations wil neuer open the heauens to you , except that ye think that the Iewes gentils Turkes and heretikes o● all sects and at hei●ts may haue place as well there as ye , seing they can deny heads of religion professed by the Catholiks with noth lesse assurance then ye , & a great part of the same with you . If ye will say any of the●s thinges which the others hade said I ask you wherefore came Luther , seing theis thinges ( as ye can not denie● ) were beleeued in the Catholik kirk before that euer Luther blew the trompette of sedition or as ye wold call it , reformation , if that honour had not beene reserued to you ? if the puritie of theis pointes was requesit , why came Luther , seing he teacheth not that puritie ? For that was reserued to you onely as we haue said often tymes . It were out of purpos to say that God hade sent him to bring in new errours and confirme ould vnder p●etext of some few that he hath taken away , where by an other might be sent . Was it needfull that your Caluin should as an other Sainct Iohn the Baptist Parare viam Domini ? In the meane tyme I will conclude ( if there was so many errou●s in Luthers doctrine ▪ that it was needfull to send another in his place to teach the trueth ) that his extraordinarie vocation was not good , or els yours , who at come vpon a false token to gif him the lie . But Domini moderatores why shall we beleeue Luther in some heads of religion as hauing commission of God and not in others , because ye say it ? According to your Eu●ngell ye at all equall , not one greater thē an other : why shall we gif you more credit , then him ? or if we refuse to credit Luther , why shall we not re●use to credit you also , that ye may remaine euer Pares ? or why shall we beleeue your , when ye improue some thinges and approue others ? is it not needfull here to haue a new extraordinarie calling to iudge with discretion and to our saluation ? and if in any thing ye be gone wrong , should there not be another extraordinarie prophete to correct you as ye haue corrected others ? And seing that the true kirk ( according to your reformed opinion ) may erre , when sh●ll we haue lawfull pastours ? ye put the true doctrine the certaine mark of lawfull calling , yet it can not be hade , because euery man bringeth errour with him , and the kirk is vncertaine and subiect to errour and so we can not trust hir . And certainely as to Luther , I credit you , when ye accuse him of false doctrine and his followers , because he him selfe doth acknowledge his nature to be so corrupted and defiled , that he can do no good at all . But that ye be not draw in frome your paritie , I gif also credit to Luther and his followers when they accuse you of so many errours , and your patriarche Caluin of so great wickednes , because he acknowledges him self of as good nature and inclination as Luther , and therefor can not tell the veritie sincerely , as not being proper instruments for so precious a worke which wold be spilt , if they touch it . Monsieur du Plessis hath no better opinion of mans nature in generall , as may be seene in the third book of the Eucharistie cap. 17. not far from the end , where he seemeth to say that the grace of God can not mak good , that cometh of vs , because that we mix in with Goddes work some of our owen particular honour , glorie , profit , and so that there is no good which we can do well , nor no ill but we can do ouer well : for so he speaketh . Notwithstāding we read not that any , who hath beene sent extraordinariely by God to preach the veritie , haue teached or proposed in Godds name to be beleeued any false doctrine And it is to be supposed that God hauing sent Luther , hath also sufficiently instructed him in all thinges he should say or do in that charge and office : for otherwise seing the thinges that we should beleeue at aboue all naturall reason and humaine iudgement , how shall we know , if he , who is sent by God , keep the direction which he hath receaued ? if he be conuict in one falshood , he losseth credit in all the rest , and there by disappointeth his maisters intent , who employeth him , Further it is certaine that God of his in finite wisdome & power , either choshed or maked the instrumēt proper , that he will employ , and suffers not in theis great matters to go otherwise then he will & our saluation requireth . For it is impossible that man can be deceaued by God who is the veritie it self . But ye will say that his doctrine who is sent , should be examined with the word of God conteined in the scriptures : yea but he is come to interprete the scriptures to you and not to ●ece●ue any interpretation of you . His vocation gifeth him good assurance to speak . If ye wold trie his vocation by the scriptures , ye should haue good reason , but to trie his doctrine hauing admitted his calling I see no reason . 11. Moreouer if it be lawfull to call in doubt any mans doctrine who is extraordinariely sent now in our dayes , why shall it not be lawfull to call in doubt the doctrine of all the●s , that euer were sent extraordinariely by God , principallie seing ye acknowledge not the Authoritie of the kirk ? For being doubt some and incertane in the one , ye can not be assured in the others seing that it is that same God that sent them all , and for that same end ▪ so shall we haue the whole bible , I say not subiect to triall , but subiect to be reiected by euery presumptuous braine , as hath beene donne by sund●y in our dayes & besore . Further seing we should receaue nothing of any extraordinarie Pastour but that which we haue tryed with the scriptures , I wold be glade to know , what triall can be made by wemen and children or ignorantes ? For if triall should passe before , why should any man or woman ( how ignorant that euer they were ) reither then learned mē receaue any doctrine without triall ? or why force ye m●n to approue sweare and subscribe your negations before they haue well tried them to be true , or reither seing they find them false . But we will keep the rest of this dispute to the triall of your sessions presbiteries and assembles prouincials and generals , where in ger erall and particuler we shall , God willing , discusse this matter the best we can . Now to your calling , which I say can not be good , whe●her Luthers be good or ill . For if it be good who so euer ingyre him self to preach and teach in the kirk of God as being a lawfull Pastour , not hauing power of Luther , should be esteemed a priuat man and not a publik officer of Gods house , a traitour and not a true man , a woolf and not a hited , ye and yours being without his mission and calling , as we haue alreddie shewin , I see not what ye can pretend for you , to haue donne as ye haue . Which I proue once againe in this sort : He who is sent a Pastour and Doctour in the kirk of God , principally is sent to preach the Doctrine , as he receaued it of the Doctour who sent him : if he doeth otherwise , his commission or procuration conteining no sic thing as he hade donne , can not serue him : for who so euer cometh in the kirk with charge , cometh as procurer , and not as proprieter , wherefor he should do according to his procuration , ( because he hath onely the handling of other mens goods and good ) and not according to his fantasie , as if all were his owen . Now if Luther the first of this new extraordinarie calling sent you , it vvas to preach that same doctrine , which he preached & hath deliuered to the world before he sent you . If ye keep not that doctrine , his mission serueth you to no purp●s , because ye haue not donne the thing , wherefor ye were sent , it not your commission iustly called back and ye declared euill officers ? As when ye gif power or commission to any new young scholler to gouuerne a kirk , it is not without iniunctions that he shall teach that same doctrine , that ye teach and that he hath heard of you , and not a nother forged at his owen fantasie or inuented by an other . If he do contrarie to your command , wold ye not depose him as not doing according to the power receaued of you ? and therefore iustly to be disawowed , but so that he could not serue him self against you with your procuration hauing passed the boundes prescribed to him . Now if ye haue receaued any power of Luther or nor , I refer the matter to you , I say onely that ye haue preached and yet do preach another doctrine then he & his followers do preach . ergo ye ar priuat men and not publik officers or lawfull pastours in this new reformed kirk ▪ except perhapes by verrue of your reformation it be lawfull to rulle without reason , ye may call your selues pastours and sainctes of God ; ye will neuer persuade to men of iudgement that ye ar his sainctes as long as ye take vpon you , the charge of Pastours without power or charge . Think not but thi● merites a ●u●t excommunication ▪ and not a conterfaited folie lyk yours , medling our selues with things for aboue your state , being but priuat men , yea so meikill worse then priuat men , that your vsurpation maketh you giltie of cryme of lesmaiestie diuine . I● ye will not credit me , go to Luther your first patriarche , and he will declare , w●at he thinke●h , seing he hath long since excommunicated you out of his new kirk because in place of his heauenly doctrine ( as he sayeth ) ye haue teached your doctrine which ye haue brought out of hell ( tak you to him if the words be some what sharpe ) to prison the wordle ; and for that cause in the very beginning he did excommunicat Caluin & Zuinglius whom he called sacramentaries and that most iustly according to their owen opinion : for they acknowledging him for that new beginning of their vocation and new reformed kirk , it behoued him to haue that power aboue them . So what doubt is but Luther hauing power to send them , hath power also to call them back if they past the boundes of his commission ? I he hath called them back and broken the commission he gaue them before ( as in deed he hath donne what he could that is in imagination as he gaue them that power ) they at priuate men againe in the middes of their reformation , and ye also , destitute of all power and authoritie to excommunicat any man. By this although Luther hath neuer called backe his power gifin to Caluin , yet could it serue him for no Warrand , seing that Luther denyeth planely that euer he him self receaueth any charge to speake or write sundry thinges , which Caluin and Zuinglius haue spoken and written since that tyme : and therefor he calles them heretiks and sacramentaries as I haue said before . Or if he receaued charge to preach thes thinges , why condemneth he other men , who preached them ? There were some excuse , if he did not all , but there is no excuse nor reason , why he should hinder other men hauing lawfull power of him self , to do that which he could not do , or to condemne them , who teacheth the veritie that being the chief and principall end of his ●xtraordinarie vocation . There is none of all ●he Prophetee , Euangelists , or other holie writters , who haue written althinges , which ●t hath pleased God to sh●w to the world . ●or so he hath though it good to distribute ●is giftes at sundry tyms , to sundry person●es , for sundry reasons , as he thought it most ●xpedient for his glorie and our saluation . ●ut there is none of them all who either gaine sayeth or condemneth the others ▪ meikilles stoppeth them to say or write any thing that they haue in charge to declare and publish to the world ▪ here tourne you to what syde ye will either Luther shal be a false prophete or Caluin an Apostate , & his vocation null and yours also . 12. I mak no doubt but ye will reither forsak Luther , howbeit first , then Caluin your last patron . I may obiect here to you the honourable titels ( quo iure non disp●to ) that Caluin gifeth to Luther as to a true seruant of God , and not as to a false prophete , which were sufficient to close your mouthes if they could be closed . But I will passe this as if it were not , and speak of Caluin and you , because ye may say that Caluin him self was sent extraordinariely to performe that excellent worke , in vaine and falsely attempted by Luther , I will well by supposition , prouiding that ye reformed brethren will stand there to , and suffer me to examine the matter a litill : for we shall see , if ye can fight better vnder this new captaine . Caluin or any oth●r ye will , was sent ( I suppose this now , in case ye will not stand by Luther & tak your ordinarie calling of him ) extraordinariely by God him self to teach the veritie , and ministrate the sacraments according to the reformation ●e was to make : if he did not his duetie in this most excellent and necessarie charge , ye should esteeme him ▪ as he is , a false prophete , who being commanded by God and assisted by the holie Spirite ( for sure I am in your opinion he lacketh not that ioyned to his charge ) yet wold not declare the veritie truely & plainely without admixting some lyes of his owne by the deuils suggestion , where by the world migh● be of new poysoned with false doctrine vnder colour of Goddes soueraigne name . If this be true he merites more thē to be slaine in the way by a Lyon for trāsgressing of the lords command , not in simple eating and drinking , being forbidden to eat or drink , as did the ancient prophete , but for teaching of false doctrine far by his cōmission , which was to shew the veritie . If he did his duetie ●n all thinges , where from cometh it , that ●undry of your brethren in France & other ●laces , yea your excellent Apostle-Verelian ●reat Pontif of Geneua M. Theodore Beze ●is owen good disciple , dissentes from him ● many heads , and as I think , ye also disa●ow him not in few pointes . Certainely I ●aue not to this day found one who appro●eth him in all thinges . For when any of ●ours ar vrged with Caluins authoritie , y● answere that ye acknowledge not Caluin , but so farre as he agreeth with the scriptures , where ye find that he agreeth with the scriptures , ye will receaue him : what lesse can ye gif to Plato , Aristotle , Cicero and Seneca , or any other profane writter ? will ye reiect them although ye find them agree with the word of God ? I think not . Truely Caluin is meikill obliged to you , if ye graūt him that , which ye can not refuse to an ould wyf . Is this the reuerence ye beare to him for his extraordinarie calling ? ar thes the thankes ye gif him for the vocation and pow●r that ye haue receaued of him ? shall not the spirite that spak in him haue more credit , then any of you ? was he sent with that condition that he should haue no credit , till ye found in the bible that it was true he sayed . Truely if I be not far deceaued , it wil be very easie to mak you beleeue any thing ye please and otherwise impossible , if the iudgement be re●erred to you poore Caluin ( so far as I vnderstand by your answers ) receaued not the spirite in the best sort . He receaued onely the spirite to tell you many thinges in forme of proposition to your holie assemblies , and ye receaued of discretion and wisdome , to iudge what was good an● what was ill . ye haue gotten a more mighti● inspiration then your chief prophet● . I am glade for your cause . we can not faille to go well hauing gottin you for supreme iudge to trie all thinges , but , as I think , euery one in his owin parish ; for euer the further we go frome vnitie , the nomber is the greater , and Papes ar multiplied in your persones . I loue your wittes to follow Cesar , reither first in a village , then second in Rome , yet good sires , seing ye ar sett vpon that high throne lyk to as many Salomons , that euery one of you & iuris nodos & legum aenigmata soluit , be not offended , if I ask some thinges at you , seing there rested me yet some litill doubtes ▪ I ask whe●her Caluin was sent extraordinariely to teach you the veritie , or be to teached & examined by you ? If he was sent to teach you , ye should admitt him without any further triall & tak the conference with the scriptures to confirme and strengthen his sayinges , & not to confute thē : for so did the first Christiās read the places of the prophetes cited by the Apostles . If he was sent to be teached & examined by you , why came he extraordinariely ? to what purpos was so great honour , & afterward to be subiect to you ? But this for an other tyme ; lat vs cōsider once againe the first . If Caluin was sent extraordinariely vz. to teach you , he may say with Sainct Paul : Ego enim accepi à Domino , quod & tradidi vobis : there is no other witnes here but God and he . If ye of your reformed modestie will giue them bothe , or any one of them the lie , I can not mend it , seing , it is ye , who hath gotten the charge to reforme the world , and so this may be accompted as a reformed lie , with the which no man should be formalized : yet with licence I may vrge Caluins pretended right . If he spak & writte according to the direction that he receaued of God how so euer thes thinges seemes strange to you , yet should ye admitte them & think , that they ar according to the scriptures : because God is never contrarie to him self , he being but one in diuerse mouthes , & not diuerse in one mouth . how can it be possible that ye can better know , what charge Caluin receaued of God , then he him self , who was ( as he and ye pretend ) employed ? We receaue without any contradiction or gainesaying the writtes of the Prophetes and Euangelists with all the rest of the holie bible , because thes writters were sent & assisted by God. If there seemeth any diuersitie , we accuse our weacknes , & not the scriptures of contradiction or falshood : for no sic thing can be in Goddes work . So if Caluin , or any other , was sent immediatly by God , ye must receaue all his doctrine , except ye shew either that he hath beene ill instructed & that it was Spiritus mendax in ore eius : or that he hath dōne besides his cōmission , of which neither can be true if God was the authour . It will serue you for nothing to say , that he was but a man & might erre . Because all the prophetes and Apostles were but men and might erre . yet the assistance of the holie Spirite suffered them not to erre in there commission , & therefor we receaue their sayinge● as Goddes owen fayinges , because he was the ●uthour , & they onely the instrument . Why receaue ye not Caluin in this maner ? or shew vs that God hade sent any man to deceaue vs falsis vera im●isce●s . I think ye will find no sic Sinōs sent extraordinariely by God , or if there be any , lett vs heare their names . If Caluin was sent , as ye pretēd , ye should thinke that God hath instructed him well , & hath giuen him good and sufficient directions ( for else the fault shal be Goddes & not his ) and suffered him not to go therefro : otherwise it hath beene a great vanitie to haue sent him . Ye will perhapes replie that God in all ages had raised vp Godly fathers & learned men to oppose them solues to errours and abuses beginning to enter in the kirk , as S. Athanase , S. Basile , S. Augustin , S. B●rnard & othe●s in great nomber , whose writinges notwithstāding ar not altogether so cleene but something may be tried & corrected . I answere there be great differēce betwixt them & Caluin or any other to whome the reformation ●ath beene extraordinariely committed . For although these Godly and learned fathers were sent by God , yet were they not sent extraordinariely ▪ but by the ordinarie way : for they receaued their vocation and power of the Catholik kirk in whose bosome they were brought vp and ●eached : The doctrine which they had receaued of the kirk , they deliuered to the members of the kirk , where in they remained still as obedient children , submitting all their works and writtinges to hir iudgement , condemning as schismatiks or heretiks , all those who left hir , employing their wholl trauell and writtinges to defend and mainteine hir against all Satans insultes , never making any sect a part , never alledging any particuler commission to reforme others , nor yet to bring any new thing . Caluin to the contraire left the kirk where he was conceaued and teached an other doctrine , then he hath learned of his mother Christs spouse , whome he shamefully foresook , refusing in any wise to acknowledge hir or hir iudgement ▪ 〈◊〉 him self to them , whome he condem●●th in mynd and writting , oppugning and ●u●sprysing hir , who concea●ed him , making a band a part , because of the pretended commission he had receaued to reforme all these thinges merited a good warrand to be beleeued , seing they conteine so many strange maximes aboue or contrarie to all good reason , which can not be found in the foresade godly and learned fathers who were sent before . And therefore their example maketh nothing for Caluin and his doinges or errours . Ye will say for your and his defence , that they at but litle thinges where in ye dissent frome him . I know that neither he , nor ye can do a great fault , ye ar all Goddes owen mignons ▪ how soone that the lord heareth , tha● it is y●e , who hath committed any thing , it is incontinent excused , because of your strōge faith , which changes ●nauery in good seruice . But I pray you how shall I know , if his faultes be great or small ▪ seing that ye will receaue no thing at all of his doctrine , till ye haue had it vpon th● touchstone of your iudgement ? and so for their litill thinges , as ye call them , ye call all in doubt , at lest with other men ▪ who perchance may think meikill , that ye think litill . And here vpon ( good sires pardon me , if I be so bold ) I gi● you no more credit then ye gif Caluin ? for by your owen rule , I must ●rye bothe his saying and your iudgement , before that I receaue any thing , yea I will re●●aue , nether because he sayeth it , nor because ye approue it ( for that were to do w●ong to the spirite and Christian libertie ) but ●●ca●se I think that I haue ●ound it so in ●h●●ible . For if I find it not there I will condemne and detest it as a plaine heresie , 〈◊〉 that where i● ye agree no● with Caluin , but all the rest , and this ( as I haue said ) according to your owen rule and pretended C●●istian libertie , where by ●uery man is i●●g● in all thinges within the reformed kirk . Further it may seeme by the forsaid answer that ye think a man can not receaue a de●dly wound ; except he be ( as they say ) 〈◊〉 to the teeth . Certainely the largenesse of the wound oft●ntymes m●keth no● the danger , but the place and part that is wounded . A man may be strooken through the body , and y●t liue ; a pri●k with a pi●n● in the hea●t or harnes myght bring certain● death , which should not be mesured by the greatnes of the wound , but by the lo●●e of the man : ye ar not ignorant how litill difference was betwix the Cat●●ol●kes and the A●rians if we will look to the lett●rs . But to reto●●ne to your Apostle he was sent to shew vs the true way , yet hath he ledde vs by the way and deceaued vs ▪ how litill as euer the mater be ▪ his part is not good ▪ Certainely I can not esteeme your Patriarche ( be it Luther , Caluin , Z●ingli●s ▪ Knoxe , Willox , Me●●en , He●io●e , Craig or what so euer other ye will for all is one in thes mater ) a true prophete , seing ye your selfes esteeme him a liar . For a litill leasing ▪ principallie in matters of religion , maketh no lesse a lier then a great leasing , onely the greater it be , he is the mo●e detestable who maketh it ▪ Ye will perchance here reply to me ▪ and say that God suffered him to fall in some thing ●● where by bothe he and we might knew that he was but a man. I answer first that it was not ●eed●u●l because no 〈◊〉 could haue taken him for a God , although he ●ade said all true ▪ for we beleeue not that the Apostles & Prophetes ar Gods ▪ albeit we be surely persuaded that all is true that they haue said , 〈◊〉 lest that they haue left vs by writt . Next there was no sic superna●urall thing in him as might bring ●s in that errour , last of all it hath beene more prope●●or vs that he had said althinges 〈◊〉 wit●●●● any suspicion of falshood ▪ where by we might assuredly haue knowen that God had sent him and spoken in him : and that for his cause , who sent him , we should receaue him as an extraor●inarie pastour come to reforme the world . It was not needfull to hazard our saluatiō to proue him a man , but we needed many good arguments to proue , that God had sent him , and principallie an argument taken frome the veritie ▪ As to him self I find him extreme proude in all his writtinges , yet think I no● that he esteemed him selfe a God , and sure I am he died not with that opinion , I say no further . Ye will perchance aske of me here , if I wold conclude that ye ar also false prophetes and liers , if ye teach any false doctrine , as doubtles ye do ? No truely , although in some sense , I might most iustly so conclude : for ●here is great difference now betwix you , as ye professe your selues to be but ordinatie pastours ( if perchance ye content your selfes with so humble and simple a stile ) and Caluin o● any other , whome ye acknowledge to b● sent ext●●ordinariely by God him self : fo● howbeit your power ( if ye haue any ▪ I vnderstand ) be diuine , as comming of God , ye● your iudgement is but humaine ▪ so that it i● no meruaill if ye go sometymes wronge i● high maters which should be called re●he an e●●ou● , then a lie , because ye w●r● dec●●ue● in your opinion as men . For this cause the ordinarie Pastour is obliged ▪ to follow the footstopes of his forfathers ▪ & make no new way to him self , nor any thing that seemed to incline to noueltie : because humano iudgement should not be bold in diuine matters : for i● ye open the doore that euery man may iudge as he list , there can be no assurance in religion , but dayly change , as spirites of men be diuerse bothe frome them self●s and others . But Caluin ( or any other ye will ) being sent by God him self , came not here to tell vs his opinion as a man , ●ut to declare Gods mynd and will as an instrument chosen extraordina●iely for that effect . So that if he haue failled , it can not b● called human a mentis error , but a per●iciouse lie against the holie spirite , who hathe geuen him expresse charge to speak otherwise then he spak . For he lieth , who in his maisters name sayeth thinges which his maister never had said ; Omnis enim debet sine ●a●o nucius ●sse . The Poetes haue fained the messengers of their fabulous Goddes , more discreit , then ye acknowledge the messengers of th● true God ; for ye shall not lightly find any one worde changed in M●rcuri●s Commissions , he is so religious in doing his charge . The same may be said of Princes Embassadors in theis dayes . I think it should meikill lesse be permitred to any man to goe from the commission gifin to him by God , either in eiking or pairing , what shall I say to speek to contrarie ? Now nothwithstanding all this seing ye find errours in your Apostle , where by ye think not your selfes obliged to follow him , but with this caueat , if he agree with the written worde , ye gif the world● plainely to vnderstand that ye approue not his extraordinarie vocation ▪ but receaues him as another man of the common so●t , who may ●eceaue many good and true instructions of your spit●te ▪ which is the true square and rule of all other spirites , where vpon ● conclude that ye haue no calling of his lying spir●te ( pardon me if I say so seing I say it after you ) who could haue no si● power ▪ and for that same reason your vocation is fallen in non entery , because ye haue bene so many yeares in violent possession , and can not as yet shew either yours or any of your forefathers re●oures : vpon theis ●ands ye haue builded your house , yea erected your Kingdome of confusi on , and established your lawes of pa●rtie to haue all men subiect to your ministeriall imaginations tending to the ruine of all superior powers . The more high your interpri●es b● , th● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you● tre●son , the ●ust cause men ●at● ▪ not onely to disobey you ▪ but meikill more to gaine-stand you as ●sur●ers of Christs Iesus charge and office wit●out his commission or command , and troublers of the common wealth and seditiouse subiects , qui est is nat● in pernicie● Principum 〈◊〉 bonorum omnium ▪ Bragge of your excōmunication as ye please it is but an vaine imagination , a bugle to fra● babes ▪ or a scare crow ▪ ● found and a shew ▪ without ●ither danger or profite , and in a word i● is but a false ●honder where by no man can be made ●elp●lo nigrio●●●o . 13. I look here for your last refuge ye will pay 〈◊〉 with your ordinarie fashion of scoffing ▪ for some of you being asked where ye found the ki●k do● answer , in the 〈◊〉 midding of Papis●rie ▪ Truely a most meete and proper natiue so●le for so wor●●ie and noble a Lady as your ki●k is ▪ I gesse your vocation was ●ound in the same royall palace . This an●wer as it is more neer to the purpos , so it contented 〈◊〉 meikill better ▪ for the Apost●●● priests ▪ monkes ▪ and friers with other dissol●te ●●●d debouched men of our ki●k were the first groundston●● of your re●ormed f●●ie congregation : so if we hade neuer had aposta●●● , ye should neuer haue ●ad Apostles ▪ Luth●r was ● mo●k , C●l●i● a 〈◊〉 none , Beza a Priour , Knoxe a Priest . If ye desyre to be any further informed of this matter , our country may furnish you many true histories of the great and charitable pietie of your primitiue kirk whē it begane 40. yeares since . 14. Now to the last head of our dispute , where as the matter is more cleare so shall we be more shorte . Gising and not granting that ye hade good Calling and were lawfull true Pastours hauing power to bind and loose . I ask what iurisdiction ye can haue vpon them , who neuer were subiect to you ; neuer acknowledged nor could acknowledge you for lawfull pastours hauing at altymes made profession of the Catholik religion which is so far different , yea contrarie to that which ye professe , and desyres them to embrace , how can ye vrge theis men to acknowledge you , or how can ye excommunicat and separate them frome you as rotten and spilt members frome the rest of your reformed body , they neuer being of your body . Feare ye not that men laught at you and your folie , to dispose so rashely vpon thinges neuer yours except perchance by a reformed imagination , or dreame ? Kinges and Princes vses not to banish out of their dominions other princes subiects who neuer were within their boundes . True it is , that they may forbid any stranger to enter within their empires , and that for good and iust reasons , yea for their only pleasure if they will so , because the lands ar theirs , and so may receaue , or hold out any man as they list , or punish sic as wold without their licence enter there in . But to banish men that never were within their realmes , were a thing very ridiculouse , that I say not , foolish . And to constraine free men , or other Princes subiects to gif them the othe of fidelitie and du● seruice were altogether against reason , principally neuer being with in their iurisdiction . Lykwise I say to you , that ye can not iustly force thes men now to acknowledge you who neuer were yours ; ye may in deed forbid them to enter in to your kirk , or to assis● to your seruice , if ye haue any , or to your prayers , or to take any charge amongst you , seing that they ●r not of you● sto●● : but how ye can passe any further against them truely I see not , except ye wold say , that your power hath no other marches , then your will and fantasie . An ample empyre truely if it be so . Ye will haue the ex●resse word of God for all thing●s that other ●en say . I pray you bring vs here some good ●nd euid●n●●e●● of the scripture which may serue you for bound & charter of your bordors● cite vs some sure place , by whose authoritie ye may proue that it is lawfull to banish men out of your kirk , who neuer were in it . Think ye not but this meriteth two or three passages of the holie writt , befor ye passe to the execution there of . The Iew●s did esteeme the Gētils in rank of excommunicated men ; bnt neuer did excommunicat them : that is did hold them as profane men destitute of the grace and assistance of God , and out of his kirk seing that they professed not that same religion , which onely at that t●me was the true religion . But neuer did they curt them of their body as rotten members thereof , because they were not of their body , but reither a body a part distinguished frome them bothe in religio● and ceremonies , which onely the I●wes did declare , and could do no further , C●ptaines vses not , to discharge or b●ack out of their ●ands , souldiours who neuer were vnder their banners . Christ Iesus neuer gaue ●o any sic exēple or command nor yet , the Apostles , y●● none of their successours after them ▪ Where● find ye the Iewe● or gentils excommunicated by the Apostles or primi●iue ●irk ? I find ●ruell pors●●utiōs exercised ag●●nst the Christians and their great patience with 〈◊〉 and ●eruent prayer made for their persecutors , I find not their execrations and curse● against them . ●e s●e the Iewes yet among● the Christians and vnconstrained to embrace the veritie ▪ o● ye● excommunicated , except by that generall excōmunication where by they ar all declared strangers in Goddes house and profane personnes ▪ with whome notwithstanding we may h●● n●●peek ; trafik , and communicat ●iuille although that our kirk doores and prayer places be closed vp to them . They may haue action in law against any man who hath either offended them , or is owing them any thing ▪ Iustice is not refused to them , because they , ar me● remaining with in the same commō wealth . Now seing the●s branches were neuer your● How can ye 〈◊〉 them of your tree . K●mi su● alteri●● arbor●s . If ye could do that , ye might hardely va●●t your selues to haue donne a miracle , which hath beene so often craued at your hands for your extraordinaire vocation . 15. But ye will say tha● they ar in your Pari●hes ▪ and therefore ye haue power vpon them as vpon the rest who ar within the same iurisdiction . I vnderstand well ▪ ye ar ●ands lo●de● , all is yours that g●owe● vpon ●he gro●●d . But good ●●●es ▪ ye should first shew that the ground is yours , and then dispose there vpon at your pleasour ▪ we shall neuer op●n our mouthes to gainesay you . The iurisdiction that ye pretend is spirituall , hitherto they haue neuer entred wi●h in your dominious ▪ Why will ye now force them to land , because they ar driuen by storme of wind vpon your costes ? They ar ●orie that your limites ar so neer to them . The onely sight of your realme hath disgusted them exceedingly : suffer them to stay where they ar and they will enter no further . They content them with your good will. The Turkes constraine no man to embrace their opinion , except he enter with in their temple : any man may be within the countrey without any compulsion . ye require more then the most cruell tyrannes ▪ If ye will credit them it shall not be needfull to banish them out of your territorie . They desyre not to enter . They haue chosen another free citie , where they like better to be burgessis , which they will lose , if they enter with you . Vlysses was neuer more desyrous to be deliuered out of Polyphemu● cauerne , or danger of Si●enes , or Charibdis then they to be exempt of your communion . It is but in vaine ye excommunicat them who neuer haue , nor yet desyre to communicat with you . Ye do as they tell the ●able of the foxe and plummes , which he could not come by , nigra sun●●olo they ar black ( sayeth he ) I will haue none of them . ye ar very liberall , ye gif to others , which neither is yours nor can ye haue ▪ what extraordinarie reformed charitie is this in you to deliuer ouer to Satan Goddes creatures not being in your charge nor keeping , meikill lesse at your gift ? But good sires why ta● ye not the paines to shew that ye haue the true kirk , out of which there is no salu●tion ; and that ye ar lawfull pastours , to whome all true Christiās ar obliged to obey as to Christs vic●i●es and lieutenants ▪ This were the ordinarie and easie way , if ye wold follow it ; for this being once sufficiently ●hewen ; I doubt not but they wold shew them selues very docil and very easie to receaue all your instructions , because of your vndoubted authoritie and charge . Ye might then very well exhorte them to enter witbin your spirituall iurisdiction , seing ye hade the lawfull power to receaue them , and to enroll them among the Children of God , and heauenly citizens . If they wold not yet heare you , ye might according to Christs command , shake the dust of your feete ▪ and leaue their blood vpō their owen heades except perchance ye wold patiently abyde their conuersion to God , seing that some ar called and do 〈◊〉 in the ●ords vinia●d ▪ in the morning , some at midday , some in the ●uening , and at last all ar new ●tded for their l●bours , ●o the which none ar constrained ▪ Ye know that faith is a gift of God , it c●n not be found e●●ry where . Spiritu● vb● vul● spir●t it de pended 〈◊〉 vpon our will , nor ●eurs to make men bel●●ue the veri●ie ▪ that appe●●in●d to God onely . vol●ntas ●ogino● p●●est●● 〈◊〉 is God onely ▪ who may change the hardnes of mens hea●●es . Why will ye force men , seing we deny free will : If ye say as ye think why v●ge ye men as if they had it ▪ excuse me , if I propose sic thinges , seing I do it following your h●mour and strange opinions . I 〈◊〉 some exemple either of ▪ ou● maister ●esus Christ o● of his Apos●los ▪ where either 〈◊〉 or Gentill euer was constrained to acknowledge the gospell , o● excommunicated ●f ●he wold non I will graunt to 〈◊〉 very freely ▪ that all men who will not acknowledge the true kirk● and lawfull pastour● a● with out the communion and pa●k● of Iesu● Christ ▪ but not ●u● out of th● communion of 〈◊〉 park of Iesus Christ : because as I haue said now often , they were ne●er within i● ▪ And therefore the Apostles and ●h●ir 〈◊〉 did euer ciuilie cōuerse with the ●othe preaching and teaching the ve●iti● ( where by our for fathers were con●erted to God ) but neuer admitted them to be present at Goddes s●r●ice till they hade left their errour & were instr●cted in the trueth , and so rece●ned in the bosome of the kirk a● true Christians should be . If the Apostles had de●a●red from● their companie all men , who wo●d not incontinent embrace their doct●ine , I think they ●hold not haue 〈◊〉 so m●ny as they haue donne . In their pa●ien●e they ouercame the world , wonn● the fa●ou● of their enemies , assured the faithfull , b●a●●gled the infidel●es seeing them die so co●●dgeously for the ve●i●ie that they preached , & at last left ou● for fathers peaceable in the kirk of God ? which certainely was a heauenly work donne by naturall inst●un●en●es indued with supernaturall graces and vertues , infused by the holie Spirite in the hear●●s of ●●ue and law●ull pasto●●s to confound all worldly wi●dome and bring vs wi●h simplicitie and obedience to eternall blisse . In pl●ce of which godly modestie and meeknes ye employ your reformed force and violence shewing that ye had ●e●●her make , them ●e made martyres , where in by many degrees ye s●●pass● the cruell barb●●●● of the Turkes , impati●t au● importune in all your actiōs , yet according to your discipline ( which is against all good discipline ) impellens quidquid sibi summa petenti obsis●it , g●udensque v●am ●ecisse ruina . — Magnámque cade●● magnámque reuertens dat●stragem latè , sparsosque recoll●gi● ignes . 16. Thus faire for them who all wai●e haue remamed Catholikes , as to others who haue at any tyme yeelded to you being ●ither forced or deceiued by you , good reason requireth that they be sett at libertie as before . Doubtles the law will declare all sic men as free frome all obligation to you , as they who neuer were yours , because of the violence and deceit ye haue vsed , principallie seing it is so fa●re against the honour of God , the Kinges Maiesties servi●e , and publik honestie , and yoú to be punished as publik transgressours of diuine and humaine lawes . If ye will haue men obliged to your doctrine and discipline , sett vp new play , procee● with honest lawfull and godly meanes without bothe fraud & force errour or treason take an ordinarie sure calling or proue wel your extraordinarie , and then , who hat● once acknowledged you , punish him ● your discretion and according to your lawes , if he reuolt frome you , But now as maters goeth , although I were a zealous brother yet as faithfull Christian and true subiect , I wold be gladd to be excommunicated out of your companie , where treason and heresies ar confirmed with subscriptiōs and solemne oathes . 18. Now to end with you , I will yet make you an offer , as I think very reasonable , which is this . Seing ye wil haue no thing that cometh of the Catholik Apostolik and Romaine Kirk , as being infected with superstition and Idolatrie ▪ nor acknowledge the Pape , because ye esteeme him the Antichrist , and therefor will haue no counceill gathered by him : do like good & vigilant pastours , assemble your selues by whose authoritie ye please , hold an vniuersall synode among your reformed brethren of all sortes through out the whole reformed world , without beginning and ending , that there appeere no superiorite ▪ make a round table , speek al at once ; dispute vpon the controuerted heads : agree among your selues and we shall agree with you . what can ye ask more of vs ? if no accorde can be hade among you , how can we agree with you ? Consenting with any one companie , we shall haue all the rest for enemies , and shall not be assured if the partie , that we haue followed , will stand long at his owen opinion . Or if ye think this offer of greater expenses then esperance , we will make you another , to agree with you & subscribe your con●ession of faith , if ye can shew that euer there was any empire , Kingdome , canton , citie , toune , village or cothouse , yea any single man Catholik or heretik , young or old , lerned or ignorant , professing your doctrine and gouuerned by your discipline before this last hondred yeares . If ye refuse this offers , iudge your selues , what the reformed flock may think of you . Abyding your answere I will mak here an end and pray God to gif vs his eternall blesse , and to you ( where by ye may atteine to the same ) a faith that may stand with your duetie to God and Prince , and with Christian charitie . Fare well . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A01221-e60 Artis ig●arus . Kno● . In his speech to parlament . In the sessions presbiteries synodes & generall coūsels . Mat. 10 Frere Iohn Crag fleeing out of Italie frō the Catholik● : being ( as he said ) in need he receaued a pourse frome ● black dogge , iudge y● of that viaticum . The●log C. lu●nist . l●b 2. sol . 135. B● Za in epistol . th●olog . & de notis Ecc●●siae . Iust . lib. 4 . ●ap . 1. ● . 9. De notis Eccl●siae . Ye ar th● first that eu●r did propos● negatiō● for a faith . 3. book the kinges cap. 13. Semp●● discente● & nunquam ad sciētiam veritatis perueniente● 2. ad Timoth . ● . 7. 
A38575	----	A treatise of excommunication wherein 'tis fully, learnedly, and modestly demonstrated that there is no warrant ... for excommunicating any persons ... whilst they make an outward profession of the true Christian faith / written originally in Latine by ... Thomas Erastus ... about the year 1568. Explicatio gravissimae quaestionis utrum excommunicatio. English Erastus, Thomas, 1524-1583. 1682 Approx. 192 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 48 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2008-09 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A38575 Wing E3218 ESTC R20859 12404771 ocm 12404771 61349 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A38575) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 61349) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 276:2) A treatise of excommunication wherein 'tis fully, learnedly, and modestly demonstrated that there is no warrant ... for excommunicating any persons ... whilst they make an outward profession of the true Christian faith / written originally in Latine by ... Thomas Erastus ... about the year 1568. Explicatio gravissimae quaestionis utrum excommunicatio. English Erastus, Thomas, 1524-1583. [13], 80 p. Printed for L. Curtis, London : 1682. Translation of: Explicatio gravissimæ quæstionis utrum excommunicatio. Advertisement: p. [13]. Reproduction of original in Harvard University Libraries. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Excommunication. 2006-11 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2006-11 Aptara Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2007-05 Robyn Anspach Sampled and proofread 2007-05 Robyn Anspach Text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A TREATISE OF Excommunication : WHEREIN 'T is Fully , Learnedly , and Modestly demonstrated , THAT There is no Warrant , Precept , or President , either in the Old or New Testament , for Excommunicating any Persons , or Debarring them the Sacraments , whilst they make an outward Profession of the true Christian Faith. Written Originally in Latine , By the famous and pious THOMAS ERASTVS Doctor in Physick , About the Year 1568. Brethren , ye have been called unto LIBERTY ; onely use not Liberty for an occasion to the Flesh , but by LOVE SERVE one another , Gal. 5. v. 13. LONDON : Printed for L. Curtis . 1682. To the Pious READER , AND Such as is studious of Truth , THOMAS ERASTVS a Physician sends greeting . LEst any , lighting upon this Treatise , should wonder what Motives or Provocations made me busie my self in this Controversie about Excommunication , I shall as Concisely as Truly acquaint the World with the Rise and Occasion of it . 'T is now much about sixteen years since some men have fallen into a kind of Excommunicating Frenzy ( under the specious Title of Ecclesiastical Discipline , and as they contend , sacred in it self , and enjoyn'd the Church by God ) and fain would they have the whole Church tainted with the like ; that the manner of it ( they propose ) should be thus : That a select number of Elders should sit in the name of the whole Church , and judge who were fit and who unfit to be admitted to the Lords Supper . I could not but wonder to see them consulting of such matters , at such a time when we had neither fit persons to excommunicate , or to be excommunicated : for scarce a thirteenth part of the people understood and approved of the Doctrine of the Reformation which was then but blooming ; the residue were our profest Enemies : so that no man , who had his wits about him , but must needs see that such a matter must unavoidably introduee dangerous Divisions among us . And therefore I thought it not then so proper an Enquiry how some might be shut out of the Church , as how more might be brought in ; and that the best thing we could apply our selves to , would be the propagating saving Truths . Besides , they who were to be the Supervisors , were not so much superior to the others , in Age , Experience , Parts , Judgment , Virtue , or Eminency , that they could manage so weighty a matter with that Port and Dignity that was requisite . Since therefore I saw that their desires could not have the labour'd Effects , without the Churches Ruine and Subversion , I was ever and anon cautioning them , that they should weigh well what they did , and not rashly attempt what they might after too late repent . But though as yet I verily thought that Excommunication had been a thing commanded in the Scriptures , yet I did not find it commanded after that manner that they proposed : So that since Christ seemed to me to have left us at large for the manner of it , I set my thoughts on work what might be the best way and course under our circumstances , and would be attended with the least Distractions and Inconveniencies ; which I did with the closer application and diligence , upon some Reflections that I had , how fatal and turbulent to Christianity this had formerly proved , and was still little better , as it was managed . Whilst I was upon these thoughts , and look'd a little back upon what the Antients had writ on this subject , I find it weaker in all points than I had before suspected ; so that I could not but begin to doubt of the very thing . My next resort was to the School-men , among whom I met with as little satisfaction . Then came I to our Modern Writers , who no whit mended the matter ; nay , I observ'd that they did most manifestly differ among themselves in some things , which quicken'd my diligence in the Enquiry . So I laid by these Commentators a while , and betook my my self to the Scripture ; in the perusal of which , I mark'd and noted , with all the exactness I could , what was discrepant from , and what agreeable unto , the commonly received Opinion . And truly it was no ordinary assistance to me in this matter , to take a survey with my self of the state of the Jewish Church and Government : for thus thought I with my self , God in the 4th Chapter of Deut. v. 6 , 7 , 8. bears witness to their Laws , that there was no Nation that had Statutes and Judgments so righteous , and that for their Laws sake it should be said of them , Surely this great Nation is a wise and understanding People : Therefore it seem'd necessary with me , that to have a Church gloriously and wisely modell'd , it must make near approaches to the Judaical Form. But certain it is , that in this Jewish Church things were never so instituted by God , as that there should be distinct procedures in the punishing Immoralities , one by the Civil , and another by the Ecclesiastical power : What hinders then , but that even now too , that that Church which God hath blessed with a Christian Magistracy , may sit down contented under one form of Government ? I then communicated my thoughts to learned , good , and pious men , so far , as that I press'd them not to consider the matter slightly and cursorily : for I could not but deem it very unnecessary that there should be two Heads of the Visible Church , where the Body is but one ; and that their Mandates , Injunctions , Decretals , and all the Acts of a governing Authority , should be distinct ( as hitherto they have been ) so that the Government of one should not be subject to the Inspection or Controul of the other , but both their Jurisdictions be Chief in their kinds : For such a Church-Senate or Convocation of select Elders would they in truth have fram'd , that they should have the Supreme Right and Power of punishing Vice even in the Magistrates themselves , but not with corporal punishments , but by prohibiting them the Sacrament , first privately ; and if on this they reform'd not , then in a more solemn and publick manner . But my Opinion was ( as I always told them ) That one Supreme Magistrate of Gods institution , and of the true Faith , might , and had as good right , now , to restrain Vice , as heretofore under the Law : And I took me an instance from Solomon's glorious Reign , which was a kind of Type of the Christian Church's reigning upon Earth . Now neither under him , nor yet under Moses , the Judges , or any other the Kings , or when govern'd by the Optimacy , have we any foot-steps of two so distinct Judicatures over mens actions and manners . Nature ( says Musculus ) allows not two absolute and Independent Governments ( without any subordinacy of one to the other ) to Lord it over the same people . I must confess I received great Aids and Improvement of these my Thoughts from the persons with whom I conferr'd them : for in some things their Observations out-went my own ; and where they did not , they furnisht me many material hints to mend them by : But still I kept my self quiet from any publick Contests in this Affair , and entered not into any Debates about it where I was not provok'd , and then too I used the utmost moderation in the managing them ; esteeming it as disadvantageous as needless to trouble our Churches with this Dispute , when it did not yet appear that any body had imposed such a Form of Discipline upon them . But others who think the relish of Government more sweet and pleasant than that of Obedience , could not so temper their mouths , but by all the Arts and Insinuations that they thought might work our most pious Prince to their designes , they labour'd ( as I afterwards understood ) to introduce something very like this into our Churches ; and had not other rubs thwarted them , God knows how far they might have prevailed . Besides , how did they lie at me all this while ? what Dirt did they throw upon me , onely for that they knew how averse I was to their purposes , and that I should not be wanting , according to my best endeavours , to frustrate them ? But this I need not here enlarge upon . It happened about the same time , that an English-man ( who was then said to have left his Country because he could not brook a Surplice and such-like Formalities then enjoyn'd ) desiring to commence Doctor , proposed in his Theses , Disputes concerning indifferent matters and religious habits . Now our Divines would not admit of this man to his Doctorship , for fear of giving distaste to the English Clergy ( though in the latter of his Theses something was proposed too relating to this matter ) ; but it seems they thought the peace and tranquillity of our own Church , a trifle not worth the regarding . And therefore amongst his other Theses this was one , That in every Church that was rightly instituted , there ought to be a Government or Discipline observed , whereby the Ministry , in conjunction with Elders for that purpose to be elected , should have right and authority to excommunicate any vitious Liver , even Princes themselves . Now though I was not without apprehensions that this Dispute was not then taken up for nothing , yet I hoped withal that no more would come of it than of an ordinary Disputation , where the Question is agitated Pro and Con , not for deciding the matter so much , as to whet and exercise the young Disputants , and to try how well qualified they are for the Degrees that they stand Candidates for . I therefore stirr'd not thither ; and indeed other affairs hindered my being present . And for others , who I saw ready to take up the Cudgels , I advised them to have a greater regard to the Churches Tranquillity , than to the Follies of a few ; yet some disputed the point with them : But it might have prov'd no more than a Disputation of course , had they not called as well them as me , Profane , Satanical , Devilish Makebates , Enemies to Religion and Holiness , Fanaticks , and what not ? Truly for my self , I can religiously say , it never enter'd into my thoughts to set Pen to Paper in this matter , till I both heard and saw with what intemperateness they comported themselves both publickly and privately ; so that I thought a longer silence but a betraying the Truth . But as I was then more than ordinarily employed ( by reason of the sick Souldiers who return'd from France with Casimire , in the year 1568. ) I set down my Thoughts but brokenly , as in the intervals of my Employ , things from time to time occurr'd to my mind ; which , when I had amassed a pretty deal ( though confusedly and immethodically ) together , I distributed and submitted them to the Censure of others , intreating them withal , that if they observ'd any thing false , or but weakly maintain'd , they would answer the one , and strengthen the other with better Reasons . And I hop'd to gain this ( if nothing else ) thereby , that those of contrary Sentiments would become more calm and moderate upon the perusal of what I had writ , and not differ from us farther than they had Arguments to bear them out . One of the two persons ( with whom I thought of conferring most particularly ) saw and read three parts of four before the whole was transcribed ; and being then askt what was his Judgment of it , he promised to give it when he should have perused the whole . But something , I know not what , he said by the by of Leaven , and that he thought the Consent of the antient Church was to be very much esteem'd of ; and , in fine , some other things did he let fall : whereby 't was easie for me to make a Judgment of his Opinion in the case . And I learnt quickly after , that the very same person had writ a Tract about Excommunication , in maintenance of the Vulgar Opinion ; which made me no longer-doubt what answer I should meet with from him : for I knew him to be one who was not easily brought to retract what he had once asserted . Therefore since I had in the latter part of my Book confuted all his Objections , I presented it whole to another person , who I thought the best Friend I had in the world : He not onely took the Book from me with disdain and contempt ( whether he had an item of it before , I know not ) but he plainly said he should not vouchsafe it a reading ; yet I left it with him for some days , and besought him with all the earnestness and entreaties that I could , that he would but look it over and give me his Judgment upon it . But I understood upon good grounds that my Sollicitations had been fruitless . I sent for my Book about twelve days after , that I might get others Opinions upon it . But because 't was long , and could not be so soon read over by many persons , I contracted it into certain Theses or Positions , that I might the better communicate it into many hands ; so that hereby I quickly got the Opinion of the most eminent German Divines ; and others who had refused the reading of it at my request , were at last thus drawn into it unawares . But that it might appear to the World that I sought after nothing but the naked Truth , I prefix'd a Preface to it , wherein I requested two things : First , That all men would be pleased diligently to examine every point , and weigh it by the Scale of Holy Writ ; and if they saw me in an Errour , would endeavour to set me right again , that I might be contributory to setting others to rights : I promised from the bottom of my heart ( God , the Searcher of hearts , is my Witness ) that I would thank him both before God and man , whoever should shew me my Errour . And ( because I foresaw what after came to pass ) my second Request was , That if they found fault with any thing , that they would so do it , that I might have a just liberty of explaining my self , and of justly defending any thing they should undeservedly condemn : for though I had approv'd my self a Friend to them in all good turns , I could scarcely expect like measure again , by what I had before experienced . Nor was I deceived : for the very men whom I had so fondly conceived to have been my best Friends , turn'd suddenly my Enemies , and would not so much as speak to me , though I had never through all my life injur'd them in Word or Deed , but always did and still will study to oblige them : but however , I thankt God that I experienced their Constancy and good Will to me , rather in a concern of this , than of any other nature . But restless were they ; and since they had vainly attempted by the help of the Magistrate to call in these Theses out of the hands where they had been dispers'd , they go another way to work , and desir'd ( under the pretext of Laws which were never yet heard of ) that as Divines were not to meddle with the Opinions and Rights of other Professions , that it might be enacted and enjoyn'd , That all of other Professions might be restrained from entering into their Divinity-Schools . Had this been ask'd threescore years ago , it might have pass'd well enough ; but how 't would go down now , let others judge . Are the Precepts , to search the Scriptures , Joh. 5. 39. and 1 Joh. 4. 1. Try the spirits whether they are of God ; and 1 Thess . 5. 21. Prove all things ; hold fast that which is good , and the like , Precepts which were given to none but those who teach Divinity for Hire ? I had thought that Christian Divinity had been a Doctrine common to all men , and was therefore to be taught every where . But what is it they ask , when they would have us keep from their Schools ? Do they mean as they concern not themselves in any other Faculties ? Sure they would not have us not to hear their Lectures , or that we should not come thither to learn ? Who I ▪ pray , ever forbid them to study the Languages , Philosophy , Physick , or Law ? But if they care not for , or neglect those Studies , must we do so by Divinity ? Did indeed the ignorance of the Scriptures carry no worse consequence with it , than their ignorance in the other Studies , we might peradventure complement them upon that point ; or they might easily prevail , if no body must speak against what they enact and determine . This was a thing that the Romanists indeed , and by a better Right than they , laid claim to ; but I cannot gratifie either of them herein , since Christ my Saviour has countermanded me . Now that , they say , it becomes me not to meddle with matters of Divinity , I value it not ; or that I have not a just regard to my Reputation ( as they suggest ) perhaps because I make not a Gain , or am not hired to study the Truth : for were I paid for my Teaching of Divinity , I should do nothing ( as themselves hold ) unsuitable to my Duty and Function . But in truth I desire nothing but to have the Truth understood , and God's Name glorified , and my self exposed to shame , rather than the Truth be kept under deck : for Christ hath not without cause said it , Joh. 5. 44. That they cannot believe , who receive Honour one of another , and seek not the Honour that cometh from God onely . Therefore when this too fell not out to their minds , and yet they could no longer smother their Animosities , they began to assail me with dint of Argument ; which upon all occasions they urged not without the severest Reflections upon me . Now though I heard thereof from several hands , yet , for Quietness and Peace sake , I easily despis'd it , hoping to see the day ▪ that when those first Emotions should be over , and their Passions cool , they might stand more fair and equally affected to me . But alas , I was no Prophet here neither ; for , for almost five months after , their Hatred run as high as ever : nor did they give over baiting me and my Writing , partly with Clamour and Reproach , and partly with I know not what Sophistical Reasonings . Therefore taking a stricter review of my Theses , which made an hundred before , I contracted them to Seventy five , and marshall'd them in a little better order : Something 's in them I explained more clearly , and enforc'd them more strongly . And in fine , I have made it my business to give as full satisfaction to all Lovers of Truth , as I could in so little a Treatise . Advertisement to the Reader . THis Tract received never ( that I heard of ) more than one direct Answer , and that writ by Theodore Beza , in the year 1590 , on the behalf of the Geneva Plat-form , or Presbyterian way of Excommunicating ; which put our Author upon a farther Reply in Confirmation of the following Theses , ( which remains yet unanswered , and unanswerable , for ought I know ) : but that Reply being above four times as long as THIS that is here published ; and the main of the Arguments that he goes upon being hinted here , though not so fully press'd , the Publication of the other is at present forborn . A QUESTION OF THE Weightiest Moment , cleared : Whether Excommunication ( so far as it debars those who understand and make profession of the Christian Religion from the use of the Sacrament , by reason of some sin committed ) be of Divine Institution , or the Invention of Men ? POSITION I. THE name of Excommunication seems to be derived from 1 Cor. cap. 10. and imports an amotion or separation from the Communion ; which there , vers . 16. is called the Communion of the Bloud of Christ : And in truth , Excommunication is now defined by almost every body , to be an Exclusion from the society and communion of the Faithful . II. Now the company of the Faithful is twofold ; the one , Internal and Spiritual ; the other , External or Visible , and Political or Civil . ( For , for that third sort which our Modern Papists have invented , 't is neither of it self a well-fram'd one , nor pertinent to our present purpose . ) III. Now betwixt both these , the difference is at least so great , that there is no necessity that either should be comprehensive of each other : for as he may still remain a Member of Christ , who without any just cause is cast out of the visible Church , or is otherwise constrain'd to take Covert , and make his abode among Infidels ; so they that pass muster amidst the visible Flock , are not all the Living Members of Christ . Hence does it follow , that those things may well be different which unite us to one and not to the other , and separate us from the one , and yet not from the other . IV. And indeed we are made the Members of Christ , that is , are joyned to the Internal and Spiritual Fellowship of Christ , and of the Faithful , by that Faith alone which worketh by Charity : and 't is by Infidelity onely that we fall from this Consortship . And therefore no body can give us admission into this Society , or shut the doors upon us , but he that can impart to us a lively Faith , and again withdraw it at his pleasure . V. Now 't is by the Profession of the same Faith , by the Approbation of the same Doctrine , and in fine , by the promiscuous usage of the same Sacraments , that we become Consorts and Fellow-members of the External and Visible Church . He that has these three in him , so long as he remains such , is reckon'd for a Member of the Outward Congregation of the Faithful , albeit he arrives not at the farther pitch of Internal Fellowship of the Soul and Spirit . VI. He therefore that is thrust out from External Communion with the Church ( that is , that is excommunicated ) is debarr'd all three , or two , or but one of them : But now from the two first , to wit , the Confession of Faith , and Assent to the Christian Doctrine ( under which latter I would include hearing of the Word and Doctrine ) no one ought to be prohibited ; but rather on the other hand , the whole World are to be invited , and by all the Allurements and Arts of men , won and brought into these . There is nothing left then , but that he who is excommunicated , must and can ( of all the forementioned three ) be onely prohibited from the participation of the Sacraments : But whether the debarring of all private Commerce be an unseparable appurtenant of this , or the one may be without the other , will be an after-consideration . Thus much is certain , that no other punishment hath any thing to do with this Excommunication , as to the substance of it : for as for other Penalties , they may as well be inflicted on such as stand not excommunicate , as they may not be inflicted on such as stand so . VII . Therefore the Papal Faction , over and besides this Excommunication ( which they call the lesser , and rightly define it by a bare Exclusion from the Sacraments ) do very improperly to adde any second , which they call the greater , and anathema ; and define it against express Scripture , by interdiction and seclusion from Temples , from all private Commerce and Conversation , and from all lawful Transaction betwixt man and man : for the Apostle , 1 Cor. 14. 23. plainly shews , that neither Heathens nor any others were precluded from hearing or reading the Word of God , or from the Thanksgivings or Prayers of Christians . VIII . From what has been said , Excommunication is apparently nothing but a publick and solemn Interdiction , as was said before , or Exclusion ▪ from the Sacraments , and more particularly the Lords Supper ( which the Apostle calls peculiarly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Communion ) to the end that the Sinners may repent , and be again readmitted to receive the Sacraments . IX . Here now the Question arises , viz. Whether any person be to be prohibited or debarred the use and freedom of the Sacraments , upon the account of any previous sin acted by him , or for the wickedness of his life , if he himself desires to take the Sacraments with other Christians ? This Question is meant , of such who profess the same Christian Faith , is ingrafted into the Church by Baptism , and differs not from her in Doctrinals , ( as we said , Sect. 5. ) but fails in point of Morality and a good Life onely . The Question is therefore this : Whether there be any footsteps in Holy Writ , of either Precept or Example , whereby such persons are either commanded or taught to be debarr'd access to the Sacraments ? X. Our Answer is in the Negative , That there is no such ; and that rather there are both Examples and Precepts too , more than once to be met with in the Bible , of a quite contrary nature : for we have it from Moses , Exod. 23. v. 14. and 34. v. 23. Num. 9. Deut. 16. v. 16. that every Male that was circumcised was to appear before God thrice in the year ; that is , in the Feast of Unleavened Bread , in the Feast of Weeks , and in the Feast of Tabernacles : And the Law commanded strangers too , Deut. 9. v. 14. ( provided they were circumcised ) to celebrate the Passover with the Jews . The unclean also , Deut. 16. v. 10. & 13. and those that should be in a Journey afar off , were commanded to eat the Passover the same day of the second month , and in the same manner with the Jews . Nay , 't is farther added , v. 13. that the man that is clean , and is not in a Journey , and forbeareth to keep the Passover , even the same Soul shall be cut off from his People . 'T was therefore the Will and Command of God , that all the circumcised should celebrate it ; and God excluded none from this Sacrament , ( nor indeed from any other Rites , Ceremonies , or Sacrifices ) except the Unclean . XI . In Leviticus several kinds of Sacrifices are enjoyned , according to the difference of the sins which the Criminal was thereby to expiate ; whether they were sins of ignorance and errour , or voluntarily and knowingly committed . In like manner doth God , Deut. 14. v. 23. give a general Command to all , ( there 's no exception there of sinners ) That they should eat the Tythe of their Corn , &c. before the Lord in the place which he should chuse , that so they might learn to fear the Lord their God always . Sacraments therefore were to them Allurements to Piety ; and for that reason was no body thrust from them , but rather was every individual man invited to frequent them . XII . In very truth , we do not at all read that any one among the Jews was either by their Priests , Levites , Prophets , Scribes , or Pharisees , prohibited access to their Sacrifices , Ceremonies , and Sacraments . The Chief Priests and Pharisees counted Christ and his Apostles bad men enough , but we never find that they attempted to thrust them from their Sacrifices or Sacraments either before or after Christs death ; nay , they did not drive out of their Temple , or from their Ceremonies , so much as a Publican that was a Jew , or any other circumcised Proselyte , though a bad liver : for they were not to learn , that this was more than the Law of Moses allowed them to do . Indeed , in Mat. 9. v. 11. they reproved Christ for eating and drinking with Publicans and Sinners ; but at no time or place did they twit him for praying with them in the Temple , for his frequenting their Sacrifices and other Rites , for his yearly Progress with them and others of the Rabble to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover and other Solemnities : And so far were they from any endeavours to put the most cruel Villains , and most wicked Hereticks , the Sadducees , from their Ceremonies and Communion in Worship , that they even permitted them to climb to the Dignity of Chief Priests : And yet 't is most apparent out of Josephus and the Acts of the Apostles , what an inveterate hatred they had for one another . Had it therefore been lawful , they would with open arms have embraced such an occasion of revenging themselves on their Enemies . XIII . But farther yet , it was not in their power to keep them from eating the Passover : for that was not eaten before the Priests , but in their private houses , as we read Christ to have celebrated his last Passover with his Disciples . Every man was then a Priest as 't were , as Philo Judaeus bears witness , when speaking of the Passover , he tells , That on that Festival every man throughout the Nation sacrificed for himself , not expecting nor tarrying for their Priests : for the Law indulg'd the priviledge of Priesthood to the whole Nation , that on one set day every year they should sacrifice with their own hands . And Exod. 12. v. 4. 't was commanded , That if the Houshold were too little for the Lamb , that then he and his Neighbor next unto the house should take it according to the number of the Souls , to the end that the whole might be eaten . The like seems to have been observed in the matter of Circumcision , ( excepting in this particular , that they were not obliged to circumcise at Jerusalem onely , as they were to celebrate there the Passover : ) for I do not remember that the presence of the Priest was requisite to Circumcision . XIV . John the Baptist too , who was the forerunner of Christ , did constantly do the same : for he baptized not onely the Pharisees and Sadduces that came unto him ( whose behaviour and manners he very well understood , when he publickly called them a Generation of Vipers ) but also the Publicans , and all others that resorted to him to be baptized , to the intent that they repenting them of their former evil life , might set about the amending it , and so might flee from the Wrath to come . 'T is scarce probable , that such a man as John was , should admit of men of such profligate lives , men that impiously , audaciously , and publickly denied the Resurrection of the Dead , had he not known that the Law forbad not access to such : for the Judaical Law ( as has been already shewn ) prohibited no circumcised persons , but the unclean and leprous . XV. Besides , this Uncleanness was a Legal Ceremony , not any impurity of Life , or pravity of Manners : for not he who had sinned , or committed any wickedness , was thereby unclean ; but the Unclean were those who touched any dead Corpse , any Excrements , any person that had an Issue of Bloud , or the like . And 't was for this cause that the Pharisees would not go into the Judgment-hall , when they had delivered up Christ to Pilate to be put to death , lest they should be debarred thereby from eating the Passover . But surely the Mosaical uncleanness did not so typifie and represent our iniquities , that as they who were thereby defiled were shut out from the Tabernale , and the company of others : so should it signifie that these sins were to be corrected and punisht by with-holding the Sacraments , and by Exclusion from the Visible Church ; as appears plainly by what follows : For , 1. Even whilst Legal Uncleanness was in force , and there were then wicked men in abundance , yet were not the same punishments appointed for the wicked and for the unclean . What probability is there then that these Ceremonies should typifie their punishment , or in any sort signifie that Moral Delinquencies should be thus checkt and redress'd , when the Ceremonies themselves should be taken away and cancel'd ? 2. Moses had plainly been inconsistent with himself , had he in fact admitted them to the Temple and Rituals , whom at the same time he by those Ceremonies signified that they were to be excluded . For certain it is , that no one was ever thrust out of the Tabernacle , or from the Congregation , for the pravity of his Manners , if , as the Law commanded , he had neither touched any dead Body , nor otherwise in that nature defiled himself . At this rate therefore Moses should punish those that were but figuratively unclean , and let such as were unclean in reality go unregarded ; ( I mean , as to this sort of punishment . ) 3. That Legal Impurity affected and tainted the Body alone ; whereas wickedness consists in the Internal actions and operations of the mind : for the cause and root of all Evil is born with us , and falls not under mans correction , whilst it puts not forth its fruit ; for otherwise must the whole World be Excommunicate : for we shall not get these spots out of our Soul , whilst we breathe mortal air . But that other Impurity , which is but a bodily stain , is punish'd by being debarr'd Commerce with others , though there be no other fruit , no farther evil springing from that uncleanness , nor he that is defil'd hath done nothing against the Law : but for the actions and transgressions of the unclean , they were dealt with at the rate of others transgressions , if the parties under that defilement did any thing against the Law ; and the cleanness or uncleanness of the sinner neither aggravated nor lessened the moral guilt . 4. Our very Adversaries confess , that not all sorts and sizes of sins are to be redressed by Excommunication ; whereas the Law commands that every uncleanness be punisht by Exclusion from the Tabernacle and publick Sacrifices : so that those could not typifie all sorts of Iniquities . 5. No man that sins unwittingly can be excommunicated ; but 't was usual for men unwittingly to contract uncleanness , and not onely without any blame of theirs , but to their great grief and trouble . What fault was there in him , who sleeping , unvoluntarily suffered nocturnal Pollutions ? and where the Wife might unexpectedly fall into that condition which the Law made a Pollution to the Husband , if he approach'd her ? or by the decease of Children , Wife , or Parents ? or the like , which usually happened ? And now it needs not to be proved that they are onely voluntary and spontaneous Crimes , for which persons may be ( as some men think ) debarr'd Access to the Sacraments . 6. A far severer punishment was ordained for him that killed a man against and without any will or intention of so doing , than a naked seclusion from the Sacraments for some few weeks or days : If therefore an unpremeditated and involuntary offence , and by consequence a sin of the lesser die , underwent a more sharp and bitter chastizement than the foulest Legal Impurities , 't is plain that the punishments for them are not intended to represent the punishment for Moral Iniquities . 7. It often fell out , that men of the greatest Sanctity and Integrity became unclean , and were debarr'd both from entering into the Temple , and from the use of Sacrifices ; whilst on the other hand , men most notoriously wicked had admission to either , without controul : whereas if in the Church of God both ought to undergo the same punishment , the latter should rather be secluded than the former . 8. 'T is manifest that God did at no time or place absolutely prohibit all Legal Impurity : for some were to attend the dying persons , some those that were infected with an unclean disease , some must bury the dead , and in fine , some must purifie the unclean , ( by which means they themselves became defiled , v. Numb . 19. ) so that God would not that all Legal Impurities should be avoided : But God prohibited sins of all kinds , and to all men , and at all times , and never indulg'd the perpetrating any wicked action at any time or place whatever . 9. God commands that sin should be restrain'd by Fire , Sword , Halters , Stoning , Stripes , Mulcts , Imprisonment , and other penalties of the like nature ; but ordains that the legally unclean should be purified by sprinkling and washing with water , and the like , Numb 19. v. 17 , 18 , 19. 10. He that had contracted uncleanness according to the definitions of legal Pollutions , and died in that state , as for instance , women in their menstruousness , or men having a Gonorrhea or Leprosie on them , were not for that inroll'd among the wicked , or doom'd to damnation : But he that shall so live , that honest good men shall deem him worthy of Excommunication , cannot be accounted of otherwise than as a sinful and impious person . 11. Legal Uncleannesses took place and were regarded but with one single People , and there too but for a limited time ; whereas sins sprang up every where , among all Nations , without distinction of place or time . Since then , as well among all other Nations , as among the Jews themselves , before Legal Impurities were introduced , sins were both when punished and in the punishing adjudged sins , it certainly signified something more than the punishment of flagitious men ; which was surely lighter than what was to make satisfaction to the Will of God. 12. Every person was purified at set-times and places , and by using set and peculiar Ceremonies , be the party how he would as to his mind ; that is , whether he become unclean with or against his Will : but none stand acquitted from their sins , but such as heartily repent , and do with as much sincerity as earnestness desire to grow and be better . 13. Every one was his own judge of his being cleansed ( excepting the leprous , and some few others ) and stood not in need of Judges or Elders , who should judge for them , and pronounce them clean or unclean . Our Opposers have otherguess Sentiments of the excommunicated : for they put the Decision upon the judgment of their Elders , not upon the Assertion of the Parties who say they repent . 14. The Leper , Lev. 13. v. 12 , 13. whose Leprosie spread from the crown of the head to the so●● of the feet , so that the Leprosie cover all his flesh , and that the skin of the whole body be all over of a colour , was to be pronounced whole and clean ; but he who on the contrary had his skin raw and defiled but in some one or more parts , was to be accounted unclean . Now in the case of sinners , 't is quite otherwise : for he that wallows over head and ears in sin ( like a Sow all bemir'd ) is not an honester man than he who retains some shadow of Religion , and shew of Honesty . 15. The Lepers are not commanded to do any thing on their part towards their cleansing , but barely to shew themselves to the Priest , that he may pronounce the Plague clean or not clean : But to wicked men the Command is direct , that themselves amend their lives , and give evidence of a sorrowful and penitent heart by their good and holy works . 16. Many were made unclean by touching the very things whereby others were made clean , and while themselves did purifie others , v. Numb . 19. but sure no man deserves to be excommunicated from the means he uses in the healing and purifying others who are defiled with sin and iniquity : Whereas if you would have the figure to answer herein , you must grant that all that would recal others into the ways of Righteousness by Excommunication , are to be excommunicated themselves . 17. The unclean were not by the Law interdicted all Sacraments : for they were to observe all the private Rites and Ceremonies of their Country ; they were to keep the Sabbath , and celebrate the Feast of Purification , whereby the fruits and benefits of Christs meritorious works were chiefly shadowed or expressed ; and all this at the peril of their lives , vid. Lev. 16. and 23. for they were not ( as I said before ) taken for men damn'd , and of a desperate condition : But whether in the opinion of our Adversaries the Excommunicate are to be thought otherwise , 't is needless for me to attempt much the proving it . 18. The unclean under the Law did propagate an uncleanness to the cloaths , houses , places , and persons that they touched , or had otherwise to do with ; but wicked men did neither defile the Temple nor any thing else , nor indeed any other men , unless those others joyn'd with them in the sin . The Temple was not polluted by bringing in an Adulteress , Numb . 5. v. 19. John 8. v. 11. no more did the Publican ( who in the Parable , Luke 18. v. 9. went up with the Pharisee into the Temple to pray ) defile it by his presence ; that Pharisee who thought him a mighty sinner , compar'd with himself , yet never thought himself defiled by his company . When Judas threw down the Traiterous Pieces , the Price of Bloud , in the Temple , we do not read that the Temple was thereby polluted , or that the Pharisees made any complaint , as to that , who yet would not go into the Judgment-hall , lest they should be defiled , John 18. v. 28. Whereas were but a woman in her Menstruousness , or having an Issue of Bloud , or any one who had buried another , or had ( though unawares ) touched a dead body , been seen in the Temple , all had been polluted and unclean ; nor might they have sacrificed , or perform'd any other Worship , till 't were again purified . In like manner Judas polluted not that last Paschal-Supper by his detestable acts ; which yet would have been the case , had but he or any other of the Disciples touch'd any dead body . In fine , the uncleanness under the Law , did figure our perverted and corrupt Nature , which could not be admitted into Heaven , unless washed and purified in and by the most pure and precious Bloud of Christ : for as the Tabernacle typified Heaven , and the casting out thence signified Damnation , or the Exclusion from the heavenly Jerusalem ; so the cleansing or washings by ordinary or sanctified Water , prefigured that Purification by the death of Christ . 'T was not therefore typical , or figurative of the quality of the Actions , but of the quality or pravity of our Nature . Nor did Gods Law prefigure how Vice should be bridled and restrained ; ( for Moses taught this in clear and express words ) but what should be our State in another life , to wit , in the Kingdom of Heaven , which the Land of Canaan did shadow to them : All which plainly enough appears in Rev. 21. v. 27. St. Augustin writing against the Donatists , was of opinion that it signified the Exclusion of Hereticks : But , be it how 't will , even a blind man may see , from the many and great differences between the Legal and Moral Impurities , that the former could not be figurative of the latter , as our Adversaries contend . XVI . Though Moses makes none but the forementioned Exception , yet shall I answer to an Objection , which may be collected out of his words : for peradventure some one may thus argue , The Jews are by Moses commanded to eat the Passover without Leaven ; which Paul , 1 Cor. 5. v. 8 , interprets the filthiness of the flesh , that is , Moral wickedness : It may therefore seem to some a very agreeable and likely matter , that the Lords Supper which succeeded to the Passover , should be celebrated by shutting out malicious and wicked men . XVII . I answer , first , That it carries little of probability with it , that God should command a thing in express terras , and again at the same time figuratively prohibit the self-same thing . God plainly and expresly , and with reiterated Precepts , commands that every Male ( except the unclean , and such as were in a Journey ) should keep the Passover : He never therefore intended to frighten away some under the figure of the Leaven . There were then plenty enough of bad men present , that it must be needless to typifie and shadow them out by Leaven : And the wickedness of men was a thing as obvious to mens senses , and as much to be taken notice of , as the Leaven that should represent it . Therefore since no figures are commonly instituted of such things as are at hand and in view , and which with equal clearness strike the Senses , 't is in vain to seek for any Figure there : How much more where the things figured are more notorious and common , than the Figures themselves ? But besides , Moses does not command that the Eater of Leaven should be debarr'd eating the Passover ; but commands him to be slain : Therefore sinners should not so much be kept from the Lords Supper , as they should be capitally punished . Which is a Consequence I should be so far from admitting with difficulty , that I rather wish it might so be : for I desire nothing more , than that the strictest Moral Discipline might be observ'd in the Church ; but such still as is of Gods appointment , not of mans invention . Secondly , The Jews might eat Leaven all the year round , excepting onely those seven days of Unleavened Bread ; ( which they did commence from the eating of the Passover . ) Now if you would parallel this with the Lords Supper , you must of necessity grant a liberty for licentious living all the year , provided you abstained from vice all the time you were celebrating the Lords Supper . Thirdly , Moses speaks here of the Passover onely , not of any other Sacraments ; by Analogie therefore wicked men should onely be kept from the Lords Supper , not from Baptism . Fourthly , The Apostle makes not the comparison to run betwixt the Feast of the Jews and the Lords Supper , but betwixt that and our whole course of life ; he says we are unleavened ( as men that are washed in the Bloud of Christ , and purged from all Leaven ) and therefore , says he , let us keep the Feast , that is , let us live not with the Leaven of Malice , but with the Unleavened Bread of Sincerity and Truth . There is a vast difference betwixt Leaven simply so called , and the Leaven of Malice or Wrath : There is none but knows that in the second sence 't is taken figuratively ; and School-men say , that an analogical or figurative sence proves nothing . This is certain , whatever is meant by Leaven , Excommunication can never be maintain'd or justifi'd from it , against Gods precept . XVIII . But some may object that Paul speaks here of the Passover ; but what , I pray , makes this to our business ? as if this word Passover were put for the Lords Supper in the New Testament : Christ , saith the Apostle , 1 Cor. 5. 7. is our Passover sacrificed or slain for us ; not his Supper . The meaning of the words is this : As the Jews , who onely began their Feast of Unleavened Bread with eating the Lamb , did eat Unleavened Bread all that week after ; so should you , who have begun to believe in Christ , and are purified and become unleavened through his Bloud , you should lead a pure and unspotted life all the rest of the week , that is , all the days of your life . XIX . Now that nothing of different nature is to be met with in the other Books of the Old Testament , may be known and proved , if it were but from this alone , that the Jews Posterity were to live according to the Laws and Institutions of Moses ; contrary to which they might not by any means institute or enjoyn any thing which related to the Worship of God. Most certainly the good and pious Judges , Priests , Prophets , and Kings , forced away none from their Sacraments and Sacrifices , but rather invited all to them with the greater earnestness and zeal . The story of good King [ it should be Hezekiah , I suppose : See 2 Chron. 35. ] Josiah , 2 Chron. 35. v. 18. is well known , who called together all the Children of Israel , as well those whom he knew to have sacrificed and burnt Incense to strange Gods or Devils , as those who for the shortness of the warning could not be cleansed , 2 Chron. 30. v. 19. according to the purification of the Sanctuary : From whence 't is observable , that Sacraments are Provocations and Allurements to Religion and Piety ; and that men grow better rather by frequenting , than by being robb'd of them , provided they are rightly and faithfully instructed . XX. Excommunication therefore can never be maintain'd from the first Chapter of Isaiah , v. 13. Psal . 50. v. 8. and many places of like import ; where 't is said , that God will have nothing to do with the Sacrifices and Oblations of the Wicked : for God doth in all those places condemn the abuse of them , in that they thought that they fully perform'd the Will of God by the meer external performance , at what rate soever their Soul stood affected . Besides , God neither commands the Prophet , nor any one else by him , to exclude the Wicked from the Sacrifices and Rites ; but shews that God will not hear them , unless that withal they amend their lives . Now the external Policy and Government of the Church stands upon a different foot with the Will of God to us-ward , as himself is the Approver or Condemner of our thoughts and actions . In fine , from the self-same places it may directly and in the same manner be demonstrated , that none that is a sinner may call upon the Name of the Almighty ; nay , that 't is unlawful for such an one so much as to praise or give thanks unto God : and then 't will be incumbent on the Priests and Elders to forbid the Wicked all these ; for God hath a like aversion to those when they come from wicked men , as is plain as well from the Texts instanc'd in , as from places of the like import . And if this latter carries absurdity in it , no less doth the former . XXI . Neither doth that of 1 Esdras , chap. 9. v. 3. 4. make any whit against us ; for that was a matter of Policy , and no ways relating to the Sacraments : for the Magistracy ( not Esdras the Priest alone , though he too was a part of the Magistracy ; for as Josephus bears witness , though they had a Leader , yet were they govern'd by the Optimacy or Nobility ) set forth a Proclamation , That whosoever met not at Jerusalem within two or three days , their Cattel should be seized to the use of the Temple , and they be cast out from them that were of the Captivity ; not from their Sacraments and Sacrifices . But we make it not the enquiry of this place , whether the Magistrate hath a right of punishing so or so , but whether the Priests had any authority of removing dissolute and bad Livers from the Sacrifices : Esdras could not do this contrary to the Command of God. Adde to this , that Moses never commanded this penalty ( to wit , Exclusion from Sacraments ) to be inflicted on them who married strange women , Deut. 7. v. 3. And in the 8th Chap. of 1 Esdras , 't is shewn how he was to proceed against the Transgressors of the Law in that point , to wit , by Death , Banishment , Corporal Punishments , Confiscation of Estates , Bonds or Imprisonments . But in fine , 't was quite another thing to be thrust out from the company of them who had returned from the Captivity , and to be shut out from the Temple and Sacrifices : for it appears from Exod. 1. 2. 21. and Numb . 9. 2. that the stranger that was circumcised , was admitted to keep the Passover , and then too , many of those who either had continued in Judea , or who of the Inhabitants had forsaken the filthiness and abominations of the Gentiles , and became Jewish Proselytes , did together with all the others , celebrate the Passover , as 't is written at the end of the 6th Chapter of Esdras . These , such as they were , were not debarr'd the Sacrifices , Temple , or Ceremonious Rites , though they were not reckoned among the number of them who return'd from Babylon . In like manner did they remove some of the Priests from their Sacerdotal Function , because they could not make out their Pedigree ; as appears 1 Esdras 2. And from all put together , 't is plainly impossible that Excommunication can be shor'd up or supported hereby . XXII . There is yet one Objection left , which some men hug themselves in , and prize mightily , and that is the casting out of the Synagogues : for to assert Excommunication the more irrefragably , they quote you what is written in John 9. v. 22. and ch . 12. v. 42. and ch . 16. v. 2. But many and true are the Answers to this . The word Synagogue sometimes signifies a place ; as when Jesus is said to have entred into and taught in the Synagogue : Sometimes a Convention or Meeting , whether the same were in the Synagogue it self , or elsewhere ; as when the Pharisees are said to chuse the chief Seats in the Synagogues , and the uppermost Rooms at Feasts , Mark 12. 39. Luke 20. 46. In this latter sence ( or rather in both of them ) is it used , Mat. 10. v. 17. and ch . 23. v. 34. where Christ foretels the scourging of his Followers in the Synagogues ; and Mat. 10. v. 17. Mark 13. v. 9. Luke 12. v. 11. and 21. v. 12. in which places the word signifies no more than the publick place of Judicature , as 't is often used for the same by the Septuagint ; as we shall have opportunity to clear hereafter . But in the last forecited places , Mat. 10. v. 17. and Mark 13. v. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate Councils and Synagogues , are there put as if they both signified the same thing : In the other places , after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , presently follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Kings and Rulers , as in Luke 21. v. 12. ( instead of which the same Evangelist , ch . 12. v. 11. puts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Magistrates and Powers : ) So in Mark 13. v. 9. Mat. 10. v. 17. By comparing these places , 't is most plainly demonstrable , that the Evangelists , or rather Christ , did not ( by the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Council and Synagogue ) understand or mean any thing more than the Jewish Judicatures which were held before several persons who sate as Judges , though generally one had the Chair , and something of Superiority ; or if more did act , they did it in the name of one of them . In these Assemblies or Synagogues those that were found adjudg'd guilty , were buffeted and beaten with Rods and the like , Mat. 10. 17. and 23. 34. Acts 17. 10. and 26. 11. and 2 Cor. 11. 25. which place may be easily understood by Deut. 25. 2 , 3. Now the casting out of this kind of Synagogue , was a kind of Political or Civil Ignominy or Punishment , and so a local banishment as 't were , as we gather out of Luke 4. 28 , 29. which can never be applied to Sacraments , which ( except it be that of Circumcision , and some few others ) were celebrated in the Temple ( of which there was but one ) and at Jerusalem : And of the same nature doth that punishment seem to be , which we spoke of a little before in our clearing that of Esdras . There is no body but knows that such Synagogues there were in every City ; therefore whether you take the word in that of John , ch . 10. v. 17. for the Assembly it self , or for the place where they assembled , it thwarts not our Opinion any manner of ways : and if at most it were denied to be a Civil Assembly , yet must it manifestly appertain to religious matters . But I dispute not here whether he who entertains erroneous Opinions of the true Religion , be to be excommunicated : for the Pharisees , says John 9. v. 22. agreed , that if any man did confess that Jesus was Christ , that he should be put out of the Synagogue . But farther yet , it was matter of Repute and Honour to be of the Synagogue , as of the other hand 't was a piece of Reproach to be cast out of it ; as may , methinks , be easily gathered from Joh. 12. 42. where 't is said , that among the Chief Rulers also ( of whom perhaps Nichodemus was one ) many believed on him ; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him , lest they should be put out of the Synagogue ; and the reason is added , v. 43. for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God. Besides , it appears that even the circumcised Publicans were not admitted into the Synagogues , in the sence we now take the word : for the Pharisees would not endure so much as to speak with them ; and one of their Cavils at Christ was , for his familiar converse with those men . But I cannot imagine , that any one who understands himself , can affirm that these very Publicans and Sinners were debarred from the Passover , from the Temple , or from Sacrifices ; therefore must they needs be two quite different things , so to be dissynagogu'd , and to be kept from the Sacraments and Rites of Gods own institution : which is manifest , as well from what has been already said , as from Acts 5. v. 42. for the Disciples after they had been severely lesson'd by the Synagogue , did not yet cease to teach and preach Jesus Christ dayly in the Temple . What a many of Synagogues was Paul put out of ? but the Jews never cast it in his teeth , never accus'd or condemn'd him for coming into the Temple , and for offering there for himself and others . But to close all this , more may yet be said , could it never so plainly be made out that the Pharisees counted it one and the same thing to exclude from the Synagogue and from the Sacraments ( which I shall make appear never was , is , or could be true ; ) yet they must needs have done this ( as well as many other things ) against the express Law of Moses , and then are we obliged not to imitate but condemn the Pattern : for we are to live up to the Laws , and not to Presidents ; and not walk after any one in his deviations from the Laws of God , unless we will confound all the Rules and Measures of Right and Wrong : Let us indeed have an eye to the good Examples of the good , and strive to come after them , but not after the bad of the bad . I have been so particular ( though with all the brevity I could ) on this Argument , because some do mightily hug and applaud themselves in it , though to the deceiving of themselves as well as others . XXIII . 'T is therefore a most certain unshaken and indisputable truth , that under the old Testament no man was shut out from Sacraments for Immoralities ; but on the contrary , all the holy Priests , Prophets , Judges , Kings , and at last , John the Baptist , that most eminent and most holy Forerunner of Christ , rather sent Invitations to all , good and bad , to come in and keep them according to the Law , than shut the doors upon them . XXIV . But now our Sacraments , and those of our Forefathers under the Old Testament , are ( as to the things signified , see the spiritual sence of them ) altogether the same , as Paul , 1 Cor. 10. plainly intimates . And therefore unless it can appear that the Law of Moses either is abolished or changed in this point , none has authority to set up a contrary practice . XXV . For as against the Anabaptists we do well urge as a most effectual Argument , that since Baptism came in the place of Circumcision , and that Christ did nowhere forbid the baptizing of Infants , it cannot be less lawful for us to baptize our Children , than 't was for the Jews to circumcise theirs ; so may we here argue with equal force , that the Lords Supper succeeded to the eating the Passover : but Vice and Immoralities were not punished by prohibiting them to eat the Passover , nor were the Jews on any such account drove from it ; but the Law did rather invite all , of what age or condition soever , especially every Male , to keep it : Which being not found to be either antiquated nor abolished , but holding still as to the reason of it , Crimes are no more now to be punished by denying us the Lords Supper ; neither ought any one on this account to be rejected . But enough has been said with reference to the Old Testament ; 't is time we should now come to Christ and his Apostles , that is , to the New Testament . XXVI . Now we read not any where that our Lord and Saviour Christ did in any wise interdict any person access unto , or use of the Sacraments ; or that he so much as commanded the Apostles that they should do any thing like it : for Christ came not into the world to destroy the Law , but to fulfil and perfect it ; therefore when the Law commanded all but the unclean to celebrate the Passover , Christ would not surely forbid any one . XXVII . For 't is very clear that Christ checkt no body for using Sacraments , or frequenting the Temple and Sacrifices ; but onely caution'd them to use them aright , and agreeably to the Will and Law of God : He went into the same Temple with Pharisees , Sadduces , Publicans , and who not , be they bad , be they good ; he was with them at the same Sacrifices ; used all Sacraments promiscuously with the rest of the people ; was baptized of John with the same Baptism as those wicked ones were . XXVIII . Upon this account was it that Jesus hindred not Judas his Betrayer from eating the last Paschal Lamb with him , but he sate down to it with all his twelve Disciples : not but that there are some who endeavour to prove that Judas was not present at this new instituted Supper of our Lord ( which is an hard , if not an impossible matter to evince from Sacred Writ ) but that he withdrew before the Institution : yet sure none can have the hardiness to deny that Judas was according to the Law admitted to the eating the Passover ; on which Concession , our Argument holds firm and unanswerable : for whether he went or went not out before the Institution of another Supper , ( though the latter carries most of probability in it , and always hath been believed by most men ) this still is plain , that he was present and partaker of the first , and was not openly or expresly forbidden the latter : Neither read we any where that Christ commanded him to go out , to the end that he might not be a Communicant in his new - instituted Supper ; if therefore he did go out , he did it voluntarily , and of his own head ; neither went he out for any such purpose . But ●he Question with us is , what Christ , not what Judas did : 'T is enough for our purpose , that Christ never commanded him to withdraw from his Supper . XXIX . But the common Put-off and Salvo for this matter , is very light and frivolous ; That Judas his Crime was not of a publick nature , and that on that consideration he was not to be put out : for first , he had struck the bargain , and agreed the price with the Pharisees before , and Christ acquainted his Disciples with it at that Supper-time ; this was an ample Publication by Christ himself , and should therefore have been the rather made a President and Example in this matter . But secondly , ( whatever this may be ) he was at least known to be a Thief before ; and though such an one he were , yet did our Lord commit a Ministry and office to him , and bestowed on him the power of casting out Devils , of healing the Sick , and of doing other such-like Miracles . Lastly , Christ admitted him as well as the rest of his Disciples to the Celebration of the Passover , all the whiles he was with him . Is not this proof enough that Christ had no mind , no intent or desire that flagitious persons should be punisht by debarring them the Sacraments ? Sure 't is matter of greater moment to take a wicked man into the Ministry , than to admit such an one to the Supper ! yet we see that Christ did both to Judas . XXX . 'T is farther observable , that at his first Supper the Disciples began to contend about Greatness and Superiority ; yet was none of them shut out thence on that score : nay , Christ would and commanded that all should drink of the Cup , Mat. 26. v. 27. which , Mark 14. v. 23. is said to be actually done : ( And as to this business , the reason holds in the Bread as well as Wine . ) Now what can it be believed was the mind and intent of Christ , but to ratifie what God had before commanded by Moses , to wit , ●●t none who were initiated by Baptism , should be debarr'd from that publick and solemn act of Thanksgiving , who had a mind to be at it ? Whence it appears , that no person is to be thrust from the Lords Table , who embraces the Doctrine of Christ , and submits to be instructed by him . XXXI . Christ doth not desire that his Kingdom ( I speak of his visible and external one in this world ) should be of a narrower extent among Christians , than were the boundaries and limits set unto the Jews . As therefore God commanded that all that were externally circumcised , should participate and communicate in the same Sacraments and Rites ; but that Criminals and other Transgressors , should by the Sword and other civil Punishments be restrained and punished : so is it Christ's Will , that all who are baptized into him , all that profess Christianity , and have a right and sound sense of Religion , should be admitted to the use of all external Ceremonies and Sacraments ; whilst the Wicked and Criminal fall under the correction of the Magistrate , whether it be by Death , Exile , Imprisonments , or other the like Penalties . And the Parables of the Net , Marriage , and Tares , seem to import no less . XXXII . We find among the Apostles , Paul especially , no fewer nor less plain and forcible Arguments for our Assertion . First , there are no Footsteps that the Apostles did either teach or practise such a kind of Excommunication . This Argument , though it be not so evincing and strong of it self , yet will be made unanswerable , if we consider that the Apostles all their time kept themselves to a strict observance of such Laws of Moses which Christ had not abrogated ; as may be gathered out of the 21th and 28th Chapters of the Acts of the Apostles : for which cause they never did nor would , attempt to put by any one from our Sacraments ( which differ from the Sacraments of their Forefathers , in the signes and time of signifying onely ) if he be a professed Christian , and make a right Confession of that Doctrine : for they neither did nor taught any thing contrary to the Precepts of Moses , which Christ had not before abrogated , but kept themselves to as close and strict observance of the Law after his death , as before ; as the chief of the Apostles bears witness in the before-cited places : for that permission , to live free from the Law of Moses , was to the Gentiles onely , not to the Convert Jews ; which ought carefully to be remark'd here , for the sake of what follows . And as to the substance of their Doctrine , they taught nothing that interfer'd with Moses and the Prophets : for had they taught any thing dissonant , the Bereans could not have judged it agreeable to those Scriptures that they searched , Acts 17. v. 11. XXXIII . But to adventure yet one step farther : Much may be said for the sense of Moses ; ( which jumps altogether with ours ) but for the contrary Opinion , Paul affords us not one Argument : for that Apostle , in 1 Cor. 8. v. 7. excludes neither those who yet retaining some fear and conscience of the Idols , thought them to be something , nor those proud boasting Gnosticks , who in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the House or Temple of the Idol ( at least , in the Room that was set apart for their solemn and publick Idol-Festivals ) did promiscuously with the profane and impious Idolaters , eat of the things offer'd to Idols : A thing expresly forbid by Moses , Exod. 34. v. 15. by the Apostles , Acts 15. v. 29. by John , Rev. 2. v. 14. This was a sin as hainous as 't would be now-a-days for a man to dare to be present and communicate at a Popish Mass ; as any one may easily gather out of the 10th Chapter of that Epistle : for Paul there proves , that such as those do not less declare themselves by that action to be Communicants , and keep a Fellowship with Devils , than they testifie themselves to be Members of the mystical Body of Christ by partaking of the Lords Supper . XXXIV . Again , Paul , 1 Cor. 10. 1 , 2 , &c. reasons the matter thus : As ( says he ) God spared not in old time such as lusted after evil things , nor Idolaters , nor Fornicators , nor such as tempted and murmured against Christ ; though all of them were baptized unto Moses in the same Baptism , v. 2. and did all eat the same spiritual meat , and did all drink the same spiritual drink , v. 3 , and 4. so shall he not spare even you too , whoever of you are defiled with like abominations , though you also all eat in like manner , as did they , of the same Bread , and drink of the same Cup with the righteous and holy ones . By this it is seen , first , that the Sacraments of the Jews before Christ , and ours since , are , as to the internal and heavenly designe of them , the very same ; else would the Apostles , Argument be of no force . Secondly , 'T is evident that in both cases many vile and wicked Wretches , and notoriously known and mark'd for such , found admittance . Thirdly , 'T is also clear , that none were commanded to keep away ( as the Excommunicated now-a-days always are : ) for the Apostle doth not say that such , whilst such , should be kept from coming ; but foretels and denounces like punishments on them , as befel such sinners of old : Some of whom Moses with the Levites slew , Exod. 32. v. 28. some God himself destroyed with Fire and Sword , Serpents and Earthquakes ; which was these Corinthians case too : for , saith St. Paul , 1 Cor. 11. v. 30. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you , and many sleep ; that is , are punished by Disease and Death from God. XXXV . In the next Chapter ( though St. Paul take notice of Divisions and Heresies among them , and of some drunken at the Lords Supper , yet ) neither are those Schismaticks and Sectaries , those Drunkards , or others of whatsoever debauched Principles , commanded to be kept from eating it ; there 's no tittle or word of any such Interdiction : Yet doth he there redress lesser matters , as that every man should eat at home , if he be hungry . How could he have here pass'd over this in silence , had he approved it ? had he thought it so necessary to the Church ? But the Apostle well knew that the Law commanded otherwise , and that the use of Sacraments in the Church was to other purposes than the punishing of Moral Vices by their deprivation ; therefore commands he that every man examine himself , 1 Cor. 11. 28. the Precept is not , that they should try and examine one another . Nay , the Apostle there cautions them that they eat worthily ; For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily , eateth and drinketh damnation to himself , v. 29. He doth not in the least command that unworthy Communicants should be denied access , but threatens them with sad dooms from the hand of God. He divides the Eaters into two sorts , according to their differing Complexions ; the worthy , and unworthy ones : he gives no Precept to either for their not eating , but would that all should eat worthily . XXXVI . Afterwards , in 2 Cor. ch . 12 and 13. he threatens not those ( who , 2 Cor. 12. v. 21. after a former admonition had not repented of the Uncleanness , and Fornication , and Lasciviousness which they had committed ) with exclusion from the Table of the Lord , but , 2 Cor. 13. 10. according to the power and authority which the Lord had given him , to edification , and not to destruction , he would not spare , ch . 13. v. 2. and 10. that is , he would proceed with rigour and severity , according to his extraordinary and Apostolick power ; a thing he often did threaten in his Epistles : But nowhere has he preach'd this Doctrine ( which is the Question now in hand ) That any should be interdicted the Sacraments ; nor has he commanded Presbyters or any others to do it . But had he been disposed to have this way given check to Wickedness , he would assuredly have ordain'd that Sinners should have been kept from Sacraments till they became reform'd in their manners , especially since he had before appointed or ordain'd Elders in the same Church , 1 Cor. 6. v. 5. and had corrected the Abuses , the miss-celebration in the Lords Supper . But perhaps we may have more to say to this hereafter . XXXVII . As we find no mention made of Excommunication in the receiving and celebrating this Sacrament , so neither doth any thing of that nature appear in its Institution ; nor indeed hath the Scripture taken any notice thereof in her Explications of the use and ends of Sacraments : Whereas had Sacraments been given to the Church for this , as well as other ends and purposes , that they should have been for Penalties upon Offences and Offenders , some mention must needs have been of it . The end and designes of this Institution of the Lords Supper , are , That we may commemorate in the most solemn manner the Death of our Lord : That we may pay our Homage in a publick Recognition and Thankfulness , for the Deliverance he hath purchased for us : That we may remind our selves , and by our presence bear testimony to others , that we have no other Food of Life , but a Crucified Saviour ; no other Drink , but his Bloud poured out for us : That we may declare our selves as well penitent for our past course of Life , as that we have enter'd upon thoughts and resolutions of a better ; and that we embrace the Christian Doctrine , are the Members of Christ , belong unto his Church , in which we desire piously and religiously both to live and die . Has the Scripture anywhere prohibited any man from performing these things ? But , you may perhaps say , Some men have too frequently relaps'd to their former bad courses , and become not one whit the better . I answer , He that by the aid and impulse of the Holy Spirit hath the thoughts of his heart right at the time of his receiving , the Scripture turns him not away ; but God only knows whether and how long he will hold on his good purposes and resolutions . 'T is our duty to hope always the best of all men , however we may sometimes be mistaken : nay , we ought to address our hearty Prayers to God , that he would vouchsafe to strengthen and confirm both us and them in all true Religion and Virtue . But still the sinner is to be told of his faults , is to be reprehended , admonished , and advised , that he may so try himself , that ( as the Apostle cautions ) he eat and drink not Damnation to himself . XXXVIII . Lastly , Whether are the Sacraments ( either for the authority of their Institution , or the intrinsick dignity of their nature ) of greater worth than the Word , that Word of God which Christ preached ? or is there more necessity of the use of those , than of this ? None without the Word , can or could be saved ; but who can doubt but that many have been , and yet may be saved , without the Sacraments , ( especially the Lords Supper ) provided they are not contemners of them ? The Apostle seems to have thought so too , when he says he was not sent to baptize , but to preach the Word . Do not almost all men say that the Word is plain and visible , and sets before our eyes what words signifie to our ears ? Why do we therefore make no attempts to shut any out from the Word , but do it from the Sacraments , especially the Eucharist ; and that contrary unto ( or at least much beside the interest of ) Gods express Command ? Do they say 't is because the Word is for all , but that the Sacraments were instituted onely for Converts to the Word ? I know all that , and speak not therefore of Turks and Pagans , such as never came within the Churches Pale , but of such as God hath called and ingrafted into his Church , such as own the Doctrine , and desire ( at least to all outward appearance ) to be worthy partakers of these Sacraments . XXXIX . Hitherto have I strongly demonstrated , that there is no word or instance , no footstep or president to be found either of Christs , or among his Apostles , of such Chastizements , or rather Restraints and Coertions put upon wicked men . Since therefore neither the Old nor New Testament hath commanded this sort of punishing , but the clean contrary is often found in both of them , we may justly think this Excommunication ( as far , I mean , as it excludes men from the use of the Sacraments for improbity of Life , and vitiousness of Morals ) rather an Invention of Man , than any Law of God. It remains therefore , that we examine what those who oppose us have to say for themselves ; and to convince the World , that all that they say has nothing of proof or force in it . XL. They tell you of a Precept , Mat. 18. 15 , 16 , 17. and in St. Paul's Epistle they tell you too of an Example or Instance of that kind , 1 Cor. 5. 3 , 4 , 5. and 1 Tim. 1. 19 , 20. We will take them in order ; and first for that in Matthew . XLI . 'T was not the designe of Christ in that Chapter of St. Matthew to set up any new Model of Government , or form of putting Excommunications in execution , but to instruct his Disciples how they should avoid giving of fence or scandal in the matter of righting themselves in private Injuries done them : for since they who flie presently to the Magistrate to right them ( especially where the Magistrate , as was that the Jews were then under , is an Heathen and prophane ) do often give occasion of offence and scandal thereby to the weak . He first exhorts and advises them , that they rather forgive Injuries , than run to the Magistrate upon every slight occasion . Thus far doth he nothing but call to their minds that Precept of Moses , Lev. 19. 17. ( which Ecclus 19. 13. hath a little more fully paraphras'd ) : After this , he directs , that if they are necessitated to resort to the Magistrate for redress , that yet they should not ( if they would avoid scandal ) accuse their fellow-brethren the Jews , before the Roman Judicatures , till their own Magistrates fail'd in doing them Justice . The like Precept hath St. Paul given , 1 Cor. 6. 1 , &c. ( which place is a kind of Comment upon this ) that is to say , that Christians go not to Law with Christians before the Unbelievers . This therefore is the true and genuine sense of this of St. Matthew : If thy Brother ( that is a Jew ) trespass against thee , try to make up the matter betwixt your selves alone ; but if alone you cannot do it , try what may be done by the Arbitrement and Mediation of two or three of your Brethren ( the Jews still ) ; and if this way you have not a just satisfaction and amends made you , tell it to the Church , that is , to the Sanedrim , to the Magistrate of your own Religion and Nation ; and if he refuse to hear him , if he stand not to the judgment of your own chief Judicatures , you may without just offence to any man , deal with him as with a Publican or Heathen that should do you any injury , and whom you cannot implead nor call before any other Authority but the Roman Tribunals . XLII . That this is the proper and genuine Interpretation of the place , is plain and evident from the whole tenor and series of the Discourse , but especially from the conclusion of it , and from all its circumstances : For , First , Christ talks not here of any enormous and publick Transgressions which belong'd to Religion , and the Laws and Rites of their Nation , for these the Sanedrim or great Councils of the Jews were to redress ; but his discourse is of private wrongs , which every man had power for himself to remit . One manifest proof of the truth of what I say , may be , for that all the whole Oration runs in the singular number : If thy Brother shall trespass 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , against thee , go and tell him his faults between thee and him alone ; and again , tell the Church , &c. and let him be to thee as an Heathen , &c. So Luke 17. v. 3. If thy Brother , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and v. 4. if he trespass against thee seven times in a day , and seven times in a day turn again to thee , saying , I repent , thou shalt forgive him . We can no ways interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , against thee , here , to be meant against the Church : For when 't is after said , Tell it to the Church , the sence would be , O Church , tell it to the Church . And again , we can as little interpret it with thy privity and knowledge : for neither the sence of the words , nor the nature or circumstances of the discourse , will admit of such an Explication . For why am I requir'd to tell a man his fault betwixt me and him alone , if I was but as one privy to his Crime , and that he trespassed not privately and against me alone ? Why should I not rather be enjoyn'd to take in them with me whom he directly injur'd , that they and I might reprove him together ? But Christ gives not that scope and liberty to take others with me in my first Applications to my injuring Brother : And therefore 't is plain , Christ speaks of Injuries done me by my Brother privately . But farther yet , how can the words of St. Luke [ If he turn again to thee , thou shalt forgive him ] be accommodated to this sence ? Can we say that here , To thee , is put for , Thou being privy and conscious to the injury done by him ? What must then the meaning be of , Thou shalt forgive him ? Must we here also say , Thou shalt be privy and conscious to his forgiveness ? Did the prodigal son , Luke 15. 11. that sinn'd against Heaven , onely sin in the sight and privity of Heaven ? 'T is indeed plain enough in 1 Cor. 8. 12. that we sin against the Brethren , when we do a thing which may become a Stumbling block to them through their weakness . But this of St. Matthew is quite of a different nature ; and truly the whole frame of this Discourse , and way of wording it , can't allow us to expound it of any other than private wrongs ; which every man has power and right in himself to remit and forgive : And if the Injurer repent him not of his own accord , this is to be done on the part of the Injured , to bring him to it . Secondly , This is again proved , for that the Apostles of Christ did not otherwise understand him ; as may be gather'd from St. Peter's Question , v. 21. Whether his seven times forgiving his offending Brother would be enough ? Peter could not be to learn , that he neither could nor ought to pardon an offence which concern'd others , or the whole Church . Thirdly , The words Unto thee , v. 17. is a farther proof hereof . Christ doth not say , Let him be unto us , or unto others , or unto the Church ; but let him be unto thee as a Publican , unto thee who art or hast been the injur'd man. Christ , though he address his discourse to all the Apostles equally , yet commands that the Wrong Doer be held for an Heathen and Publican by him alone who is the Sufferer thereby ; and that too , not till the Church ( that is , the lawful Magistracy of the Jews in their Sanedrim ) had admonish'd him . Besides , he speaks not there of things which relate to the whole Church , or to any number of persons ; but which relate to private men . Fourthly , Christ speaks of such Trespasses which we are obliged to pardon as often as the Offender says , he repents . And that this Remission and Forgiveness transacted between two alone , puts an end to the Controversie , appears from these words , v. 19. Again , I say unto you , If two of you shall agree on earth , as touching any thing that they shall ask , it shall be done for them of my Father which is in Heaven . But an hanious and publick Offence , which concerns many persons , or perhaps the whole Church , may not be remitted by one alone . And here we may take notice by the by , of that Adverb again ; whereby he intimates his having spoke before to the same purpose , though in different words . Fifthly , Christ speaks of Trespasses and Offences which the actor of them is not asham'd of , or which he will not stick frankly to confess and own before any man. Had he spoke of Crimes of a deeper dye , which concern'd many , or the whole Church , 't would be in vain to bring him to others that might bear witness ( as 't is v. 16. ) : for such an Action , if 't were yet private , no Offender would avow it before witness , which might endanger him . But in all things here discoursed of , this gradual procedure recommended by Christ , must be observ'd ; and therefore he speaks of private Injuries , which others have nothing to do with . Sixthly , Christ speaks of such Offences which the Church , he here speaks of , doth not otherwise punish than by admonishing the Offender with bare words : for 't would be needless to have added , If he hear not the Church , could an open punishment have redress'd the Offence . Seventhly , The Parable that follows , v. 23. gives a clear proof to this matter ; its conclusion being , that God will not forgive them their Trespasses , who from their hearts forgive not the Trespasses of a repenting Brother , without exacting farther pains or penalties upon him . But the Church ( as some of our Adversaries tell us ) ought not thus to forgive , but ought to keep them , at least for a time , from the Sacraments , till they shall have given testimony of their Repentance to Elders surrogated and appointed for that purpose : So that such a Church will not seven times a day forgive them that say they repent , but will see the argument and proof of that Repentance ; things which Christ says not a word of : he requires no farther argument than the Confession of the Fault ; which scarce any man will have occasion to repeat seven times a day , who hath not plaid the Hypocrite in some , or all , of the former six . We have , I think , from all this evidently prov'd , that Christ in this 18th Chapter of St. Matthew , speaks nothing of Crimes that are to be redressed by Excommunications , but of light and private Injuries , and the way and means of making them up and reconciling them ; and therefore belongs not to the business of Excommunication . If indeed we do but well weigh the close of that Chapter , all doubt from hence must be at an end . XLIII . He that can and will needs imagine that Christ in this 18th Chapter of St. Matthew , set up or instituted Excommunication , ought to shew in which of the words 't is contain'd : If he cannot shew it any where there comprized , 't is to no purpose to say 't is there commanded . But if it be there , it must either be in these words , v. 17. Tell it unto the Church : or in these , Let him be to thee as an heathen and a publican : or lastly , in these , v. 18. Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth , shall be bound in heaven , &c. But I doubt not to prove it with most unanswerable Arguments , that none of these words comprize any such matter ; and since it can be found in no other , 't is lost labour to enquire here after it . XLIV . These words of Christ , Tell it unto the Church , prove no more than this , that he who has been injur'd by his Brother , and all his endeavours of reconciliation with him have been ineffectual , may honestly and lawfully complain of him to the Church , or to the Governours and Rulers of the Church . And further , that this same Church hath a right and authority to reprehend and admonish the Wrong Doer , that he cease from being so : But no more of power is here given to the Church , than ( v. 17. ) was before given to the one or two Witnesses , excepting onely in this , that the Cause is not to be brought before the Church without the Witnesses . Is it not therefore a weak way of reasoning , to say , The Church has power to admonish him that trespasses against his Brother ; therefore has she power to excommunicate him , or to deb●● him the Sacrament ? But now , some may perhaps urge , that the Church not having a Right or Authority of punishing the guilty with Death and other corporal punishments , she is necessitated to have recourse to this way of denying them the Sacrament . But I answer , Were the Antecedent as true ( as indeed from both the old Testament , from the History of all Ages , from what our own Eyes and Senses tell us , we are assured 't is quite otherwise ) no such consequence could be drawn from it ; nor can it be ever proved that these things have any necessary coherence one with another : The Church hath not the power of the Sword , she can't kill and slay ; therefore may she , must she , drive from the Sacrament those who own and profess the same Religion , the same saving Faith ; she must drive from that Sacrament that was instituted for , and ought to be open and common to all that outwardly profess the same Faith. XLV . If yet our Adversaries think Excommunication to have been instituted in these other words , Let him be to thee as an heathen man and a publican , I utterly deny it : Nether can it by any Art or Rhetorick , Perswasion or Argument whatever , be demonstrated whilst the world stands , that this form of Speech , Let him be to thee as an heathen man and a publican , should tantamount to this , Let him be excommunicate , let him be kept from the Sacrament : for even in the days of Christ , the circumcised Publicans , were they Jews or Gentiles , were not prohibited the Temple , Sacrifices , Rites , Ceremonies , and Sacraments . And truly Christ may seem to have joyn'd the Publican with the Heathen , to prevent all thoughts and suspition of his here interdicting them such Rites and Sacraments How could the Publicans by the Jewish Law be shut out from the Temple , and from worshipping God there , when 't was not so much as a sin to be a Farmer or Collector of Taxes and Tribute-money ; nor found to be any where prohibited by God ? Sure 't is , that Christ nowhere forbad it . When the Publicans askt John what they must do to be saved , he doth not bid them quit their Employments ; but directs them , Luke 3. 13. not to exact more than that which was appointed them . And , Luke 19. 5. Christ doth not order Zacheus ( the Chief among the Publicans ) to lay down his Office , nor finds any fault with him on account of his Employ : and the Publican that , Luke 18. 10. went up into the Temple to pray , and return'd to his house more Justified , in the judgment of Christ , than the Pharisee ; we do not read that he left off being a Publican ; nor those others who , Luke 7. 29. and Luke 15. 7. justified and praised God , and were dear and intimate with Christ and his Apostles . In short , I say , that the Holy Writ , that is , God hath not at any time or place condemn'd , or any ways spoke against Publicans for their very being Publicans , that is , Tax-gatherers ; which all sober men will voluntarily grant me . Upon which Concession , I argue thus : God in Scripture condemns not a Publican as a Publican . Now whom God condemns not , he cannot be excommunicated by any Law of God ; therefore no Publican could by the Law of God be prohibited access to the Temple , or to Divine Worship . I therefore make this conclusion : No Publican could by the Law be condemned or excommunicated ; but Christ commands that he that neglects to hear that Church which he there speaks of , should be to him as a Publican : therefore he wills , that he should be to him as a man who was not by the Law of God accursed , that is , not barely for his being a Publican . And whereas these Excommunication-men say , that the words , Let him be to thee as a Publican , signifie as much as if he had said , Let him be to thee as a Publican is to the Pharisees ; 't is both absurd , false , and impossible : for 't is in no sort credible , that Christ in the same place in which he design'd to institute ( as our Adversaries will have it ) a thing of that weight and moment , and so beneficial and necessary to the Church , should or would make the wicked action of most profligate men , the Rule and Measure for all the World to go by afterwards . Besides , it hath been already prov'd , that no man was ever excommunicated by the Jews , after the rate that we now talk of Excommunication . And lastly , all the words of Christ are inconsistent with this their interpretation : for Christ here talks neither of , nor with the Pharisees , but all is betwixt him and the Disciples , and the subject of the discourse is of avoiding Scandals ; and this is the thing that Christ says , If the Wrong Doer neglect to hear the Church , let him be to thee , that is , he is to thee , as a Publican ; to thee , not to the Pharisees . Moreover , 't is plain that Christ and his Disciples , and other good men , had no hatred for the Publicans ; most certainly they never thought them to deserve Excommunication , but did dayly eat and live with them . And in that Christ joyns the Heathen and Publican together , we must needs acknowledge that Christ speaks of a matter common to them both : therefore these words , Let him be to thee as a Publican , must have quite another meaning from these , Let him be to thee as an excommunicate person . This therefore must be the meaning of the place : If he neglect to hear the Church , you may ( as to this matter ) proceed against him without offence or scandal to any man , as if you had to do with an Heathen man or a Publican . Now he that had a Controversie with any such , was forced to submit his Cause to the Roman Magistracy ; ( which is plain , as to the Heathens alone : and that 't was so for the Publicans , may easily appear , for that they were the sworn Officers of the Romans , even against their own Nation ; and for that also , that they could expect scarce common Justice from the Pharisees and Chiefs of the Jews , who accounted them the most despicable and profligate of mankind . ) But Christ allowed not this Appeal to the Roman Magistrate against a Brother-Jew , till he had endeavoured a Reconciliation that way which Christ proposed , and which had before been prescribed them by the Law. St. Paul's excuse for himself , in the last of the Acts , looks much the same way , to wit , that he had never appeal'd unto Caesar had he not been constrain'd ; nor did he it to accuse the Jews , but defend himself from violence and wrong . The Apostle , 1 Cor. 6. 1. commands , that if any Christian had a matter against another , he should decide it before the Saints , and not presently go to law before the unjust : But if a Christian had just cause of Action against an Infidel , what doubt is there , but that he might prosecute his Right before an Heathen Magistrate ? So if any one did neglect or despise the Sentence , Judgment , and Admonitions of the Elders of the Church , he that was the Sufferer , the injur'd person , might without offence to his Neighbour , appeal unto the Heathen Magistrate . XLVI . But we shall handle this matter with the more perspicuity , if we take into examination what , and of what nature that Church was , which Christ commanded the injur'd person to tell it unto : in the clearing of which , I lay this for the entrance and foundation ; which I doubt not but all men will allow of , and I know none that ever denies it , ( viz. ) That Christ speaks of a Church that was then in being ; how could he otherwise have bid them tell it to a Church which was then nowhere to be found , and of which , and of its nature and constitution , they as yet heard nothing ? Had he design'd the raising a new Church , or new form of Government as yet unknown to the Apostles , he had deliver'd them but a very lame Institution , for that he neither told them who were that Church , nor how , nor of what sort or number of men it was to be made up of , nor the ways of their judicial proceedings , nor what penalties they might inflict , and the like : Neither did he speak of all kind of sins , as I have before proved ; and even they who build their Excommunication upon this Text , are forc'd themselves to confess as well as we ( for they openly own ) that Christ took notice here onely of private Trespasses . But whenever Christ made any new Institution , he omitted nothing that was requisite to its being and subsistency : here he onely says , Tell it unto the Church ; and if he neglect to hear her , he gives the Complainant liberty to look on him as a Publican : here 's no penalty annext to the Contumacy . St. Luke when he sets down the same passage , recounts it not with all those particularities as St. Matthew does . The other two Evangelists make not the least mention of it ; who yet would scarce have pass'd over a matter of such moment and necessity , had they known that Christ had then first made any such new Institution . To which we may adde , that the Apostles were all along firmly perswaded that Christ should not die , or change the Jewish Rites ; nor did they here , by word or otherwise , declare themselves not to understand what Christ here taught them , or shew any forwardness to ask farther after it , or to wonder , as if he had told them an unusual and unheard of piece of Doctrine . Peter onely wondered at this , that he was requir'd to forgive his Brother so many times together : Surely therefore they never took these words of Christ to be institutive of a new form of Government , which they had never dreamt of before , but believed themselves to be taught ( as truly they were ) when and for what they might without offence and scandal , accuse or implead a Brother Jew before an Heathen Magistrate . And at this day 't is rarely seen that Jews go to law with Jews before Christian Judges . XLVII . But if any ask me whether and how then can this Precept reach all men ? whether it be of farther use than for those alone that live under an Unchristian Magistracy ? my answer is , That the first part of it , of labouring a Reconciliation before we appeal to the Magistrate , or go to law about the matter , belongs to all Christians ; but the latter is of no force or use , but where true Professors live under an Unchristian or Antichristian Magistrate . St. Paul , 1 Cor. 6. v. 1. & 4. therefore advises the Corinthians to chuse out some among themselves who may judge such Controversies betwixt man and man , that they GO NOT TO LAW BEFORE THE VNIVST , that is , the Heathen Roman Judges . Who doubts but that the Corinthians might lawfully have conven'd a Christian Brother that had injur'd them , before the Roman and Gentile Tribunals , if he had refused to stand to the Determination of those who were chose from among themselves to judge on such occasions , or if he mended not upon their Sentence ? 'T is certain , that St. Paul , when he saw himself hardly pressed by the Jews , appealed unto Caesar , Acts 25. 11. which , Acts 28. 19. he excuses to those Jews that lived at Rome . But he that shall carefully compare Lev. 19. with Ecclus 19. and 1 Cor. 6. with this Chapter of St. Matthew , will be able much more clearly and easily to understand this whole matter , and may observe how well all hangs together ; especially if he diligently note the latter part of Christ's and of St. Paul's words , which were justly omitted in Moses and Ecclesiasticus , there being then no occasion for them , for that the Jewish Nation was not then subject to any forreign Power , as they were in our Saviour's and St. Paul's time to the Roman Empire . XLVIII . And thus far , as I conceive , all will easily agree that Christ spoke of a Church which was then in being , I mean , the Church in Judea ; but quickly shall we be divided again in our enquiry what Christ understood by the word Church : for sometimes it is put for the whole Congregation or Multitude gathered together ; sometimes for the Senate , Council , or Elders , which were its Governours . Thus find we the Hebrew words to signifie a Church , Company , or Congregation , ( as Num. 35. 24 , 25. Josh . 20. 6. Psal . 82. 1. and elsewhere ) which the Septuagint renders by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a Congregation . Now there are Arguments of no little weight , to induce us to conclude , that Christ in this passage of St. Matthew , would not have us understand by the word Church , the Multitude or Congregation of People , but the Jewish Senate or Council , called sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for , first , 't is evident that Christ did not innovate any thing in the forms of Judicature or Government which were administred agreeable to the Law ; nor did he himself , or permitted his Disciples to do any thing contrary to what Moses had rightly instituted by Gods command . Now Moses did ordain , that such Suits and Controversies should be decided not by the Multitude , but by the Senate or Sanedrim of such and such places ; which at first was held at the Gates of each City , where the Elders sate to judge . Had Christ thought of introducing any thing here contrary to the Institution of Moses , his Disciples must needs have been highly moved at it , who were all their lives strict observers of the Law. Let every man think with himself what dust and Triumphs the Pharisees would have rais'd , could they have in truth fixt so criminal an Action upon him , that he in opposition to the Law of Moses , had stir'd up the People against the Magistrate ! what fairer pretext could they have wish'd to lay Sedition to his charge , than by proving upon him this attempt , to set up the People against the Magistrate , contrary to Gods determination ? to commit to them the Examination of Witnesses ? to give them a power to convene whom they would before them ? to grant them cognizance of Gauses , and power of Judicature ? Secondly , Christ commanded to tell it unto that Church , which had power to send for and call before them the party accused ; which might hear the Cause , which might examine Witnesses , ( and therefore he commands us in the second place to take two or three , that the Fact may be competently prov'd ) and lastly , which might pronounce their Sentence and Judgement in the case . But every one must know , that these things could not be done by the Croud , the Multitude , without chusing some set persons who might manage and moderate matters . ( It must be a very small Congregation , a very handful of men , who could be able of themselves , without the Elders , to dispatch such Causes : for which reason some have rightly judg'd that this Precept of Christ could not hold well , could be of little or no use , but when the Church consisted of very few Members . ) But now since that they who thus preside in these Affairs , are in very truth nothing but the Senate , the Sanedrim , the Sessions of the Elders ; it again follows , that Christ commanded not to tell it unto the Multitude , but to the Council or Sanedrim : and truly in Christ's time the People had not the power of chusing their Magistracy and Governours . We must needs therefore by the word Church understand the Jewish Senate or Council ; as 't is plain the Disciples did , from what has been already said . Therefore if the meaning of the Church there , be all the Members of it , the People ; we are then to tell it unto a Church which has right and authority to make choice of such a Senate or Council as was that of the Jewish Church ; but our Churches have no power to chuse such a Council as the Jewish Sanedrim was : nay , in Christ's time the Jews themselves had not that liberty , as I told you just now . We might adde , that when the Scripture speaks of the Multitude , it generally uses the words People , Multitude , Children of Israel , or the like comprehensive words ; but when any thing is related to be said or done in the Synagogues , or in all the Congregation . I need not tell you that this form of speech is usual at this very day : for we say , we have communicated the matter to such a Kingdom or State , when we have acquainted onely the King , Senate , or Governing part of such State or Kingdom : We recount how this or that Nation has rewarded a man , when the Representatives onely in such a Dyet or Parliament hath been liberal-handed to them . 'T is so common a thing to use phrases of this nature , that 't is wonderful so few should have observ'd it . But the sum of all is this : Christ alter'd not the Customs of his time , nor introduced any Novelties or Changes into their Courts of Judicature , or Measures and Ways of Judging ; nor do his Disciples betray any suspition of Innovation or Alteration : and therefore his Command is to acquaint the Sanedrim , before their denier resort to the Heathen Magistracy . XLIX . Now , 't is evident from Holy Writ , ( as well as other History ) that the Sanedrim was the legal Magistracy of the Jewish Nation , and that in Christ days they both kept and us'd the power of the Sword. Many things in the Narratives of the Passion of Christ , besides other Testimonials , evince as much : They send armed men to take Jesus ; they proceed in examining Witnesses , as the Law requir'd ( at least they pretended so ) ; they command him to be set before them in Judgment ; they delivered him bound to Pilate , after they had first publickly condemn'd him : they openly condemn Stephen , and command him to be stoned : they seize the Apostles , and put them in the common Prison ; they cause them to be beaten , after a general Consult held about them : they give Letters and authority to Paul to bring any that he found of that way , bound to Jerusalem for to be punished . The Jews themselves , with the Elders and High Priest , that is , the Sanedrim , say it in express terms , by their Speaker Tertullus ; who accusing Paul before Foelix , Acts 24. v. 2. adds , v. 6. That they took him , and would have judg'd him according to their Law , but that Lysias came upon them , and with great violence took him away out of their hands . And Acts 23. v. 3. says Paul to the High Priest , Sittest thou to judge me after the Law , and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the Law ? And afterwards , Acts 26. v. 10. Paul confesses before King Agrippa and Festus , that many of the Saints he shut up in prison , having received authority from the Chief Priests ; and when they were put to death , he gave his voice against them , and punished them often in every Synagogue , and compelled them to blaspheme ; and farther , persecuted them into strange Cities ; still acting under the authority derived from the High Priests , as when he was going to Damascus by their Commission , v. 12. I can't imagine but that Agrippa , and Festus too , knew well enough whether it was lawful or not for their Council to do so ; and sure they would not have acquitted him in the manner they did , v. 34 , & 35. had not the Authority he had been committed by , been warrantable : for Paul should have offended no less against Caesar , than against the Pharisees . For he who doth an unlawful act by the permission and command of them who have no right nor authority to permit and command , transgresses no less than they that command it : but no such thing is charg'd upon the Accusers or Accused ; but Paul is fully acquitted , as one that hath done nothing worthy of death or of bonds . And had not the Jewish Sanedrim had this authority and liberty then lest them , Pilate could not have said to them , Joh. 18. 31. Take ye him , and judge him according to your law : And when they answer , that it was not lawful for them to put any man to death ; this must be understood either ( as St. Augustin interprets it ) at the time of that Festival , for fear of the People , or ( as St. Chrysostom expounds it ) of that kind of Death which they desired that Christ should die . With which latter Opinion , the words of St. John which immediately follow , very well agree , to wit , That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled , which he spake , signifying what death he should die . To the same purpose is that of Mat. 26. 55 , 56. where Christ says , I sate dayly with you teaching in the temple , and ye laid no hold no me ; but all this was done , that the Scriptures of the Prophets might be fulfilled . They took him therefore at a time when , by reason of the Feast then at hand , and for fear of the People , they could not put him to death : vid. Mat. 26 5. and Mark 14. 2. Since therefore they could not bear that he should live any longer , and they could not well take his life away themselves , it follows of course , that he must be deliver'd into the hands of the Romans ; that so all things which he had , ( Mat. 24. ) foretold his Disciples , might be fulfilled ; as the words of St. John intimate , and as Augustine and Chrysostom agree : And those Cries and Vociferations of the People , Crucifie him , crucifie him , give farther Testimony to this Interpretation . L. By what has been said , the falsity of that Affirmation is apparently detected , which says , that the Sanedrim had not the power of the Sword , that is , the authority of Life and Death ; and that Stephen was ston'd tumultuously by the Rabble , and not by Decree of the Council . For I think I have proved beyond all contradiction , that such a Power they had ; and for St. Stephen's case , 't is clear , that he was not tumultuously slain , for that Acts 6. 12. he was solemnly brought and accused before the Council ; Witnesses were produced , though false ones , v. 13. they carried him out of the City ; and those Witnesses , as the Law provides , cast the first stones at him , as may be easily gather'd from their laying down their Clothes at Saul's feet , v. 58. The same too may be as fully proved out of other Histories : for Josephus in his fourteenth book of the Antiquity of the Jews ( ch . 12. 16 , & 17. according to the Greek Copies ) tells us , That the Romans gave liberty to all Nations , and by name to the Jews who dwelt in or out of Judea , to use their own Laws in things relating to Religion , and to live freely according to their own Rites and Customs . And in that twelfth Chapter he quotes Strabo for his Author , that he ( writing of the City Cyrene ) says , they had there a President or Chief Ruler who heard and decided their Causes , and transacted all affairs , as absolutely as if they had been an Independent State. That also makes farther for us which we read , Acts 18. 15. of Gallio the Deputy of Achaia ; where he tells them , that if it be a matter of their Law , they may look to it . The same Josephus , lib. 16. ch . 4 , & 5. recounts how Herod had obtained of Agrippa , that the Jews in Asia might have the freedom of enjoying the Priviledges before that time indulg'd them by the Romans . I take occasion to remember this , because some object that Herod destroy'd and slew all the Sanedrim , and stript them of all Authority ; as if none had succeeded those that were kill'd : How likely is it that Herod should take from them in Jerusalem that power of judging in matters relating to Religion , and determining therein according to their Law , who endeavour'd to procure and preserve the same to all the other Asiaticks ? Besides , the time of Christ's preaching fell not under Herod or Archelaus , but under the Government of Pilate : 'T is certain that the Jews forced even Pilate himself to send again out of the City the Roman Standards ( which he had caused to be privately introduc'd ) to prevent the breach of Gods Commands of suffering any Image in the City . And that they reserv'd and continued this Power to themselves , to the very destruction of Jerusalem , may be clearly gathered from Josephus his Oration to the Besieged ; The Romans , says he ( in his fifth Book of the Wars of the Jews , ch . 26. ) exact Tribute of us , for that our Forefathers have a long time been wont to pay it to theirs : If in this you comply , they 'll neither sack this our City , nor meddle with our Temple , but leave both you , your Goods , and Families free , and the free use and enjoyment of your sacred Laws . Titus himself , after his having taken the City , said almost the very same to the Jews , lib. 6. chap. 34. Whether therefore we consult the Holy Writ , or the Jewish History , 't is an undoubted truth , that that Sanedrim which Christ commanded to tell it unto , had the power of the Sword , the power of Life and Death , especially over those who sin'd against their Religion : ( for in Civil matters , and Causes of Right and Wrong , where the Law had not specified the Punishment , I do not question but that the Romans encroached and usurp'd , if not all , yet most of them , to themselves , as is easily discernable out of History , and may well be conjectur'd out of Acts 18. v. 12. ) LI. And 't is no ways repugnant to what we have said , that in Josephus his Antiquities of the Jews , some of them tell Albinus , that it was not lawful for the High Priest to call the Sanedrim or Council , without his leave : For he there , as an Historian , relates what others did ; not that he applauds or approves of the Fact thereby . Besides , peradventure the High Priest during the interregnum , that is , whilst Albinus ( after the death of Festus ) was no his Journey thither , ought not to summon a Court for a matter of that weight and moment , till the new Governour confirm'd him in that Authority : for he had procur'd that James the Lords Brother ( who was vulgarly sirnamed the Just ) should be put to death ; who being a person well belov'd by all , many took it very ill at his hands : for he was but newly got to that Dignity , and not approv'd of , or confirm'd in it by the Roman Governour . And Eusebius , in the second of his Ecclesiastical History , chap. 23. tells us , that this High Priest snatcht at this occasion of the interregnum . But what 's all this to our purpose ? Was not Archelaus , who was stiled King in his Father Herod's last Will ( and that by the Allowance and Gift of Caesar ) was he not therefore King , because he refus'd the Name and Authority of a King , till he had Caesar's confirmation for it ? And not the Magistrates of some Cities ( of which there are many in Germany ) who are subject to some particular Prince , not true and lawful Magistrates , because on the death of the Prince they are requir'd to pray the Confirmation of their Priviledges from the Successor ? But now that the High Priest had power , after his Confirmation , to convoke the Judges of the Sanedrim , is clear enough , for that they do not say to Albinus , that this summoning them was in it self unlawful , but that it ought not to have been done by him , without the apprebation and privity of Albinus . LII . It has now been fully and solidly prov'd , that , Tell it unto the Church , signifies no more than Tell it unto the Magistrate of thy People ( or who is of the same Religion with thy self ) before you implead your Brother in the Heathen Courts , as St. Paul , 1 Cor. 6. 5. hath incomparably expounded it ; where he commands them for this cause to chuse persons out of themselves to judge and arbitrate their Quarrels . But now who doubts but that this Precept holds not , where God hath blessed us with a pious Christian Magistracy , a Magistracy of the same Religion with our selves ? Indeed St. Augustine , in the second Chapter of Faith and Works , plainly enough informs us , that he accounted Excommunication supplied the place and defect of the visible Sword , when the Church wanted that external aid : for , as he would have it , Moses his punishing Transgressors with Death , and Phineas his slaying the Adulterers , did typifie and prefigure the punishing evil men by Degradations and Excommunications ; that is , at such time as the material Sword , the Civil Temporal Power , should be wanting in the Church . I remember that some Modern Writers hold , that the Jews had and retain'd this Custom of Excommunicating , because the Sword was taken from them ; ( which I have prov'd by irrefragable Reason , Argument , and Testimonies , to be utterly false : ) but were it but thus far true , it must necessarily follow , that there 's no occasion for Excommunication in such a Church which hath the Civil Authority of its side : Nor is it requir'd as a thing obligatory to us , to chuse Judges or Arbitrators , other than the lawful Judicatures of the Land. Be it how it will , nothing can be more certain , than that the word Church in this passage of Matthew signifies nothing less than a Church-Senate , a Council of Clergie-men or Ecclesiasticks , endowed with a Faculty , a Right or Power to shut out whom they please from the Sacraments . LIII . Two Objections yet remain : First , How any one can be said to neglect to hear the Church , if that and the Civil Magistrate , who hath the power of the Sword , are the same thing ? Secondly , How that passage of binding and loosing , Mat. 18. v. 18. suits with this matter ? To the first , the Answer is intimated before , That the Jews had not then power of judging in all matters , but almost every thing that related not to Religion , belong'd to the Roman Judicatures : And therefore Christ permits , that if any one neglects or contemns the Authority of the Sanedrim in such matters , the injur'd person may prosecute his Right before the Heathen Magistrate ; in like manner as if he were to sue an Heathen or Publican . Besides , many cases may occur , which the Law had not provided a distinct and proper punishment for , or had not prohibited under any penalty at all ; in which case it may well be , that the Offender may be dismist without more ado than a verbal chiding or admonition . Now if the Wrong Doer does not yet leave wronging him , the party injur'd may seek farther satisfaction , and may again and again apply himself to the Church or Magistrate to punish the other's obstinacy : But though this Answer hold true , yet the former seems , in my mind , more apposite and suitable to the purpose and designe of Christ , as well as to the several circumstances of time and place , and the like . LIV. To the second , there is as little difficulty in framing it an Answer : for since the manner of speaking is the same , and almost the self-same words are here repeated which are used by Christ , Mat. 16. 19. 't is necessary that they signifie either the same thing , or something very like it ; but in Mat. 16. 19. to bind and to loose signifies nothing else but to preach the Gospel ; whereby he that believes in it , is loosed from Sin and from Death : and therefore can signifie here no more than the desiring his Brother to leave injuring him , and rather to become good and affectionate to him ; this being a thing acceptable unto God , and he will surely punish those that break this great Commandment of Love and Charity . Now he that thus wins upon his Brother by soft advice and entreaties to forbear wronging him , and urging to him the revealed Will of God , and what Wrath he has in store for them that thus offend ; if his Admonitions have their effect , he hath gained his Brother , that is , he hath loosed him : if they return unsuccessful , he is still bound , the Wrath of God remains upon him , in like manner as it doth upon him who having heard the Word of the Gospel preached unto him , believes or disbelieves it . But now that we might be ready and forward to forgive them that repent , Christ labour'd to perswade us to it by that most apposite Parable of the Kings taking account of his servants , which he subjoyn'd to this passage ; whereby Christ's meaning and purpose is mightily cleared , as to the sence we have put upon it before . LV. I cannot but infinitely wonder , how or why some men do here expound this binding or loosing by driving men from the Sacraments , and readmitting them thither again , when throughout the whole Bible these words are never put for any such matter , and the Apostles have neither by word or otherwise discover'd that they understood Christ in such a sence . There is extant a Precept of Christ , that if any refused to receive the Gospel , they should depart out of that house or City , shaking off the dust of their feet against them , Luke 10. 11. Mat. 10. 14. which they put in practice , Acts 13. 25. and 18. 6. But that they should deny any Sacrament to those that believed the Word , and were baptized unto Christ , and embraced his Religion and Doctrine , we nowhere find it either enjoyned unto , or practised by them , as hath been before abundantly and firmly proved . But it may suffice at present to inform the World , that it can never be made out by Holy Writ , that Binding is put for Excluding Believers from receiving the Sacrament ; or Loosing to signifie a Readmission again of him who had been for his sins and contumacies debarr'd , and thus to re-engraft him as 't were into the Church anew . LVI . Thus have I firmly and truly prov'd , that Christ in Mat. 18. 19. treats not of Exclusion from Sacraments , but of the charitable management and composure of private Injuries between fellow-brethren , men professing the same Faith. But others have seen this before , as well as I ; as St. Augustine in his sixteenth Sermon upon St. Matthew ; and Theophylact , who ( as no body can otherwise doubt ) borrowed this Opinion ( as almost all he says besides ) from Chrysostom . Among the more modern Divines , D. Johannes Brentius writes many things in his Comments upon this Chapter , very agreeable to what we have said . LVII . 'T is now requisite that I should shew that the action of St. Paul , 1 Cor. 5. 3 , &c. is nothing of kin to this Excommunication . First , That Apostle appears to have been a strict observer of the Mosaick Law ; against which ( as he answers for himself , Acts 25. 8. ) he had not at all offended : And , Acts 18. 18. and 21. v. 24 , 26. it appears , that he with other of the Apostles , complied with the Ceremonies of the Law , and bore the Jews company in keeping them ; and was ill spoken of by the Convert Jews , not for teaching the Gentiles that the observation of the Law was not requir'd of them , but for teaching the Jews which were among the Gentiles to forsake Moses , &c. whereas all the believing Jews that were in Judea , kept and were zealous of the Law , v. 20. But who knows not that Christ changed not the Law of Moses in that point of celebrating the Passover , which commands all to come who were circumcised ? and therefore neither doth he keep back that incestuous person , nor any other , from communicating at the Lords Table , who would come and profess the Christian Faith. As to the Jews , 't is a plain case , who would never have suffer'd such an Encroachment upon their Law , and their constant inveterate usage to the contrary : And who can well think that the Gentiles should be in worse circumstances than they , as to this purpose ? LVIII . But again , if the delivery to Satan was no more than a bare interdiction from the Sacraments till his repentance , why did Paul excuse himself to the Corinthians with all that care and niceness ? Why did he so near repent him , as 't were , of what he had done ? ( as we read he did , 2 Cor. 2. 4. and 7. v. 8. ) Besides , why were the Corinthians so overwhelm'd with grief , if they already knew this to be the method and practice of the Church in punishing sinners , and that this was to be a lasting Discipline for all successions of Ages ? they should rather , methinks , have rejoyced that they had such a President and Pattern given them to walk by for the future . If it were but a spur to Repentance , and an wholsome and safe Antidote against Damnation , why did their sorrows run so high ? why were they not rather rejoyced ? Christ tells us , that the Angels of God rejoyce more over the Conversion of one Sinner , than over ninety nine just persons . The Corinthians therefore could not have had the Spirit of Christ in them , had they conceiv'd such mighty sorrow on seeing the Apostle do this and no more , and barely to recal an erring Brother into the right way again , and save him from that damnation he was pulling down upon his own head : But who can be so blind as not to see that the Apostle struck deeper than this comes to ? Thirdly , What need had the Apostle to write to them , 2 Cor. 7. 8. that he does not repent , though he did repent ? or how indeed could he any ways repent him of what he had done , if his purpose was to have it put dayly in practice every where , and in all Churches ? or if it were but a Temporary Seclusion from the Sacrament , and at longest but till his repentance ? Fourthly , What occasion was there that the Corinthians should use such earnest and powerful Intercessions with the Apostle on that Wretch's behalf , if they knew that upon his repentance he should straitway be admitted into their Fellowship again ? But that they did earnestly entreat for him , 't is evident from the Apostles words , 2 Cor. 2. 10. To whom ye forgive any thing , I forgive also : for if I forgave any thing , to whom I forgave it , for your saeke forgave I it in the presence of Christ. Fifthly , We find Paul in that second Chapter , v. 9. excusing himself , that one of his aims was to know the proof of their Obedience ; And in the seventh Chapter , v. 12. he tells them , he did it that his care for them in the sight of God , might appear to them . How could he have said or writ thus , if he had commanded them no greater a matter than that they should trun away such a one from the Sacrament ? Sixthly , How shall we ever make these words hang together , Ye were made sorry in a godly manner ( or with respect to God ) that ye might receive damage by us in nothing ? 2 Cor. 7. 9. He tells them , they suffer'd no loss , damage , or detriment by that sorrow of theirs , for that their grief had been prevalent with him for the pardoning that unhappy Wretch : without this they had received loss , even the loss of that incestnous person . But pray what loss had it been to them , if he had been onely to be kept from the Sacrament till he repented ? Seventhly , Paul speaks not there of the Lords Supper , but of the whole Life of a Christian ; and therefore his meaning must be , not to put him away from the Table of the Lord , but from among them , that is , out of the world ▪ that that little Leaven might not vitiate the whole Mass . This is suitable to the Apostles phrase , and to the Figure of Leaven ; but Excommunication cannot be easily accommodated either to his or Moses's words . Eighthly , It must be observ'd , that he doth not say simply , that they themselves , and they onely , when they are gathered together in the Name of the Lord , or according to Christs command , should deliver him to Satan , or deprive him of the Sacrament ; but , I verily , as absent in body , but present in spirit , have judged already as though I were present , concerning him that hath so done this deed , in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ , when ye are gathered together , and my spirit , with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ , to deliver such an one to Satan , &c. Plainly intimating , that the power of our Lord Jesus Christ was necessary to intervene in this business ; and therefore was a matter of greater moment than a Temporary Amotion from the Sacrament : Besides , he says , that he himself had already judged ( though ( perhaps by reason of his absence ) he determin'd not to do it without them ) he doth not command the Church that they by themselves should do this , as if this were purely an Apostolical , not an Ecclesiastical Power ; an authority annexed to the persons of the Apostles , and not to any Church or other Order or Succession of men : which are considerations not to be slurr'd over with slight and contempt . Lastly , We do not any-where read that the Apostle commanded any single person , or number of men , to deliver any one to Satan for the destruction of the Flesh , either whilst he lived , or when he should be dead and gone ; well knowing , that this was appropriated to his Apostolick Power , and not to be delegated , not to be agreeable to any other or less Authority : for as they had the Power of Healing , so had they that of Wounding too , as appears , Acts 5. 5 , 10. and 13. 11. for which reason we read not of any ordained by the Apostles , that are commanded to exercise this Extraordinary Power . And therefore the Apostle is ever and anon threatning them with his coming in power ; with his being sharp and severe upon them ; with his dealing with them according to the power given him by God ; with his coming to them with a Rod , and the like : and commands to note those by Epistle that offend . This is not a thing given in charge to the Elders ; that it may be without all controversie , that this Power was granted to the Apostles , and to none else . Of the same import is that which we read , 1 Tim. 1. 20. of Hymenaeus and Alexander , whom Paul ( not the Church , nor the Presbyters , nor any other persons whatsoever ) delivered unto Satan . LIX . I have hitherto , by way of Argument , and from Circumstances , clearly evinced , that 't was a thing of a quite different nature , to deliver to Satan , and to shut out from the Sacrament . Now proceed I to demonstrate the same truth from the words themselves , and the propriety , tendency and nature of that whole passage : for , First , The Apostle does not say , Why did ye not interdict this incestuous person the Lords Supper ? but why have ye not mourned , 1 Cor. 5. 2. that is , why have ye not by Mourning and Prayers put up to God , besought that he that hath done this deed , might be taken away from among you , what way God shall best please ? St. Augustine in his third book against Parmen . explains the place to the same sence ; and the same way doth he expound what the Apostle , ch . 12. hath written of sorrowing . They also seem to be of St. Augustine's and Truth 's side too , who suppose the Apostle to allude to 1 King. 21. & 9 , & 12. From whence we may conjecture it to have been an ancient Custom among the Jews , to make inquisition after enormous crimes , by fasting , Prayers , and publick mourning , that the same , when detected , might be brought to condign punishments as the Law requir'd . Therefore at that time when the Church was destitute of the Civil Authority , he admonishes them that they ought to address to God that he would ( as might seem best to him ) take him out of the way ; which was a quite different thing from that which we call excommunicating a man. But besides , by what competent Author can it be made out , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , To take away from among men , should be a phrase for debarring a man access to the Sacrament ? In propriety of speech he is said è medio sublatus , to be taken away from among men , who is any ways kill'd : for though a banished or exil'd person may in some sence be said to be driven away from among others , yet in propriety of speech , and as the Greeks commonly use it , 't is not so taken by them , at leastwise 't is not to be found in that sence in Holy Writ . Secondly , But if the Apostles direction here be to have him discommon'd and thrust out of the Fellowship and Converse of the Faithful , what need was there of publick mourning ? he should have been turn'd over and banisht to the Gentiles . But that 's not consistent with that other Clause , That his Soul may be saved ; which ( at least on our Adversaries principles ) could never be out of the pale of the Church . If you say he was onely debarr'd and removed from the Sacrament and private Commerce , he was not then è medio eorum sublatus ; he was not taken away from among them : for I do not think any man able to make it out , that the Apostle order'd him to be kept from the Sacrament alone , and from private Conversation , Familiarity , and Fellowship with them . This then is a mere addition , a forc'd sence upon the Apostles words , which cannot be prov'd ever to have enter'd into his thoughts . Truly I think that no man ( who is vers'd in Scripture , and the most ancient Expositors of it ) can doubt , but that the Apostle borrowed this passage , and the very words that he expresseth himself in , from Deut. 17. 10. ch . 19. 20. ch . 21. 7. ch . 22. 6 , 11. ch . 24. 8. where Moses puts the words for cutting off the Offender by death , and for nothing else ; and in all the alleadged places , Moses keeps to the self-same words ; Whereas in ch . 13. he puts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but both in the same sence . How is it therefore possible that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , here should bear such a construction , viz. to excommunicate , ( as Excommunication now-a-days signifies ? ) Thirdly , The Context seems to prove that this Offender did not persist in that piece of Wickedness : for in v. 2 & 3. of that fifth Chapter , 't is , him that hath done this deed ; which shews he had , not that he then did , do it . The Apostle therefore seems to designe the punishing him for the Fact that he had committed , agreeable to the Command of God , and to the Practice of every good Magistrate : And indeed when he says , v. 4. That the Spirit may be saved , &c. he seems to have been inform'd of his penitence : for how could he otherwise have written thus of a man who had given no proof how his Soul was touch'd for so enormous a Wickedness ? Fourthly , The Apostle tells them , he had determin'd or judg'd already to deliver such an one unto Satan , for the destruction of the flesh , that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus . Are we to seek for the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ? In what prophane Author , or in what place of Scripture , hath it a different sence from what 't is here taken in , of giving , giving up , delivering , permitting , yielding , and the like ? And here we have , first , the person giving him up , and the person to whom he was so given , and he that was given : Nay , 't is over and above added , why and for what purpose he was deliver'd up . And as to the form of speech , 't is just as if I should say , I deliver over my Son to his Master , or I put him into such a Masters hands , for Instruction , or for Discipline . Who that should hear a man speak so , would not think that he put his Son into the Masters power , to be instructed or corrected by him ? He that would have instances of this nature , let him turn to 1 Tim. 1. 19. Acts 27. 24. Mat. 5. 25. and ch . 18. 34. and ch . 27. 2. Mark 13. 9. John 19. 16. and that of Mat. 24. 9. they shall deliver you up to be afflicted , is directly parallel : So Mark 13. 12. the Brother 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall deliver up ( or as we render it , shall betray ) the Brother to death . So 2 Pet. 2. 4. speaking of the Angels that sinned , he says , that God deliver'd them into chains of darkness to be reserv'd unto Judgment . In Job 2. 6. God says unto Satan , Behold , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , I have deliver'd him to thee , or as we render it , he is in thine hand , onely save his life . Do not all these places tell us of a delivering up to be afflicted , to be killed , to be condemned , and the like ? In short , none shall to the worlds end , be able to shew that ever this kind of phrase is used to signifie the excluding one from the Sacrament , unless the destruction of the Flesh here , and interdicting the Sacrament be the same . Fifthly , 'T is impossible to shew that this word , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 destruction , is any where in the New Testament put for mortifying the Lusts of the Flesh ; but where-ever 't is found , 't is put for the death of the Soul or Body ( whether the word Flesh be joyn'd with it or not ) . I might also say , that no extant Greek Author hath used it to that sence that some , as I have said , put upon it ; but we keep to its acceptance in Scripture . The Apostle makes use of it in 1 Thess . 5. 3. and 2 Thess . 1. 9. and in 1 Tim. 6. 9. and the Verbal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , we read in 1 Cor. 10. 10. as the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Heb. 11. v. 28. and the Compound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Acts 3. 23. taken by that holy Pen-man out of Deut. 18. 15. But in all these places Death and Destruction are thereby signified . The Septuagint do ordinarily use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which Pagninus generally renders exscindo , to cut off , or slay : 't is certain they always mean Death by it . I know that which the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Rom. 8. 13. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Col. 2. 3. and Gal. 5. 12. and 6. 14. are put for mortification of the Fleshly Lusts . But for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they are not met with in that sence either in sacred or profane Authors ; nor in truth do I remember my self to have read that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the New Testament is so taken . 'T is therefore a poor Evasion that some frame , supposing Paul here to distinguish betwixt the affections of the Flesh and the Spirit : Since he here sets the Destruction of the Flesh , or , which is all one , the Death of the Body , against the saving of the Soul or Spirit ; as both the genuine sence of the words , the drift and purpose of Paul , the whole series and circumstances of the Discourse , and the very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to deliver , so unquestionably demonstrate , that any lover of Truth can't but sit down satisfied under the proof of it . But , Sixthly , The following words , That the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus , that is , in the day of Judgment , give farther testimony to the truth of this Interpretation , and are a convincing demonstration , that the Apostle speaks of this wicked one , as of one whose death was at hand . Seventhly and lastly , The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 2 Cor. 2. v. 6. ( which we translate Punishment , but ought rather to be rendered Censure ) argues he was not expuls'd from the Sacrament : for in its primitive signification 't is put for Chiding , Censuring , Reproving , or Rebuking , and the like , ( as Interpreters commonly translate it ) not for Punishment , Mulct , or Penance . There are yet two more Reasons left us ; the one , That the Interdicting from the Sacrament is nowhere in Scripture put for or ordained to be Punishment . The other , that the words themselves plainly shew , that 't is here put for Chiding or Censure ; which not one single person alone , but many used towards him : for , says St. Paul there , sufficient for such an one is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , this Censure ( not as we read it , Punishment ) which was inflicted of many . He absolves him from nothing but those Comminations and Threats which many , or peradventure the whole Church , all the Corinthian Believers , had denounced against him , That he should be delivered over to Satan , to be by him buffeted , tormented , kill'd . He had yet therefore onely experienced their Threats : for Paul doth not absolve him of part , but of all that had as yet befallen him ; and , as he says , this Censure , these Threats and Ratlings that had been rounded in his ears , were sufficient . Nay , he plainly intimates withal , that this was all that was done to him . We read of this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Mat. 16. 22. ch . 17. 18. ch . 19. 13. ch . 20. 13. and in the other Evangelists ; as also 2 Tim. 4. 2. ( where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , bear it company : ) In all which places 't is put for Reproof and Rebuking , or the like ; but nowhere for Punishment . LX. But here now it may be askt me , If the incestuous person underwent no more than this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , this Censure or Rebuke , how can he be said to have been deliver'd unto Satan , to be tormented and slain by him ? Some of the ancient Writers hold , that he was indeed deliver'd over to be tormented with Diseases , or the like , and so be gradually brought to destruction ; but was released and absolv'd aagain by the Apostle , before it had gone so far . If this Answer be true , I see not but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might here signifie Punishment , ( as indeed our Translation has rendered it . ) But now though I do not deny but that this is a passible Interpretation , yet I shall present you another as suitable to the Apostles words : St. Paul had not resolved to deliver this man to the Devil by himself alone , but had rather have it done in a full Congregation , when the whole Body of Believers should be gather'd together for that purpose . But when once the Church saw this deplorable Creature so dejected and overwhelm'd with Sorrow , and that Grief had almost already given him the Death that they threatned , they reprieved him as 't were , and deferr'd pronouncing the Sentence , till they might learn the Apostles pleasure , whether at their intercession he would remit the rigour of it , and restore him on his Repentance : which if they could not prevail with him to do , they threaten they will not longer be wanting in their Duty . Thus came it to pass that this poor Soul remain'd for some months under great Terrors and Agonies of mind , till he had receiv'd the joyful intelligence of Paul's remitting the Punishment . That the matter was manag'd much after this rate , may be plainly collected out of that second Epistle to the Corinthians . LXI . From what has been already alleadg'd , as well as from what might yet be urg'd , 't is so clearly and solidly demonstrated , that this delivering up to Satan was quite another thing from that which we now-a-days call Excommunication , or Suspension from the Sacrament , that sure none but those who are as defective in understanding , as in love to the Truth , can have the face to deny it . I said just now , that some ancient Writers expounded this place as we do : Augustine ( whose Testimony I cited before ) is one of them ; there is another passage of his in his first Book , upon Christ's Sermon in the Mount , concurring with us ; as doth also Athanasius , and after him Chrysostom , and his Compiler Theophylact. LXII . Let us now take a short survey of those other places , which our Opponents flie unto for their own defence . Some lay a stress upon that passage of St. Paul to Timothy , 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well , be counted worthy of double honour , especially they who labour in the Word and Doctrine : for hereby they fancy themselves able to squeeze out a proof that there were some Elders who did not labour in the Word ; and on these they bestow another Office , to wit , that of inspecting and censuring our Manners and Behaviour , of being Observators of our sins and failings , of admonishing the Stubborn and Refractory , of certifying their fellow-Elders , that is ( say they ) the Church ; and lastly , ( in conjunction with these ) of excommunicating such as hear not ( or obey not ) the Church . LXIII . But we think it evident from the Writings of the Apostles Peter and Paul , that Ministers , Bishops , and Presbyters or Elders ( if Office , Function , and Ministry be meant by those two last , and not their Age ) were all the same in the Apostles time ; and so that there was no Presbyter who was not a Teacher ( or Preacher , as we now call them ) that is , who did not labour in the Doctrine : unless any are desirous to stretch this word to those Judges and Arbitrators of Suits and Controversies mentioned 1 Cor. 6. 4. ( But we talk not of them at present , since their Duty was of a quite different nature . ) This Opinion of ours , which we think grounded upon apparent truth , hath both Hierom and Ambrose to vouch for it : onely this latter says that Bishops were first nominated out of the Order of Presbyters . This therefore is the manner of Paul's Discoursing ; as if I should say , I love all Ministers and Pastors , but especially those who with unwearied Industry , and a constant waking Care and Sedulity , feed the Sheep committed to their charge . I love all studious persons , but especially those who sit to it night and day . I do not now by saying thus , say that there are some Pastors who never feed their Sheep , or some Students who never study ; but I suppose thereby some more diligent than others , though I do not say that any do more than they ought to do , or than their Function requires of them . That this is the genuine and true Exposition of the Apostles meaning and words , the subsequent words , v. 18. concerning the reward , proves it : for 't is in no sort probable that the same reward was at any time allotted in the Church to them that did , and to them that did not teach ; for the first should be charg'd with a double Duty , and the other with but a single one : yet the Apostle stiles them both worthy of double honour . Besides , the Apostle quotes that passage of the Ox treading out the Corn , to prove that Sustenance is due to the Ministry : and the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confirms our Exposition ; which signifies not barely labouring , but wearying our selves with labour , or using an extraordinary diligence therein : And thus is it always taken in the * New Testament , where it often occurs . And the Greeks call that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which the Latins call Lassitudo , Weariness : And as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 differ , so do their Verbs . LXIV . They say withal , that Christ did forbid to cast Pearls before Swine , and to give things that are holy , unto Dogs . I answer , Christ speaks of them that despise those Pearls , and tread them under their feet , and turn again and rend the Donors of them ; that is , he speaks of the Enemies of the Gospel , with whom we have nothing to do in this dispute : for we meddle not with any here , but Christians , who are rightly principl'd in that Doctrine , and approve the same , and are desirous to be Partakers of the Sacraments with their fellow-Christians , though they live not up to that Integrity that others do . Besides , Christ speaks not there of Sacraments , but of the Doctrine of the Gospel , which ought not to be offer'd to Dogs and Swine , that is , to such as refuse and trample it under feet ; of which nature is that Parable of the Pearl , Mat. 13. 45. where Christ likens the Kingdom of Heaven to a Merchant-man who bought a Pearl of great price ; and therefore it makes nothing to our purpose . LXV . Whereas again they remember us that St. Paul gave it in charge to Timothy , 1 Tim. 5. 29. That them that sin he should rebuke before all ; We deny not the thing , but deny that it relates to our purpose . I will not muster up multitudes of Arguments to prove it ; this onely shall I say , That 't is beyond the wit of man to make it out , that to reprove or rebuke any man before or in the presence of the Church , is the same thing with forbidding him the Sacrament . Nay , they that object this , object it to no purpose , unless they can shew it to be the same : Who can prove that the Apostle so much as thought here of interdicting the Sacrament ? Again , the Apostle treats not here of sins that are committed openly , and in the face of the world , but those that sin ( says he ) that is , that persevere & continue in sin , rebuke before all , that thereby both he that hath sinned , and others that saw it , may fear with him , and do no more wickedly . He puts no distinction here between little and great , venial and moral sins ; much less between publick and private sins . To speak once for all , 't is a leaden Objection , and will melt away like wax at the Fire of Truth , and vanish like the smoak . Besides , St. Paul's words stand in perfect opposition to this Excommengent : for he commands him that sins to be rebuk'd ( not to be excommunicated ) before all , subjoyning it as a reason , that all may fear ; as if he should say , If he will not repent and mend himself , at least others shall thereby learn to be and do better . Where by him that sins is not meant him that has left sinning , or him that had sinned onely , but him that abides and continues to walk in the ways of sin , and repented not after admonitions and warnings given him : Him , I say , that thus sins , he charges Timothy to rebuke and reprove before others ; he does not give it in charge to him , to see him excommunicated . LXVI . Next , say they , the Apostle commands so far to avoid the company of the Wicked , that he allows not the liberty of making our common Meals with them , 1 Cor. 5. 11. With such an one no not to eat ; much less ( conclude they ) would he have us eat the Lords Supper with them . But I utterly deny the consequence : for surely they are of very different import , the prohibition of private familiarities , and the non-admission to the Sacrament ; and the forbidding the one , is not a denial or disallowance of the other ; the former is a Civil or Political Punishment , the latter Sacred ; we have a Command for one , none for the other ; St. Paul explains the end and reason of the former , but we find no mention of either for the latter : nay , the thing it self is nowhere enjoyn'd , or so much as the name of Excommunication once heard of in Scripture . And that one may be without the other , the Pharisees are a pregnant instance ; who , that they might pass with the World for the greater Saints , would not approach the Publicans , would not eat , drink , or associate with them in the common concerns of Life . ( I can't at present recollect that I have read of the like Niceness in any others ; ) but no man can shew me , whilst the World lasts , that these Publicans were denied admission to the Sacrifices , to the Temple , to the Passover , or any other Sacraments , provided they were but circumcis'd , and turn'd not Renegades to their Religion . There are at this day some who shut out all notoriously lewd and dissolute persons out of their company ; they will not live , nor entertain a Conversation with them : which evinces , that this avoiding their Company , and maintaining no Correspondencies with them , is rather a Civil than an Ecclesiastical Punishment , and amounts not near to that of delivering over to Satan , which some will needs have to be Excommunication . The Apostle directs Good men to shun all Consortship with Ill , that Shame may hasten in them a Repentance : The Interdiction runs not to the Ill , that they shall not live among the Good , if any good men would give them admittance . In private Conversations men talk of all matters indifferently ; and if a dissolute Wretch find by the freedom of his access , that for all his Debaucheries he is as much made of as ever , not onely himself is not amended , but his Company by degrees endanger'd : But where a man sees himself avoided , and that all shrink , flie , and detest his society , he can't but cast a reflecting thought upon the occasion , and enter into considerations of a better life , that he be no longer the Scorn and Contempt of those that before embrac'd him with all the arms of Friendship . And therefore as being debarr'd of private Commerce and Conversation , frights us from some sorts of Crimes and Uncleannesses , so the indulgence of familiar and fair outward Correspondencies , feeds , pampers , and encourages us in those bad courses . But these reasons hold not in the receiving or being denied the Sacrament ; for frequent Communicating at that Table , gives not vigour and nourishment to our Vices at the rate private Communications and Familiarities do : for in the Churches or Chappels where that is administred , no vain and worldly things , nothing of private concern , is then transacted , but the Word of God onely is there handled . There , when men shall hear of a Christ that died for them , of a Christ that invites to that Commemoration , and publick demonstration of our acknowledgments and thankfulness for so great a Benefit , and that none can be a worthy Communicant , who hath not throughly and sincerely examin'd himself , and that those who thrust themselves in unworthily amongst his Guests , do but eat and drink damnation to themselves : This will put men , that intend to approach unto the Lords Table , upon a seriousness of thought , What is there exhibited ; what is his concern in it ; what God requires of him , and how he may for the future so regulate his life , that it may be acceptable in the sight of God , how debauched soever and villanous it were before . He that has not these offers , these incitements and invitations , is depriv'd of these invitations , grows still the worse , to be sure , no whit the better for it : which seems to be the reason of Gods instituting and enjoyning such multitudes of Sacrifices , Offerings , Rites and Ceremonies . But for certain the Apostle has nowhere order'd , that they with whom he would not have good men to hold a Correspondence , should be also put by or denied the Sacrament . And when in another place , 2 Thess . 3. 14. he writes to have them signifie that man by Epistle who walks disorderly ; ( for the Marginal translation in our English Bibles seems to be truest in this place ) he does not there set the Elders upon excommunicating them , or suspending them the Sacrament . All which are evident proofs of their mistakes , who think Excommunication to have been either here approved , allowed of , or design'd by the Apostle . LXVII . But to enforce the Objection , they tell us , 't is no less unfit that the Church , the Congregation of the Faithful assembled in the Worship of God , should be defil'd with the Company and Communion of the Wicked ; and that 't is therefore consequently necessary that the Evil should in all accounts be serv'd and kept from the Pious and Good. But I would return them this Answer : There is no danger that the Wicked should pollute or injure the Good in the use of those Rites and Ceremonies which are of God's own institution , whilst they take not after them in their natures , nor learn not their immoralities : for neither the holy Prophets , Kings , or Judges , nor John the Baptist , nor even Christ himself , nor yet his Apostles after him , were ever defil'd by being present at the same Worship , at the same Sacrifices , in the same Temple , using the same Rites and Sacraments with men of the most debauched and profligate lives . Our Saviour was spotless amidst that Generation of Vipers , who were baptized with him by John in the same Baptism . Judas neither polluted Christ , nor the Apostles , nor the last Supper of our Lord , by his presence at it , though he was then a known Thief , and had before laid the Plot for betraying his Master , and had received the Pay for his pains . Again , the Apostle Paul does not bid us examine one another in the celebration or receiving of the Lords Supper , and to look about us whether any of the by-standers , any of our fellow-Communicants , be sinful or unworthy , be such as may derive any Pollution or Uncleanness to us ; but thus runs his Commandment , 1 Cor. 11. 28. Let a man examine himself ; himself , he says , not others . LXVIII . Hitherto have I effectually and truly prov'd , that no circumcised person was ever ( before Christ's days ) prohibited those Ceremonies and Sacraments which God by the hand of Moses had ordain'd amongst them , upon any delinquency in Morals , or Piety of Life : Nay , I have withal shewn , that 't was not lawful for any one whomsoever to forbid them ; and I have by pregnant Testimonies from Scripture and Reason , made it out , that neither Christ nor his Apostles taught or acted contrary . Besides , I think I have demonstrated , that what our Adversaries offer on their own behalfs , cannot maintain the Opinion they would build on it . So that now I see not any farther rubs , nothing that can shock this Conclusion ; That that Excommunication which shuts out Christians from the Sacrament for pure Immoralities , and the Vitiousness of their lives , was never ordained by God , but is a Figment and Invention of men : for so far is it from deriving its original from Scripture , that the invention and trick of it is rather declaim'd against and condemn'd there . LXIX . If any yet reply , that at this rate we bespatter , we condemn whole shoals of pious Bishops , who quickly after the Apostles times began this excommunicating Sinners ; I must tell them , 't is one thing to speak against an Opinion , and another against the Assertors or Authors of it . Many in our Age , of no less Piety than Learning , have examin'd , have sifted and confuted sundry ancient ( and as I may say ) Catholick Errours , Errours that crept early into the Church : As for instance , the Limbus Patrum , Purgatory , Praying to Saints , Exorcisms in Baptism , Coelibacy of the Priesthood , Unctions in Baptism and at the point of Death , Prayers for the Dead , and Satisfaction in the Case how in question ; and yet I know not any man that has it charg'd on him as a Crime , barely for that he hereby condemns his Predecessors . If men will needs labour to enforce this Excommunication upon the Churches , as a Law of Gods promulgation , I can never be brought to commend it therefore ; though at the same time I cannot but highly praise and approve of their Zeal and good Intentions , who first gave rise to it : for their aim was hereby to curb the restiff and unweildy humours of vitious men , since they could not imagine a more commodious and effectual way of doing it : And very many ( as we see even to this day ) walk on in this beaten and publick Path , do it because others before them did it , having never so much as taken it into their considerations , whether it be a matter that stands with holy Scripture or no. LXX . I cannot at present say much of the very time when Excommunication had its first rise ; onely that towards the latter end of the second Century after Christ , I meet with something like it then attempted and set up . For above one hundred and fifty years , I do not find any one suspended , or put by from receiving the Sacrament , for unholiness of life . They that are fuller vers'd in the History and Writings of the Fathers , may perchance speak better and clearer in this point . They that shall carefully peruse what Socrates in his fifth book of Eccles . History , chap. 19. has transmitted to us , I verily believe will , without much difficulty , confess with us that this Custom of Excommunicating had its first Epoch or Commencement in the Church , about the time of Novatus : Yet Sozomen , in his seventh book , chap. 16. pretends other causes for its Institution . Besides which , we read that about the year of the Lord 200. Victor Bishop of Rome admitted not to the Lords Supper them who refused to forgive Injuries ; but I have observ'd , that till that time none were denied the Communion but Hereticks , and such as swerv'd from or renounced the Christian Faith. But be that how it will , this is both certain and evident , that Excommunication was first introduced into the Church for the restraint and punishment of Vice ; and afterwards when the Church had got the Sword into their hand , as well as the Keys at their girdle ; that is , when the Magistrates , Kings and Princes , became Christian , and subjected themselves to the Faith ; yet did the Church-men not let go this power , but continued the exercise of it by their Bishops : partly , for that the Episcopal Order was then believed to be of Divine Right ; partly , for that they could not but be fond and tenacious of that Power which made them formidable to Kings and Emperours , and was therefore a morsel too sweet to be parted with without regret : And they easily wrought others into a belief of Christs being the Author and Institutor of it , since themselves had before so forwardly and so willingly swallowed it . Superstition too , in a little time , had ascribed so much virtue to the Sacrament , that it gave strength to the Opinion ; for 't was believed , and publickly owned by their Writings , that there were some that could not die , till they had been housell'd and received the Sacrament . Either therefore this Errour made men dread Excommunication , or Excommunication led them into the Errour : for how facile a thing was it to impose upon the Credulity of the illiterate and weak Vulgar , that Life was annext to the receiving , and Death to the deprivation of the holy Sacrament , since the denial of this to a sinner , was the highest and last Punishment that they saw inflicted on him ? LXXI . But for the Persons that executed and denounced this Excommunication ( as far as our Conjectures can carry us in this affair ) they seem to have been at first such Elders as we read of 1 Cor. 6. 4. ( who supplied the place and defect of Magistracy in the Church ) together with the Ministry ; but afterwards all this Authority was devolved upon the Bishops , who took cognizance of all Suits , made up Differences , gave Judgment , and did every thing that related to the decisions of Right , and distributing Justice betwixt man and man : as we perceive by the History of those times , and by St. Augustine's complaining of so much then lying on the Bishops hands of this nature . Ambrose affirms , that those sort of Elders whose assistance was wont to be made use of in the Church on all occasions , were in vogue and authority when yet they were destitute of Bishops . And it appears by the Apostle , that these Elders were to have an Authority as to that Employment of Judging , as long as the Church should be under the pressures of an Heathen Magistrate ; which gives us to understand , that as under a Christian Government that Employment would be useless , and was therefore to cease ; so Excommunication ( upon supposition that they had exercis'd such a thing before ) yet should it in a Christian Kingdom cease . For we must note , that these Elders were instead of Civil Magistrates , and manag'd Civil affairs , and were no Ecclesiastical Judicature : ( which now-a-days is of a different nature from the Civil ) for 't is plainly said , that they were to deal in Suits and Controversies of Law , things relating to this Life and the Concerns of it . LXXII . 'T would make a Volume to recount what advantages the Church did hereby reap ; most certainly they can't be set out in a small compass : for first , this Excommunication made men to look for salvation from the Sacrament ; for thus they fram'd the Argument : The Exclusion from the Sacrament draws down Death and Damnation ( say they ) therefore the Receiving of it gives Life . They scarce could entertain a doubt of the truth of the Antecedent , whilst they were taught that this was so dreadful , so Soul-destructive a punishment ; and when they thought themselves , by being shut out from the Sacrament , to fall straight into the very clutches of the Devil , and be wholly at Satan's mercy : which has made it thought by some , that they could not die , without being housled , as I said before . This Errour grew and got strength from the many great and long Penances , the Solemnities of Absolution , and the like ; amongst which , none was more prevalent , than that they would not administer the holy Eucharist to them , till the very point of Death ; and that then they gave it them , 't was of pure compassion , that they might not go hence destitute of the Souls necessary food : for if any ( through whatever Accident ) was so unfortunate , he was held for a man damn'd and lost to all Eternity ; as if God would not forgive them their sins who heartily and sincerely repent , and vouchsafe unto them everlasting life , unless these Elders should adjudge them qualified for the Lords Supper . What errour is there of a more detestable and fatal consequence ? But another Fruit of this was , that all the World now began to believe that 't was in the power of men to shut and open Heaven when and to whom they pleased : and therefore the younger Theodosius would not eat his Dinner , because having denied an importunate Monk's Request , he stood excommunicate by him for his pains ; and though the Bishop of Constantinople told the Emperour that the Excommunication was invalid , yet rest , good man , he could not nor would not , till the same hand absolv'd , that had bound him . So Ambrose for eight months together kept an Elder from Church , from Sermons , and all the acts of publick Worship : 'T is true , offended he had , but more pardonably than Ambrose himself , as any man , that has his eyes in his head , may see upon the perusal of Nicephorus his History , and the Chronicle of Philip Melancthon . By these steps has the Roman See encroached upon the Western World , and made Princes , Kings , and Emperours to lacky to her Lust , and arbitrary sway in pretended Spirituals . Dyed has been the German Empire in the Gore of hundred thousands that fell a Sacrifice to this Roman Diana , to excommunicating Popes , and excommunicated Emperours , Kings , and Princes . Religion she has chopt and chang'd , mangled and disfigured , debased and vitiated , at her pleasure ; none daring to question her Canons , dispute her Decretals , or look her Bulls in the face ; the whole World were Caligula's , and durst not shew their heads when she sent her Thunder of Excommunication abroad . The God of Foxes spoken of by Daniel , Dan. 11. 38. ( if we weigh that passage aright ) signifies nothing but this Excommunication , or the Prohibiting men the use of Sacred things , especially the Lords Supper : For this Excommunication acts a very God in earnest ; 't is to this day a God of Forces , a God who has put all things , all the power of Heaven and Hell , under the Popes feet . And there are not wanting now-a-days too , another sort of men acting upon the same Principles , who would make all Humane Authority and the Civil Christian Magistrate , truckle to them , and dread their Censures , as far as the Popes ignorant Votaries do his Bulls . But I hope the time will come , when this God shall stand expos'd and condemn'd for a false and feigned God , and be stript of all its God-like terror and dread , and whatsoever may or has so long plagu'd and enslav'd the Church . In fine , this Idol Excommunication had every where such an Ascendant , that 't was the constant Belief of the World , that they who by Church-Censures and Interdictions from the Sacrament , and publick acts of Worship , were denounced unworthy of eternal Life , were thereby wholly fallen from divine Grace ; as on the other hand , saved must they needs be , whom the Church received and would have so . Can we hope better terms , or greater moderation , from our Modern Church-men , than the World has experienced in their Predecessors ? I fear he that should expect it , would find himself deceiv'd , and that he has but little weigh'd what either the Scriptures or Experience might inform him of . LXXIII . I see no cause why Christian Rulers should not now-a-days do what God in the Jewish Common-wealth requir'd of the Civil Magistrate : Do we conceit that we can frame a better Model and Form of Discipline in Church or State , than God gave to them ? since we read in Deut. 4. that the Nations for this should praise and admire the People of Israel for their Wisdom and Understanding , evinc'd by those Statutes and Judgments which God had given them ; yet God never taught them Excommunication : But the Power of punishing the Debaucheries , and restraining the looseness and licentiousness of manners , was wholly in the Magistrate , whose duty 't was , not onely to animadvert on such Crimes by the Rules that God had in their Law prescribed them ; but the management of all the Externals of Religion , the Disciplinary part and Constitution , was in them . For 't was not Aaron , but Moses that did this ( God still commanding it ) ; and we know this Jurisdiction was transferred over to Joshua , not to Eleazar ; 't was Joshua on whom God laid that Injunction of seeing the Israelites circumcis'd the second time , and not Eleazar , Josh . 5. 2. and this was to be universal , without exception of one man ; the Bad were to be circumcis'd as well as the Good ; and Bad there were , without question : And the keeping the Passover then was by him too directed ; nor was any person , that we there read of , excluded from it for dishonesty of his life . The Ark of God was carried from place to place , as he gave the word ; and in all things relating to Religion , he interpos'd his Commands , as may be observ'd throughout the whole book of Joshua . Eli and Samuel , who had the charge of Religious as well as Civil affairs , they offer'd and administred at the Altar as Priests ; but as Judges they manag'd both Church and State : for 't was lawful for the High Priests under the Old Testament , to meddle with the arts of Government and Secular affairs , as they were the Types of Christ our King and High Priest : but under the Gospel 't is another case , IT SHALL NOT BE SO WITH YOV , says Christ . See 1 Pet. 5. 3. which is pertinent to our purpose . LXXIV . If we go farther to the Kings , the case is no less plain : As to David , there 's none can doubt it , since it appears that he order'd all the Offices and Charges relating to God's Worship : he that pleases may read , 1 Chron. from the 22th to the 27th Chapter . Then for Solomon , ( who was a King and no Priest ) he not onely built the Temple , but dedicated it . To the same purpose is that famous relation , 2 Chron. 19. of Jehosaphat ; which being well consider'd , gives great light to the matter in hand . So does that of the good King Hezechia : and indeed the whole Old Testament witnesses no less . If therefore the State and Church was founded , instituted , and established upon so much Wisdom ; that which makes the nearest approaches to the Form and Model thereof ( as far as the present circumstances and different state of things will allow ) challenges at least our Praises and Approbation , if not our Imitation ▪ And therefore in whatever Nation the Civil Magistrate is Christian , Pious , and Orthodox , there 's no need of other persons , who under another name or title should set a governing us , and call us to account , or punish us for our misdeeds , as if there were no difference betwixt a Believing and Infidel Prince . But ( says D. Wolfgangus Musculus , in his common places de Magistratu , from whom I have borrowed and transcribed what I said last ) 'T is a most pernicious Errour , and big with dangerous Consequence , that so many think no better of a Christian Magistracy , than of an Heathen one , whose power is to be allowed of no farther than meer Temporals . If then Believing Governours had authority not onely to interpose in the ordering religious matters , agreeable to Scripture-rules , and to regulate the Offices and other the Ministerial parts about it , ( which is the reason that Moses commands , that when they should chuse them a King , he should write him a Copy of the Law in a Book , and that to be with him , and he to read therein all the days of his life ) but had also power to punish Vice in the same manner . 'T is a needless fruitless attempt for men to be now-a-days contriving and setting up new Models of Government , which levels Magistrates themselves to the Rank and Condition of their Subjects : for this Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction , in point of Manners , hath no place of Holy Writ to vouch for it , or set it up : not but that Civil Governours will do well to advise in all Doctrinals with those that are learned and have labour'd in the Word . LXXV . But now in those Churches whose mishap 't is to live under a Profane Government ( as in the Dominions of Turks and Papists ) they should make choice of pious sober persons , who ( agreeable to St. Paul's command ) might arbitrate between contesting Members , might take up Quarrels , might do every thing of that nature ; might chide and admonish debauched flagitious men , and such of the Ministry themselves who walk disorderly : and if this avail not , then might they punish them , or rather recal them to a better temper , by avoiding their company , by debarring them of private Commerce , by reprehending them publickly , or by some such-like marks of their displeasure : but to thrust them from that Sacrament which is of God's Institution , when they are minded to come , is more than any Church or man has a right to do ; for none can judge of the Heart but God alone . It may chance that some sparks of Piety and Remorse may kindle in a sinners Soul , whilst he sits in the Assembly ; which it can be no hurt ( nay , may be greatly good ) to cherish , since Religion forbids it not . And how can it be ( I would fain ask ) but horrid , absurd , and impious to boot , to turn away any man from publickly and solemnly paying his Thanks to God , and commemorating the Death of his Saviour , when he finds Impulses from within to do it , and would fain celebrate it with his fellow-brethren the Church , and declares 't is his hearty desire to be and continue a Member of it , and that he would give publick testimony that his past life is irksom to himself . APPENDIX . IT will not be amiss perhaps , by way of Corollary or Supplement , to mention the Decrees that were made in the year 1523. at the Diet at Norimberg , by all the Layety of the Imperial States , and were sent to the Bishop of Rome : for 't will appear by that , that we are not the first who have started this Question , but that the Divines began to think of it nigh 46 years since . I am confident no man that is any whit vers'd in the German Affairs , can believe or imagine that any such thing should be enacted , but requested by them from the Bishop of Rome , without the Clergies knowing of it . But that the Authority may be the more authentick , and the thing clearer , I have been content to compare the German Copy which was writ at that Diet , with the Latine one sent to the Pope ( and which Matth. Flac. Illyricus caus'd to be reprinted at Basil , 1565. with his Book De Sectis & Dissensionibus Papistarum ; ) and upon comparing both , to publish the entire Decree or Act. Therefore among the 100 Grievances ( which were fuller express'd at this Session at Norimberg , than they had two years before at Worms ) this following is the 34th . Item , Many Christians at Rome , and in other places besides , are by Archbishops , Bishops , and their Ecclesiastical Judges , excommunicated for Civil causes , and on a Temporal account ; whereby many weak Consciences are disturb'd , and brought to despair : so that upon a moneyscore , and for the transitory things of this life , and very often , for very trivial causes , are some brought into danger of perishing Soul and Body too , contrary to the Law and Command of God , besides the losses they suffer in Estates and Reputation thereby : Whereas no person ought to be excommunicated , or held for such , unless he be convict of Heresie , as the Holy Scripture bears witness . And therefore the Lay-states of the Empire beseech your Pontificial Holiness , that as becomes a godly and religious Father , you would take away these Grievances of Excommunication at Rome , or in the Roman Court , and provide that the same be done every where else , by the Archbishops , Bishops , and other Ecclesiastical Judges . And lastly , that your Holiness would command , That no person be excommunicated , or reputed for such , for any cause whatever , besides the plain and prov'd Crime of Heresie in matters relating to Religion ; for that no person ought to be separated or removed from God and his Church , for any Temporal cause or otherwise , or for any other humane crime , except Infidelity or Heresie . To the same purpose is that of Joh. Stumpias , in his second Book of his Chronicon Helvet . cap. 29. where he says , That the Swedish Clergy , about the year 1245. ( when Henry Landgrave of Turing , and after his death , William Earl of Holland , were chosen by the instigation of the Pope , in opposition to the Emperour Frederick the second , and Conrade his Son ) taught with great constancy , among other things , That never was there such a Power granted to mortal man under the Sun , to prohibit Christians Spiritual Duties , and the Worship of God ; and therefore did they continue to say Mass ( says he ) though the Pope had interdicted them , and denounced them Excommunicate . FINIS . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A38575-e790 Hieronym . upon Tit. chap. 1. * See Mat. 11. 28. Luke 5. 5. Joh 4. 6. 1 Cor. 4. 12. Eph. 4. 28. 1 Thess 5. 12. which helps mightily to the explaining this . 1 Tim. 5. 17. 1 Tim. 4. 10. 1 Cor. 15. 58. & alibi . 
A91314	----	A vindication of foure serious questions of grand importance, concerning excommunication and suspention from the sacrament of the Lords Supper, from some misprisions and unjust exceptions lately taken against them; both in the pulpit, by a reverend brother of Scotland, in a sermon at Margarets Church in Westminster, before the Honourable House of Commons, at a publike fast there held for Scotland, on the 5th of September last: and in the presse, by three new-printed pamphlets, by way of answer to, and censure of them. Wherein some scripture texts, (commonly reproduced for excommunication, and bare suspention from the Lords Supper onely,) are cleared from false glosses, inferences, conclusions wrested from them; ... / By William Prynne of Lincolns Inne, Esquire. Prynne, William, 1600-1669. This text is an enriched version of the TCP digital transcription A91314 of text R212424 in the English Short Title Catalog (Thomason E265_5). Textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. The text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with MorphAdorner. The annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). Textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. This text has not been fully proofread Approx. 258 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 36 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. EarlyPrint Project Evanston,IL, Notre Dame, IN, St. Louis, MO 2017 A91314 Wing P4124 Thomason E265_5 ESTC R212424 99871048 99871048 123446 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A91314) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 123446) Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 44:E265[5]) A vindication of foure serious questions of grand importance, concerning excommunication and suspention from the sacrament of the Lords Supper, from some misprisions and unjust exceptions lately taken against them; both in the pulpit, by a reverend brother of Scotland, in a sermon at Margarets Church in Westminster, before the Honourable House of Commons, at a publike fast there held for Scotland, on the 5th of September last: and in the presse, by three new-printed pamphlets, by way of answer to, and censure of them. Wherein some scripture texts, (commonly reproduced for excommunication, and bare suspention from the Lords Supper onely,) are cleared from false glosses, inferences, conclusions wrested from them; ... / By William Prynne of Lincolns Inne, Esquire. Prynne, William, 1600-1669. [10], 60 p. Printed for John Macock, for Michael Spark senior., London, : 1645. Annotation on Thomason copy: "Octob: 3d". Reproduction of the original in the British Library. eng Lord's Supper -- Church of Scotland -- Early works to 1800. Excommunication -- Early works to 1800. A91314 R212424 (Thomason E265_5). civilwar no A vindication of foure serious questions of grand importance,: concerning excommunication and suspention from the sacrament of the Lords Su Prynne, William 1645 45679 1210 15 0 0 0 0 268 F The rate of 268 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the F category of texts with 100 or more defects per 10,000 words. 2007-02 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2007-02 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2007-03 Emma (Leeson) Huber Sampled and proofread 2007-03 Emma (Leeson) Huber Text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A VINDICATION of foure Serious QVESTIONS Of Grand Importance , Concerning Excommunication , and Suspention From the SACRAMENT of the LORDS SUPPER , from some Misprisions and unjust Exceptions lately taken against them ; both in the Pulpit , by a Reverend Brother of Scotland , in a Sermon at Margarets Church in Westminster , before the Honourable House of Commons , at a publike Fast there held for Scotland , on the 5th of September last : and in the Presse , by three New-printed Pamphlets , by way of Answer to , and Censure of Them . Wherein some Scripture Texts , ( commonly produced for Excommunication , and bare Suspention from the Lords Supper onely , ) are cleared from false Glosses , Inferences , Conclusions wrested from them ; The grounds of sole Suspention from the Sacrament , of unmixt Communions , Independency , Seperation from our Churches , Sacraments , examined , refuted , subverted ; Judas his reception of the Lords Supper , cleared ; It manifested , to be a converting , as well as a confirming Ordinance ; a means to beget , as well as increase Grace : With other particulars tending to the Advancement of Verity , Vnity , and the better , speedier Settlement of a Church-Discipline , according to Gods Word , so much desired . By WILLIAM PRYNNE of Lincolns Inne , Esquire . 1 Thess. 5. 21 , 22. Prove all things : hold fast that which is good : Abstaine from all appearance of evill . Augustin . Epist. Concilii ad Donatistas : & Gratian Caus. 1. Qu. 1. Communio malorum non maculat quemquam participatione Sacramentorum , sed consentione factorum . LONDON , Printed by John Macock , for Michael Spark senior . 1645. TO The truely Honourable and Victorious Sir THOMAS FA●RFAX Knight , Generall of all the Forces raised , by the PARLIAMENT , against the Popish and Malignant Party . Most meritoriously Honourable , THE many late Glorious Trophies and Vnparalel'd Successes , wherewith the Lord of Hosts hath been graciously pleased to Crowne Your cordiall Military Vndertakings , to the Admiration of all Your Friends , the Astonishment , Confusion of all the publike Malignant Enemies of Our Churches , Kingdomes Tranquility ; as they have engaged the Parliament , ( with all parts of the Realme under their Command ) to return publike Solemn Prayses unto God , for sundry Successive Victories , over puissant Armies in the Field , and Conquests of divers Strong-holds , atcheived by Your indefatigable Industry , Incomparable valour , through Gods blessing on them : so it hath specially obliged Me , as to render particular Thankesgiving unto God , so to tender some small apparent Monument of my Obligations and Gratitude to Your selfe , whom God hath highly honoured to all posterity , in making You an happy Instrument of redeeming my Native Country ( Sommersetshire ) with the adjacent Counties , out of the devouring Jawes of the oppressing Enemy , and of reviving , recovering our lost dying Kingdome even at its lowest Ebbe , in a time of greatest need , with so great Celerity , so little effusion of English Blood on either side ; Which I knew not , for the present , how more visibly to expresse , then by presenting Your Honour with this briefe P●lemicall Vindication , in defect of a Richer Present . It was my great undemerited Happinesse , and your Generous Humility ( at Your first arivall in London from the North , to undertake the Chiefe Command of the Parliaments Forces ) to stoop so far below Your selfe , as to honour Me with Your voluntary sweet Acquaintance and Discourse ; which emboldens me to crave this further Favour , to dignifie this rude Vindication , with your Noble Acceptation , of so Small unpolished a Piece ; whose Subject matter ( Church Discipline ) is of so Great concernment , that the Settlement thereof according to Gods Word , and the Purest times ▪ is one principle end of Your and Our taking up Defensive Armes . I shall not be so injurious to the State or You , to interrupt Your weighty Military Affaires , or retard Your Admirable Expeditions with my unseasonable Lines . I shall rather become a dayly Orator to the Lord of Hosts , so far to multiply the weekely Catalogues of Your sucessefull Conquests , that You may ere long return to the Great Counsell and Metropolis of our Realme in a Triumphant Chariot , with this Honourable victorious Motto , engraven in golden Characters on Your Helmet ; This is the Generall whom the Lord hath honoured to be , next under him , The speedy Finisher of our long protracted Civil Wars ; And happy Restorer of our Long-desired Peace : Which is and shall be the Prayer of Your Honours most Devoted Friend and Servant WILLIAM PRYNNE . To the unprejudiced Reader . Christian Reader : HAving privately communicated Foure short Questions concerning Excommunication and Suspension from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , to some of my Parliament friends , out of a meer cordiall desire to expedite the setling of an Ecclesiasticall discipline in our Church , according to Gods word ; so much desired , and now in agitation in the Commons house : I have for this good service ( these Questions since growing publike ) been openly censured , traduced both in Presse and Pulpit , and these my Queries have been seemingly refuted , by some well ▪ meaning persons , whose Affections are stronger then their Arg●me●ts , and misguided Zeale more predominant then their Knowledge , in the points debated by them , wherein they betray their own Ignorance and Error , whiles they would censure mine . The first Answer to these Questions , intituled , An Antidote against four dangerous Queries ; is such a combination of Ignorance , Errours , Misprisions , and impertinent Invectives , as merits rather derision then refutation , and hath been already sufficiently triumphed over in the Antidote animadverted ; so as it needs another Antidote to preserve it from sodain expiration . The second Answer to them , stiled A Brotherly and friendly Censure ; as it Courts my person in the Title and Epistle with friendly complements , so it wounds and traduces my honest intentions , but in no sort answers my Questions ; the Censure it self , being the same in substance with the Antidote , and as full of grosse Errours , Mistakes , and injudicious weak replies , as it . The third Answer , as it is more large , so more judicious then the other two , and thwarts them both in some particulars , as in that of Judas his receiving the Lords supper ; and , that Ministers , as such , have no authority to keep back any from the Sacrament , but have discharged their duties by their premonitions of the danger of unworthy receiving . I have not here answered each of them distinctly ▪ but only taken the quintessence and substance of them all into examination , debating only the most materiall differences between us , and bringing their false mettals to the test of Scripture and sound Reason ; omitting all their impertinencies , and things of lesser moment , as not deserving any reply . My subitane Lucubrations in Vindication of these Questions from all their misprisions and erronious censures , I here humbly submit to the Parliaments publike , and thy private impartiall scr●tinie ; in perusing whereof , I shall only request thee to pursue the Apostles Canon , a To examine all things by the Word , and to hold fast that which is good and true . For my part b I can do nothing against , but for the Truth : and though some report c I am their enemy ( yea an enemy to publike Reformation ) because I tell them the truth , in these controversal points of Church-discipline , in which they have little insight ; yet neither their calumnies on the one hand , nor flatteries on the other , shall ever sway me one hairs-breadth from the Truth , either to the right hand , or the left . And although I certainly know , the speaking out of the whole truth in this present Controversie will render me odious and distastefull to many of my dear Christian friends and Brethren in the Lord , and draw sharp censures on me : yet because d I was for this cause born & brought into the world , that I might beare witnesse to the truth ; I neither waigh their favours , nor regard their frownes , being resolved whiles I breath on earth , neither for feare , favour , partiality , nor any private interest or relation whatsoever , to do any thing against the Truth , but only for it , whatsoever the issue or event thereof shall prove ; be it , Veritas odium parit ; or Vncharitable constructions , or wresting of my Writings point-blank to their sincere intentions , whereof I have had experience in this Controversie , especially in two particulars , which I cannot pretermit in silence without some reply thereto . First my Antagonists publikely charge me , That I speak untowardly , to the great offence of godly people , against all Christs Ministers and Ecclesiastical Rulers , in this conditionall clause , [ If it fall into indiscreet , over-severe , ambitious , passionate , or revengefull hands ] In which I suppose , that ordinarily the hands of Ministers & Elders of Christs Church are such , and therfore they ought not to be trusted with such power of Suspension and Excommunication ; or else that I suppose , some of them may act with such hands , and therefore that all of that calling are to be abridged of that power . To which I answer , that no such uncharitable incoherent inference can any way follow from this Clause ; the whole scope of my Questions diametrally contradicting it , which tend only to an orderly regular settlement of Presbyteriall power in the originall institution of our new Presbyteries , not to take from them all Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction due by divine right to them , but to confine it within certain definite limits , to prevent all exorbitant abuses of it , into whose hands soever it should fall . There is no man so unskilfull in Politicks , but will acknowledge , it is the duty and ought to be the speciall care of Lawgivers , in the creation of new Iurisdictions , and promulgation of new Lawes , to look , not only to present , but future Inconveniences which may possibly spring up in after-ages ; and to consider , not what some , or most men are which shall execute such Lawes or Iurisdictions at present , but what any of them may possibly prove to be in after-times , and thereupon to prescribe set bounds to all alike , and leave nothing meerly arbitrary to any , how good or just soever , to prevent all possible , all probable abuses by any intrusted with such Lawes and Iurisdictions . And there are none so ignorant of the present condition of our English Church & Ministery , but must acknowledge , 1. That many of our godly Ministers and people are very passionate , indiscreet , and over-rigorous ; having more zeale , then knowledge , or discretion how to manage such a power . 2. That the best and justest men we can select to constitute Presbyteries of , if left at large , to an arbitrary kind of proceeding , and not bounded by strict or punctuall Lawes and Penalties , will be very apt now and then ( through naturall infirmities , and the remainder of corruptions in them ) to abuse or exceed their power , and run into extravagancies to the oppression of the people , of which we have divers experiments in many Counties , if the complaints against their Committees may be credited , as many of them are too true . 3. That though there be sufficient choice of prudent , discreet , learned , conscientions , upright Ministers and Christians in and about London , fit to be united into Presbyteries , Classes , and trusted with Ecclesiasticall censures ; yet in most places else throughout our three Kingdomes ( except here and there a City or country Town ) there are very few , if any such Ministers or Lay-Elders to be found for the present , and none can certainly determine when or where to provide or cull out such for the future . 4. That , let the Parliament make the best present choice they can of Ministers and Lay-Elders to execute Ecclesiasticall discipline , yet there may and will be a Judas among the twelve Apostles , at least one or more indiscreet , passionate , ambitious , or spleenatick persons , who upon occasion offered wil be apt to abuse or exceed their power , to the prejudice of others . 5. That into whose hands soever this power shall be put for the present , yet there is not only a meer possibility , but probability too , ( especially if the Episcopall or Malignant party should at any time prevaile ) that it may hereafter fall into unjust , tyrannicall , oppressing hands , out of which it will hardly be wrested again . 6. That since we intend to settle the self-same Ecclesiasticall Government and Discipline in all three Kingdomes , at leastwise throughout our English territories ; there ought to be the self-same rules , bounds , and limits prescribed unto all Presbyteries and Classes , to regulate their proceedings by , and prevent exorbitances in every of them ; and none of them left more arbitrary then others , lest their proceedings should vary from others . These undeniable principles were the grounds of my Supposition so much excepted against , If it fall into indiscreet , over-severe , passionate , or revengefull hands : Yea , the true reason why the Parliament takes so much deliberation and advice in setling of the intended Presbyteriall Church-Government and Discipline , in which more difficulties arise then ordinary capacities are able to apprehend . Wherefore for any to inferre from thence , as my Antagonists do , That the hands of all the Elders and Ministers of Christs Church , are such , and therefore ought not to be trusted with the power of Church-censures ; or that all of them are to be abridged of this power , because some of them are such ; is such a malicious and uncharitable perverting both of my words and meaning , as nought but prejudice or malice it selfe could invent . The second Charge is of the same strain ; That th●se Queries charg● the Reverend Assembly very unjustly , with falling into extremes ; with affecting a greater Lording power over the consciences and priviledges of their Christian brethren , then of right belongs unto them . That they , and our new Presbyters will proceed as in the Papacy and Prelacy ; with indiscreet , over-severe , passionate , revengefull hands , &c. Whereas they desire nothing but a strict discipline according to the rules of Christ , &c. And that they cast many such unjust aspersions upon the Assembly . Certainly there is not one syllable in these 4 Questions from whence any such malignant accusation can be strained : and my former Writings to vindicate the Reverend Assembly ( whom I love and honour with my soule ) from the libellous , venomous , intolerable aspersions cast upon them , in many late seditious schismaticall printed Libels , ( published by Anabaptists and other Sectaries , to defame them , and vilifie all their proceedings ; ) with the grounds in the preceding Answer ( which occasioned all the Passages unjustly wrested by these uncharitable Answerers , to warrant this false charge ) will ( I hope ) sufficiently purge me from these scandalous accusations , and all misinterpretations of my Queries , or this Vindication of them ; the scope of both being only this , to reduce the Power of Ministers and Presbyteries , in the originall erection of their Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction , ( now in agitation in the Parliament , ) to as great a conformity to the Word of God , and as punctuall certainty in all particulars as possible may be ; and to settle it with such necessary Cautions & Limitations as may prevent all abuses of it , into whose hands soever it shall be committed either for the present , or in future ages : since a smal error , or admission of a meer arbitrary power in som things in the beginning of this New Government , may soon degenerate into a grand inconvenience and grievance in conclusion , which is easier prevented then redressed . Thus having fully cleared the sincerity of my own intentions , against these scandalous inferences , I have onely this to adde in the Parliaments behalfe ; That the settlement of Church-discipline being a matter of great difficulty and concernment , wherein many new doubts and scruples daily arise , requiring much debate , they cannot be justly blamed ( in the middest of their other pressing publike occasions to preserve our Kingdomes , themselves and us from eminent ruine ) for proceeding deliberately in this weighty work , which hath taken upthe Assembly themselves so many moneths debate , and wherein there are such differences of Opinions . Many there are , who deny any Excommunication at all to be of divine institution , producing sundry strong arguments to justifie their opinions , and answering all objections to the contrary : In maintenance of which opinion , Tho. Erastus ( a learned Physitian ) long since wrote a large Volume in Latine , intituled , Explicatio gravissimae quaestionis de Excommunicatione printed An. 1589. who is seconded by many learned men . Others , who admit Excommunication to be introduced , and exercised in the Apostles times , and somwhat after ; yet hold it to be but a temporary Ordinance , taken up by Christians out of meer necessity , for want of Christian Magistrates to restrain and punish scandalous sinners ; and altogether uselesse , or seldome or never to be put in execution in such places , Churches , where Christian Magistrates are setled , whose office and duty it is , to punish all obstinate , impenitent , scandalous sinners , with the temporall sword of justice , and to cut off all evil doers from the City of God , Psal. 101. 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8. Rom. 13. 3 , 4 , 5. without whose assistance Church censures will become altogether uselesse , invalid , & contemptible : whence the Church hath always been inforced to pray in aid from the Secular arme , and Civil Magistrate , by Writs De Excommunicato capiendo , and the like , to force obedience and submission to her censures , which else would prove meer Bruta fulmina . Others , who admit of Excommunication , deny suspension from the Sacrament of the Lords supper , as no divine step or degree to it , nor to be inflicted upon any but persons actually excommunicated from all other Ordinances . Others who plead most for Excommunication and suspention from the Lords Supper , are yet divided into these circumstances which concern them . 1. Who shall inflict those censures ? Whether the Ministers only ? Or the Presbytery and Classis only ? Or the whole Congregation ? 2. For what sins and Offences ? which is now the grand doubt and debate : Whether for Incest , and Heresie onely , for which they pretend examples of Excommunication in Scripture ; or for any other sins , for which we finde no pattern of any Excommunication or Suspension in the Word ? 3. In what manner , and by what steps and degrees the Presbytery or Classis ought to proceed in inflicting these censures ? What remedy shall be given by way of Appeal , to the parties grieved ? And , to whom they shall appeal ? 4. How , and by whom such who contemn those censures shall be proceeded against ? How long those censures shall continue , and how and when reversed ? 5. Whether excommunicated persons ought to be admitted to hear the Word , or to any other Ordinance ? and in what sort ; with what publike badges of infamy and distinction , the more to shame themselves , and deter others ? All these , with sundry other difficult controversies arising in the settlement of Church-discipline ( in which the very Assembly-men are divided in opinion , as well as the Members of Parliament ) it must needs require much debate and deliberation to settle Church-discipline in a due and solid manner . It is a received Maxime , approved by prudent men , and God himself ; Diu deliberandum quod semel statuendum ; We must deliberate long of that which is to be setled but once . We know that the materiall Temple of Solomon was neere * twenty yeares in building ▪ though David , Solomon , with all the Princes and people most cheerfully contributed their best assistance toward it ; and yet it was after * far●onger in re-edifying : And can we then imagine the Spiritual Temple and Church-Goverment should be compleatly finished and built up by the Parliament in a moneth or two ? How many yeares , I pray you , have our Independent Brethren been in hammering and compleating their New Church-Model , long since promised , and yet are not agreed on it , or else afraid , to publish it , lest all should discern its manifold flawes ? Ignorant men , altogether unacquainted with the numerous difficultes , intricate disputes which accompany this Subject , may deem it an easie busines , soon dispatched : but persons of better judgements , acquainted with the severall controversies in point of Divinity and civil Policie , which arise about Church-Discipline , will find it an Herculean labour , and a work of time to establish it so , as to answer expectation , satisfie all objections , and stop the mouths of all opposers , which must first be done , or else it will not be imbraced with such alacrity as is fit . Wherefore be perswaded to wait a while longer on the Parliament for the accomplishment of our longing desires in the setling of Church Discipline , and pray earnestly to God to steere their hearts and judgements aright in this work of highest concernment to us ; for fear they should now settle any thing in haste , which they and we may hereafter repent of by leisure . With which friendly advice I shall dismisse thee to the perusall of this Vindication , which I humbly tender to thy Christian acceptation . Farewell . A short Vindication of foure serious Questions of grand importance concerning EXCOMMUNICATION and Suspension from the Sacrament , from some Misprisions and Exceptions taken against them , both in the Presse and Pulpit . THERE is nothing so sincerely intended , so well performed , but is lyable to some mis-interpretations or exceptions in this criticall age , by men of contrary opinions . This hath been the hard fate of these four Questions . First , the Author of them hath been publikely taxed in print , as an enemy to Reformation , and oft stiled a THE ADVERSARY ( of it , ) when as God who b knowes his heart , and those men who are acquainted with his person and intentions , will acquit him from this calumny , and know him to be as great , as cordiall an Advancer of Reformation , as any of his Accusers . Secondly , these foure Questions have been conceived and reported to be , a grand obstruction to the work of Reformation and settlement of Church-Discipline , yea purposely published to obstruct it : When as intentionally and really they doe ( by moderating irreconcilable extreames ) tend onely to facilitate and expedite this much desired work ; which he cordially desired might be speedily accomplished , to prevent the dangerous encrease of Errours and Scismes , which multiply daily in our Church . Thirdly , they are apprehended to strike at the very root of Excommunication , and absolutely to deny it , in case of grosse and scandalous sinnes ; when as it onely tends to remove those sandy foundations whereon some would build it , to prevent and regulate all probable abuses of it in its originall establishment , and confine it to its due bounds , to prevent , as farre as possible might be , al just scandall and prophanation of holy things in the people , and Arbitrary Government , Tyranny , Oppression , and Lording it over Gods Ordinances , Heritage and mens consciences , in the Ministers and Presbitery , as the expresse words thereof demonstrate . Fourthly , it is conceived , that their principall end was , to deprive Presbyteri●s of their due jurisdiction , conferred on them by divine right , when as there is not one sillable in them to that purpose , but onely to regulate their power by Gods Word , & to controle the Arbitrary , Tyrannicall usurpations of some Ind●pendent Ministers , who take upon them an exorbitant jurisdiction , not onely to exclude whom themselves please from the Sacrament , without any legall admonition or conviction of ignorance or scandall , but likewise refuse publikely to administer the Lords Supper to their Congregations or Parishoners for sundry moneths , nay yeers together , ( yea , to those , against whom they have no just exceptions , and who tender themselves to their Examination , desiring to be excluded , if found ignorant or unworthy ) for feare of delivering it to some , whom they ( before conviction ) deeme scandalous or unworthy , as they pretend ; or rather , in good truth , only because they will not joine with them in their new Independent ways and Covenants . Fifthly , it hath been suggested , that it layes a tax ●pon our Ministers and intended Presbyteries , as if they desired ▪ Papall & Tyrannicall authoriy over mens consciences ; when as it tends onely to prevent such Papall , Episcopall abuses of Excommunications and Su●pensions , which may possibly creep into them by degrees , if not carefully provided against in the originall settlement of their authority , by strict and punctuall Lawes ; there being no authority so good , so necessary in Church or State , but by reason of their corruptions who manage it , may be abused to tyranny and oppression : ( especially , if not bounded ) And we find by Histo●y and experience , that these Church censures have bin as grosly abused , as tyrannically managed by rigid Anabaptists and Seperatists , as Popes & Prelats , & po●sibly may be so by Presbyteries . These prejudices and mis-apprehensions being removed , I shall next proceed to the exceptions against the substance or subject matter of them , wherein to avoyd mistakes , be pleased to observe : First , that it is confessed , yea agreed by the Opposites , that Excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament , is a matter of grand concernment , fit now to be established with as much deliberarion , caution , circumspection and care as possible may be , to prevent prophanation , scandall on the one hand , and Arbitrary , Papall , Tyrannicall domineering over mens consciences , christian liberties , & all abuses of this power , on the other hand ; and that it is a matter of very great difficulty thus to settle it ; & it is as readily yeelded on the other side , that grosse notorious , scandalous , obstinate sinners , who presumptuously persevere in their iniquities after private and publike admonitions , without remorse of conscience or amendment , may be justly excommunicated from the Church , the society of the faithfull , and all publike Ordinances , after due proofe , and legall conviction of their scandalous lives ; and that 1 Cor. 5. 13. warrants thus much , notwithstanding the various readings and interpretations of that Text : So that thus farre there is no dissent on either part . Secondly , it is accorded on both sides , ( in words at least , though not in practice ) that no Minister may 〈◊〉 can in point of power or conscience , refuse to admini●●er the Sacrament to any member of his Church , not actually excommunicated after sundry admonitions and publike reprehensions for some grosse scandalous crime , who earnestly desires to receive it , in case he publikely professeth his sincere repentance for his sinnes past , and promise amendment of life for time to come , though the ●inister or Presbytery in their owne private opinions , may have a hard prejudicate opinion of his unfitnesse , or unworthinesse to receive it . These Agreements on both sides premised , which will in a manner determine the greatest controversie , and rectifie the mistakes between us ; I proceed to the matters in difference ; which are these : First , whether there he any precept or president in Scripture , for the suspending of any Member of a particular Church or Congregation , from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper only , who is not at the same time excommunicated and utterly sequestred from the Church , the society of the faithfull , and all other publike Ordinances there used , as Prayer , Preaching , Fasting , Catechizing , singing of Psalmes , and the like ? And whether the d Texts of the old or new Testament , quoted in the first Question , and in the Margin here , warrant any such partiall excommunication or suspension from the Lords Table , but not from preaching the Word , and other publike Ordinances ? This I positively deny , from the pregnancy and words of these Texts of Scripture , backed by the judgement and practice of Antiquity in the purest times , as I shall prove at large anon : Neither hath the Author of the Antidote against four dangerous Questions ▪ nor the Reverend Preacher in his Sermon at St. Margarets before the Commons House ( who undertook to refute them ) produced one dram of Scripture or solid reason to refute it , the latter not so much as taking notice of this Question ( the onely thing there controverted ) but utterly mistaking it , whiles he charged the Questionist with mistakes . Secondly , whether Matth. 18. 16 , 17. If thy brother trespasse against thee , &c. tell it to the Church , &c. be properly meant of excommunication of suspension from the Sacrament ? The Opposites affirme ; I deny it . The only reason they have rendred in Presse or Pulpit , why this text should and must be intended of a sentence of excommunication given by the Church , is , because the text saith , let him be to thee as an heathen man and a publican ▪ that is , as one quite cast out of the Church , which must be only by excomunication , whereby men are cast out of it ; no private christian ( as they affirme ) having any authority to esteem his brother , as a heathen and publican , if the Church hath not first cast him out ; for then he may esteem one man of the Congregation thus , and after that another , and so all the Membets of it , and at last , the whole Church by degrees , by his owne authority ; which to doe , say they , is a great absurdity , sinne and inconvenience : But this reason ( under correction ) is very infirme , inconcludent , if not false and absurd : For first , Heathens were no excommunicate persons , being never Members of the Jewish or Christian Church , and therefore uncapable of any excomunication out of it : Excomunication being peculiar only to Church-members , as St. Paul expresly determines , 1 Cor. 5 ▪ 10 , 11 , 12. and Aretius in his definition of Excomunication , cited in the first Question : And as for Publicans , if they were not heathens but Jews ( as e some of them were ) we never find them excommunicated from any of Gods Ordinan●es , as they were Publicans , but partakers of them ; To make then an excommunicate person , and an Heathen , a Publican , Synonimaes , is at best an incongruity , if not a contradictiō . Secōdly , the genuine sense of this expression ( not elswhere used in Scripture , and f no forme at all of any excomuni●ation practised by the Jewes ) Let him be to thee a Heathen and a Publican , in the judgment of the best Interpreters , is no more but this ; keepe not any familiar company , or have no civill fellowship with him , but avoyd his company and fellowship , as Paul expresly interprets it elswhere , 1 Cor. 5. 10 , 11 , 12. 2 Thes. 3. 14. Eph. 5. 11. Rom. 16. 17. or receive him not into thy house , neither bid him God speed , as St. John renders it , 2 John 10. Which phrase was derived from the practice of the Jewes and Pharises in that age , who shunned the very company of heathens and publicans ; not in publike Ordinances or Sacraments ( in which heathens certainly had no communion or society with them , being no Members of their Church ) but only in civill conversation ; whereupon they taxed Christ , for keeping compauy with publicans and sinners , Mat. 9. 10 , 11. ch. 11. 19. ch. 21. 31. 32. Mark 2. 15 , 16. Luke 18. 11 , 12 , 13. ch. 15. 1 , 2. though some of them beleevee on , and received him , when the Scribes and Pharises ( who disdained their company ) did reject him , Luke 7. 29. ch. 15. 2 , 2 , 3. ch. 19. 2. to 12. Mat. 21. 31 , 32. And as the Jewes then avoyded all civill familiar society with Publicans g whom they generally hated for their covetousnesse and extortion ) so also with Heathens , with whom they might not inter marry nor familiarly converse , Deut. 7. 2 , 4. Josh. 24. 12 , 13 , Neh. 13. 27. to 31. Ezr. ch. 9. & 10. Ps. 116. 34 , 35. Act. 21. 28 , 29. Whence we read , The Jewes had no dealing or conversation with the Samaritans , John 4 ▪ 9 nor they with the Jewes , Luke 9. 52 , 53. If then , let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican , be no more then , keep not civill company , fellowship , or familiar conversation with him , who obstinately trespasseth against thee , after private admonition and publike complaint ; or avoid intimate familiarity with him ; then every christian hath free power by Gods word to do this , without any danger of sin or scandall , before any private or publike censure of excommuncation passed against him by the Church , as is cleer by 1 Cor. 5. 9. 11. 2 Thes. 3. 14. Rom. 16. 17. Pro. 22. 24 , 25. Ps. 101. 4 , 5 , 7. 2 Tim. 3. 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. 2 John 10. 11. Therefore by the self-same reason may he avoid the company of any other brother , or the Members of an whole particular Congregation severally , without sin or guilt , if he or they continue impenitent , in the case of private injuries or trespasses against him after admonition ; Wherefore this Answer of theirs is both erronious and impertinent . Now that this Text of Matthew ( so mvch insisted on ) is not meant of excommunication or Church-censures ; and that the h Church in this text was not any ecclesiastical Consistory , but only the i Sa●hedrim , or Court of civil justice among the Jews ( commonly called the Councel in other Texts ) is apparent to me for these ensuing reasons , never yet answerd by the Opposites . First , because it speaks not at all of any publike scandalous sin against the Church or Congregation , the proper Object of Church-censurs , but onely of pr●vate civill trespasses betweene man and man , as is evident by the words , If thy brother trespasse against THEE , goe and tell him his fault between him and thee , &c. which Saint Luke relating without any Die Ecclesi● , Luke 17. 3 , 4. puts out of question , if compared with Gen. 52. 31. 1 Sam. 25. 28. Now the puni●hment of such trespasses belonged properly to their temporall Magistrates , not to their Ecclesiasticall Consistory , as the 1 Sam. 2. 29. Deut. 10. 16 , 18 , 19 , 20. ch. 25. 1 , 2. 2 Chron. 19. 9. 6. Exod. 21. 6. 22. chap. 22. 8 , 9. prove : Secondly , because the following words , ver. 16. If he refuse to heare thee , take with the● one or two more , that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established ; relate onely to the manner of trying civill capitall crimes , ( as murthers and the like ) before the civill Magistrates of the Jewes , which was by two or three witnesses , Num. 25. 30. Deut. 17. 6 , 7. chap. 19. 5 , 6. not to any proceedings in Ecclesiastical causes , in their Ecclesiastical Cōsistories , of which we find no president . Thirdly , because tell it to the Church , the Assembly , or Congregation , in the 17. verse , is not meant of any Presbyteritall or Ecclesiasticall Classis , which had Cognizance of private trespasses , there being no such among the Jewes , but only of the * civill Court of Justice , which the Scripture commonly cals the Councell , which had power ( which no meer Ecclesiasticall Consistory can doe ) to scourge , imprison ▪ torture and outlaw offenders , if not to condemn● , put to death , but not properly to excommunicate them , Matth. 5. 22. chap. 10. 17. c. 5. 26 , 27 , 59. 60. chap. 27. 1 , 2. Marke 13. 9. Acts 4. 3. to 22. chap. 5. 17. to 40. chap. 6. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15. chap. 25. 15. to 29. chap. 24. 20. Fourthly , because he addes , If he will not heare the Church , What then ? not , let the Church excommunicate or suspend him from the Sacrament , or put him out of the Sinagogue , or cast him out from them , or deliver him to Satan , or denounce an Anathema Maranatha against him , or cut him off from his people ( the onely phrases in other Texts alleaged for proof of Excommunication ) but , l●t him be as an Heathen man and a P●blican ( a phrase never used elswhere in Scripture ; ) which cannot properly signifie excommunication , because Heathen men being never Members of the Church , could never be excommunicated or cast out of it , being un - capable of such a censure : As for Publicans those of them who were members of the Jewes Church , though they were execrable to the Jewes , by reason of the●r Tax-gathering and Oppressions , yet we never read in Scripture that they w●re excommunicated or cast out of their Sinagogues , but contrarily , that they went up into the Temple to pray as well as the Pharises , and were more acceptable to Christ himselfe ( who never excommunicated , but received and conversed with them ) then the proud Pharises were , Luke 18. 11. to 15. ch. 3. 12. chap. 7. 29. chap. 5. 27. 28 , 29. chap. 15. 1 , 2. chap. 19. 2 , &c. Mark 9. 11 , 12. Matth. 10. 3. Marke 2. 15 , 16. Therefore these expressions can no wayes warrant or imply any excommnnication or suspension from the Sacrament . Fifthly , the words runne onely , let him be TO THEE as a heathe● man and a Publican ( not to the whole Church , and all others professing Religion , which might have intimated something in behalfe of the Opposites ; ) and therefore ●o ground excommunication from the Church , or suspension from the Sacrament on this Text ( which the Papists and others have very much abused ) is to extract water out of a flint , and palpably to wrest the Scripture from its genuine sense . Object . And whereas some object , that the n●xt ensuing words , verse 18. ( Verily I say unto you , what soever ye shall bind on earth , shall be bound in heaven , &c. ) doe necessarily infer the preceding words to relate to Ecclesiasticall censures , and the power of the Keyes ( as they phrase it . ) Answ. I answer , first , that these words have no coherence with , or dependence on the former , but are a distinct sentence of themselves , because spoken onely to , and of Christs Disciples , as is evident by the Parall●l Text of John 20. 23. not of the Jewish Church , much lesse of their Councell or Sanhedrim , meant onely by the Church in the former verse , as is already cleared . Secondly , the this binding and loosing is not meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament ( as some would fancy it ) but onely of binding and loosing mens finnes , by preaching the Gospell , and denouncing pardon or remission of sinnes and salvation to penitent and beleeving sinners ; but judgement and damnation to obstinate , impenitent sinners , as is evident by comparing it with Matth. 16. 19. Marke 16. 16. John 3. 16 , 17 , 18 , 36. chap. 12. 48. Luke 13. 3. 5. Rom. 2. 16. Acts 2. 38. chap. 3. 19. Therefore some clearer Text then this must be produced , to found excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament , and Ecclesiasticall Discipline upon , by those who contend for it Jure divin● . Thirdly , whether 1 Cor. 5. 5. To deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh , that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus ▪ and 1 Tim. 1. 20. whom I have delivered unto Satan ▪ that they may learn not to blaspheame , be properly meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament ? Some of our Opposites peremptorily affirme it , but produce no shadow of proofe for it ; others speak dubiously of these Texts , as needing a large debate , and therefore prudently wave them with a rhetoricall preterition , as the late Reverend Preacher did : I for my part humbly conceive , that to deliver to Satan , is a thing somewhat different from excommunication and suspension from the Lords Table : My reasons are these : First , if to deliver a man to Satan , be the self-same thing with excommunication , or suspension from the Sacrament , as some affirme , then every excommunicated or suspended person , should ▪ during his excommunication or suspension , either in a literall , or sprituall sense at least , be in their judgement , in the actual power of Satan , though a true child of God , whom e Christ himself hath rescued out of the jawes and pawes of Satan ; since such a one may be actually excommunicated , suspended from the Lords Table for a season , not onely injuriously , but upon just grounds , and yet not inthe Devils actuall power or possession , but in Christs , John 10. 28 , 29. Secondly , if to deliver unto satan , were the same with excommunication , then it would have some proportion and coincidency with other Scripture phrases produced for proofe of excommunication ▪ ( as put away from among you that wicked person , and the like forecited ) with which it hath no 〈◊〉 . Thirdly , our Opposites generally grant f that Excommunication belongs onely to the Presbytery or whole Congregation , not to any one particular person , be he Bishop , Minister , or other ; whereas Paul himselfe deliv●●ed Hymeneus and Phyletus unto Satan , as the words ( whom I have delivered , &c. ) import , without the concurrence of any other . Fourthly , many members of the visible Church are spiritually under the g ●ower of satan , and taken captives of him at his will , though still within the Church , and not actually excommunicated ; therefore to deliver men over thus to satan , and no more , cannot be properly tearmed excommunication . Fifthly , nor can it be meant meerly of suspending people from the Sacrament ; for then children and others debarred from the Sacrament , by reason of their nonage , or any other naturall dis-abilities , should be as much delivered over to Satan as any scandalous persons . What this delivering of men over to satan is , hath been much controverted among Divines : Many who take it to be meant of excommunication , and an act of discipline established then in the Church for all future ages , interpret it to be , not onely a casting of a man out of the Church h wherein Christ reigns , into the world of ungodly men , among whom satan rules ; but likewise to give a man over to be guided in his spirit by the word & spirit of satan , as the Church and those within it are led , guided by the word and spirit of God ▪ explaining it by Ephes. 2. 2 , 3. 2 Tim. 2. 26. John 14. 30. John . 8. 44 ▪ 1 John 3. 8. But this exposition seems to me both false and improper : First , because these scandalous sinners , even whiles they were in the Church , were i led and acted by the spiret of satan , in committing those scandalous sinnes , for which they were excommunicated ; and therefore their excommunication cannot thus deliver them over unto satan , who tooke them captive at his will , but leaves them in his hands in the same condition as before . Secondly , such a delivery unto satan , as this , to be guided , acted in their spirits by him and no more , tends nothing at all to the destruction of the flesh , but rather to the pampering of it , much lesse to the reforming of the life , or the saving of the spirit in the day of the Lord Jesus , but rather to aggravate and encrease mens sinnes . Thirdly , it 's confessed , that a godly man may for some notorious sinnes or scandals , be actually excommunicated , as well as other wicked persons ; now such a one God never k gives over to be led and ruled by the unclean spirit of satan , but he always leads them by his own holy spirit , which ever dwels and rules within their soules , and is never dis-possessed by the Devill . Fourthly , all accord , that the end and use of excommunication , is onely to reforme or amend mens lives , and turn them from the power of satan unto God : And is not this diametrally contrary to that end , to deliver them over to the very conduct and guidance of satan , who l rules only in the children of disobedience , precipitates them into all sinful courses with a ful c●●●re , and is so farre from learning men not to blaspheme , that he fils their hearts and mouthes with naught but lyes and blasphemies ? This interpretation therefore I cannot approve ; Neither doe I read or beleeve that any Presbytery or Church hath or doth claime any authority in these dayes to deliver any man to Satan ; Wherefore , to deliver a man unto satan , I rather cōceive to be meant in two other senses more agreeable both to the letter and scope of these Texts , and the interpretation of the Fathers on them . The first is , either to deliver up a man corporally , by way of punishment , into the actuall possession of the Devill , onely in respect of his body , not soule , so as the Devill thereby might actually possesse , macerate , torment and afflict his flesh ( as he m used to vex those whom he did corporally possesse , which the Scripture plentifully manifests ) till he were sufficiently punished , and then be dispossessed of the Devill againe by those who delivered him into his power , and restored to the bosome of the Church ; the Apostles and others n in their age , having a power , not onely to cast out and dispossesse men of Devils , but likewise to deliver men up by way of punishment to o be corporally possessed by the Devill : which ( as I conceive ) was the ground of that common imprecation , ( too frequent in lewd mens mouthes , when they are injured or provoked by any man ; ) the devill take you , or , Tradatur Satan● . This kind of delivering men over to satan was peculiar onely to the Apostles , and some others in that age , but ceased since , and so cannot be drawne into practice among us ; A godly Christian by way of punishment may be for a season thus delivered unto satan , for the mortifying or destruction of his flesh and carnall corruptions , and yet still continue a true child of God in respect of his soule and spirit , p which the holy Ghost doth alwayes possesse , though the Devill possesse his body ( as he had possession of Christs body , though not of his soule and spirit , when * he led him into the Wildernesse to be tempted , and carried him from place to place . ) And this I take to be one genuine sense and scope of these two Texts . Secondly , there is another sort of delivering men up to satan , somewhat different from the former , which suits very well with the words and sense of these Scriptures ; and that is , when a man by Gods immediate permission is delivered unto satan to be tortured , afflicted and vexed by him ; either in his body , by sicknesses , botches , diseases ; or in his mind , by cares , feares , perplexplexities and discontents ; or in his estate and family , by losses and crosses of all sorts , as q Job was , of purpose to mortifie his flesh and carnall members , to humble his soule and bodie before God , that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord , his sinfull life reformed , and he hereby lessoned , no more to blaspheme or dishonour God : In this sense God many times delivers over his children ( as he did Job ) into their Adversary , satans hands , to scowre away all their drosse , and crucifie their old man , the flesh , with the affections and lusts thereof , without giving their hearts and spirits into his power , which he still reserves intirely to himselfe , as he did lob's ; and theirs whom the Devill cast into prison , and into tribulation for ten dayes , that they might be purifid , and have their robes of corruption washed quite away , and made white in the blood of the Lamb , Revel. 2. 10. chap. 7. 14. And in this sense ( no doubt ) the Apostles by Gods permission , had power to deliver men over to satan , ( one of whose r Messengers Paul had sent to buffet and humble him , least he should be exalted above his due measure ▪ ) for the destruction of the flesh . But how farre the Church or Ministers of God have any authority at this day actually to deliver any scandalous persons thus to satan ( unlesse it be by way of prayer or option ) I submit to others , who now claime this power , to determine : However , in these two last senses ( which I conceive most genuine ) these Texts are no solid proofes at all , either of excommunication from the Church , or suspension from the Sacrament ; since a Christian may be delivered over to satan in both these senses , and yet not actually excommnicated or suspended from the Sacrament . The fourth difference is this , Whether 1 Cor. 5. 11. If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator , or cov●tous , or an Idolater , or a railer , or a drunkard , or an extortioner , with such a one no not to eat ; be properly meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament , or not to eat with such at the Lords Table upon any tearmes ? Some Opposites confidently averre ; others , with my selfe deny it ; and that upon these grounds : First , because there is not one sillable of receiving the Lords Supper , or eating at the Lords Table spoken of in this chapter ; and in the 10. and 11. chapters , where the Apostle professedly treats of the Lords Supper , and receiving that Sacrament , he speakes not one word of secluding any members of the Church , or Christians from it , but onely exhorts men carefully to examine themselves before they come to receive it , least they eat and drink their owne damnation , become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord , and draw downe sicknesses and diseases upon themselves ; affirming expresly , ch. 10. ver. 16 , 17. The bread which we breake , is it not the communion of the body of Christ ? for we being many , are one bread and one body ; for ▪ WE ARE ALL PARTAKERS OF THAT ONE BREAD : If ALL ▪ were then partakers of this bread , certainly none were excluded from it in the Church of Corinth ; but as the Israelites under the Law , did ALL eat the same spirituall meat , and ALL drink the same spirti●all drinke , though ▪ God were displeased with many of them , who were idolaters , tempters of God , fornicators , murmurers , and were destroyed in the Wildernesse , 1 Cor. 10. 1. to 12. so all under the Gospell who were visible Members of the Church of Corinth , did eat and drink the Lords Supper , to which some drunkards whiles drunken did then resort , as is cleere by the 1 Cor. 11. 20 , 21. which Paul indeed reprehends , verse 22. Therefore this , with such a one no not to eat , cannot be meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrameut . Secondly , if we look upon the catalogue of those with whom the Corinthians were forbidden so much as to eat , we shall find railers , covetous persons , and extortioners therein mentioned , as well as idolaters , fornicators , drunkards ; and if all such must be excommunicated or suspended the Sacrament , what will become of most of our Anabaptisticall and Independent Congregations , who are generally knowne to abound more with covetous persons , extortioners , railers , then our Parochiall or Presbyteriall Congregations do with idolaters , fornicators , drunkards ? I ▪ feare their Independent Conventicles and chamber Congregations will be dissolved for want of members , of Ministers , and their Lords ▪ Tables be left empty without Guests , if all railers , covetous persons and extortioners were excommunicated out of them , and this their pretended discipline put into exact execution ; yea , I fear , too many Presbyterian Ministers , Elders , who would be very active in excommunicating , suspending others from the Sacrament for fornication , idolatry , drunkennesse , must themselves be first excommunicated from the Lords Table for their owne covetousnesse ; Wherefore s let such pull that beame out of their owne eye , before they passe the sentence of excommunication and suspension for the m●tes they spye in their brother's eye ; and this would much moderate their severity towards others , if not make them disclaime this Text to be ment of those Ecclesiasticall censures , which would light first and heaviest on themselves . Thirdly , it is as cleere as the noon-day Sunne , that , no not ▪ to eat , in this Text , is no more , then not to keep company , or hold civill familiarity with such : First , by verse 10 , 11. I wrote to you in an Epistle , NOT TO KEEPE COMPANY with fornicators , &c. yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world , &c. for then ye must goe out of the world ; ( as those must doe who would have unmixt churches and communions without any putred members : ) But now have I written unto you , NOT TO KEEP COMPANY : If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator , &c. with such a one NO NOT TO EAT : By which it is most cleer , that , no not to eat with such , is nothing else , but * not to keep company , or converse familiarly with them , it being here twice together thus interpreted in the preceding words : And that it cannot be meant of eating with them at the Lords Table , is most cleere ; because this inhibition extends it selfe , ( though not in the same strictnesse , ) to fornicators , idolaters , covetous persons , &c. that are Infidels and without the Church , as well as to him that is called a brother , and within the Church , as is evident by verse 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ▪ compared together : Therefore it must of necessity be meant of civill conversation with them , of which eating together with others , and sitting with them at our , or their Tables , is one principall branch ▪ being one of the highest expressions of outward friendship and familiarity , as is evident by Gen. 43. 16 , 17. 32 , 33 , 34. 2 Sam. 12. 28. 33. 2 Kings 2. 7. Psal. 41. 9. John 13. 18. and disdaining to eat with one , the greatest token of estrangednesse , or want of familiarity one with another , Gen. 43. 32. compared with John 4. 7 , 8 , 9. Secondly , this is further confirmed by these parallel Texts of Rom. 16. 17. Eph. 5. 7. 12. 2 ▪ Thes. 3. 14. Tit. 3. 10. 2 John 10. 2 Tim. 3. 10. which interpret , no not to eat here , by these phrases , of avoyding them , turning away from and rejecting them , not to keep company or have fellowship with them , nor to welcome the● into our houses ; neither of which amounts to an excommunication or suspension , which are judiciall acts of the whole Church or Presbytery , after legall proofe and conviction : whereas these acts of not eating , avoiding , or not keeping company , &c. are all onely morall or prudentiall acts of particular Christians , or Voluntary negative actions , not positive , judiciall , publike Church censures . Object . But our Opposites object , that though this Text be not directly meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament , yet it warrants such mens suspension from tht Lords Supper by necessary consequence : For if we may not so much as eat and drinke with raylers , drunkards , covetous persons , &c. at our owne , their , or other mens Tables , much lesse may we doe it at the Lords Table . Answ. I answer , that the Argument is meerly sophisticall , fallacious , and not properly any formal Argument from the lesse to the greater , because itvaries in the kind of eating ; the one being civill , the other spirituall ; the one private in ones own house , or anothers , where he hath absolute freedome or liberty to eat , or not to eat with another ; the other pulik in the Church , where he hath a divine command , necessitating him to communicate with others of that Congregation , in the Sacrament , as well as in other Ordinances . Every Argument from the lesse to the greater that is conclusive , must have sundry qualifications to make it solid : I will instance but in three . First , it must be in the same kind of action ; Secondly , it must fall under the same precept ; Thirdly , it must be within the compasse of the same power : If either of these faile , the Argument is a meere Inconsequent . For instance , This is a solid Argument ; Men ought to abstaine from the smallest sinnes ; Ergo , much more from the greatest sins ; because this holds still to the same kind [ sinne ] and abstaining from the greatest sins , fals under the same precept which forbids the least ; So this is a firme Argument ; He that can make a little Watch or ball can likewise make one somewhat greater , because it in the same kind of manufacture , and both of them within the virge of the Artificers skil : But on the contrary , these inferences are unsound and inconcludent : A man must not keep company with an angry man , Prov. 22. 24. Ergo , he must not joyne with him in any publike Ordinances or acts of Gods worship ; or , A man must not sweare vainly by the Name of God , which is the lesse ; Ergo , he must not swear solemnly before a Magistrate , which is the the greater ; because there is in these , a variation in the kind , occasion and manner of swearing ; So , it is unlawfull for any Christian to recompence evill for evill in the least kind , nor to avenge himselfe for the least wrong , Rom. 12. 17. 19. Therefore it is unlawfull for any Christian Magistrate to recompence evill for evill , or inflict the highest degree of Vengeance on Malefactors , even death and capitall punishments ; is a meet Nonsequitur ; because this publike revenge by way of justice , fals not under the same precept with privat reveng : So , such a workman is able to make a boat or ditch , which is the lesse ; ergo , he is able to build a Ship or Fort , which is the greater , is an Inconsequent , because they fal not under the self-same degree of art & ability : To apply this to the objected text ; Not eating with scandalous persons at meales in private , differs in manner , kind from eating with them at the Lords Table in publike ; they fal not both under the self-same precept ; and we have free power not to eat bread with those at our own Tables , with whom we have no power or liberty left us by Christ , to refuse to eat with them at the Lords Table : Therefore this Argument , in point of Logicke and Divinity , is as infirme and absurd , as any of the former : Yet how many thousands , as well Schollers as Ignorants , have been over-reached with it , so far as to make them separate , not onely from our Sacraments but Congregations too ? Now because thi● grosse , fallacious Inconsequence in my apprehension , is one principle cause and prop of Independency , yea of Separation from our Churches , Sacraments , and hath misled so many , especally of later yeers , I shall a little further examine it , with relation to the Text on which it is grounded , and further lay open both the falsenesse and absurdity thereof , to all mens jndgements and consciences . First , it is cleere , that this Text is ment onely of civill conversation , eating and drinking , not of spiritual , as I have already proved : I would then demand these two Questions of the Objectors : First , whether this Text prohibits all kind of civill communion , and eating at Table with any Christians who are raylers , fornicators , idolaters , covetous persons , extortioners or drunkards , under paine of mortall sinne ? If yea ; then it is a damnable sinne in the Objectors to eat , drink , or converse in any kind with any such as these , which they daily doe without any scruple , and cannot avoyd ; yea , then it would be a sin against this Text , for a wife , child , kinsman , Master , Magistrate , Prince , constantly to convers or eat with such a scandalous husband , parent , kinsman , servant , neighbour , Pastor , fellowservant , Subject , or they reciprocally with them , if scandalous ; then if any Member of the Parliament , or of any Corporation , Colledge , Innes of Court , or the like , should but eat together at meales with his fellow-members who are thus scandalous , in any Common-Hall , or at any Ordinary or Corporation-feast , they should sin against this Text , which I never yet heard any Anabaptist , Separatist , Independent , Presbyter , or Divine affirm ; neither of which make any conscience of not repairing to the Lord Majors , or any other publike City-feast , where they are sure of good fare , because they were certaine there to meet and eat with some covetous , or other scandalous persons ; with whom Saint Paul prohibits them , no not to eat : Which precept Christ himselfe and his Apostles should have transgressed , in eating and drinking with Publicans and sinners , for which they were [ s ] taxed by the over-precise Pharises . If then this Text extends not to oureating at meales with such scandalous christians in cases of necessity & expediency , where either our natural , civill relations , or cōmon civility engage us to it , so as we delight not intheir company , or do it notvoluntarily out of free choice , when we may avoid it without offence , as the very Objectors , I suppose , wil grant , and S. Paul resolves , ver. 11. then by the self-same reason , it can be no offence at all against this Scripture , to eat or drink with such at the Lords Table , at this his publike Feast and great Supper , to which all Christians are invted ( if we beleeve Christs owne Parable , Mat. 22. 1. to 15. & Isa. 55. 1. Rev. 22. 17. ) in such cases wherein we may lawfully eat & drink with them at our own , theirs , or other mens Tables . Secondly , our Objectors themselves affirme , that it is lawful to hear , pray , read the Scriptures , ●ing Psalmes , repeat Sermons , fast and performe all other christian duties in the company of such scandalous Christians as are here particularized , without any violation of this Text : If then we may keep company or hold communion with them , and they with us in all other Ordinances , till they be actually and judicially excommunicated from the Church and them ; then why not likewise in the Lords Supper too ? since this Text and all others cited for proofe of excommunication or suspension by our Opposites , prohibit communion in them al alike , or els in none . Thirdly , admit Ministers themselves be polluted with any of those Vices , suppose with covetousnesse , ( as too many are , ) yet none of the Objectors dare averre , that it is a sinne against this precept , for any of their Congregations to receive the Sacrament from , or eat the Lords Supper with them , no more then to joyne with them in prayer , fasting , or to heare them read , preach , catechize , expound , or sing Psalmes together with them ; since the goodnesse or viciousnesse of the Minister ( as t all accord ) doth neither adde ought to , nor detract any thing from the efficacy of the Sacraments , or any publike Ordinances , which proceeds from God alone : If then we may receive the Sacrament from , and eat it with a covetous Minister without any sin or contradiction to this Text , then why not likewise with a covetous Neighbour or fellow-parishioner ? Fourthly , the Objectors grant , that a Christian may lawfully receive the Sacrament with persons secretly guilty of these and other grosse sinnes , with close Hypocrits , who guild over their vices ; and unregenerate Christians not really sanctified , who are neither ignorant nor notoriously scandalous in their lives , without scruple or offence against this Text . Therefore they may lawfully doe it in point of conscience with such who are notoriously scandalous , before their actuall conviction & excommunication , especially if they professe sincere repentance for their sins past , and reformation of their lives for time to come ; as all do , at least in their general confessions before the Sacrament , if not in their own private meditations , prayers & preparatory devotions twixt God and their owne soules . Fifthly , it is not the meere guilt , but onely the scandall , ill example , and contagion of notorious sinnes that subjects men to the censure of excommunication , in regard of others , least they should infect and draw them on to imitation of them , as Paul resolves , 1 Cor. 5. 6. else those very sins which are not notorious , and those infirmities , of which the best Saints themselves are frequently guilty , should subject them unto excommunication , or suspend them from the Sacrament ; and then what mortall man almost should be admitted to it ? It is not then such sinners bare receiving with us , or ours with them , that can any way hurt , much lesse deter or keep us from the Sacram●nt , ( for they eat and drink damnation onely to themselves , not others ) in case we imitate them not in their sinnes , or receive no contagion from their company . Sixtly , the Objectors will grant , that there is a necessity lyes upon Ministers to administer , and on people to receive the Sacrament at all convenient seasons : That God onely infallibly knowes the hearts and reall preparations of all Communicants , in the very best of whom there are many failing and corruptions , which make them in themselves unworthy to communicate : That all who come to receive , doe alwayes make a generall and joynt confession of their sins before God and the Congregation , acknowledging and bewayling their manifold sinnes and iniquities , which they from time to time have committed in thought , word and deed , against the Divine Majesty ; professing , that they doe earnestly repent , and are heartily sorry for all their misdoings , that the remembrance of them is grievous unto them , the burthen of them intolerable ; desiring God to have mercy upon them for his Sonne Christ Jesus sake , and to for●er all that is past , and grant , that they may ever after serve and please him in newnesse of life : offering up themselves , soules and bodyes to be a holy and li●ing Sacrifice acceptable unto God through Jesus Christ : Yea , I dare presume , there is no Receiver so desperate , that dares professe when he comes to receive , he is not heartily sorow for his sinnes past , but resolvs to persevere impenitently in them for the future , though afterward he relapse into them ( as the be● Saints do to their old infirmities ) because his heart nature are not truly regenerated by Gods Spirit : All this being granted , no Minister ought to refuse the Sacrament to such an external penitent sinner ( the sincerity of whose heart and repentance , God onely knows ) nor may or ought any Christian to abstaine from communicating with him at it , in case he be not actually excommunicated , or not re-admitted to the Church for his prophane , scandalous life , since they have no warrant from this or any other Scripture else to doe it . All which , if seriously pondered , by Separatists and Independents , misled by the objected inference , would speedily reduce them to the bosome of our Church , and quite allay the heat of the present controversies about suspension from the Sacrament , in which many now place The very Kingdome of Christ , who never claimed nor exercised such a soveraignty as they , under his name and title , would usurp unto themselves . The fifth thing in difference is , Whether the Priests under the Law had divine authority to keepe backe any circumcised person from the Passeover , who desired to eat it , for any reall or pretended ignorance , heresie , or scandalous sinne ? My opposites affirme they had ; for proofe whereof they produce Num. 9. 1. to 12. Where the Israelites being commanded to eat the Pasover on the fourteenth day of the first moneth at evening , there were certaine men defiled by the dead body of man , that they could not keep the Passeover on that day ; and they came before Moses and Aaron on that day , and said unto Moses , we are de●iled by the dead body of man ; wherefore are we kept backe , that we may not offer an Offering to the Lord in his appointed season among the children of Israel ? And Moses said unto them , stand still , and I will heare what the Lord will command concerning you : And the Lord spake unto Moses saying , speak unto the children of Israel , saying ; If any man of you or your posterity shall be uncleane by reason of a dead body , or in a journey a farre off , he shall keep the Passeover unto the Lord , the fourteeenth day of the second Moneth they shall keep it , and eat it . By which it is cleere , that legall uncleannesse did dis-able them to eat the Passover at the appointed time ; therefore much more scandalous sinnes and spirituall uncleannesse did dis-able and keep them from it , and by consequence they doe likewise debar men from the Lords Supper now , of which the Passeover was a type ; yea , our reverend Scottish brother in his controversall Fast-Sermon , added , that no man might bring a Trespasse offering to the Lord , to expiate any particular sin he was guilty of , unlesse he did first confesse he had sined in that thing , Levit. 5. 5 , 6. Therefore said he , a fortiori , he could not be admitted unto the Pasover ( nor any now unto the Lords Table ) unlesse he first particularly and publikely confessed the sinnes he stood guilty of . To this I answer , first , that all circumcised persons whatsoever , had a right to eat the Passeover , and participate of all the Ordinances under the law , from which the Priests had no power to exclude them for ignorance , or any scandalous offence , for ought appeares by any Scripture-precept or president : ALL of them under pain of being cut off from their people , being bound to eat the Passeover in its season , except in cases of necessity , disability , by reason of a journey , or of legall uncleannesse onely , ( not spirituall ) as is cleere by Exod. 12. 3. 43. to 50. Num. 9. 1. to 15. Deut. 16. 16 , 17. Ezra 6. 19 , 20 , 21. 2 Kings 23. 21 , 22. 2 Chron. 35. 6 , 7 , 13 , 17 , 18. where we read , that ALL THE PEOPLE and ALL the Males THAT WERE PRESENT received the Pasover , not one of them being excluded from eating it . This is most evident by that noted place of 2 Chro. 30. 3. to 21. where King Hezekiah proclaiming a solemn● Pasover , summoned ALL Israel , and ALL THE PEOPLE , from Dan to Beersheba , to repaire to it ; whereupon there assembled MUCH PEOPLE to Jerusalem to keep it : Now there were many in the Congregation that were not clean nor sanctified ▪ for a multitude of the people had not cleansed themselves ( from their legall pollutions ) YET DID THEY EAT THE PASSOVER , ( neither Hezekiah nor the Priests prohibiting them to eat it ) otherwise then it was written ; But Hezekiah prayed for them saying , The good God pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seeke God , the Lord God of his Fathers , though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the Sanctuary : And the Lord hearkned t● Hezekiah and healed the people . Here legall uncleannesse did not actually suspend them from the Passover , when their hearts were upright , and they desirous to eat it , the Lord at Hezekiah's prayer passing by their unpreparations and accepting their devotions in this act ; Nor yet did spirituall pollution , by reason of grosse and scandalous sinnes , debar them that were circumcized , from the Passeover , as Paul expresly determines , 1 Cor. 10. 1. to 10. ( an unanswerable Text to this purpose ) Moreover brethren , I would not that ye should be ignorant , that ALL our Fathers were under the cloud , and ALL passed through the sea , and were ALL baptiz●d unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea ; and DID ALL EAT THE SAME SPIRITUALL MEAT ( to wit , the Passeover and Manna ) and did ALL DRINK OF THE SAME SPIRITUALL DRINK for they drank of the Rock that followed them , and that Rock was Christ : But perchance ALL these Communicants were visible Saints , free from any legall pollution , at least not tainted with any scandalous sinne : The Apostle to take off this evasion , subjoynes in the very next words , But with MANY OF THEM God was not well pleased , for they were overthrowne in the Wildernesse : No● these things were our examples , to the intent we should not lust after evill things , 〈◊〉 they also lusted ; neither be ye Idolaters as were some of them , &c. neither let us commit fornication as some of them committed , &c. neither let us tempt Christ 〈◊〉 some of them also tempted , neither murmure ye as also some of them murmurd , and were destroyed of the destroyer : So that the Israelites being once circumcized , were all admitted to eat the Passeover , though some of them were Idolaters ; others , lusters after evill things ; others Fornicators , others tempters of Christ , others murmurers against God and Moses ; therefore there was no suspension of any circumcized Israelite from the Passover , for spirituall uncleannesse , and scandalous sins , but only for legall uncleannesses . Secondly , it is cleere by the objected Text , that those who were legally uncleane at the day appointed for the Passover , so as they could not then receive it , were yet peremptorily enjoyned to eat it the 14. day of the second Month ; and not suspended , til they made publike confession of their sins , reformed the evill of their doings , and gave publike satisfaction to the Congregation , or Priests , as God himselfe resolves in terminis , Num. 9. 11 , 12. If any man of you , or of your posterity shal be unclean by reason of a dead body , YET HE SHALL EAT THE PASSOVER the fourteenth day of the second moneth at even , he must not be suspended from it above one moneth : By what Law then , doe many Ministers now presume , to suspend ▪ their whole Congregations , not onely above whole moneths but yeers from the Lords Table ( contrary to this text ) whereof the Pasoever was a Type ? let them amend this practice , or renounce this Scripture , and their unwarrantable inferences from it . Thirdly , he that was legally unclean , was kept back from the Passeover for the present , not by the Priest , or Ecclesiasticall Classis , or temporall Magistrate , but by those of the same u Family wherein he was to eat the Passover , as ver. 6 , 7. imports . And the true reason in this Text , why his uncleannesse did seclude him from eating the Passover , was , because it quite excluded him out of the Camp for a time , ( not Tabernacle or Temple ) and so by necessary consequence , from the House wherein he was to eat the Passeover , as is evident by Levit. 14. 3. 8. chap. 16. 26 , 27 , 28. Num. 5. 2 ▪ 3 , 4. chap. 12. 14 , 15. chap. 19. 7. 11. chap. 31. 19. 20. 24. Deut. 23. 10 , 11. And by like reason it debarred him from all other Ordinances , as well as it ; So that all you can probably inferre from this Text , is but this , which none will contradict : that prophane , scandalous persons justly excommunicated , and shut out of the Church , ought not to receive the Sacrament , nor participate in any other Ordinance , during their excommunication , till their re-admittance into the Church ; as the uncleane Israelite could not eat the Passover , nor be present at any other publike Ordinance or sacrifice , till his re-admittance into the Camp . Fourthly , here is a direct resolution of God himselfe in positive tearmes , prescribing a suspension from the Passover in case of present legall pollution onely , not spirituall ; yet expresly enjoyning the self-same person under the severest penalty , to eat it the very next moneth after ; but there is no such punctuall resolution in the old or new Testament , to warrant a like suspension of any from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , in case of scandall or spirituall uncleannesse , unlesse he be first legally excommunicated , nor can any Minister or Classis debar him justly from it by any colour or inference from this text , if he be desirous to receive it ; any longer then for one moneth . Fifthly , this argument for suspending men from the Lords Table for spirituall uncleannesse , because some were suspended from the Pasover for legall ▪ uncleannesse , but not for spirituall , is no way conclusive ; First , because the Passeover and Lords Supper , ceremoniall and spirituall pollution differ in kind : Secondly , because suspension from the Sacrament for spirituall uncleannesse , fals not at all under this temporary precept , of suspension from the Passeover , onely for legall uncleannesse ; the rather , because no man was kept from the Passeover by colour thereof , for any spirituall pollution , but onely for ceremoniall uncleannes ; therefore much lesse can any be suspended by color of it from the Sacrament , to which it hath no relation ; Thirdly , there is a direct divine warrant for the one , but not for the other ; wherefore we may justly reject the objected argument as erronious and fallacious . Secondly , to the latter part of the Objection ; that none might offer so much a● a Trespasse-offering for sinne , without a particular private confession of hi● sinne ( to God , not to the Priest ; ) Ergo , he might not eat the Passover ( nor any now the Sacrament ) if he were a scandalous sinner , without a particular publike confession and repentance of his scandalous sinnes . I answer , that it is a meer Non-sequitur , because , First , directly contradicted by 1 Cor. 10. 1. to 12. as the premises manifest : Secondly , because a particular examination of the conscience and repentance for sin , is no where required in Scripure of such who did eat the Pasover , though all circumstances & necessaries for the worthy eating of it be most punctually enumerated , Exod. 12. Num. 9. Deut. 16. Neither was there any such reason why God should require such a confession of sinne in those who were to eat the Passeover , as he expresly exacts from those who came to offer a Sin-offering to him , only of set purpose to pr●cure an attonement for those very particular sins which they did then confesse , at which oblation it was both necessary and requisite they should particularly confesse those very sinnes ( yet not to the Priest , Classis or Congregation , but to God alone ) since the Scripture is positive , that without confession of sinne , there is no remission of it ; and therefore when they came purposely to sue for pardon , and make attonement for any particular sinnes , it was absolutely needfull and expedient they should then confesse them : But in the Passeover there was no atttonement nor confession made to God for any particular sinne , but onely a commemoration of his infinite mercy in passing over the Israelites first borne , when he slew the Aegyptians : Therefore the paralelling of these two together , and the inference from the one , applyed to the other , is very incoherent : Finally , I answer ; that every particular Communicant befoce he comes to receive the Sacrament , makes a publike confession of his sinnes to God with the rest of the Congregation , and in words at least , voweth newnesse of life for the future ; there being no Communicant that ever I heard of so desparately wicked and Atheisticall , as not to professe hearty sorrow for all his forepast sinnes , or to avow impenitent continuance in them when he came to the Lords Table ; therefore he cannot be justly debarred from the Sacrament by vertue of this Text , after such a confession , since none were kept off from making their attonement by a trespasse offering if they did first confesse their sinnes to God , though perchance his confession was not cordiall , or such as the Priests approved , but externall , onely in shew . The sixth thing in controversie between us , is , Whether Judas received the Sacra●ent of the Lords Supper , as well as the other Apostles ? Our Antagonists most confidently deny he received it , against direct Scripture , and all antiquity , the currant confessions , resolutions of most Churches , and their eminentest Writers of all sorts : I shall prove the affirmative that he did receive it , by Scripture , Antiquitie , Fathers , modern Authors of all sorts , and then answer all pretences to the contrary , with all possible brevity . First , the three Evangelists Matthew , Marke and Luke , who onely relate the institution of this Sacrament , are all expresse in terminis , That Christ sat● downe to eat the Passeover , and the TWELVE APOSTLES with him ▪ that Jud●s was one of these twelve , and present at the Table ; that as they sate at meat together , Jesus tooke bread and brake it , and gave it to them , ( the TWELVE ) saying , Take , eat , this is my body : That he likewise took the cup , & gave thanks , and gave it TO THEM , saying , drink YE ALL of it , &c. And Mark expresly records , he gave it to them , and THEY ALL drank of it . If all twelve then sate downe with Christ , and Christ gave the bread and cup to them , and bad them ALL eat and drink thereof , and they ALL did eat and drink thereof accordingly : With what shadow of truth dare any confidently aver , that Judas did not receive this Sacrament of the Lords Supper , and that he was not present at its institution ? Adde to this , that Matthew and Mark record , that immediately before the institution of this Sacrament , as they sate at meat , Iesus said u●to the TWELVE , Verily one of you shall betray me ; whereupon they began to be sorrowfull , and to say unto him , EVERY ONE of them ONE BY ONE , Lord is it I ? and he answered and sayd unto them , it is ONE OF THE TWELVE that dippeth with me in the dish : Then JUDAS who betrayed him , said , Master is it I ? and he said unto him , thou hast said it : which was no sooner uttered , but Iesus took bread and blessed it , &c. and both instituted and distributed the Sacrament to them ALL , as yo● heard before ; Therefore certainly to Iudas , the l●st man that said , Is it I ? immediatly before the institution , as Saint Matthew records ; And to manifest yet further , that Iudas was present at the Sacrament , Saint Luke placeth these words of Christ concerning Iudas his betraying him ▪ after the institution and distribution of the Sacrament , not before it , which he thus expresseth ; But behold the hand of him that betrayeth me IS WITH ME AT THE TABLE , &c , and they began to enquire among themselves which OF THEM should betray him . Saint Iohn writes thus ; And SUPPER BEING ENDED , the Devil having NOW put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot to betray him ; Christ riseth from supper , and laid aside his Garment , and tooke a towell and began to wash his Disciples feet ; and it seemes he washed Iudas his feet , who was then present , as these words import , Iohn 13. 10 , 11. And ye are cleane , but not all ; for he knew who should betray him : Therefore he said , Ye are cleane , but not all : After which he sate downe againe ▪ and among sundry other discourses with his Disciples , he said ; Verily I say unto you , that ONE OF YOU shall betray mee ; then the Disciples looked one upon another , doubting of who● he spake : Now there was leaning on Iesus bosome , one of the Disciples whom Iesus loved ; Simon Peter therefore beckned to him , that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake : he then leaning on Iesus breast , saith unto him , Lord who is it ? Iesus answered him it is to whom I shall give a sop when I have dipped it : And when he had dipped the sop , he gave it to Iudas Iscariot ; and after the sop , satan entred into him : Then said Iesus unto him , that thou doest , doe quickely ; he then having received the sop , went immediatly out , and it was night . Now Saint Iohn expresly averring , verse 2. That all this discourse , and the giving of the sop to Iudas , was AFTER SUPPER ENDED : And the other three Evangelists unanimously according , that Christ instituted and distributed the Sacrament ( at least the bread ) as he sate at Meat , as they were eating , before Supper quite ended ( whence it was stiled the Lords Supper ; ) it must of necessity follow from all the Evangelists severall relations , joyned together , and especially from Saint Iohns ( who was present at the institution ) from whence our Antagonists would inferre the contrary , that Iudas did receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , together with the other Disciples ▪ and they may as probably question , whether Peter or Iohn did receive it , as Iudas , there being not one sillable in any of the Evangelists , intimating he did not receive it with the rest , which doubtlesse they would have particularly and positively recorded , had he not been present at it , being a thing of so great moment . This truth is so transparent , that all Ages have positively averred , received it as an indubitable verity ; for which I could produce whole Centuries of Writers : but for brevity , I shall recite the testimonies onely of some few of principall Note . Origen Tract. 35. in Matth. Si autem potes spiritualem mensam & cibum spiritualem & dominicam intelligere Caenam , quibus omnibus dignificatus fuerat ( Judas ) a Christo abundantius videbis multitudinem maliciarum ejus , quibus magistrum , cum cibo divinae mensae & calicis , & hoc in die Paschae tradidit . Saint Cyprian in his Sermon de Ablutione Pedum writes thus , Ad Mensae tuae participationem , Judas proditor est admissus : And de Caena Domini , he thus seconds it : Quamdiu , cibi illi , qui ad diem festum erant parati convescentibus Apostolis sumebantur , veteris paschae agebatur memoria nec dum Iudas ad veterem vitam pertinens , diabolo invadente & occupante anim●m ejus egredi cogebatur ; sed ubi sac●um cibum mens perfida tetigit , & sceleratum os panis sanctificatus intravit , paricidialis animus vim tant● sacramenti non sustinens , quasi palea de area exsufflatus est , & praeceps cucurrit ad desperatio●em et laqu●um . Saint Ambrose Enar. de Tobia . lib. c. 14. resolves thus : Judas ibi miser periit in illo convivio quo alij saluantur : Idem Apologi a Davidis posterior , cap. 11. Judas panem accepit a Christo , & tunc magis est repletus Diabolo , quia non accepit ex fide , qui tam hospitali Domino pro litionem parabat And Com. lib. 12. in Luc. 13. Judas proditionem sanguinis Dominici inter sacrificia positus cogitabat . Saint Chrysostome Serm. 1. de Mysteriis Caenae Dominicae . Qui sacratae huius Caenae indigne participatur accubitu , non cum Petro perveniat ad s●l●tis Portium , sed sustinebit cum Iuda sine reparatione naufragium . Iudas non syncerus sed simulator accubuit , et post bu●●●llam Christi , in eum Diabolus introivit . And de Resurrectione . Homil. 3. Quid Caenam illam liberalem commemorem , ubi tingebat Discipulus mendax digitum ? Edebat cum pane Caed●m ▪ ●t sorbebat cum sanguine potionem . O crudele Proditoris convivium ! rogo , quibus oculis ●spectebat , quem sub dente premeb●● ? To passe by Nazianzen , who in his Christus Patiens , agrees , that Iudas did receive the Lords Supper ▪ together with the other Apostles . Cyrill . Bishop of Ierusalem asserts the same , Catechesis 13. Prodiderat Judas improbus Patrem-familias , nuperque exiens a mensa , & poculum benedictionis bibens , & pro potu salutari sanguinem Justi effudere volens . Saint Augustine thus seconds him , in Psal. 3. Enar. Cum Traditor Domini Judas fuerit , ipsa Domini nostri , tanta et tam miranda patientia , quod cum tamdiu pertulit tanquam bonum , cum ejus cogitationes non ignoraret , cum adhibuit ad convivium in qu● corporis et sanguinis sui figuram discipulis commendavit et tradidit . In his 162. Epist. Iudas accepit pretium nostrum : And Tract. 6. 26. & 62. in Joan. he oft reiterates it : Non mala erat buccella quae ●radita est Iudae à Domino . Absit , Medicus non d●ret venenum ; salutem medicus dedit , sed ind●gnè accipiendo ad perniciem accepit , qui non paratus accepit : Talis erat Judas , ●et tamen cum sanctis Discipulis vndecim intrabat et exibat . Ad ipsam C●nam Domini●am pariter accessit ; conversari cum iis potuit , ●os inquinare non potuit : De uno pane et Petrus accipit et Judas ; et tamen quae pars fideli et infidel● ? Petrus enim accepit ad vitam , manducat Judas ad mortem : Qui enim comederunt indignè judicium sibi manducat et bibit SIBI , NON TIBI : S● judicium Sibi non Tibi , toleramalum bonus , ut venias ad praemia bonorum , ne mitteris in poenam malorum : which our Venerable Beda , in his Comentary on 1 Cor. 11. both recites and approves . Sundry more passages to this purpose are there in this Father , which I pretermit for brevity . Victor Antiochenus in chap. 14. Evang. Marci . comments thus : Dominus autem licet omnium consiliorum Judae gnarus esset , attamen a Sacramenti sui accessu illum non prohibuit : Cur ita ? nempe ut hin● discas , nihil corum praeterijsse , quae eum ad sanam mentem reducere quoquo modo poterant : sunt tamen qui Judam ante porrectum Eucharistiae Sacramentum exiuisse existiment , &c. The first mention I find of any opinion to the contrary . Theodoret in his Interpretation on the 1 Epistle to the Corinthians , cap. 14. writes thus of Christ , Salutaris Sacramenti portas aperuit , et non solum undecim Apostolis , sed etiam Judae pr●ditori pretiosum corpus et sanguinem impertit . Remigius Bishop of Rhemes , in his Explanation on the 1 Cor. 11. asserts it in these tearmes . Probet se , &c. utrum ▪ dignus sit neque ; Nè fort● unde alij sumunt r●medium , accipiet ille damnationem et judicium , indigne-illud percipiens , sicut Iud●● proditor : nam cum alij Apostoli sumpsissent illud terribile Sacramentum ad remedium et ad salutem suam ille qui non dignus erat tanto mysterio , accepit illud ad dam●ationem suam ; quia quem Diabolus antea tenebat per suggestion●m et tentationem , postea ad damnationem , tenuit plenius , ut nihil aliud posset cogitare aut facere nisi quod voluntas ejus erat : with whom Haym●Bishop of Halberstat , concurres in the self-same tearmes , in his Interpretation on the 1 Cor. 11. Pascatius Ratbertus , de Corpore & sanguine Domini , cap. 28. hath this memorable passage to this purpose : Aliud verò Christus nouerat , quod et boni dignè , et mali indignè , hoc mysterium , licet praesumptione accepturi essent , voluit formam dare cunctis Communicantibus , quid boni , quid●è mal● percipiant : et ideo Judas in figura omnium malorum ad percipiendum admittitur . Aecumenius Enar. in 1 Cor. 11. hath this speech , Dominus ●oster communi mensa non sanctos modo discipulo● , sed et ipsum Proditorem ea dignatus est , inimicum s●eleratissimum : et vos dedignamini vna cum pauperibus caenare . Algerus de Sacramentis , lib. 1. cap. 21. resolves thus . Cum ergo malos corpus Christi verè sumere , ipsumque Iudam a summ● sacerdote Christ● , cum caeteris Apostolis acc●pisse sancti testentur , astructum etiam videtur , non esse nobis noxium , si à nobis , vel nobiscum mali malè suma●● Sacramenta , cum Iudas ab ipso Christo cum caeteris Apostolis acceperit , nec etiam a pravis minus verè confici ipsa Sacram●nta , cum ipse Proditor tan●● offici● Ministerium à summo Pontifice accipiens , cum caeteris , hoc faci●e in meam comm●morationem , a●dierit : si enim sicut e● à Domino injunctum fuerat , corpus Domin● confecisset , numquid vera minus ab ipso pravo , quam à qu●vis bo●o factum fuisset ? Q●ia enim Judas accus●tus et damnatus non fuerat , ideo Christus conscientiam ejus perversam quan●vis sibi notam dam●ar● noluit , ut nos instru●ret , quod aliquorum pravitas nec conversation● , nec Sacramentorum consecratione vel comparticipatione bonis aliquatenus nocere possit . Augustinus contra Donatistas : Communio malorum non maculat aliquem participatione Sacramentorum , sed consensione factorum . Item , ●dem in Homilijs suis ▪ Ut sufferas etiam cum quem nosti malum , attende Apostolum dicentem , unusquisque onus suum portabit . Non enim cum illo communicas avaritiam , sed Christi mensam : Et quid obest si Communices cum illo mensam Christi ? qui manducat & bibit indignè , judicium sibi manducat & bibit . SIBI inquit , non TIBI . Quia igitur , ut a●t Leo , Judae Dominus nec negavit Apostolic● ordims honorem , in conficiendis Sacramentis , nec Communionem in ipsis percipiendis , multum providit Ecclesiae suae , ostendens per hunc solum innoxiam e● fore malorum praelationem vel conversationem , in quo nisi esset praescisa tanti causa scismatis , multi magis superbè quam Religiose calcibus etiam à se repellerent eos qui apud se minoris esse viderentur aestimationis : Unde Aug. in Serm. 49. super Joannem : Quid voluit Dominus admonere Ecclesiam suam quando unum perditum inter duodecim habere voluit , nisi ut malos toleremus , ne corpus Christi dividamus ; Ecce inter sanctos est Judas , ecce fur est & sacrilegus ; talis cum Discipulis ad Coenam Dominicam accessit ; conversari cum eis petuit , inquinare eos non potuit . Theophilact who flourished about 1070. veers after Christ , in his Enar. in Marcum . cap. 14. page 109. writes thus ; Quidam dicunt ( but who they were , appeares not in any extant works of theirs ) Iudam non fuisse participem Sacramentorum sed egressum esse pri●squam dominus Sacramenta traderet : Alij autem dicunt ▪ quod etiam ingrato illi sacro-sancta dederit : But himself subscribes to the latter opinion without scruple , not onely in his Enar. in Ioan cap. 13. where he affirmes it over and over severall times ; but also in his Enar. in Matth. 26. page 67. Apposuit autem vescentibus ut ostenderet crudelitatem Judae , quia in mensa & Communione ciborum illius , quando si & fera fuisset , mansuetiorem se exhibuisset ; tunc neque cum argueretur intellexit , sed et corpus illius gustans non poe●●tuit : Quidam autem dicunt ; quod egresso Juda tradidit Sacramentum alijs discipulis proi●de et nos sic f●cere debemus , et malos a Sacramentis abarcere , &c. Bibite ex ●o omnes ; Sunt qui dicunt propter Judam hoc dictum : Judas enim panem accepit , et non comedi● , sed oc ▪ ul●avit , ut monstraret Judaeis , quod panem corpus suù● voc●rit Iesus ; pocul●m autem invitus bibit , cum non posset occultare , propterea ho● loco dic●b●t , bi●ite omnes . Saint B●rnard suffragates to all the former , that Iudas did receive the Sacrament as well as the other Apostles . I shall trouble you with no more Ancients , since they all unanimously acco●d herein without one dissenting voice , excepti●g Hilary , in Matth. Can●n . ●0 . The old and moderne Canonists of all sorts , with one consent suffragate to this verity ; I shall instance but in two , to wit , Gratian . Caus. 1. Quest . 1. & Ivo C●●not ensis ▪ D●cretalium ▪ secunda pars : in both which we have many senten●●s of Fathers collected to this purpose , and among others , this of Augustine , in Exposi● . Psalmi . 10 ▪ Christus quid fecit vobis qui Traditorem suum tant a pati●●ti● pertulit , ut ei primum Eucharistiam confectam manibus , et ore suo commend●t●m , sicut caeteris Apostolis traderet ? Quid vobis fecit Christus , qui eundem Traditorem suum que● diabolum nominavit , qui ante traditionem Domini nec lo●●lis d●minicis ●idem potuit exhibere , cum caeteris discipulis ad praedicandum Regnum Caelorum misit , nisi ut monstraret , dona dei perve●ire ad eos , qui cum fide accipi●nt , etiamsi talis sit per quem accipiunt qualis Judas fuit : See Gratian to the same effect , Caus. 7. Que. 1. & de Conserat . dist. 1. & 2. All succeding Canonists and Glossers upon Grat●●n concurre with these two ancients without dissent , and so doe the Casuists too ; I spare their names for brevity sake . The Schoolmen generally s●bscribe to this conclusion ; I shall mention onely three or four of them . The first is , Alexander Alensis , our owne Country-man , stiled the irrefragable Doctor , in whose Summa Theol●giae , pars 4. Quest . 11. Art. 1. Sect. 3. I first of all meet with this Question propounded and disc●ssed : An Christus etiam Iudae corpus suum in coena dedor●t ? This Doctor holds affirmatively that he did , which he proves by Ma●th . 26. 24. &c. Iohn 13. Dionysius Areopagita , Chrysostome , Hom. 81. super Matth. the Ordinary Glosse on Mat. 18. Iohn 13. & 1 Cor. 11. and other Texts : Adding that if Christ had actually excluded Iudas ▪ from this Sacrament , certainly s●●● of the Evangelists or others would have expresly noted such a memorabls and notable all , which not one of them hath done : And he resolves thus , Tha● Christ in this Supper gave his body to Iudas , and that for divers reas●ns : The first t●ken from Gods wisdome , and that for a twofold reason ; First , to teac● us to love our e●emies , since Christ fed this Traitor with his owne slesh ; Secondly , to instruct the Ministers of this Sacrament ▪ for in that he denied ●ot his body to Iudas ▪ who was entangled in a grievous ●inne , he hath taught the dispensers of this Sacrament , that they ought to give it to sinners in the like case , when they shall desire it . Secondly , in regard of Gods mercy , and that in two respects ; F●rst , revocati●n from evill ; secondly , promotion in good : For ●his well ought , out of the consideration of Gods mercy ( which most appeares in this that he delivered his body to him ) to recla●me him from his evill p●rpose , and conse●uently to meliorate him by the vertue of so great a Sacrament ; but he increased in his sin , from whence he ought to have augmented his Merit . Thirdly , in resp●ct of divine justice , and that in two respects : the augmentation of his fault , the retribution or damnation of his punishment ; for since he would not cease from his conceived malice by so great a benefit , by the just judgement of God , he is punished by a fall into a more grievous crime , to wit , desperation . Fifthly , in respect of divine conversation , the Lord for this cause giving him his body with others , that he might shew him , that he ought to be of like good conversation with others . Sixtly , for his perfect reformation as much as might be , on the Lords part , since he left no meanes unattempted to reclaime him . This and much more Alensis , who is seconded by Thomas Aquinas , 3. Qu. 81. 1. 0. l. 4. Dist. ii . Qu. 3. ar. 2. Qu. 1. 2. 0. By John Gerson Serm. in Coena Dom. ad Eccle. Ca●telam ; Hugo de Sacram. l. 2. c. 8. and by our Countrymen ▪ Rich. de Media Villa , l. 4. dist. 11. ar. 4. qu. 2. 3. Tho ▪ Waldensis , Oper. tom. 3. c. 43. sect. 6. and all the Popish Schoolmen ; many of them holding t that Iudas did receive the very body of Christ himself , as well as the Sacrament of his body : This Doctrin of Judas his eating the Sacrament with Christ at his last Supper , is so currant in the Church of Rome , that they have inserted it into most of their Ladies Psalters , Howers , Missals , and expressed it in this Rime . Rex sedet in Coena , Turba Cinctus DUODENA , Se tenet in manibus , &c. For Protestant Writers , the most and best of them in forraigne parts agree u that Judas did receive the Sacrament , or outward elements of Christs body and blood ; but not the body and blood of Christ himself ; Panem Domini , non panem Dominum , Sacramentum corporis & sanguinis Christi , non rem Sacramenti : The outward signes , not the inward & spirituall grace , for which read Caluini Instit. l. 4. ● . 17. sect. 34. Aretii Problemata , Locus 77. De usu Sacramentorum , instead of hundreds of others ; And as the prime Writers , so the publike Confessions of the Reformed Churches resolve , That Judas did receive the Sacrament as well as the other Apostles : Witnesse the x Confession of Bohemia . In the holy Scripture manifest examples of this nature are found in many places ; especially in Judas , who received the sacrament of the Lord Christ himselfe : And the confession of Belgia , An evill man verily receiveth the Sacrament unto his owne condemnation , but the thing or truth of the Sacrament he receiveth not : as for example ; Judas and Simon Magus ▪ both of them did receive the sacramentall signes , but as for Christ signified thereby , they received him not . For our owne Protestant Writers , I shall nominate but two of note , our English Apostle John Wickliffe , as Thomas Waldensis records his opinion , Operum Tom. 3. c 43. sect. 6. and our incomparable Bishop Jewel , in his Defence of the Apology of the Church of England ( publikly reserved in all our Churches ) part 5. sect. 16. Divis . 1. pag. 635. who determine , that Iudas received the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ , though not Christ himselfe ; and the whole Church of England in the Exhortation before the sacrament , in the antiquated Common-prayer booke , hath resolved , that Judas did receive the sacrament , as this clause manifests ; Therefore if any of you be a blasphemer of God , &c. bewaile your sinnes , and come not to this holy Table , least after the taking of that holy sacrament , the Devill enter into you , as he entred into Iudas , &c. And the 29. Article of the church of England , with the 96. Article of the church of Ireland ▪ resolve as much , in citing , approving S●int Austins words as orthodox doctrine , which he spake directly of Judas his receiving the Sacrament , and externall elements of Christs body and blood ; for which you may consult with Ma●ter Rogers his exposition on this Article . The verity of Judas his receiving the Sacrament being thus abundantly ratified by direct Scriptures , and so many concurr●nt authorities of all sorts in all ages , ( to which hundreds of like testimonies might be added . ) I shall onely add● this further consideration to the premises , that al our Antagoni●●s & the Evangelists cleerly agree , that Judas did eat the Pass●over with Christ himselfe , as well as the other Apostles : ( now the Passeover was a type of the Lords Supper ( which su●ceeded in its place , and a Sacrament under the Law ) the same in substance with the E●charist under the Gospell ; wherein Christ was spiritually represented and received , as well as in the Lords Supper , 1 Cor. 10. 3 , 4. ch. 5. 7. Therefore since Christ admitted him to the one , I cannot beleev he quite excluded him from the other ▪ which the last answer to the four Quaeres doth ingenio●●ly acknowledg . And here I cannot but wonder to see , with what groundle●●e confidence many godly learned Divines now averre the contrary both in Presse and Pulpit , of purpose to introduce a suspension of pretended ●nworthy persons from the Sacrament , before any actuall excommunication from the Church , or other Ordinances deno●●ced against them : Certainly , their grosse mistake against Scripture , and the resolution of all ages ▪ Churches , in this particular , will make wise consciencious men in all parts of this particular controversie ( wherein prejudice and selfe ends , I feare , have much over ▪ blinded their judgements ) distrust and examine all other their Paradoxes ▪ Inferences , and mis-interpretations of Scripture , which will prove but darknesse in the conclusion , though cryed up and embraced by many , under the specious seducing notion of NEW-LIGHT . Having thus made good ▪ the affirmative , I shall answer the reasons produced by the opposites , to prove , that I●das received not the sacrament ; which in truth are meer mistakes : First , they say , that Iudas went out before supper ended , immediately after he received the sop , John 13. 30. but our Saviour did not ordaine this sacrament till after supper , Luke 22. ●0 . when he had supped , 1 Cor. 11. 25. therefore Judas certainly received not the Sacrament . I answer , first , That Judas went not out till after Supper , as Saint Iohn expre●●y resolve● , Jo●● 13. 2. And SUPPER BEING ENDED , the Devill having n●w put it into the heart of Judas &c. After which , he addes ▪ that Christ rose from the Table and washed his Disciples feet , and Judas feet among the rest , if not first of all ( a●Theophilact with others hold ; ) After this , Judas continued there with Christ for some space , as the series of the chapter from the 20 , to the 30 verse attests . Seco●dly , all the three other Evangelists prove directly , that Judas was present at the sacrament , as I have formerly evidenced ; therefore to inferre the contrary fr●● John 13. 30. is to make John contradict all the other Evangelists , and himselfe 100 , v. 2 &c. Therefore it must needs be a cursed interpretation which corrupts the Text , and se●s the Evangelists together by the ears . Thirdly , This Sacrament was not i●sti●●ted after Supper , but as th●y sat● at supper , whence i● was called the Lords supper ; Matthewes and Pauls expression is , As they were eating , Iesus tooke bread , &c. Marks , As they sate and did eat , and Lukes words taken altogether , imply as much : Therefore he instituted the Sacrament , not after supper , but at and during supper , whiles they sate and did eat at table : True it is . Luke writes , not of the bread , but cup onely ( to which Pauls objected words likewise relate ) he tooke the cup after supper , Luke 22. 20. yet it appeares he took it likewise during supper , verse 17. yea , some learned me● are o● opinion ▪ that Christ had two suppers that night : First , his Pas●ha● sup●er , at the clo●e whereof he instituted the Sacrament of his owne supper : Secondly , an ordinary supper , which succeeded the insti●●tion of his owne , in imitation whereof ▪ the u ●or●●h●ans and x Primitive Christians had their Agape or Love ▪ feasts , which they did eat immediately after the Lord ▪ supper : and this is more then intimated by Saint John , ●hap , 13. ver. 2. 4 ▪ 12. to ●1 . where we read , that af●●r supper , Jesus did rise from supper , and washed his Disciple ▪ feet ; which done , after some discourse he SATE DOWNE AGAINE with them and then dipped a sop , ( which could not well be at the Paschall Supper ▪ where we read of no so●s , nor ought to dip them in ) and gave it to Judas ▪ &c. who having received the sop went imediately out : therefore Lukes , after supper he took the cup must be meant only after the Paschall supper , not the other common supper : for if Judas went out before the Paschal supper q●ite ●nded , thē you mu●t grant that he did not drink of the cup contrary to Christs expr●●●e precept , Drink ye ALL of this ; and Saint Marks relation , that they did ALL drink thereof ; to wit , all the twelve Disciples . Fourthly , the word imediately doth not alwayes imply , a thing done at the self-same instant , without the lest intervenient stay or delay ; but many times ( as all know ) in our common speech ▪ it signifies , soon after , or not long after ; as we usually say , we will doe this or that imediately , instantly , presently , when as we meane onely ●peedily , within a short time , not at that instant or very time we speak it ; So that admit the mo●● that can be , this word will not necessarily in●erre , that Jud●s went out so imediatly after the sop received , that he did not stay to receive the Lords supper ere he went out , which all the other Evangelists words deny , who would certainly have expressed it in direct tearmes ▪ had there been any such thing . Their second reaso● , that Judas received not the Sacrament , because Christ could not say unto him particularly , Take , eat , this is my body which is given for thee ; this is my blood which is shed for thee ; is very absurd . First , because it appeares not , that Christ did deliver the Bread and Wine severally , one after another to every of his Disciples ▪ as our Ministers ●se now to do ; but o●ely ▪ gave it promis●●o●sly to them all at once ; who took and divided it severally ●mong themselves , and handed it one to another , as Luke 22. 17. & Mat. 26. 27. Divide it among your selves ▪ He tooke the cup and gave it TO THEM ( joyntly , not to each of them by himselfe ) saying , Drinke ye ALL ( not tho●Peter or John ) of this , doe more then imply . Secondly , because admit Christ used those words particularly to Judas , a● Ministers now do to each particular Communicant , yet he meant them only co●●i ●onally , that his body was broken , and his blood shed for him , if he would really receive the● by faith , otherwise not ! Christ being made o●rs onely by faith . Thirdly , Matthew and Mark relate Christs words of instit●tion to be without any such particular application , as w● subjoyne ▪ viz. Take eat ▪ this is my body : Drinke y● all of this , for this is my blood of the new Testament which is shed FOR MANY : not for thee Judas ; which he might very well use to Judas , as conjoyned with the other Apostles . But these Antagonists have a second shift ; when they cannot deny that Judas received the Sacrament , they answer , he was a close Hypocrite , guilty of no scandalous crime , so that the other Apostles were more ready to suspect themselves then Judas , when Christ told them , that one of them should betray him ▪ Therefore this is no president or warrant for Ministers , to admit open scandalous sinners ( though not actually excommunicated ) to the Lords Table . I answer , first , that Christ himselfe ( the b searcher and knower of all mens hearts ) did some one or two yeers space before this , infallibly know , and tell his Disciples , that one of them , to wit , Judas Iscariot , was a devill , for he it was should betray him , being one of the twelve , John 6. 70 , 71. Secondly , at the time when he instituted the Sacrament , he infallibly knew and foretold the Disciples , yea Judas himselfe , that Judas should betray him , and that it was fore-prophesied he should doe so , John 13. 18. to 28. Matth. 26. 20. to 26. Mark 14. 18. to 22. Luke 22. 21 , 22 , 23. Acts 1. 17. 18. Thirdly , that when Christ washed his Disciples feet ( and Iudasses among others ) after supper , he told them , that they were clean , but not all ; meaning it of Iudas ▪ Iohn 13. 10 , 11. Fourthly , he infallibly knew him to be lost , and thereupon called him , the sonne of perdition , that the Scripture might be fulfilled , Iohn 17. 12. and knew that the Devill after the sop given , would enter into , and take actuall possession of him , Iohn 13. 27. compared with ch. 6. 70 , 71. & that he should be certainly damned & fall from his Apostleship , for his transgression , that he might goe to his own place ( that is , to hell ) Acts 1. 25. and that therefore in eating the Sacrament , he would certainly but eat and drinke judgement to himselfe , and be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord , 1 Cor. 11. 27 , 29. If then Christ himselfe did infallibly know all this of Iudas , though perchance his other Disciples did not ( as likewise his theevish , covetous , as well as traiterous disposition , John 12. 6. both which did make him scandalous , and an unworthy ●eceiver ) and yet for all this , in the very originall institution of the Sacrament , because Iudas was still one of the twelve , nor actually convicted of , nor excom●●nicated for these crimes , and voluntarily desiring to receive the Sacrament as well as others ▪ and because Christ himself would leave him unexcusable in leaving no externall meanes unattempted to reclaime him from his desperate intentio●● , by what divine authority , rule of conscience , or Christian prudence , can any Minister of Christ ( who is not , at lest ought not to deem himself , either greater ▪ wiser , holier , preciser or more consciencious then Christ his Master ) keep any unexco●●●nicated christian from the Sacrament , though covetous , scandalous , & outwardly fl●gitious for the present , in case he be desirous to receive it , and will not be kept from it by any serious dehortations or admonitions of the danger of unworthy receiving , if he in his owne conscience judge himselfe worthy , professe his hearty sorrow for his sinnes past , and reformation of them for the future ( especially since no Minister c can so certainly know the secret disposition of such a mans heart for the present , nor what d he may from thenceforth prove for the future ▪ or whether he be not ●● e elect child of God , and so certaine to be effectually called , converted , peradventure at that instant time , in or by this very Ordinance of the sacrament ; ) as Christ himselfe did know the heart , state , and finall impenitence of this traitor Iudas , whom notwithstanding he admitted to his Table : I shall therefore beseech all our Ministers and Opposites , to lay this seriously to heart ; and if they will needs make , or pretend conscience in any thing , let it be in this , not to make themselves wiser , holier , rigidder , or more consciencious in this point then Christ himselfe f Remember the words that Christ said to his Disciples , & in them to all Minister● , The servant is not greater then his Lord , nor he that is se●t ▪ greater then he that sent him : it is enough for the Disciple that he be as his Mast●r , and the servant a● his Lord . Remember what St. Iohn determines , 1 Iohn 2. 6. H● that , saith he , abideth in Christ , ought himselfe to walk eve● as he walked ; who , as in his suffering , so in the Administration of this Sacrament , hath left Us an example , that We should follow his steps , 1 Pet. 2. 21. Eph. 5 , 1 , 2. compared with th● 1 Cor. 11. 23 ▪ &c. We all grant , it is Christs prerogative onely to institute Sacraments , and is it ●ot his prerogative likewise to prescribe how and to whom they shall be administred ? and hath he not done this by hi● own example ? take heed therfore of making conscience of excluding such unexcommunicated person● from Christ● Table now he is in heaven ▪ as himself without scruple admitted to it whiles he was on earth ; If any unexcommunicated Iudasses will wilfully come to this sacred feast without a Wedding-garment , or with a traiterous and impenitent heart , contrary to their externall profession of repentance , ●fter your serious dehortation to them , and advisements to abstaine , the danger , guilt and sinne is onely their owne ▪ not yours ( as I shall prove more fully a●on ) else Christ himselfe should have been guilty ( by your kind of reasoning ) of Iudas his sinne and ●nworthy receiving , which you dare not affi●me . Secondly , if Christ himselfe knowing Iudas to be such a desper●te wick●d wretch , traitor , reprobate , did yet admit him to eat the Passeover and Sacrament with his other Disciples , and they made not any scruple of conscience ●o communicate with him in both , no not after Christ had particularly informed them ▪ and Judas himselfe , that he should betray him , Matth. 26. 21. to ●6 . then certainly there can be no colour for ●ny Christian , in point of con●cience ▪ to withdraw himselfe from the Lords Table , or sever from our Churches because of mixt Comm●nions ( as some now phrase them ) or because some op●● s●a●dalous unexcommunicate persons , are admitted to communicate with them : This i●●he use and inference which most of the Ancien●s ▪ made of Iudas his ●ating the Lords Supper and Passeover with his fellow-Disciples and they with him , against the scismaticall Donatists ( now revived in our Ind●penden●s A●●baptists , Separatists ) whose resolution● in this case they may doe well to read at large in Gratian , Caus. 1. Quest . 1. and in Ivo Carnot●nsis , Decre●●lium ▪ ●ec●nda par● , to whom I shall referre them : Certainly they may with as much conscience and reason refuse to joyne with such in hearing , reading ▪ fasting ▪ singing , prayer , or any other Ordinances as in this , ●pon the self ▪ same grou●d● t●ey 〈◊〉 to communicate with the● at the Lords Table : Therefore let not such ground ▪ lesse whimsie● , and false principles , upon which they have hitherto soun●●d their practice of separation in this kind delude thē any longer ; they being ●s much partakers of other mens sin● , in participating ▪ joining or being present with them in any other Ordin●nce , as in this ; since if they de●est their sinfull courses , they are no more guilty of them by rec●iving the S●crament with the● ▪ then Christ or his Apo●●le● w●re of Iud●s his ●●ea●on or unworthy receiving , by communicating with him ; the ●ather , b●cause the Scripture resolves expresly ( and all Come●tators new and old upon the Text sub●cribe to it ) that every unworthy Communicant eats and dr●●●es judgement onely TO HIMSELFE , 1 Cor. 11. 27. 29. ) not to the Ministe● or any other , with whom he shall Communicate in this Ordinance . Let those therefore who out of spiritu●ll pride and selfe ▪ opinion of their owne transc●●dent holinesse above others , disd●ine to communicate with those whom ●hey deem more sin●●l , l●sse p●nitent then themselves , beware lest this groundlesse Phari●●ical ride of theirs make them not more scandalous & unfit to receive thi● Sacrament ( ●t which they should especially manifest their humilty , charity , love , ●ompassion and 〈◊〉 towards their br●thren ) then those scandalous persons they refuse to communicate with , as the Pharis●s pride in prayer , made him lesse justifi●● and un●●ceptable to God then the Publican , Luke 18. 9. to 15. a place well worthy their saddest consideration . And thu● much for I●das his receiving the Sacr●ment , which go●● very farr in deciding our present controversies . The seventh difference is ▪ Whether the Minister hath not fully discharged his duty and conscience if he give warning to unworthy Communicants of the danger they incurre by their unworthy approches to the Lords Table , ●nd seriously deh●rt them from comming to it , ●●lesse they repent , reforme , and come prepared ? And ●hether the 1 Cor. 11. Ezek. 33. 1. to 10. Acts. 20. 26. 27. ●ith the Li●urgies of our owne and the French Churches doe not intimate a●d prove a● much ? I affirme , my f Antagonists deny it in their three printed Pamphlets ; affirming , that it is not enough for Ministers to warne them of the sinne and danger of unworthy receiving ▪ unlesse they l●kewise keep them back from the Sacrament : The reason they render is , because , ●f the Minister gives the Sacrament to such , he is a partaker of their sinne and as much guilty by the giving , as the other by his unwor●hy receiving ▪ and shall partake with him both in the guilt and punishment : To exemplifie which they use this simi●itude : Sir , if you have a cup in your hand which will poyson and kill a sick distempered man , if he drinke of it , will you give it unto him if he desire it ? and do● you think it enough to admonish him that it is deadly poyson , and first deh●rt him from drinking of it ▪ and then imediately reach it to him , with intent tha he shall drink of it ? I perswade my selfe , that as he shall perish , so hi● blood shall be required at your ha●ds and that you shall as guilty hold up your hand at the barre for it . Yea , th y av●rre , that this is more then arbitrary , tyrannicall ▪ papall domineering over the consciences of Pastors , Elders and godly people , to ●● s●andalous sinners intrude and come boldly to the Lords table ▪ and the Pastors and Elders have no power to keep them backe . To which I answer ▪ I very much wonder at this strange divinity , never heard of in the world till of late , and that first among the Anabaptists , from whence it was derived into o●● English soyle : But for a direct reply , I readily acknowledge that all desperate , sc●nd●lous , wicked ▪ obstin●te sinners , may be justly excōmunicated from the Church ●nd S●craments ▪ after sever●ll previous admonitions for their sinful courses , & th●t being th●s excommunic●ted ▪ they ought ●ot to be admitted to the s●cr●ment nor any other publike Ordin●nce til their open profession of sin●ere repentance ●●d re-admission to the Church : But if ●ny such not thus proceeded ●gainst ●or excommunic●ted after due ●dmonitions , profer themselves ●t the Lords Table together with others , professing unf●ined rep●ntance for their sinne● past , and reformation of their lives for time to come ( a● every person vol●ntarily doth who resorts to the Lords table ) in such a case the Minister when he hath s●rio●sly ●dmonished them of the d●nger of unworthy r●ceiving , and dehorted them to come to the Sacrament , unlesse they find th●mselves sufficiently prepared in their owne consciences , hath fully discharged his duty , and cannot repell them from this heavenly banquet ▪ And if i● this case they receive unworthily , he is no way guilty of their ●inne in the least degree , since he consented ●ot to it and did for●w●rne the● of it : To make this apparent to every mans capacity , I shall lay downe these six conclusions which I desire all Christians , especially Separatists and I●dependents , seriously to ponder . First , that eve●y visible Member of ● visible Church or Congregation , not actu●lly secl●ded from it by excomm●nication for some notorious sca●dall , hath a true interest in , ●nd right unto every Ordin●nce of Christ ●d●inistred in that Church , of which he is not made unc●p●ble by any naturall disability , as children , fooles , and distracted men are of receiving the Lords Supper , bec●use unable to ex●mine themselves ; to which notwithstanding they have been admitted in some Ch●rche● . For pro●fe of this conclusion , I must lay downe another , which ●tterly s●bverts the very fo●nd●tion of Separation●nd Independency ; That the Sacr●ments both of Baptisme and the Lords s●ppe● were beq●eathed by Christ himselfe ( as all his other Ordinance● ) ●ot only to his elect and regenerated children ▪ but to his visible Ch●r●h on e●rth , and ●ll visible member● of it ; in which there alwayes hath bee● ▪ ●o● is , and ever will be ▪ a ●ixture both of good and bad , ch●●fe and Wheat , exter●all and re●ll professors , Hypocrites and sincere Beleevers . Hence it is all our Opposite● unanimously grant ▪ that they ca●●ot refuse the Sacrament to H●pocrites , or c●rnall morall Christians , of civill ●nblam●ble life ●nd conversatio● , though there be no power of godli●esse in them , if they be not grosly ignor●●t , nor yet deny the Sacrament of Baptisme to their childre● ( which the Apo●tle cal●Saints or H●ly ) bec●●se they are members of the visible Church ▪ to whom the Sacaments of right belong , as such ; else they ●ight s●spend all s●ch from the Lords S●pper upon this very ground ▪ that they are hypocrites , unregenerated ▪ unsanctified persons ▪ who have no right unto the Sacraments as well as scandalous impenitent sinners ; From whence I argue thus , Those who have a true right to the Sacrament , as visible members of the visible Church , ought not in justice or conscience to be deprived of it , in case they demand it , by any Minister or Presbytetery , Mat. 24. 45 , 46 ▪ &c. Luke 12. 42 , &c. compared with Mat. 22 ▪ ● , to 15. 1 Cor. 10 ▪ 1. to 7. 17. ● Tim. 2. 24. 25 ▪ 26. But all unexcommnnicated Christians ▪ who are able to examine themselves , as visible Members of the visible Church , have a trus right to the sacrament , in case they doe demand it , when publikely administred . Ergo , they ought not in justice or conscience to be deprived of it by any Minister or Presbytery , when publikely administred , if they shall require it . The rather , because nothing but an actuall excommunication can suspend them from this their right , as an actuall o●tlary suspends men from the benefit of the Law . Secondly ▪ that every visible Christian not actually excommunicated , who hath a right to the Sacrament of Baptism & hath bin admitted therunto ( which answers circumcision this Seal of the covenant ) such only excepted , who by reason of infancy or other infirmitie● of nature , are unable to examine themselves , hath likewise as good a right to , and interest in the Lords supper , the other seal of the Covenant ( as some phrase it without a text ) which answers to the Passeover ; even as every circumcised person under the Law had a right to eat of the Passover , and might not be debarred from it , as is formerly proved ; since no rationall Christian is able to give a satisfactory re●son , why such should enjoy the benefit of one Sacrament and yet not be admitted to the other , seeing that which entitles them to the one entitles them to the other , and that which debarres them from the one secludes them from the other : We read in the very Apostles times , that a meere externall slight confession of sin and profession of the Christian faith , was sufficient to enable sinners to be baptized ; hence Simon Magus , a meere dissembler , and Symonaicall unregenerate wretch , was b●ptized by Phillip as well as others who really repented and beleeved in Christ , though he were in the gall of bitternesse and bond of iniquity , Acts 8. 12. to 25. yea , many others who turned Wolves , Apostates , Hereticks were baptized by the very Apostles , onely upon their externall profession of Christ , without any inward truth of grace , Acts 20. 29. 30. 2 Tim. 3. 1. to 6. Rom. 16 17 18. 2 Pet. 2. throughout Iude 8. to 20. 1 Ioh. 2. 18 19 And u●on a very sodain , seeming remorse for sin and Confession of Christ at the very first Sermon without any delay or long examination of the sincery or truth of their faith or conversation , thousands with their whole housholds were baptized and admitted into the Church by the Apostles , Act. 2 37 38. 4● . c. 8. 12. 13. ● . 10. 34. to the end ch. 16. 33. Yea ▪ among the very Anabaptists themselves both beyond the seas & at home , there are farre more hypocrites and carnall persons of ripe yeers rebap●i●ed ▪ then reall Saints ▪ onely upon a bare externall profession of faith and repentance ▪ and so generally i● all other Churches in the world , from Christs time till this present : I● then the Sacrament of Baptisme hath in all ages , Churches since its inst●●●tion ▪ and b● the very Apostles themselves without any danger of si● or s●ruple of conscience be●n administred to all externall ●rofessors of Christ and never denied to any suc● , ( or to their children , but by Anabaptists ; ) then by the self ▪ same rea●on the ●a●●ament of the Lords Supper may and must be adminis●red to th●● , w●●n t●ey ●●nder themselves among others to receive it , and can neither in point of conscience or Christianity be justly with ▪ held from them by any Ministery or Presbytery whatsoever , if not actually excommunicated for some ●otorious s●●ndall , the one being as much a tr●● Sacrament as the other , if not of more absol●●e necessity then the other : Upon which ground , I shall challe●ge all my Opposites ▪ to shew me any divine charter or president in Scriptu●e authorizing them to suspend any unexcomm●●icated Christians , able to exmine themselves , and willing to comm●nica●e , from receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , whom they ●ave formerly deemed fit to receive and could not deny him the Sacrament of Baptisme : Till this be done , they must pardo● me for not subscribing to any such pretended authority by divine right . Thirdly , that it is the Ministers bounden duty to administer the Sacraments to their people , as well as to preach and pray , Mark 16. 15 , 16. Matth. 28. 19 , 20. Acts 2. 41 , 42. chap. 8. 12 , 13. chap. 10. 47 , 48. 1 Cor. 10. 16. chap. 11. 23. to 28. Therefore they can no more deny to administer this Sacrament to those of their Congregation who are not excommunicated , then ref●se to preach the Gospell to them , or pray with them : What Paul writes of preaching the Gospell , Necessity i● laid upon me , andw●● is me if I preach not the Gospell ▪ 1 Cor. 9. 16 , the same may Ministers apply to their administrng the Sacrament , woe to us if we administer it not when de●ired ; the r●ther because it is now a received principle among Presbyterians , and professedly agreed by our reverend Brother of Scotland i● his Fast Sermon ; that no private Minister hath any jurisdiction in himself to keepe back● any from the sacrament , but onely the whole Classis or Presbytery . Fourthly , that though God hath originally in his primary intention ordained his Gospell and Sacraments ( which are rich mercies in themselves , ) only for the comfort and salvation of those who worthily receive them ; yet he hath secondarily instituted them to be the savour of death unto death , and a means of aggravating the sins and condemnation of such who shall wilfully conte●ne , abuse , or unworthily receive them , 1 Cor. 11. 25. to 30. 2 Cor. 2 ▪ 15 , 16. Matth. 10. 14 , 15. Mark 16. 15 , 16. L●ke 8. 18. Heb. 6. 6 , 7 ▪ 8. Iohn 15. 22. 2 Pet. 2. 21. Ezek. 2. 3. to 9. Yea ▪ Christ himselfe , tho●gh he be a most sweet Saviour in his owne ●at●re and Gods pri●itive intentio● , yet accidentally he is set for the fall , as well as for the rising of many in Israel , Luke 2. 34. ●ay , for a stone of st●●bling and rocke of off●nce , for a gin , and for a snare ; at ●●d against which ●any shall stumble and fall , ●nd be broken , and s●ared , and taken , Isa. 8. 14 , 15 , chap. 2● . 16. Rom. 9. 33. 1 Pe●. 28. Matth. 21. 44. Luke 20. 18. So ●re his Word ●●d Sacraments too , accidentally set ( by reason of me●● corruptions and ●●worthy , ●●profitable particip●tio● of them ; ) for the fall and ruine , as well as the salvation of 〈◊〉 . Fiftly , that God onely i●fallibly knows the he●●ts and present state of all men , not any Minister or Presbytery , 2 Chron. 6. 30. Acts 1. 24. 2 Tim. 2. 19. 1 Sam. 16. 5. to 14. Matth. 26. 21 ▪ 22. Iohn . 2 , 24 ▪ 25. That he can convert and change ●●●s hearts and lives in a m●ment ▪ and make them meet Co●●nicants though●● cannot discerne them to be such ▪ Acts 3. 9. to 28. chap. 2. 37 ▪ 38. &c. Rom. 11. 3 ▪ 4 ▪ 5 ▪ He can sodainly give th●m a white ston● , with a new name written in it , which NO MAN KNOWETH SAVING HE THAT RECEIVETH IT , Revel● 2. 17. And therefore if we see any desirous to receive the Sacrament , to be penitent in outward shew and profession , we ought in the judgement of ch●●ity to esteem them such , since we cannot infallibly discern● and search their hearts ▪ 1 ●or . 13. 5. 7. Phil. 2. 3. Heb ▪ 6. 9. Mat. 7. 1. Rom. 14 ▪ 4. to 15. Sixthly , that no Ministers private judgement , or conscience ought to be the rule of his admitting any to ▪ or suspending them from the Sacrament : For first , there is no Text nor cla●se of S●ri●tu●e that makes his private judgement or conscience such a rule : Secondly , if a Minister should have power to deny the sacrament ( under pain of sin ▪ ye● punishmentt , as some men ●each ) ●o every Communicant he deems unmeet or unworthy , before actuall convictio● of his unworthinesse in the Presbytery , then it would rest in the power of every particular Minister , how justly or unjustly soever , to admit or se●l●de from the sacrament whom ever his cōscience or judgment should think fit ; which would introduce the most exorbitant arbitrary Papall jurisdiction , usurpation over the consciences ▪ priviledges of christians & Ordinances of Christ , that was ever yet heard of or exer●ised in the christian world ; make every Minister more thē a Pope every member of a congregation worse then a slave , and give greater authority to every ordinary Pastor , then ever Christ or ●is Apostles exercised , or the Pope or Prelats hitherto claimed . Thirdly , then it would inevitably follow , that in case the whole Presbytery , Classis or Synod should deem a man , upon any appe●l unto them against his Ministers unjust suspension , worthy and fit to receive the sacrament ; yet if his Ministers judgement and conscience be not satisfied ▪ but he deems him still ●nworthy , he may , will and must still refuse to administer the Sacrament to him , notwithstanding their resolution , else he should offend against his owne judgement and conscience . So on the other side , if the Presbytery , Classis ▪ Synod , should vote any man unworthy and unfit to communicate ▪ yet if the Minister think him fit he may , wil and must admit him to the sacrament if he r●quire it lest he should sin against his conscience ; And then to what end serve Presbyteries Classes , Synods , or Appeales unto them in such ●ases ; since upon my Opposites objected ▪ princi●les ( if they will adhere unto them ) not their resolutions ▪ but every particular Ministers private j●dgment , conscience , is and ought to be the sole canon and Directory which he will , must and ought to follow , And then to what a miserable slavery shall we be re●●●ed , if every Minister may have snch authority to Lord it over the Lords inheritances and Ordinances too , let all prudent men determine . These six conclusions premised , which have utterly overt●rned the very foundations o● this strange Objection , and laid the Opposites on their backs ; I answer directly , That a Minister in delivering the sacrament to a scandalous , unexcomm●nicated person , who ●fter admonition of the danger , doth earnestly desire to receive it , as conceiving himselfe in his owne heart and conscience meet to participate of it , becomes no way guilty of his si●ne or punishment , in case he eat and drink judgement by his ●nworthy receiving of it : My reasons are th●se ; First , because this receiver being not excommunicated , hath a true ●ight to this sacrament , as a vi●●ble member of the visible Church , as well as to Baptisme and other Ordinan●●s ; therefore the Ministers cannot in point of conscience debarr● hi● fro● it . Secondly , be●●use he hath no commission from Christ to keep bac● ▪ such a person , nor yet any such power from the Church or state . Thirdly , because every Communicant is to examine himselfe and his owne conscience between God & him , whether he be fit to receive the sacrament or not , and to be the judge of his owne heart , which no other can so truly discerne as himselfe , 1 Cor. 11. 28. 31. 2 Cor. 13. 6. Gal. 6. 4. 5. Jer. 17. 9. 1 Cor. 2. 11. And if he judge himselfe fitly prepared , joynes with others in the publike confession of his sinnes , and promiseth newnesse of life , the Minister ought in point of charity to deem him so , and hath no commission from Christ to exclude him ; When Christ himselfe instituted and administred this sacrament , we read not of any examination made by him of his Disciples fitnesse or preparednesse to receive it ; nor yet of Paul or any other Apostle or Minister in the new Testament , that made any such particular scrutiny into other Communicants consciences to try their fitnesse or unfitnesse , as some now magisterially take upon them to make by way of jurisdiction ▪ not advice , derived originally from Popish tyranny , and their exploded practice of Auricular confession to a Priest , before the receiving of the sacrament ▪ : All the power they claimed or exercised in this kind ▪ was onely by way of Councell ; Let a man therefore examine himselfe , not others , or others him ( say all old and new Expositors on the Text ) And if they may not examine , then much lesse judge or seclude him as unworthy ▪ without examination or knowledge of his heart , which God onely knowes and searcheth , and himself . Fourthly , because he administers the sacrament to him as to a person outwardly fitted and prepared , the inward preparation of whose heart , for ought he knowes may be sincere towards God , & really changed from what it was before . Fifthly , because the administration of the sacrament is an holy lawfull action , and Gods Ordinan●ce in the Minister , who delivers it onely as Gods Ordinance , in obedi●nce to his command , with a good intention to benefit all , and hurt none by it . Sixthly , because such a persons unworthy receiving is onely contingent and casuall ; no Minister , or creature being able infallibly to judge , whether God at this instant ▪ out of his abundant mercy , may not by the omnipotent working of his spirit , in the preparatory examinations , prayers , exhortations before the act of receiving , & in the very receiving it selfe ( the sacrament being as well a meanes to beget as confirme grace ) change both his heart and life , and make him eat and drink salvation , instead of damnation to himselfe . Seventhly , because all our Opposites accord , that Ministers may and ought to admister the sacrament to masked Hypocrites , and unregenerate civill morall Christians , who live not in open scandalous sinners , though these for want of faith and sincere repentance doe all eat and drink judgement to themselves as well as scandalous open sinners : Yea , most of them acknowledge , that if the Classis or Pre●bytery , shall judge any man whom the Minister deems ignorant , scandalous and unworthy to communicate ; to be a meet Communicant , contrary to the Ministers judgement and conscience , yet he may nay must admit and administer the sacrament to him . I would then demand of my Antagonists , whether in this case the Minister be guilty of these receivers sinnes and unworthy receiving ? or whether their similitude of a Cup of poyson holds in such a case ? If yea then why wil they thus inforce them to commit a sin against their conscience● ▪ and to par●ake of other mens sins in these cases by administring the sacrament to them ? If not , then they yeeld their objection false , in the case of scandalous persons too , there being the same ●●worthy p●rticipation in both . Seventhly , because the Minist●r onely gives the sacrament , and the unworthy rec●iving , is the receivers owne personall act and sinne alone , not the Minist●rs , as is his unworthy hearing , praying , acting . Eighthly , because else Christ , who was guilty of no sinne , sho●ld have been partaker of I●das his sinne and u●worthy receiving , in administring the sacrament to him , knowing him infallibly to be a Traytor , Theefe , Devill , and sonne of perdition , which were blasphemy to affirm : And if it were no sin in Christ , then not in others , to give the Sacrament to known unworthy receivers , since they do but follow his example . Ninthly , because the Minister in administring the Sacrament , is a sweet savour of Christ , as well in those that perish by it , as in those that are saved and benefitted by it , as he is in preaching the Gospell ; God having appointed it secondarily and contingently ( as well as his Word ) to be a means of aggravating mens sins and condemnation , to magnifie his justice , as well as an instrument of grace and salvation to magnifie his mercy , 1 Cor. 11. 25. to 30. Finally , the holy Ghost himselfe expresly resolves in positive tearms , that he that eateth and drinketh unworthily , eateth & drinketh damnation or judgment TO HIMSELFE ( not to the Minister or other Communicants , ) and drawes guilt , judgements onely upon himselfe , verse 27 , 30 , 31. Thus all the ancient and moderne Comentators on this Text , together with Gratian , Causa 1. Quest . 1. Iv● Carnot●nsis Decretal . secunda pars , resolve unanimously against the Donatists ; and this the objectors owne practice heretofore , in delivering the sacrament to such , without thinking themselves guilty of their sin , having exhorted , admonished them of the danger , and so done what in them lay to keepe them off , refutes . This new Doctrine therefore of theirs , is point-blank against the Scripture , Saint Pauls expresse resolution , the practice and judgement of all antiquity , their owne opinions , practice heretofore , and others now ; whether of these are to be credited herein , let themselves determine . Finally , the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} , in this text , which you render damnation , signifies naught else but judgement , as the margin of our Bibles render it ; that is , some temporall judgement , as sicknesse , weaknesse , death , and such like punishments , as v. 30 , 31 , 32. directly expounds it , and most Expositors on this text resolve ; not eternall condemnation , as you misinterpret it , as Mat. 5. 21 ▪ 22. c. 7. 1 , 2. 1 Pet. 4. 7. will fully clear . Therefore the very founda●ion of this objection , is a meere mistake . As for the much pressed similitude of a cup of poyson , which hath deluded many , it is but a meere fallacy , and differs in many particulars from the Cup in the Lords Supper : For first , the Cup in the Lords Supper is no poyson in it selfe , neither can any Minister certainly determine , that it will prove poyson to the soule of any one par●icular Communicant , no more then the Word or other Ordinances ; for it may for ought he knowes , prove a soveraigne medicine to those very persons through Gods blessing , to whom he thoug 〈◊〉 it might prove poyson ; And therefore if a Physician give a whole some potion to one , to whom it may in probability prove a medicine , not a poyson ; and it proves poyson to him onely by accident , through his distemper who receives it ( as many physicall potions doe ) this certainly is neither man-slaughter nor murther in the Physician , as the Objectors ignorantly mistake , ( for then I doubt all the Physicians obout London would soon take a ●urne at Tibur●● . ) Set then the similitude right , as it stands paralell with the Sacrament in this respect , and it vanisheth into nothing , or else turnes against you : Secondly , it is a meere arbitrary , voluntary act in men to give a poisonous potion to him that shall demand it , & they have free power to keep it from him if they please : But on the contrary , the Minister hath no power to deny the Sacramentall Cup and Bread to any seeming penitents that desire it , and doth but his duty in administring it , as I have manifested ; therefore it can be no crime in him : Thirdly , you may make the same argument against the Ministers preaching the Gospell to obstinate scandalous sinners , since his very preaching doth encrease their sinnes and damnation , as well as his administring the Sacraments to them , Mat. 10. 14 , 15. Heb. 6. 6 , 7 , 8. Now whereas they object , that the admission of unexcommunicated wicked scandalous persons to the Sacrament , is more then an arbitrary , tyrannicall , Papall domineering over the consciences of Ministers , Elders , and godly people : it 's a meere untruth and scandalous assertion , as all the premises demonstrate ; never affirmed by any Classicke Author till this age ; and though a real errour in many consciencious persons who beleeve it as a truth , yet I fear & partly know , that many who now object & urge it , do not cordially beleev it as a truth , but rather make use of it as a received error the more easily to usurp unto themselves a meere arbitrary , if not tyrannicall authority over their Congregations consciences , and Gods Ordinances , in admitting to , excluding from them whom they please : the very extremity of that arbitrary , Episcopall , Papall power , which we solemnly vow against in our Nationall Covenant , and have taken up arms against in the field : And so much concerning this grand difference , the importance whereof hath made me more prolix and copious . The eighth thing in controversie is , Whether Ministers may not as well refuse to preach the Word to such unexcommunicated grosse impenitent , scandalous Christians , whom they would suspend from the Sacrament , for feare of partaking with them in , and being guilty of their sinnes , as to administer the Sacrament to them ? since their unprofitable hearing of the Word , is every wayes as dangerous , as damning a sinne to their soules , as their ●nworthy receiving the Sacrament , and those who eat and drink damnation to themselves , in the one , doe but heare and multiply damnation to themselves in the other ? 2 Cor. 2. 14 , 15 , 16. Mat. 10. 14 , 15. Mark 16. 15 , 16. Luke 8. 18. Heb. 2. 1 , 2. chap. 2. 7 , 8. chap. 6. 6 , 7 , 8. The rather , because that oft alleaged Text of Matth. 7. 6. Give not that which is holy unto dogs , neither cast you your pearles before swine , least they trample the● under their feet , and turne againe and teare you : is properly meant of preaching the Word , t●o administing the Sacrament unto such ; as is evident by Mat. 10. 14. Mark 16. 15 , 16. Acts 13. 46. 51. And whether any reason can be given by our Opposites , why such as these should be admitted by themselves , to heare the Word , without any scruple , guilt , or participation of their sinnes , and yet be totally secluded from this Sacrament , under paine of being guilty of their unworthy receiving ? To this pressing demand , our Antagonists answer v●riously , putting sundry groundlesse differences , between the preaching of the Word , and administration of the Sacraments , which I shall severally examine . First , they say , that a Minister preacheth the Word to many unprofitable hearers , not knowing them to he such , in hope to convert and profit them , if there be any such in the Auditory : so also he gives the sacraments to some unworthy receivers , not knowing them to be such , with an intention to doe them good : and in such cases he is blamlesse : ( Thus far then there is no such difference , as is surmised . ) But ●f he give the holy seals of Christs body and blood to scandalous and impenitent persons , he knows he gives them damnation to eat and drink ; and is half sharer with them in the sinfull act ; so that though unworthy hearing and receiving be equally damnable , to the hearers and receivers , yet not equally dangerous to the Ministers . I answer to this latter clause , wherein the difference is pretended : First , that the Minister doth as certainly know , that if he preach the Word to obstinate , scandalous , impenitent sinners , he doth but preach damnation to them in his Sermons , as that he doth give damnation to them in the Sacrament Mark ▪ 16. 16. Heb. 6. 6 , 7 , 8. Matth. 10. 14. 15. and those whom he certainly knowes to be such scandalous and impenitent receivers , he cannot but know ●o be first impenitent , scandalous hearers , since the Sermon preceeds the Sacrament : Therefore if he be guilty of their sin or damnation , in giving the Sacrament to them , he must be likewise in preaching to them . Secondly , this evasion is built upon two false principles : First , that a Minister may and doth ●ertainly know , that if he give the Sacrament to one who hath been formerly an impenitent scandalous sinner , but now comes openly and confesseth his sinnes , promiseth reformation for time to come , and is desirous to receive the sacramentall signes of the pardon of his sinnes , with the rest of the Congregation , with expresse promise and desire to become a new man ( as all receivers ever externally doe ) that he gives him damnation to eat and drink : This I am certaine no Minister can infallibly know or affirme , because he knows not the present change or inclination of his heart , or whether God by ●his very duty may not really convert him : Secondly , that the Minister who sorewarnes men of the danger of unworthy receiving , and admonisheth the Communicants seriously to examine themselves , and come prepared to the Sacrament , or else to forbeare , is guilty of the unworthy rec●ivers sinnes ; which I have already disproved . Therefore this diversity vanisheth into smoke . Secondly , they alleadge ; That the Lords holy table in the holy Communi●n , 〈◊〉 a place of Gods more holy presence then the common Auditory , where we come neerer unto God ▪ and receive with the Word and Promis●s particularly appli●d to 〈◊〉 the seales of o●r co●●union with Christ , and of our right and int●res● in him , and all his benefits : But preaching to a co●●on Auditory , is a generall pr●pounding of the Word and Promises to all , not a particular application of it to any : therfore there it ●ore danger and greater sinne in admitting ●●worthy receivers to the Lords table , then in preaching to them ; at app●ares in Aarons two sonnes , Levit. 19. 1 , 2 , 3. and Uzzah , 2 Sam. 6. 7. To which I answer ; first , that the beginning of this distinction , is just the late Archbishop of Canterburies Doctrine , in his Speech in Starre-chamber ( so much distasted in former times ) who produceth this for a reason , why we should bow to the Table and Altar , not to the Pulpit , pag. 47. We must bow towards the Altar as THE GREATEST place of Gods presence on earth ; I say THE GREATEST , yea GREATER THEN THE PULPIT ; for there it is , Hoc est corpus meum , this is my body ; but in the Pulpit , ▪ t is at ●ost but ▪ Hoc est Verbum meum , this is my Word ; and A GREATER REVERENCE NO DOUBT is du● to the body , then to the Word of the Lord ; and so in relation answerably to the Thr●n● where hii body is usually present , then to the Seat whence his word useth to be proclai●ed ; which I have elsewhere at large refuted , proving Gods presence and Spirit , to be as much , a● really present in other Ordinances as in this , from Matth. 28. 20. and other Texts . Secondly , this passage proves this Sacrament to be as converting , yea , a more converting Ordinance , then preaching of the Word , which my Antagonists positively deny . Thirdly , in the preaching of the Word , there is or ought to be a particular Application of it to all the Auditors severall consciences , sinnes , conditions , as well as in the Administration of the Sacraments : witnesse experience , and Acts 2. 23. 37. 38 , 39 , 40 , 41. chap. 3. 14 , 15 , 17 , 19. Matth : 24. 45 , 46. Luke 12. 42. therefore this is a difference without a diversity . Fourthly , the examples of Arons sonnes , and Uzzah , are impertinently alleaged , since they relate not to the Sacrament , and rather respect unworthy Ministers , then Communicanst . Thirdly , they Object , that the Minister in giving the Sacrament to knowne impenitent sinners , pr●acheth ●ost palpable lyes against his owne conscience , when he s●●h , The body of Christ was broken for you , and his blood shed for you ; when as in preaching the Word , the Ministers of Christ propound the truth to wicked men generally , but not partic●larly apply any word of co●fort , or pro●ise of blessing to any ●●profitable hearers , b●t ●pon condition of repentance . To this I answer ; first , that the Minister doth not administer the Sacrament to any knowne impenitent sinners under that notion , but onely as penitent sinners , truly repenting of their sinnes past , and promising , purposing to lead a new life for the future , as the exhortations before the Sacrament and their publike confessions before the whole Congregation manifest . Secondly , he useth these words , The body of Christ which was broken , and the blood of Christ shed for yo● &c. not absolutely , but conditionally onely ▪ in case they receive the Sacrament worthily , and become penitent and beleeving receivers , as they all pro●esse themselves to be , just so as they preach repentance and remi●sion to their Auditors ; Therefore the case is just the same in both without any difference . Thirdly , the particular delivery and recitall of the words by the Minister to every Communicant , is not simply necessary , nor of divine , but humane institution onely , though usually and warrantably practised amongst us . Therefore this new distinction is of no moment . Fourthly , they surmise , that they have an expresse command to preach the Gospell to every creature without exception , to Pagans as well as Christians , Matth. 28. 19 , 20. Marke 16. 15. Rom. 10. 18. But they have no such command to administer the Sacrament to all , but onely to worthy receivers . I answer ; first , that this precept principally respectes none but the Apostles , who were sent to preach the Gospell to all Nations and creatures , and endued with the gif● of tongues to that purpose ; not ordinary Preachers , who confine themselves usually to particular Congregations , Countries , and have no extraordinary guift of tongues enabling them to preach to all Naions in their owne language , as the Apostles had , Acts 2. Secondly , though the Sacrament must not be administred to Heathens , to whom the Gospell may and must be preached , before they beleeve and professe Christ ; yet it must be administred to them as well as baptisme , after their beliefe and profession of Christ ; since it appeares by the very objected Texts , that as they were to preach the Gospell to all Nations , creatures , and sorts of men , so they were to baptize them likewise , and by consequence to administer the other Sacrament of the Lords Supper to them , as well as baptisme : as the 1 Cor. 10. 1. to 6. 16 , 17. 21. chap. 11. 20. to 34. compared with Matth. 26. 20. 27 , 28. Marke 14. 18 , &c. Luke 22. 14 , &c. manifest . Thirdly , the Sacrament of the Lords Supper belongs of right to all visible knowing Members of the visible Church , as well as the Sacrament of Baptisme , as I have formerly evidenced ; and as the Confession of Saxony resolves in these tearmes ; The Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords Supper are so instituted , that every man may use them , because they be pledges and testimonies , which declare , that the benefits promised in the Gospell doe ap●rtaine to every one ; for the voyce of the Gospell is generall , &c. This distinction therefore is invalid . Fifthly , they consent , that they ought not to preach the Word , to scandalous impenitent sinners , who turne Apostates , wilfull scorners and persec●tors of the Gospell , who doe but the more rage and are ●ardned thereby ; it being a prophanation of holy things , a giving of holy things to dogges , and a casting of Pearls before swine , Mat. 7. 6. chap. 10. 14. Acts 14. 51. Ergo , they must not give this sacrament to such . I answer , that by this they fully grant what I contend for , to wit , that such dogges and swine who ought to be suspended from the Sacraments , ought likewise to be suspended from hearing the Word ; so that they do herein justifie and subscribe to my opinion instead of refutingit . For my part , I never contested ▪ that such dogs and swine as these , ought to be admitted to the Sacrament , but they ought to be totally excommunicated , as well from the Word , and all other Ordinances , as from the Lords Supper ; not secluded from it alone , and admitted to all the rest : Only here the Question between us will be , who are those dogges and swine that our Saviour intends , Matth. 7. 6 ? Certainly not every Christian that relapseth againe and againe into severall scandalous sinnes , against his pomises , Vowes , Covenants , as the best men many times may doe , by reason of the strength of their sins and corruptions , before they can totally subdue them Pro. 24 , 16. Psal. 34. 19. Psal. 38. 3 , 4. Psal. 40. 12. James 3. 2. Matth. 18. 22 Gal. 6. 1. Nor yet every scandalous sinner , who repaires to the Word and Sacraments , with a desire to heare and receive the same , and joynes with the Congregation in the externall confession and bewailing his of sinnes , promising , vowing repentance and a new life ; surely such a● these are no dogges nor swine within our Saviours precept , as you surmise ; for then by your owne confessions , you ought not to preach unto them , but seclude them from the Word , ( of which this Text is principally intended , ) as well as Sacraments ; but onely such Infidels and Heathens who refused to embrace and beleeve the Gospell , andharbour or entertaine the Preachers of it ( which many scandalous sinners are very willing to doe ) Or such open contemners , persecutors of the Gospel and Ministers of it , who run upon and teare the Preachers thereof , trampling the Pearls of the Gospell , and the tenderers of them under their feet , as the Text resolves in terminis , Matth. 7. 6. chap. 10. 14 , 15. Luke 9. 5. Acts 13. 46 , &c. Or , open Apostates from the Christian faith , which they once embraced , but after , return with the dogg● to his vomit , and the sow that is washed , to her wallowing in the myre , trampling under feet the Sonne of God , and counting the blood of the Covenant wherewith they were sanctified , an unholy thing , offering despight to the spirit of grace , denying the very Lord that bought them , and contemning Christ himselfe ( as Julian the Apostate , with others did ) a● Saint Peter and Paul expresly determine , 2 Pet. 2. 1 , 2. 21. 22. Heb. 10. 28 , 29. chap. 6. 4. to 9. To apply this Text then to such scandalous sinners , who duly repaire to the publike Ordinances , desire to participate in them , and externally professe reformation and repentance ( of which the controversie onely is ) is a meere perverting of this Text , and an application of it unto such , whom Christ did never intend thereby , as these parallel Texts demonstrate : However , certaine I am , this Text extends not to any pious , penitent , beleeving Christians , truly fearing God , who out of judgement , conscience , dare not joyn with Sectaries in their new Independent wayes of separation , to whom our Independent Ministers , Anabaptists , & other Separatists , are so uncharitable , unchristian , that they will not admit them nor their children to the Sacraments , in their separate Congregations , nor communicate with them upon any tearmes , for feare of giving that which is holy to dogges , and casting Pearles before swine ; such , and no better are the holiest , best of our Presbyterian Ministers , and Churchmembers estimated in their uncharitable Pharisaicall , unbrotherly opinions . God grant unto them more charity , and lessespirituall pride , which of all sinnes ●he , d●serves most to be excommunicated out of all Christian hearts and Congregations . But their sixth and last difference , wherein they all accord , yea place their strength , ( being indeed the very foundation of their mistake , ) this great controversie of suspension from the Sacrament , & so requiring a fuller answer , is that which ou● Reverend Brother of Scotland insisted on i● his conorov●sall Fas● Sermon , That the preaching of the Word is a converting Ordinance , and therefore ought to be preached to scandalous sinners , to convert them from their sins ; but the sacrament of the Lords supper is no converting , but onely a sealing and confirming Ordinance , instituted , not to beget , but ●ncrease faith and rep●●tance where they are formerly b●gun ; and therefore not to be administred to such , to whom they can seale no pardon of sinne , nor covenant of grace . The same distinction hath likewise been used in a Sermon at Wool-chu●ch , and is subscribed to by all the three printed Answers to my four Queries . To which I answer ; first , that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is a converting as well as a sealing Ordinance . For the better cleering wherof , we must distinguish of two sorts of conversion and sealing , which our Antagonists , to delude the vulgar , have ignorantly , wilfully or injudiciously confounded : First , there is an externall conversion of men from Pag●●is●e or Gentilisme , to the externall profession of the P●ith of Christ ; which is ordinarily wrought by the preaching of the Word ; or extraordinarily , by miracles without the Word preached , in reference to those without the Church ; but ordinarily effected by the Sacrament of Baptisme , in reference to infants of Christian Parents borne within the Church , which Sacrament both admits and makes them members of the visible Church ( without the preaching of the Word of which infants are not capable , ) Acts 2. 37. to 43. 1 Pet. 3. 20 21. Joh. 3. 5. 1 Cor. 7. 14. Secondly , there is a conversion from a meere externall formall profession of the Doctrine and faith of Christ , to an inward spirituall embracing and application of Christ , with his merits and promises to our soules , by the saving grace of faith , and to an holy Christian reall change of heart and life : In this last conversion , the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not onely a sealing or confirming , but likewise a regenerating and converting Ordinance , as well as the Word . There is likewise a double sealing ( if we admit this Sacrament or Baptisme to be Seales , though never once * stiled Seals in any Scripture text : ) 1. A visible externall sealing of the pardon of sin , & Gods promises in the blood of Christ to our outward sences . 2. An internall invisible sealing of them by the Spirit , working in , by the Word and Sacraments , to our soules : In the first sense , this Sacrament is a seale to all receivers , even to those who are scandalous and unworthy , who receive only the outward elements ; In the second sence , only to worthy , penitent , beleeving receivers , who receivethe inward invisible grace as wel as the outward signes : The first , seales all Gods promises and a free pardon of all our sinnes onely conditionally , if we truly repent , lay hold on Christs passion , merits , promises , and apply them to our soules by a lively saving faith , and sincere repentance ; the second seales them to us absolutely , because we have thus embraced and applyed them . These distinctions premised , we may easily discover the falsity of the Antagonists surmise , That this sacrament is no converting , but onely a sealing Ordinance ; and that onely to true beleevers , and worthy receivers , to whom alone it seals the pardon of sinne , and promises of the Gospell ; for proofe whereof , they produce neither reason nor Scripture , but their owne bare confident groundlesse assertions , which I shall thus refute because it is a very common dangerous error . First , our Antagonists unanimously grant , that the Sacrament belongs to all unscandalous members of the visible Church , capable of self-examination , and not actually excommunicated , to close Hypocrites , & morall carnal Christians , not really regenerated , converted , yea to scandalous persons unconvicted , whom they professe no Minister hath any power to suspend from the Sacrament , upon his owne particular private knowledge of their guilt . If then the Sacrament be onely a sealing or confirming ordinance of true grace , when and where it is already begun , then it were altogether impertinent and ineffectuall unto civill carnall Christians ; Therefore do ubtlesse it is and was intended by Christ for a conv●rting Ordinance to all such as these , to turne them from their evill wayes , and work saving grace within their hearts , since it can have no other proper primary effect in such : Certainly God and Christ bestow no Ordinances upon men in vaine ; therefore their intentions in instituting this Supper even for such visible morall unregenerate Christians , as well as reall Saints , must necessarily be for their conversion , not their confirmation and sealingonely , in that sense as they interpret it . Secondly , all Ordinances of Christ that tend to edification , confirmation , or encrease of grace , are more or lesse conducent to begin or beget grace , converting , as well as strengthening Ordinances ; the preaching , reading , hearing of the Word , which comfort , strengthen and build up men in grace , doe likewise ( by our Antagonists free confessions ) convert and beget grace ; why then should not the Sacrament doe the like ? ●ince Gods spirit equally breathes and works in all his Ordinances , and may and doth regenerate and beget grace in mens souls , by what Ordinance he thinks best , working in and by every Ordinance , as well as by any : The rather , because Christ instituted this Sacrament to be frequently received , when a● Baptisme only is but once administred , for this very end , that those who often fall into sin through infirmity , may likewise by this supper often rise againe , be refreshed , comforted , and get strength against their sinnes and corruptious : And is it not then a converting as well as a co●firming Ordinance , fit for sinners to resort to ? The Sacraments are by all Divines whatsoever , and the very Directory , page 52. ever enumerated among the MEANS OF GRACE and SALVATION ; why then should they not be meanes of converting and begetting grace , as well as strengthning and consirming it ? as your selves affirme . Thirdly , the very receiving of the Sacrament , even in unregenerate persons , is for the most part accompanied with such particulars , as are most effectual to convert & beget grace in mens hearts : As first , with a previous externall ▪ serious examination of their own hearts and estates , between God & their owne consciences , for which there are divers pious rules and directions published in printed books of devotion , which most Communicants ordinarily read and make use of before their resort to the Lords Table . Secondly , a solemne searching out of all their open or secret sinnes and corruptions , past or present , accompanied with a serious , particular , private confession of them , a hearty contrition and humiliation for them , private prayers to God for pardon of , yea power and strength against them ; secret purposes , Vowes and resolutions for ever to relinquish , war , strive , fight against them , and avoid all occasions which may ensnare them in them . Thirdly , sundry pious , soul-ravishing meditations , both in regard of their sinnes , Gods mercy and justice , Christs merits , death , passion , the end and use of the Sacraments , &c. which make deep temporary impressions on their hearts , spirits , and work an extraordinary change both in their resolutions , minds , spirits , conversations for the present , and many times for the future . Fourthly , flexanimous exhortations ; admonitions , comminations , directions , prayers by the Ministers in the Congregation , before , in , & after this duty , which operate , penetrate more upon Sacrament-dayes , upon Communicants of all sorts ( as experience manifests ) then at other seasons . Now whether the receiving of this Sacrament , usually accompanied , and set on upon mens spirits , with such most effectuall powerfull , likely meanes of conversion , be not a most apt and proper Ordinance to regenerate , reclaime , convert ungodly , scandalous sinners , and more likely to regenerate and change their hearts , lives , then the bare Word preached , or any other Ordinance , at least wise more effectuall to convert and amend them , then any rigorous suspensions of them from the Sacrament , let every mans conscience and experience judge . Fourthly , all our Antagonists accord , that we have a more immediate intercourse and communion with God and Christ in this Sacrament , then in any other Ordinance whatsoever , where in the outward elements we behold Christs death and passion visibly represented to our eyes , and by them unto our hearts , and more lively , more particularly applyed , and the remission of our sins more sensibly sealed to us then in any other Ordinance ; from whence I thus infallibly conclude against these Opposites : That Ordinance wherein we most immediatly converse with God and Christ , and have more intimate visible , sensible communion with them then in any other , is certainly the most powerfull and effectuall Ordinance of all othecs , to humble , regenerate , conve t , and beget true grace within us , and most probable converting Ordinance of all others ; because the manifestation , revelation and proximity of God and Christ to the soule , is that which doth most of all humble and convert it , as is evident by Job , chap. 38. to 41. compared with chap. 42. 1. to 7. Isa. 6. 1. to 9. Luke 5. 7 , 8 , 9. Psal. 148. 14. Isa. 55. 6. Zeph. 3. 2. Hab. 10. 21. Eph. 2. 13. 17. James 4. 8. But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper by our Antagonists own confession is such : Ergo , it is a converting , as well as a confirming Ordinance . Fifthly , what is it that makes the Word it selfe a converting Ordinance ? ●s it not the particular revelation and application of the promises of the Gospell , of Christs merits , death and passion to the soule , by Gods holy Spirit , not the meere outward voyce or sound ? 1 Cor. 1. 23 , 24. chap. 2. 2. to 6. If so , as all must grant , then certainly this Sacrament , which by our Antagonists confession , doh most particularly , fully , lively , effectually , and sensibly apply the promises , yea , the death , passion and merits of Christ unto every Communicants eyes , eares , heart and soule , far livelier then the Word preached doth , 1 Cor. 11. 14. to 30. Gal. 3. 2. must be a converting Ordinance , and not a meere consirming ordinance , as they pretend . Sixthly , all grant , that God doth as effectually teach , convert & work grace by the eye , as eare ; For first , the very book of nature and contemplation of the creatures instruct us , that there is an invisible God , & is enough to leav men without excuse , and through Gods blessing sufficient to raise up excellent meditations tending both to sanctification and conversion , Psal. 8. 3. to 9. Psal. 19. 1 , 2 , 3. Ps. 100. & 104. throughout , Job 31. to 42. Rom. 1. 28. to 25. Acts 17. 23. to 30. c. 14. 17. Secondly , all the externall Sacrifices of the old Law , together with the Sacraments of Circumcision and the Passeover , did instruct and teach Gods people who participated of them , or were present at them , by the eye , and were both edifying and converting Ordinances , as well as confirming , as all doe and must acknowledge . Thirdly , the severall Miracles of the Prophets under the Law , of Christ and his Apostles under the Gospell ( which converted thousands without preaching ) did convert and regenerate men by the eye without the eare ; the very sight of the Miracles being the ground and cause of their conversion and beleeving , John 2. 11. 23. chap. 3. 2. chap. 4. 52 , 53 , 54. chap. 6. 2. 26. ch. 7. 31. chap. 16. 41. 4. chap. 12. 18. 19. chap. 11. 45 , 47 , 48. Acts 1. 12. to 17. chap. 6. 7 , 8. chap. 8. 6. 13. chap. 15. 12. Acts 19. 11 , 12. Matth. 15. 30 , 31. Luke 5. 25 , 26. 1 Kings 18. 38 , 39. Exod. 18. 31. Fourthly , experience and Scripture informe us , that the things we see with our eyes , doe more affect and beget deeper impressions in our hearts , then the things we heare , Lam. 3. 51. Hence is that speech of our Saviour himselfe , to those who had the happinesse to see his person ; Blessed are your eyes , for they see , &c. Matth. 6. 16. Luk. 10. 23. Hence old Simeon , when he beheld our Saviour , was so ravished at the sight , that he brake out into these patheticall expressions ; Lord now lettest th●n thy servant depart in peace , according to thy Word , for MINE EYES HAVE SEEN THY SALVATION , &c. Luke 2. 29 , 30. Yea , Luke expresly records , chap. 23. v. 46 , 47 , 48. that when the Centurian saw our Saviour on his Crosse , giving up the Ghost , he glorified God saying , certainly this man was a righte●us man : And ALL THE PEOPLE that cane together TO THAT SIGHT , BEHOLDING THE THINGS that were done , s●ote their breasts and returned . If then all these visible objects , Sacraments , Sacrifices , Types , Miracles , and the very beholding of Christs person , passion , without the Word , were the most effectuall meanes of working contrition , conversion , beliefe and faith in Christ in the spectators , by the eye ; why should not the visible expressions of Christs crucified body , blood-shed , passion on the Crosse , most lively presented to our eyes and sences in this Sacrament , even as if Christ himselfe were againe actually crucified before our eyes , Gal. 3. 1. 1 Cor. 11. 25 , 26. have the like effectuall converting , regenerating operation on our hearts and spirits , as well as these other visible objects ? Seventhly , all Divines accord , that the most humbling , melting , sin-purging , mollifying , soul-changing meditation of all others that men can fix on , is the serious contemplation of Christs bitter death and passion on the Crosse ; that our particular sinnes did wound , pierce , not onely his hands , feet , side , but his very soule ; that he was bruised for our iniquities , &c. And yet that such is his suparlative goodnesse , mercy , pity , that forgetting all these indignities ▪ provocations , he heales us by those his very wounds which we have made , and washeth away our sinnes in that very blood of his , which we have shed . No meditation comparable to this , to reclaime ah obstinate sinner , mollifie an adamantine heart , humble a proud spirit , reforme a sinfull life , regenerate and convert a carnall heart . And is not this most passionately , lively , really and effectually represented to our eyes , hearts , in this very Sacrament , in a more powerfull prevailing manner then in the Word alone ? And can any then deny it , to be as converting , yea a more humbling , regenerating , converting Ordinance then the Word , which is likewise commonly joyned with it ? Doubtlesse if this Sacrament be not a converting Ordinance in this regard , I know not any which can be so reputed . Eighthly , all accord , that our owne corporall externall ( a ) afflictions are many times without the Word , the meanes of our repentance and conversion unto God : and the Scripture is expresse they are so . If then our owne afflictions are , or may be a converting ordinance , then much more the Sacrament , wherein the afflictions of Christ himselfe are so visibly set forth before our eyes . Ninthly , that Ordinance whose unworthy participation is a meanes of our spirituall obduration , must , by the rule of contraries , when worthily received , be the instrument of our mortification , conversion , salvation ; But the unworthy receiving the Sacrament , is a meanes of our spirituall obduration and damnation , 1 Cor. 11. 27 , 29. Therefore its worthy receiving must needs be an instrument of our humiliation , mollification , conversion and salvation . Tenthly , the severall ends and purposes for which this Sacrament was ordained , and of which it minds men when ever they receive it , prove it to be a sweet regenerating and converting , as well as a confirming Ordinance . As first , the keeping of Christians in perpetuall memory of Christs death and propiciatory sacrifice on the crosse , of purpose to convert and reconcile them unto God , 1 Cor. 11. 26 , 27. Gal. 3. 1 , Mat. 26. 28. Secondly , the ratification and sealing of all the Promises & Covenants of Grace unto the receivers souls , 2 Cor. 1. 20. Thirdly , to be a pledge and symbole of that most neere and effectuall communion which Christians have with Christ , and that spiritual union which they enjoy with him , 1 Cor. 10. 16. Ephes. 5. 25. to 35. Fourthly , to feed the Communicants soules in assured hope of eternall life . Fifthly , to be an assured pledg unto them of their spirituall and corporal resurrection . Sixthly , to seal unto them the assurance of everlasting life upon their sincere repentance , and embracing of Jesus Christ for their only Savior . Seventhly , to binde all Chistians , as it were by an oath of fidelity , and obliege them forever to the service of Christ , who died for us to this very end , that whether we live we should live unto the Lord , or whether we dye we should dye unto the Lord ; & that living and dying w● should be ever his , Rom. 14. 7 , 8 , 9. 2 Cor. 5. 14. to 19. from whence it is called A Sacrament , or Oath by Divines . Now I beseech my Antagonists to informe me , how it is possible that a Sacrament ordained for such and so many spirituall ends , ( every one of which is most powerfull to operate upon the flintyest heart and obduratest spirit ) should not in all these regards , both in Gods intention and Christs ordination , be a converting , as well as a sealing ordinance ; since that which doth seal all these particulars to mens soules , and represent them to their saddest thoughts , must needs more powerfully perswade , pierce , melt , relent , convert an obdurate heart and unregenerate sinner , then the Word it self , when but nakedly Preached , which comes not with such advantages upon impenitent hearts , as this Sacrament doth in all these respects . Eleventhly , I would but demand of the opposites , what true conversion is ? Is it not a sincere universall turning of the whole frame of a Christians inward and outward man , from the love and service of the world , flesh , devill , sin , unto the cordiall love , service , obedience of God in Christ ? And is there any Ordinance , engine , instrument , so probable , so prevalent to effect it as this Sacrament , in all the forecited respects ? certainly none at all . Twelfthly , ( to spend no more arguments in so cleere a case ) I appeale to every Christians conscience ; whether their own experience will not ascertaine them , that the Sacrament is a converting ordinance , turning their hearts from the power and love of sin , to the service , love of God and Christ ; and strengthning them against their corruptions ; temptations , as well , as much as the Word , if not far more . And cannot many thousands of converted Christians experimentally affirme , that their preparations and approaches to this holy Sacrament , were the first effectuall meanes of their conversion , yea that they had not been converted , had they beene debarred from it for their former scandalous lives ? For shame therefore disclaim this absurd irreligious paradox , for which there is not the least shadow of Scripture , or solid reason . If then the Sacrament be a converting as well as a sealing ordinance ; then questionlesse no unexcommunicated scandalous person , who is fit to heare the Word , and joyne in any other converting ordinances , as Fasting , Prayer , &c. ought to be debarred from this , it being one of the most effectuall principall meanes which Christ himselfe b who invites all heavy-laden sinners to come unto him ) hath instituted for their reall conversion . Is it not ( I pray you ) a Soul-murthering tyranny for any Ministers or Officers of Christ without an expresse divine Commission from him , to keepe backe any who externally professe his name , and are not utterly cut off from the society of the faithfull and all other ordinances , from this most effectuall lively meanes of their conversion , comfort or salvation ? to hinder them from taking spirituall physicke , because they are spiritually sicke of sinne ? May not the Sacrament ( thinke you ) convert them as speedily , as probably as the bare Word ? If men be corporally sicke , we will use all meanes , and debarre them from no one cordial or receit that may probably restore them to health ; and shall we not doe the like with sin-sicke soules ? If you say the Sacrament may prove poison to them : therfore we dare not give it them . May not , nay wil no● the Word & other Ordinances prove poyson to them likwise as probably as i● , and yet you admit them without any scruple or dispute to them ? Nay , let me a little retort the objection ; Is not this Sacrament of Christs own institution , the wholsomest medicine , the comfortablest cordial to , & purposly ordained by him ●●r sin-sick-dying soules ? And is any potion more likly to recover , revive & strengthen them then this ? Will you then adventure to detaine it , nay plead you must of necessity , under paine of mortall sin and damnation to your selves , deny it unto those who need it most and earnestly cry out for it , because it may possibly , through their present indisposition of spirit ( which is only infallibly knowne to God , not you ) prove dangerous or mortall totheir soules , when you deny it not to other civil carnal Christians , to whom it is as deadly , as poysonous every whit ? Is any Parent or Master so unnatural or sottish , to deny his children , servant wholsome meat , drink , to feed their bodyes , because perhaps they may turne to crudities , diseases ( as they doe in many ; ) or because they may possibly abuse them to excesse and riot , and so quite starve them for want of nourishment ? And shall any Ministers be so irrationall or inconsiderate , as to deny the Sacramentall food and nourishment of mens soules unto them , onely because possibly or probably they may receive them unworthily ( as the best too often do ) to the aggravation of their sin or present condemnation , and so starve their soules ? Is any Physician so absurd , as to deny his Patient the most prevailing Potion to recover him , because peradvetture it may prove dangerous , as all other physick may and will doe , if the very best prove deadly ? Suppose any soules you thus keep back , without good warrant from Christ himselfe , should despaire , dye , perish for want of this spirituall physick , cordiall , wilfully detained by you from them when desired , would not their blood be required at your hands ? It was an old generall error among many in point of phisick , which murdred thousands , to deny drink to those who were enflamed with burning-feavers , and earnestly cried out for it to quench their thirst , for feare of encreasing their feavers violence , which in truth it would have allayed , extinguished , if taken ; and therefore Physicians of late have corrected this deadly mistake , by suffering such to drinke freely when they please , to extinguish the unnaturall heat , that else would kill them , which hath saved many such sick persons lives : I beseech you suffer not this old errour in physick and Physicians to creep in among Divinity and Divines , in permitting them to deny the Lords Cup to such feaverish Christians , burning in the flames of sinnes and lusts , who need it most to quench their flames , and cry unto you for it ; out of a fond conceit that it will prove poyson to them ; wheras you cannot deny but that it will probably , and for ought you certainly know , may through Gods blessing , eventually prove the most effectuall meanes for their health and recovery , and not of their destruction . We all justly condemne the Papists , for with-holding the Sacramentall Cup from the Laity , to which they have a divine right , as well as the Priests , upon pretended inconveniences ; and shall any then usurp a popish ●ower , not onely to deny the Lords cup , but Body too , to any who desire thē , and have a right , an interest in them , as visible members of the visible Church ? We sharply censure all such Ministers , who [ a ] deny or deferre the Sacrament of Baptisme to Infants , especially in cases of sicknesse or danger ; and are not th●se as blameworthy , who deny or delay to give the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to such of riper yeeres , who are ready and desirous to receive it ; when their soules for ought they know , may be as much endangered for want of it , as others are through want of preaching and other Ordinances ? Certainly if there be any danger in the unworthy receiving the Sacrament , it is onely to those who desire it , not to those who administer it to them at their desire , with the forementioned cautions ; But if any hurt , dispaire , danger happen by their not receiving it , when desired ( as for ought any Minister certainly knowes there may be ) the sin and danger is certainly theirs who refused to give it when requested , Since therefore , a peradventure we may receive or do good by such a particular Ordinance or action , is a sufficient encouragement for us to adventure on it in other cases , let it be also a warrantable ground and encouragement for Ministers to administer the Sacrament in such cases , where they have at least a probabilty , a possibility , a peradventure , it maybe , and an who knoweth but it may co●vert and doe th●m good , as well as a peradventure it may prove dangerous to their soules : Remember , you are onely the Ministers not Lords of Christs Sacraments , Ordinances , Flock ; their Stewards to give them the food of their soules in due season , not to with-hold it from them : And for a conclusion , think of these determinations of Lucas Osiander , against the Anabaptists , De Ecclesia , c. 6. Qu. 3. Etsi tenemur errantes & peccatores admomere , & si sieri pessit , in viam reducere , tamen nostrum non est in acceptione Dominica Caenae , ILLORUM , SED NOSTRA probare corda , sic dicente Paulo , probet SEIPSUM ( non ALTERUM ) h●mo , & sic de pane illo edat , 1 Cor. 11. Justus SUA side vivet , non aliena , Abac. 2. ideoque , sive alius ●idem suam contammet , sive prorsus amittat , non tamen tu illius vel diffidentia ant infidelitate , vives vel morieris . Et alibi dicit Paulus ; Unusquisque nostrum PROSE ( non pro alio ) rationem r●ddet Dec : Non ergo amplius invicem judicem●● , Rom. 14. Cum Christus institueri● , Caenam sua, sacram , aderat inter A●stol●s & Jud●● , Tradit●r Christ , illius tamen indign●tas nihil detraxit reliquis Apost●tis , neque jussi● illos Christus , ●ropter Jude praesentiam ( quem tamen Christus jam proditor●● suum esse sciebat ) de mensa surgere , & excluso ill● ( n● contaminarentur forte & ipsi ) deni●● celebra●e Coenam Domini . Ita etiam Paulus de indignis scribit , quod ILLI ( non vero caeteri digne communicantes . ) SIBI , non alijs recte accedentibus , manducent judicium . Neque caeteros probatos abstinere jubet a sacrae Coen● sumptio●● , sed indign●s , ad indigne se pr●parandum , coh●rtatur : Dogma hoc Anabaptisticum pr● se fert Pharis●ic●m S●perbiam qua hujus●●d ▪ ho●ines se alijs ●eli●res esse putant ▪ & occup●ti circa alie●●s conscientias proprias suas neglig●nt ▪ fals●●mirum persuasi , sib ▪ diligentiore & can●a probatione ●pus non esse : Deo a●tem hac Pharisatca {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} , vehementer exosa est : Tantum igitur ocij est hisc● hominibus ● propria imbecilliate ut aliena potius , quam sua scrutentur . Fieri praterea potest , ut de quo Anabaptistie●●i Pharisai pessi●● judicant , is , propter panitentiam cordis , qua nobis occulta esse potest , Deo sit longe acceptior , quam superciliosus hom● , qui ●●ndem j●dic● , ●icuti Publicanum ( quem tamen Pharisaeus despiciebat , meli●rque ipso videbatur ) justificatum in domum suam descendisse , prae Pharisaeo legimus , Luke 18. Ad ho● illud Christi spectat , Ejice prius hypocrita trabem ex oculo tuo , quam ex fratris oculo sestucam eximas , Matth. 7. And thus much for their severall evasions of my third Quere , in which I have been more prolix , because it is the very foundation of all our Antagonists mistakes and errours in this controversie . Onely this I shall adde for a conclusion ; That if all excommunicated persons ought by the law of God to be admitted to the preaching of the Word , but not to Christs Supper ; as the Antagonists determiue : Then by their owne confessions and practice it wil inevitably follow , there is no absolute excōmunication at all by any divine institution left by Christ unto his Church ; since persons admitted freely to communicate every day with the Saints and faithfull in the ordinary hearing of the Word and prayer , are really unexcommunicated ; it being a flat contradiction , to say they are excommunicated , when thus admitted to heare the Word , and to all other ordinances , but this Sacrament onely . And thus by this very evasion they yeeld up their cause so much contended for at this present . The ninth thing in debate is , Whether John 9. 21. 34 , 35. The Jewes had agreed already , that if any man did confesse that he was Christ , he should be cast out of the Synagogue : and they cast him out ( or excommunicated him , saith the Margin : ) And c. 12. 42. Nevethelesse , a mong the chiefe Piests also many beleeved on him ; but because of the Pharises , they did not confesse him , lest they should be put out of the Synagogue : And c. 16. 2. They shall put you out of their Synagogues , &c. be any good proofe at all , that excommunication or suspention from the Sacrament are of divine institution ; or an ordinance of Christ which he hath left and perpetuated in his Chuch ? The doting Antidote-man affirmes it , page 1. And in the dayes of our Saviour ( writes he ) excommunication out of the Sinagogue continued among the Jews , and our Saviour did not abrogate it , for the abuse of it by the Priests , Scribes and Pharises ; but his Apostles under the Gospell did exercise it against Simon Magus , when by professed sacriledge he declared himselfe in the gall of bitternesse , and bond of iniquity ( which I take to be no excommunication nor suspension . ) To this I answer : first , That this putting men out of the Synagogue practised by the Jewes , was no divine institution prescribed or warranted by Gods Word ; but onely a humane invention or punishment , introduced by the Jewes , or Jewish Sanhedrim , as the texts themselues demonstrate ; and so no president to binde us Christians . Secondly , this practice used by the Jewes in the objected tex●s , was so farre from being an ordinance of Christ , or approved by him , that it is a me●e diabolicall institution against Christ , and all who should professe him , who wee adjudged by the Jewes to be put out of the Sinagogue for this very cause ( and no other that we read of ) that they professed Jesus to be the Christ : And is this a fitting patterne of divine institution for Christians to imitate , or a sufficient warrant to suspend men from the Sacrament ? Certainly if it be so , it is but in this respect ; that as the Jewes would cast men out of the Sinagogue , only for professing Jesus to be the Christ ; so you , in imitation of them , would keep off unexcommunicated scandalous Christians from the Lords Table , that they might not there receive Christ tendred to them in this Sacrament , if they doe but desire it . Thitdly , if we beleeve the Jewish Rabbies , Godwins Jewish Antiquities , l. 5. c. 2. a Erastus , b Master Seldon , and c other learned men ; this casting out of the Sinagogue , was no proper Ecclesiasticall , but onely a civill censure , whereby the party cast out , was separated from all company or society with any man , or woman for the distance of four cubits onely at the pleasure of the Judge , ( therefore it was certainly arbitrary , not divine ) also from eating or drinking with any , from the use of the Marriage-bed , shaving , washing , and the like , according to the quality of the offence : It was of force forty dayes yet so , as that it might be shortned upon repentance ; he that was thus excommunicated , had power to be present at divine service , to teach others , and learne of others ; he hired servants , and was hired himselfe , but alwayes on condition of keeping off four cubits distance from them . Therefore doubtlesse it was meerly a civill excōmunication like to an oxtlary , not Ecclesiastical or Divine ; since it suspended none from any divine Ordināce , but civil cōversation only . Fourthly , It was prescribed , inflicted , not by the Priests or Ecclesiastical Classis , but by the temporal Magistrate , Ruler of the Sinagogue , Sanhedrim , or people , as the Texts demonstrate , the Jewes , ( not Priests ) were the actors in it . Fifthly , In the Jewish Sinagogues , there was neither Passeover nor Sacrament , nor sacrifice celebrated ▪ for all sacrifices , Passeovers , festivals were celebrated in the Temple at Jerusalem , in the place which God did choose , not in their Sinagogues where they had onely reading , expounding , preaching , disputing , prayer , but no sacrifice , or sacrament , as you may read in Godwin's Jewish Antiquities , l. 2. c. 1 , 2. & l. 3. c. 4. Therefore from this practice you can no wayes prove any suspension from the Sacrament , because no Sacrament nor Sacrifice was then administred or offered in them by the Jewes : and if it prove ought for the use or divinity of excommunication , it is onely thus much , that excommunicated persons cast out of the Church must be suspended from preaching , reading , prayer , and such Ordinances then used in the Jewish Sinagogues , not from any Sacrifice or Sacrament which were appropriated to the Temple , to which those who were cast out of the Sinagogue might resort : In brief , you may as well justifie excōmunication from Deotrophe as frō hence . The tenth difference is , concerning the Scriptures quoted in the fourth Question ; whether I have rightly applied them ? My Opposites say no , upon four mistakes of theirs . First , that they can infallibly know the hearts and present conditions of Communicants who have formerly lived scandalously and impenitently in their sinfull courses , to be impenitent , obstinate and wicked even at that very instant when they come to receive , though they publikely professe their unfained sorrow and repentance for all their sinnes past , and solemnly promise , yea , vow amendment and newnesse of life for ever after : which I affirme to be meere arogancy , and a usurpation of Gods owne Tribunall , for any Minister or Classis peremptorily to determine , since God onely knowes mens hearts , and can change them in a moment . Se●●ndly , that the Sacrament is no converting Ordinance , but meere poyson to all that have been scandalous persons resorting to it , though with profession of repentance and reformati●n . Thirdly , that none but persons truly regenerated an● sancti●ied have a right to the Sacrament , and that Ministers and Presbyters have di●in● a●●hority to keep back such scandalous persons frō the Lords Supper , whom they have no lawfull authority to suspend from other O●●inances . Fourthly , that suspension from the Sacrament is , by divine institution , a necessa●y preparatory steppe and degree to excommunica●ion , as well 〈◊〉 admonition , exhortation , reprehension , and publike rebuke ; which is a meere groundle●se fancy , warranted b● no Texts nor president of Sc●ipt●re , as the premises d●mon●trate : And therefore the answers t● them b●ing grounded on these erronious positions and mistakes , they yet remain● in their full vigor . Finally , to close up all other differences in few words , take notice , that my Antagonists contend for that which I grant them with advantage , and yet quarrel with me as denying it : for first , I freely grant them in my Questions , that all scandalous , obstinate , peremptory , incorrigible , notorious sinners , who desperately and professedly persevere in their grosse scandalous sinnes , to the dishonour of Christian Religion the scandall of the Congregation , the ill ezample and infection of others ▪ after severall sole●n● previous publike admonitions , reprehensions , rebukes , contemned or neglected , and full conviction of their scandall and impenitency , may and ought to be excommunicated , suspended , not onely from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper ▪ but from all other publike divine Ordinances whatsoever ▪ and the society of the faithfull , till publike satisfaction given for the scandall , and open profession of amendment of life , accompanied with externall symptomes of repentance : And they contest with me for a suspension of such sc●ndalous persons onely from the Lords Supper , without any totall excommunication from the Church , and all other publike Ordinances , for which I must profess● I can see no ground at all in Scripture ▪ or reason ; but Scripture and rationall grounds enough against it ; and quite subverts excommunication . Secondly , I affi●m that no visible member of a visible Church , professing sorrow for his sins , able to examine himself and desirous to receive the Sacrament , may or ought of right to be suspended from it , but such onely who are actually excommunicated from all other Ordinances , or at least notoriously guilty and convicted of some publike horrid crime , of which all the Congregation or Presbytery have legally taken notice , and are ripe for a sentence of excommunication then ready to be pronounced against them , so farre as to suspend them from all publike Ordinances : In such a case as this , where the fact is notorious , the proofs pregnant , the sentence of excommunication ready to be pronounced against them as persons impenitently scandalous and incorrigible , perchance the Presbytery or Classis may order a suspension from the Sacrament or any other Ordinances , before the sentence of excommunication solemnly denounced , if they see just cause ; but not where there is a bare accusa●ion without any notoriousnnesse of the fact , or witnesses examined to prove the scandall ; for thus to suspend a man upon a meere accusation , or surmise , before witnesses produced , were to pre-judge him as guilty , before hearing of his cause , or probat of the offence or accusation , which may be false a● well as true , for ought appeares to the Presbytery : This was all I meant by this new addition to the second Impression of the four Quares ( or judicially accused , pendente lite ) wherein the third Answerer to these Quaeres so much triumphs , as if he had wo●ne the field by this short addition , saying , that our Ministers and the Assembly desire no more power then this ; which I shall readily grant them , with the precedent limitations , which will take off all his flourishes on it ; and so we are both accorded ▪ provided , that this power be claimed by no divine Right , but only by Parliamentary authority and humane institution . To close up this discourse , I shall onely propound these four New Quares to all my Antagonists , and leave the further consideration of them to the saddest debates both of the honourable Houses of Parliament and Veverable Assembly ; who perchance may seriously advise upon them First , Whether a bare excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament or other Ordinances , if not backed with the authority of the civill Magistrate , when these censures are slighted , or contemned , be not likely to prove an impotent invalid , ineffectuall meanes to reclaime impenitent obstinate sinners , especially if they once grow common , triviall , and inflicted upon many together , which made it so contemptible under the Pope and Prelates ? Whether it be not farre better , safer profi●abler for Christians in point of conscience and Christian prudence , to admit such scandalous persons to the Sacrament , not actually excommunicated ▪ who earnestly desire to receive it , and externally profesle repentance and amendment of their lives , though they thereby eat and drink judgement to themselves , and become guilty of Christs body and blood ; then under colour of keeping back such , to deprive them , or any sincere true hearted Christians of the benefit and comfort of it , to whom really it belongs , t● the very breaking of their hearts and wounding of their spirits ? which hath been the ca●e of some and may be of more , if Christian moderation , compassion ▪ charity , prudence be not most predominant in every Presbytery ; Doubtlesse better it were a thousand reprobates and obdurate sinners who will not be restrained by threats and admonitions , should eat unworthily , to the damnation of their soules , then one worthy Communicant , or sincere hearted Christian be deprived of that right and comfort of the Sacrament , which belongs unto him . Secondly , whether the suspending of such persons from the Sacrament ( being no Ordinance of Christ for ought appeares to me , nor expresly warranted by any Scripture , president , or precept ) without a totall suspension of them from all christian society & other Ordinances , will not be ● means to harden prophane obdurate , scandalous sinners , if it be once made ordinary and generall rather then to reforme , convert , amend them ? And whether their admission to the sacrament accompanied with serious previous ad●onitions ▪ exhortations to them against unworthy receiving ▪ and persevering in their impenitent courses after the Sacrament received , and publike serious reprehensions for their former evill courses , b● not a farre more probable way and meanes of reclaiming ▪ converting them from their evill wayes , then any bare suspension from the Sacrament , without any concurrent suspension from all other Ordinances and Christian communion can be ? My reasons for propounding this Question are very considerable : First , be●ause such obstinate scandalous sinners , as experience teach●s , make no great conscience at all of receiving the Sacrament ( from which for the most part they voluntarily suspend themselves for sundry months , nay yeers together out of meer prophanesse ) in case they may be freely admitted to other publike Ordinances : It being onely the totall exclusion from the Church and all Christian society ( not any bare su●pension from the Sacrament ) which workes both shame and remorse in excomunicate persons , as Paul resolves , 1 Thes. 3. 14. 1 Cor 5. 13. compared with the 1 Cor. 5. 1. to 11. Secondly , because we find this an experimentall verity , that the most prophane and scandalous sinners that are , when they intend to receive the Sacrament , will many of them ( like loose c Italians in the Lent ▪ season ) for a day or two before , at leastwise on the very day they receive it , and some dayes after ▪ demeane themselves very penitently and devoutly in o●tward appear●nce , yea openly and privately promise and vow to become new creatures , to give over all their sinfull courses , and never to returne to them againe , and for the ●eason seem to be reall converts ; yea no doubt many d●boist persous have been really reclaimed converted ▪ even by their accesse and admission to the Sacrament ; who if actually suspended from & not admitted to it , would have grown more obstinately impenitent & dissolute in their lives ▪ and never have entred into any serious examination of their evill wayes , courses ▪ nor promised such newnesse of life , as they doe at time● of receiving , by their admission to the Sacrament . Thirdly , all our Antagonists grant , that the Sacrament is a solemne Vow or Covenant , which obligeth all receivers , esp●cially the most scandalous and sinfull , generally to re●orm all their evill wayes , and carry themselves more obediently , zealously towards God and Christ , then ever they did before : And we experimentally find that many sc●ndalous sinners , even out of a meer naturall or hypocriticall conscience , when they resort to the Lords Ta●le , doe oft enter into solemne secret Vowes and Covenants between God and their ownesoules , to amend their former evill wayes peruse and read some good pious books of devotion , meditation , and listen very diligently to the Word when preached , which they will no whit regard , look on ▪ ot hearken to at other seasons , yea , become good , reall , at leastwise formall converts . Fourthly , every Ordinance of Chtist , and the Sacrament ▪ especially above others , is a speciall meanes not onely of confirming , but begetting and encreasing grace , as I have proved ; and I make no doubt , but many scandalous , obstinate sinners , have been , and may be still reclaimed by their owne ptivate conscionable preparations , examinations , meditations , prayers , vowes , and pious resolutions , taken to themselves ▪ and by the publike confessions , exhortations , admonitions , prayers , i●structions ▪ used in the Congr●gation both before , at , and imediatly after their approaches to the Lord● Table : yea I dare say ten to one , would be reclaimed , converted , by such admission , then will be converted or amended by their bare suspension from it : Hence it was , that Christ , who came into the world to save sinners , when he would reclaime and bring home sinners conversed familiarly with , & permitted them ever to come to him and hi● Ordi●ances , not debarred them from them : And the forecited Fathers alleage this for one reason why Christ admitted the very traytor Judas to the sacrament , though he knew him to be a devill and cast-away , because he would ●vercome him by this great mercy , goodnesse , lenity , and leave no meanes of his convertion unattempted : If therefore scandalous sinners seriously desire to receive the Sacrament , as a principall meanes to subdue their iniquities , reforme their lives , and tye them faster unto God for the future , making publike profession of the reality of their intentions in this kind ( as they all doe , at lest in words and outward shew ) why such should be debarred fro● the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , since really admitted to the Sacrament of Baptisme , and all other Ordinances ; I cannot yet discerne any proofe or reason . Thirdly , whether Christ did ever intend , that none but true reall beleevers and penitents should receive his supper ? Or , whether he did not infallibly both know and really intend , that many unregenerate , impenitent persons , would and ●hould receive it , some of them to their cōvertion , who belong to him , others of them to their h●rt & condemnation , as well as true penitents for their comfort and salvation ? Our Antagonists do , and m●st of necessity grant ▪ that close hypocrites , persons , who are not scandalous , b●t blamelesse in their outward conversations & endued withcompetent knowledge , have an external right to the Lords supper , though not truly regenerate and endued with saving faith ; and that no Mini●ler , Presbytery or Classis can or ought of right to suspend such from the Sacrament ; for if reall Saints should onely approa●h the Lords Table , how few would the number of Communicants be in all Congregations ? or what Minister , Church , or Classis might or could take such a jurisdiction upon them ▪ as certainly to define who are reall Saints , and who not ; since the Lord onely knowes infallibly who are his ? They doe and must likewise yeeld ▪ that such persons as these hauing no justifying faith nor sincere repentance in them ▪ when they doe receive this Sacrament , doe eat and drink their owne damnation , as well as the prophanest obstinatest sinners . If then these may be admitted to the Sacrament , though they thus eat and drinke damnation to themselves , not discerning the Lords body , then why not others ? and if Christ hath ordiained the Sacrament of his Supper ( as well as the preaching of the Word and Gospell ) to be a savour of death to such unworthy , as well as a savour of life unto life to worthy receivers ; then what reason ▪ in point of conscience , can any Minister alleage , why he should not administer the Sacrament to all who desire to receive it , as well as preach the Gospell to those who desire to heare it , since God hath his end in both ? the glory of his justice in the one , as well as of his grace and mercy in the other . Fourthly , Whether all obstinate , scandalous , impenitent sinners , before they come to participate at the Lords Tahle , b● not in a present state of damnation ? and whether they doe not aggravate and e●crease their damnation by resorting to Sermons , hearing ▪ reading , praying , fasting , and every other publike duty they performe to God , as well as eat and augment it by resorting ●o the Sacrament ? If yea , which cannot be gain ▪ said , and is yeelded by all ; then what matter of conscience or solid reason can be rendred by any rationall Christian , why such perso●s should not at well be admitted to the Sacrament , as to any other Ordinance ; or not suspended equally from all Ordi●ances as well as from it ; since all by accident , ●hrough mens abuse and unprofitablenesse , prove means of aggravating their sins and condemnation ? Either therefore our Opposites must suspend such person● from all Ordinances alike , till they be reclaimed ( which themselves perchance will deem a preposterous course ) or else admit them to the Sacrament as well as to other Ordinances , since all prove alike good or bad , saving or damning to them . Object . If they alleage ( as some of them doe ) that suspension from the Sacrament , though not from othe● Ordinances , is but a step to excommunication , and therefore warranted by those Texts and reasons , which make for a totall excomunication from the Church and o●her Ordinances . Answ. I demand , first , whether Christ himselfe ( whose Kingdome and Discipline you pretend excomunication to be , and him to be the onely Law-giver of his Church ) hath made suspension onely from the Sacrament , but not from other Ordinances , a step to totall excomunication , or a necessary or expedient forerunner of it , as you grant he hath made publike admonitions , exhortations , reproofes , and the like ? If yea , then shew me where , when , or how by Scripture , which I am certaine you cannot doe ; If not , then this suspension from the Sacrament alone ( which is now contested for with so much eage●nesse as if Christs Kingdome and Church-discipline did wholly consist therein ) is but a meere humane invention and so no Ordinance of Christ , nor any part of his Kingly government . Secondly , I shall demand , whether those Texts which prescribe a totall exclusion from the Church , Ordinances , can be any way satisfied , obeyed , by a partiall execution of them ? Wh●n God commands any thing to be fully executed , a halfe or partiall performance onely is no better in his esteem , then plaine disobedience or rebellion ; as appeares in the case of ( a ) Saul's incompleat fulfilling●f Gods commission against the A●al●kites , in sparing Agag and the best spoyles ; and destroying onely the vulgar Amalekites , with the worst of the cattle and spoyle . Your selves doe daily inculcate upon the Parliament , and your Auditors , a through and compleat Reformation in Church and State ; informing them , that lesse will not be accepted of God or good men ; and will you content God will a halfe excomunication of scandalous , notorious sinners , by suspending them onely from the Sacrament , when he requires a compleat sequestration and casting out of such , from all publike Ordinances and Christian communion ? Answer me but this , and you will soone satisfie your objection . Thirdly , what are the principall ends for which excomunication was instituted in the Church ? are they not ; First , the punishment of the impenitent delinquent for his crimes ? whence it is stiled by you & others , a censure , yea the terriblest censure and punishment of all . Secondly , the preserving of others from infection ▪ pollution , by their ▪ ill example and conversation , as Leapers in the Leviticall law , and plague sick persons and Leapers by our laws now , a●e to be shut up & sequestred from the company of others during their contagions ? If so ( as you must needs acknowledge from ths 1 Cor. 5. 6 , 7 , 8. Gal 5. 9. 2 Tim. 2. 17 , 18. ) then if this censure be of Gods institution not mans ▪ how can you prove Chancellors to m●tigate or halfe it at your pleasures without Gods warrant ? how can you inflict it but in part ▪ when and where he requires the whole ? Are you f●ithfull or impartiall judges herein ? I presume you dare not say so ; Either therefore execute this censure throug●ly and impartially , as God ( you say ) prescribes it , or not at all ▪ least you 〈…〉 selves wiser or mercifullier then God him selfe . Againe , how can you 〈◊〉 others from infection by their society and examples ▪ if you doe not totally seclude them ▪ for the time you suspend them , till they reforme themselves , from all Christian society and publike ordinances as well as from the Lords Table onely ? Shall such converse and communicate daily with you in publique prayers , Sermons ▪ Fasts , reading the Scripture , singing Psalmes , &c. and yet not so much as once communicate with you monethly quarterly or yeerly , for feare of contagion or pollution by their ill example and society in that duty onely , in which ( for the most part ) they are ever most seemingly penitent , holy and devout ? Was ever any man so absurd or se●slesse as to avoid the company of a Leaper , or plague-sick person once a moneth or quarter , at his Table onely , for feare of infection , and yet meet with him daily or weekly in the self-same house and roome upon other civill occasions of businesse or discourse ? And can any Christians then be so irration●ll , as to conceive , that their daily or weekly communion with such scandalous impeni●ent sinners in all other publike ordinances , will not endanger or pollute them , nor make them ▪ guilty of their sinnes by participation , communion or approbation ; and yet thinke their monethly , quarterly , or yeerly meeting and communicating with them at the Lords Table only , will so poyson ▪ so infect them with their sinnes and guilt , that they neither can nor dare with safe conscience , admit them to , or joyne with them in this ordinance onely , though they ordinarily joyne with them without scruple in all others ? I beseech you deare Christian Brethren , consider seriously of all these particulars , apply them home to to your owne conscien●es , weigh them by the sacred ballance of Gods holy Word , the rules of right reason , piety , prudence , and then I doubt not by Gods blessing , if you be not obstinately wedded to your owne opinions more then to the truth ▪ you will speedily disclaime and confesse the weaknesse , falsnesse , deceitfulnesse of those ●rro●ious grounds & whimseys wheron you have hitherto over ▪ rashly ( without any serious deliberation or discussion ) built this your partiall suspension from the Sacrament alone , without exclusion from other ordinances , which hath neither colour of Scripture , nor solid reason to support it , but both expresse against it . Remember , I beseech you , that the a times of mens conversion and reformation are in Gods hands alone ▪ not theirs or yours ; that b the change of the heart and life is not him of that willeth , nor in him that runneth , but in God that sheweth mercy ▪ and worketh this blessed alteration ▪ both at what time , and by what meanes he pleaseth : he can make the Word and Sacrament effectuall to some scandalous sinners , it may be c at the third , perchance at the sixth , possibly not till the eleventh or last houre of the day : shall you therefore debarre them from them in the interim ? Consider how many of your selves ( perchance ) have lived impenitently , unprofitably under the ordinances ▪ Sacraments , for sundry yeers together , and how long God did d wait to shew mercy upon ▪ you , er● you did repent and amend ; and will you ▪ not exercise the e self same patience and indulgence towards others , as God and others did towards you , during your owne scandalous and impenitent lives ? Doth God f suff●r the tares to grow together in his Church with the wheat , and to enjoy the rain and dew of his Ordinances till the very harvest , without separation , because possibly some who are for the present tares , may afterward prove wheat : & wil you extirpate or deprive them from the Sacrament before Gods time without separation , not following that golden rule the Apostle prescribes to every Minister who is the Lords servant , g to be gentle towards all men , patient ; in meeknesse instructing those that oppose themselves , if God peradventure will give them repentance , to the acknowledg●ng of the truth , and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the Devill , who are taken captive of him at his will : Let us no● be more impatient and harsher towards any then God himselfe and Christ are , and h would have us to be ; but let us i put on bowels of tender mercies towards them , with long-suffering , as they do ; God himself endures with much long-suffering ( in his Church ) the very vessels of wrath fitted for destruction , endeavouring to overcome or leave them unexcusable by his Ordinances & long-suffering : And shall not we endure them or others , though scandalous for the present , who by these ordinances may become vessels of mercy , as well as we ? Consider the k Parable of the marriage of the Kings Sonne , where the King sent forth his servants to invite guests to the Wedding ▪ supper , who gathered together ALL they found , both BAD and good , that the Wedding might be furnished with Guests ; and beware that ye fall not in point of the Sacrament , into the very errour we condemne in Papists , in regard of the Word , who take away and deny the use of the Scriptures from the common people in the vulgar Tongue l because the unstable and unlearned wrest them ( as they did in Peters time , & never more then now ) to their owne destruction ? upon which very ground you take away the Sacrament from scandalous sinners , because you pretend they eat & drink it to their own damnation ; and so lapse into the self-same error in one kind as the Papists doe in another , upon one & the same pretence . I plead not this as a meer Lawyer , for any private ends or l●cre ( as some scandalously report ) since I value not my calling ( to which true Church-discipline will be no prejudice ) nor any thing in the world in comparison of Gods glory and the truth ; Nor yet as an Advocate for licentio●● , scandalous sinners , to extenuate their offences , punishment , or any way to encourage them in their impentiency & prophanations ; nor out of any disaffectiō to the Presbyterian Government , for which I have earnestly pleaded , and suffered much reproach from Sectari●s and Independents , and in which I may expect as great a share of Presbyteriall power and honour as any other ; but meerly out of consci●nce , of love unto the truth , and tender compassions to ▪ the souls of other● , from whom without any punctuall Scripture warrant , I would have no meanes of grace , or ordinances of Christ with-held , wherein they have ● right , a property , which may conduce to their reformation or conversion . And I doubt not but many thousands now contrary minded , when they have perused my grounds and reasons , wil readily sub●cribe to my opinion as the truth of Christ most agreeable to his practice , w●rd , mind ▪ from which mee● crochets and new whimseys of conceited braines ▪ ought never to seduce us , Let us n stand fast therefore in the liberty wherew●th Christ hath made us free , and be no more entangled with any yoake of bondage ▪ but what himselfe hath put upon us , or authorized others to impose on 〈◊〉 by his word , especialy in Christs Ordinances , which concern our souls , from which no creatures have power justly to seclude us , but in such cases where he gives them expresse commission , and in such sort as he prescribes . And let me suggest but one thing more unto your saddest thoughts , That in the Churches of the Anabaptists and Brownists , both abroad and at home , where excommunication and suspension from the Sacrament are most rigidly and severely exercised , pressed ; the sinnes and execrable scandalous crimes of heresie , false doctrine , spirituall pride , sedition , scisme , disobedience to Magistrates , and the higher powers , envy , hatred , malice , covetousnesse , oppression , extortion , hypocrisie , yea , lying , rayling ▪ uncharitablenesse , slandering , un●aturalnesse , sometimes of sor●ication , adultery , fleshlinesse , doe farre more abound then in many of our English Congreg●●ions , where these censures are very rarely exercised , or put in ●e ; and that the practicall power of godlinesse is generally more evidently visible , and the lives of the generality of the people more strict , pious , lesse scandalous and licentious in our English Congregations where there hath been powerfull preaching , without the practice of excom●●ication or suspension from the Sacrament , then in the reformed Churches of France , Germany , Denmark or Scotland , for which I appeal to all ●ravellors , and our Independent Ministers who have lived i● the Netherlands , who wil & must acknowledge ▪ that in the sanctification of the Lords ●●y , strictnesse of life , and exemplarinesse of conversation , our English Ministers and Protestants generally excell all others , notwithstanding their strict discipline , which really reforms very few or none , and works no such miracles of reformation , holinesse , precisenesse in mens lives or hearts , as is pr●●●nded : And in popish Churches , where excom●●ications , suspensions , Interdictions , Church-censures ▪ most abound of any ▪ and are most frequently and formidably fulminated bypopish Prelats and their officers ; how many exorbitances and grievances they introduce , how little reformation they worke in mens hearts or lives , is so well knowne to all men , and to our Opposites in opinion , that we can have little hope● they will produce much reall sp●●dy reform●●ion in our Churches , since they have hitherto wrought so little in all these , especially if ●hey once grow common , g●nerall , and so contemp●ible . Certainly the speediest , best and onely way to suppresse all kind of sinnes , scisme● , to reforme and purge our Churches from all scandalo●s offences , will be , for Ministers no● to draw out the sword of excommunication and suspension against them , which will doe little good ; but the sword of the Spirit , the powerfull preaching of Gods Word , and the sword of the ●ivill Magistrate , which are onely able to effect this work , And if our Assembly and Ministers will but diligently preach against that c●talogue of scandalous sinne● and sinners they have prese●●ed to the Parliament , and the Parliament prescribe severe ●emporall lawes and p●nishments against them , and appoint good civill Magistrates to see them duly executed ▪ inflicted , I am confident , that this would work a greater reformation in our Chu●ch and State in one halfe yeere , then all the Church ▪ discipline and censures now so eagerly contested for , will do in an Age ▪ and will be the only true way and speediest course to reform both Church and St●●e at once , which I hope the Parliament will consider of , and take care , that our Ministers ( like the Bishops formerly ) may not now be taken up with ruling and governing ▪ but preaching and instructing , which is work enough , wholly to engrosse their ●ime and thoughts . And whereas many godly , true-hearted , zealous Christians are now perswaded , that the Parliaments deliberate ( for I cannot say slow proceedings ) in setling Church discipline and cen●ures , is the maine cause of the encrease of so many heresies , seismes and sects among us , and that the speedy setling of that modell of Church Discipline the Assembly hath presented to the Houses , will both prevent and redresse this deplorable mischiefe , as is insinuated in a late printed Petition ; I must needs informe these wel-affected pious men ( whom I truly love and honour ) that they are much mistaken both in the cause and c●re of this malady , and spreading dangerous Gangreen . For first , the Parliaments deliberation in debating and setling Church-discipline is no true cause of this Epidemicall disease ▪ which springs originally from other roots , of which I shall informe them . First , from our owne Ministers late daily sowing , spreading of erronious , dangerous seeds of separation in their Sermons , Discourses , Books , and maintaining ●ome Anabaptisticall and Brownisticall positions , specially concerning the Sacrament of the Lords supper , and suspending scandalous persons from it ( which I have here already recited , refuted ; ) even whiles they think and beleeve they write and preach against scisme , seperation , Anabaptisme and errors tending t●●hem : This I am confident , is one maine cause , if not the chiefest of this spreading grievance , which some of those who most complaine against it , doe out of this their ignorance and un●dvisednesse , most foment . Secondly , our Magistrates , Ministers and peoples free permission of divers Ministers , Hereticks , Scismatikes , to vent their scismaticall erronious fancies , tenents , freely in our Churches , Pulpits , Presses ▪ under pretence of advancing the Parliaments service , and being firme unto their cause ; some of them , like so many wandring starres , running up and downe from County to County , City to City , Pulpit to Pulpit , where they freely and boldly vent their errours , seismes , to seduce poore ignoran● people , and preach against our Church-worship , Doctrine , Ministers calling , the Parliaments , Synods authority in setling Church government &c. declaiming outright against our Church , Ministers as Antichristian ▪ and the like ; without apprehension , censure or controle : driving on their own s●ism●ticall designes , under pretext of doing God and the Parliament service . Thirdly , the permission of Ministers and Sectaries of all sorts , contrary to the lawes of God and the Realme , openly to gather and set up private Independent Churches and Conventicles of their owne , seperate from the publike : and to meet freely , boldly at them without the least interruption : With the toleration of such to hold constant private meetings and consultations together , every day , week , or moneth at least , how to advance and strengthen their party in all places , and get the greatest power and places of trust into their hands . Now will excommuncation or suspension from the Sacrament , or the setling of Church discipline prevent or redresse all these true causes of our seismes ? Certainly no : Not the first , nor last of them , and the second but in part : For those who thus voluntarily separate themselves from our Churches ▪ Ministers , and will not joyne in any Church communion with us , will not care a straw , but deride and je●re u ; to our faces , if we should excommunicate them from our S●c●aments , Churches , Assemblies , of which they professe themselves no Members , and from which they have already excommunicated ▪ suspended themselves , but only when they creep up into our Pulpits , of purpose to preach against ●s ▪ and seduce the people to sever from us , and seperate to them , whenas they will not permit any orthodox Ministers of ours to preach , much lesse to preach against their wayes , errours , in their separate Congregations . The only wayes therefore to remedy this dangerous mischiefe for the present , and prevent it for the future , are these e●suing , which answer to these causes of them . First for our own Ministers to labour to discerne and then publikely to retract and unteach the people by word and writing , their erronious , grounds , scismaticall doctrines touching the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , unmixt communions and suspension from the Sacrament : and then none will separate when they are better taught , and the false grounds of separation and scism ( formerly pressed on them through ignorance , or in●ogitancy ) be as constantly preached and written against , as they have been formerly asserted in the Pulpit and Presse . Secondly , for our Magistrates conscionably to convent question ▪ and people to informe against all Ministers or others , who runne about , and vent scismaticall , erronious new Doctrines or whimseys in their own or others Pulpits ▪ & seriously to admonish , cheek them for what is past and enjoine them for time to come , to prea●h nothing but Christ crucified , o● doctrines of edification , and to avoid all ●nnecessa●y controversies concerning Church ▪ government ( in which some now place all Religion ) snd all erronious doctrines contrary to those established among us ; and in case they shall afterwards offend in the like kind , to debarre them from stepping up into other mens P●lpits , and suspend them from their owne till they shall reforme their erros , scisms and promise never to offend in like kind againe . And withall ▪ carefully to suppresse the printing and dispersing of all hereticall erronious or scismaticall books , by inflicting severe punishments on the Authors , Printers , dispersers of them : for which the good lawes and ordinanc●s already made and in full force , are sufficient , were they but duly executed . Thirdly , to prohibit , suppresse ▪ by strict publike lawes and ordinances , the gathering of any particular Churches or Congregations without publike authority , together with all private conventicles , of Ana●aptisticall sectaries wholly separating from , and standing in direct opposition against our publike Church-meetings ; together with all their private cabinet-councels , consultations , to foment and augment their party : And in case they will not be reclaimed by lenity and friendly christian proceedings , but continue still obstinate and incorrigible , then to proceed severely against the ring-leaders of separating sects ▪ ●cismer , and to keep or remove them from all Offices or places of publike trust in Church o● State , wherein their continuance may prove prejudiciall to b●t● or either of them : And if all o●r Magistrates , Judges , and Justices in City and Country would but modestly execute the good statutes and ordinances already provided against those ; I am certain these spreading errours sectaries , scismes would be soon suppressed , and we all united in one , now the great stumbling block , of Superstitious popish Ceremoies , Altars , Images , with the Common prayer Book ( the only eye-sores heart-sores and grounds of separation , formerly complained of ● conscientious people ) are totally removed by the Parliament , together 〈◊〉 scandalous and unpreaching Ministers and Gods word more powerfully , more ●ncere●y preached , then in any Conventicles or segregated Congergations whatsoever , where illiterate Mechanicks ( who may as well st●p into the Kings Throne , a●d civill Magistrates Tribunall , as into the Ministers Pulpit ) or ignorant , ●●gif●ed Ministers , doe usually exercise their leaden Talents , and vent their dros●e straw , stubble , instead of the pure gold and orient Pearles of Gods sacred oracles . As therefore you desire , tender the redresse of this great grievanc● , the speedy settlement , peace , unity of our distracted Church and State , the long expected establishment of such an exact Church ▪ discipline as is warranted by Gods Word , not built on humane fancies ; the advancement of Gods truth , honour ; the avoyding of all groundlesse , unwarrantable occasions of scismes or separations , occasioned by some new erronious paradoxes and false notions , touching this weighty subject of Excommunication and suspension from the Sacrament ; I shall humbly beseech and seriously adjure you in the name of Jesus Christ , the o great Shepheard of his sheep , and impartiall Judge both of quick and dead , 〈◊〉 ( p ) you wil answer the contrary before his dreadful Tribunal at the last day , & avoid his q Anathema Maranatha , with all good mens censures here , to lay aside all self ▪ ends , self interests , prejudices whatsoever in this weighty controversie , and with a single , upright heart , seriously to weigh the severall particulars her● presented to your consideration ; and where you find I have Scripture , truth , or right reason siding with me , there cordially to embrace it without more co●te●●● ▪ where you shall discerne I have been mistaken in any thing ( as for ought I know I am in nothing ) there in a brotherly manner to refute it ; and the Lord give 〈◊〉 all sincere hearts to r Prove all things , and hold fast what is good , both in our judgements and practises ; and to rest truly thankful for the great work of Reformation already made , not to murmure or repine against God and the Parliament , ●s if little o● nothing were already done , because that ▪ Church-Discipline of excommunication and suspension from the Sacrament ( which some pretend , but prove not to be Christs Ordinance and Kingdom ) is not fully established in sounlimited and dangerous an arbitrary way as they desire , and cannot have their wils or humours satisfied in every s●all punctilio . 2 Cor. 13. 7 , 8. Now I pray God tha● ye do no evil ▪ not that we should appeare approved , but that ye should doe that which is honest th●ugh we appeare to be Reprobates : for wr can d●● nothing against the truth , but for the truth . Errata . Page 33. line 6. read s●nnes : ● . 35 l. 45 not : p. 39 l. 3 pr●m●ses l. 9 of his l. 44 in this p. 47 l. 32. Ap●st●lo● . p 48 ● . 23. Priests , l. 28 Church , l. 42 were . FINIS . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A91314e-1230 a 1 Thes. 5. 21. b 2 Cor. 13. 8. c Gal. 4. 16. d Iohn 1● . 37 Eccles. 2. 18 , 19 c. 6. 12. c. 10. 14. * 1 Kings 9. 10. 2 Chron. 8. 1. 1 Chron. 29. 2 Chron. 2. & 3. * As appears by Ezra 4. 24. Notes for div A91314e-2350 a In An Antidote against foure dangerous Questions . A brotherly , friendly Censure , &c. b Acts 1. 24. ● See the Histories of the Anabaptists Lucas Osiander . Bnchirid . Cont. cum . Anabaptist is de Ecclesia , cap. 6. The prophane Scisme of the Brownists , discovered by Christopher Lawne and others . printed 1612. d Num. 21. 14 15. Deut. 23. 1 2 , 3. 1 Cor. 5. 7 to 13. Joh. 9. 22 32 , 3. 3. ch : 12. 42. c. 16. 2. 2 Thes. 3. 14. 2 John 10. 11. 3 John 10. Rom. 16. 17. Tit. 3. ●0 , 11 : 2 Tim. 3 5. e 〈◊〉 Ep●st at 〈◊〉 Godw●ns fewish Antiquities l. 1. c. 3. f See Go●w●ns ●ewish Antiquities ▪ ● ▪ ● . ● . ● . g Godwins Jew●sh Antiquities , l. 1. c. 2 h {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Signifies any Civill Assembly , Councell or Court of Justice , as wel as on Ecclesiasticall Presbytery , see Scapulae Lexicon , page 730. h Scapula ibidem , Godwins Jewish Antiquities , l. 5. c. 4 Ioseph . Antiq. Jud●eo●um , l. 14 , c ▪ 17. i P. Galatinus , l. 4 c. 5. Doctor Potters want of Charity iustly charged , London , 1634. p. 26. It may be underst●● of any Assemb●y , AS WELL CIVILL as Eccelsiastical , so it was in the first Edition , but it is expunged in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Arch bishops speciall direction . * See Pecrus Cunaeus de Repub. Judeorum l. 1. c. 12. Juni . Brutus Vindiciae contr. Tyoannos , Q. 3. p 94. to 97. e Acts 26. 18 Eph. 2. 1. to 6. 1 John 3. 8. 2 Tim. 2. 26. f See Cartwrights Notes on the Rhem. Testam. on 1 Cor. 5. g John 8. 44 : 1 Johu 3. 8. 2 Tim. 2. 26. Acts 5. 3. John 13. 2. 27 : h See Cartwrights Answ . to the Rhem : Testam. on 1 Cor. 5. i A●ts 5. 3. Joh 8. 44. 1 John 3 ● . Eph. 2. 2 , 3 , 4. 2 Tim. 2 , 26. k Rom ● . 4 , 〈◊〉 11. 13. 14. Gal 5. 18. 25. l Eph. 2. 2 , 3 , 4. 1 John 3. 8. 2 Tim. 2. 26. m Mat. 15 22. Luk. 6. ●8 . Mar 9. 17. to 30. c. 5. 2. to 10. n Mat. 16. 1● ▪ Acts 16. 16 , 17 18 Mat. 10. 8. o See Mark 5. 9. to 15. John 13. 27. Eph. 2. 2 , 3. 2 Tim. 2. 26. See Beda in 1 Tim. 1. p John 14. 16. 1 Cor. 6. 19. Se Aecumenius Chrysost. Primasius , Haymo , Beda , Theodor . Theophilact. in ● Cor. 5. Mat. 4. 1. to 12. q Job c. & 2. See Aecumenii Enar. on 1 Cor 5. Primas . Theophilact. Chrysostom . Hierom in locum . r 2 Cor. 12. 7 s Mat. 7. 3 , 4 , 5 * See Primasi●s , Theodoret , Theophylact , Chrysostom , Haynor . O Ecumen●u ▪ Ans●lm and M●sculus in locum . Ro. 12. 18 , 19. Mat. 5. 34. Mat ▪ 9. 10 , 11. c : 11. 19 ▪ Mar. 2. 15 , 16. t See Gratian ▪ Caus. 1. Quest , 1. Ivo Decret. seci●da pars . 1 Cor. 11● 29. u Exod. 12. 3. 〈◊〉 7 , 47. ● Chron. 30. ●● to 2● . Prov. 28. 13. 1 John 1. 9 ▪ Psal. 32. 5. Exod. 12. 22. to 28. Mat. 26. 17. to ●1 . 47. Mark 14. 15. to 27. Luke 22. 24. t See Willets Synopsis Pap●smi , p. 650. u See Lucas O sia●d . Encha rid . contr. cum Anabaptist . de Eccl●sia , cap. 6. Qu. 3. x The harmony of Confessions printed at London , 1643. p. 280. 321. 1 Cor ▪ 〈◊〉 2● , u 1 ●or . 11. 21 ▪ 22. x S●e T●rtul . Ap●l . ●●●n ●● 17 c. ● . ●9 2● . b Act. 1. 24. 〈◊〉 2. ●● c 2 Chr 6. ●● Jer. 17. 4 , 5. d 2 Tim ▪ 2. 25 26 e Rom 8. 29 30 1 Cor. 6. 10 , 11. Tit. 3. 2 to 8. f Joh. ●5 . 20. c 13. 16. Mat. 10. 24 , 25 f A Bro●●●●ly and friendly censure ▪ p ● 7. ● A● A●●i●ote against 〈◊〉 da●ger●us quaeries , p 6. An Answer , &c 1 Cor. 7. ●4 . ● P●● 5. 3. Prov. 16. 1 ▪ 1 Co● 7. 16. 1 Tim. 2. 25 , 26. Rom 9. 15 , 16 18. A brotherly and ●●eindly Censure , 〈◊〉 ● , 8. A brotherly and friendly Censure ▪ ● . ● . In my Plesant Purge for a Roman Catholike , and Quench-Cole . A brotherly and friendly Censure . p. ● . The last Answer to the four Qu●stions ▪ Harmouy of Consessions . p. 287. See Richard Capel his Nature of temptation , &c. para 1. pag. 214 , 215 , &c. Lucas Osiander ●nshirid . cont. cum Anabapt ▪ c. 6. Qu. ● . ● No nor Sacraments ; which I onely mention , because they are s● much cryed up above the word , and made more holy then it , onely because they are term●d Sacraments , and Seal●s of the Covenan● without any ●ext to warrant it . Lucas Osiander Enchirid. Contr. cum Anabapt . cap. 6. Q● . 3. p. 126 , 127. See the Pract●ce of P●ety , p. 400. ●o 480. and all others concerning the Sacrament and ●ur pret●tio●s to receive it . See Gen 9. 16. Job 42. 5 , 6 Isa. 6. 5. 1 John 1. 1 , 3. See Act. 2. 23. 37 , 38. ch. 3. 13 , 14 , 19. Rev ▪ 1. 5 ● . Isa. 5● . Psal. 1. 19 67. 71. 2 Chron. 33. 11 , 12 , 13. Isa. 48 10. Hos. 5. 15. See the Practice of Piety , p ●15 to 435. b Mat. 11. 28 Isa. 55. 1 , 2. John 7. 37. Mat. 22. 2 , to 11. Mat. 9. 6. Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiasticall Anno. 604. Can. 68 , 69. Zeph. ● . 3 ▪ Amos 5. 15. Jonas 3. 9. c. Gen. 31. 31. 32. 30 ▪ Numb. 22 6 , 11. Josh. 2. 24. Judg 6 , 5. 2 Tim. 2. 25. Jer. 36 ▪ 3 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 21. Est . 4. 14 , 16. 1 Sam. 4. 6. ch. 14. 6. 1 Kings 28. 5 , 6. 2 Sam 12. 21 , 22. 2 King 7. 3 , 4 , 5 , 6. a De Excommun cati●ue . b De Jure naturae & Grat. lib. 4. cap. 8. De anno Civiil &c. Praefatio , p. 6 , 7. & cap. 18. p. 83 , 84. c Buxto●f . ●pi . Hebraei . p. 55. d Num. 9 , 1. to 16. Deut. 16. 1 2 King. 23. 22 23. 2 Chron. 30. 18. 35. throughout . Ezra . 6. 19. Mat. 26. 17. 18 Godwins Jewish Antiquities li 8. 2. cap. 1. & l b. 3 cap. 4. 3 John 9 , 10 , 11. C●l 6. 1 , 2. 1 Tim. 5. 1. 20 Ti● . 3. 11. c S●●Ed● . Sa●●● R●lat●●● . Mat. ● . 11. ●3 . c●ap . 13. 28 , 24. L●k● 7. 34 ch ▪ 1● . ● , 2. 1 Tim. 1. 15. ● Tim. 5. 1 20 ●●t ▪ 〈…〉 c. 2 ▪ 1● ▪ 2 Thes. 3. 14 , 14● Gal 6. ●● 2 ▪ ● Sam 15 ▪ Levit 13. Num. ● . 〈…〉 a Psal. 31. 15 ▪ b Eph. 2. 1 , 2. 2 Tim. 2. 25 , ● 26. Rom. 9. 16 Phil. 2. 13. Marke 10. 23. c Mat. 20. 1. to ● . d ●er . 30. 18. e See Mat. 18 ▪ 27. to 33. f Mat. 13. 28 , 29 , 20. Heb. 6. 7 , 8. g 2 Tim 2. 25 26 , 27. h Gal. 6. 1 , 2. Luke 6. 36. Col. 3. 12 , 13. i R 〈◊〉 9. 22. k Ma● . 23 ▪ 1. to 11. l 〈◊〉 Pet. 3. 16. 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 11. 27. n Gal. 5. 1. See the Histories of the Anabaptists , & Books against the Brownist● ▪ P●t on and fomented by our Ministers underhand . o ●eb . 13. 21 d. 1. Pet. 4. 5 q 1. Cor. 16. r 1. Thes. 5 21 ▪ 
A69677	----	Brutum fulmen, or, The bull of Pope Pius V concerning the damnation, excommunication, and deposition of Q. Elizabeth as also the absolution of her subjects from their oath of allegiance, with a peremptory injunction, upon pain of an anathema, never to obey any of her laws or commands : with some observations and animadversions upon it / by Thomas Lord Bishop of Lincoln ; whereunto is annexed the bull of Pope Paul the Third, containing the damnation, excommunication, &c. of King Henry the Eighth. Barlow, Thomas, 1607-1691. 1681 Approx. 767 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 164 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2005-12 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A69677 Wing B826 ESTC R12681 12095763 ocm 12095763 53979 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A69677) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 53979) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 680:20, 757:1) Brutum fulmen, or, The bull of Pope Pius V concerning the damnation, excommunication, and deposition of Q. Elizabeth as also the absolution of her subjects from their oath of allegiance, with a peremptory injunction, upon pain of an anathema, never to obey any of her laws or commands : with some observations and animadversions upon it / by Thomas Lord Bishop of Lincoln ; whereunto is annexed the bull of Pope Paul the Third, containing the damnation, excommunication, &c. of King Henry the Eighth. Barlow, Thomas, 1607-1691. Catholic Church. Pope (1566-1572 : Pius V). Regnans in excelsis. English & Latin. Catholic Church. Pope (1534-1549 : Paul III). Ejus qui immobilis permanens. English & Latin. [24], 294, [7] p. Printed by S. Roycroft for Robert Clavell ..., London : 1681. Running title: Observations on the Pope's bull against Queen Elizabeth. UMI reel guide incorrectly lists item as Wing B827. Includes bibliographical references. Reproduction of originals in Cambridge University Library and Huntington Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Elizabeth -- I, -- Queen of England, 1533-1603. Henry -- VIII, -- King of England, 1491-1547. Catholic Church. -- Pope (1566-1572 : Pius V). -- Regnans in excelsis. Excommunication -- Catholic Church -- Papal documents. 2005-03 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2005-04 Aptara Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2005-05 Rachel Losh Sampled and proofread 2005-05 Rachel Losh Text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-10 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion Brutum Fulmen : OR THE BULL OF Pope Pius V. Concerning the Damnation , Excommunication , and Deposition OF Q. ELIZABETH , As also the Absolution of her Subjects from their Oath of Allegiance , with a Peremptory Injunction , upon Pain of an Anathema , never to obey any of Her Laws or Commands . With some Observations and Animadversions upon it . By THOMAS Lord Bishop of Lincoln . Whereunto is Annex'd the Bull of Pope Paul the Third , containing the Damnation , Excommunication , &c. of King Henry the Eighth . Come out of her my People , that ye partake not of her Sins and Plagues . Rev. XVIII . 4. LONDON , Printed by S. Roycroft for Robert Clavell at the Peacock in St. Paul's Church-yard . MDCLXXXI . The Right Hon. ble Algernon Capell , Earl of Essex , Viscount Maldon , and Baron Capell of Hadham : 〈◊〉 . THE EIPSTLE TO THE READER . Reader , WHoever thou art ( Protestant or Papist , Courteous or Censorious ) having made these Papers publick , thou hast a liberty to read , and a right to judge ; and that thou maist do it impartially , ( not out of hate or kindness to me , but upon a serious and just Consideration of the Cause ) I shall neither importune thy Favour , nor deprecate ( when 't is just ) thy severest Censure . For , 1. 'T is truth , I have impartially desired , and not indiligently sought ; and if ( by the blessing of God ) I have found it , Magna est veritas & praevalebit , it will prevail , in despite of all Enemies and Opposition ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , nat super , non immersabilis undis . Truth we know ( especially Divine Truth , which concerns our Souls and their salvation ) ever had , and , so long as there are Devils and wicked Men , will have in this World many Enemies ; who will indeavour ( what they cannot do ) to suppress it ; premi potest veritas , opprimi non potest . They may dipp , and ( for some time ) keep it under water , but they cannot drown it . If these Papers contain truth , ( as I hope they do ) then I am sure that every Intelligent Reader , and pious lover of Truth , will be its Patron ; and ( though in this Epistle I do not sollicit him ) ready to vindicate it from the Objections of its Adversaries . But ( on the other side ) if my Reader relate to Rome , and be possess'd with strong delusion to believe ( against Reason and Divine Revelation ) his Catholick Cause , the Papal Monarchy and Infallibility , it will be in vain for me , in this Epistle , to desire ( what I believe I a cannot have ) his Favour . However , he shall have my Pity and Prayers , That God Almighty would be graciously pleased to open his Eyes , and bless him with the Knowledge and Love of the Truth . 2. We know 't is true , what the great Roman Orator long since said — Humanum est errare , labi , decipi , &c. The wisest men have their mistakes ; Bernardus non videt Omnia , & quandóque bonus dormitat Homerus . Since Adam fell , the best men have their Infirmities , and sometimes erre , even when they desire and seek Truth . Since the Prophets , our blessed Saviour and his Apostles , left the world , I know no man Infallible ; nor any , save the Pope , who ( against evident Reason and the sense of Christendom ) pretends to it . For my own part , I do humbly acknowledge my many and great Infirmities ; and for these Papers — Hominem pagina nostra sapit , there may be mistakes and errors in them ; yet it is my hope and ( not ungrounded ) belief , that there are none such as may prove pernicious , or ( in the main ) dangerous — Non hic Centauros , non Gorgonas , Harpyasve invenies . No such prodigious and pernicious errors , as our Popish Adversaries maintain , & ( so far as they are able ) vindicate : such I mean as their stupid Doctrine of Transubstantiation ( contradictory to Natural Reason , Divine Revelation , and all our Senses ) their Idolatrous Adoration of a piece of Bread , with Divine b Worship due to God only ) their Sacrilegious robbing the Laity of half the Sacrament in the Eucharist , contrary to our blessed Saviour's express c Command , and the practise of the Christian d World ( even of the Church of Rome her self ) for above a thousand years ( as their own great and learned Writers confess ) &c. I say , such errors as these , I do ( and have reason to ) believe , the Reader will not find in these Papers . Though it be certain and confess'd , that every one , even the best and most learned Writers are fallible ; yet so long as they rationally build their Conclusions upon the clear Principles of Nature , Scripture , or Vniversal Tradition , They may be sure enough , ( and so may their Reader too ) that they are not actually false , nor what they so write erroneous . However if the Reader find any errors of what nature soever , and can make it appear , that they are indeed errors , I shall not ( as I said before ) deprecate his severest Censure , but concur with him , and Censure them my self , as much as he ; and do hereby promise publickly to retract them , and heartily thank him for the discovery . For in this Case my Reader and I shall both be Gainers , and ( in a several way ) Conquerors — e Vicimus utérque nostrum , palmam Tu refers mei , Ego Erroris ; my Reader has overcome me , by manifesting my mistakes , and I ( by his help ) have overcome those errors ; otherwise , in Cyprian's opinion and language , f Non vincimur cum offeruntur nobis meliora , sed instruimur . He , who by his Adversaries help and concluding Arguments , gains the knowledge of Truth , is ( in that good Father's opinion ) not conquered , but instructed . But if the Intelligent Reader discover any error in these Papers , and can , and will really make it appear to be so , let him call it what he will , Victory or Instruction , I shall thankfully submit , and both love that truth , and him for the discovery of it . 3. I know that this Tract of mine ( as every one of the like nature ) is already prohibited and damned at Rome ; for the Rules g presix'd to the Index Librorum Prohibitorum , contrived by the Authority of the Trent Council , declare all Books of h Controversies between Catholicks and Hereticks ( Protestants and Papists ) in any Vulgar Tongue , prohibited and damned ; neither to be i had nor read by any Papist , under pain of Excommunication , and many other Penalties contained in their Canons , Papal Constitutions , and their Expurgatory Indices . So that although our blessed Saviour , by his holy k Spirit , in the Gospel , Command all ( even the Common people , for to those he writes ) to Examin and try all things , to use that understanding and discretion God has given us , to distinguish truth from error ( for that 's evidently the meaning of those words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prove all things , as l scher and learned Papists confess ) and when we have done so , then we must hold fast that which is good . I say , in this Case , in the choice of our Religion , wherein the Eternal weal or woe of our Souls is concerned ; though Christian prudence require it , and our blessed Saviour , ( by his Apostle ) Command , that we should not believe every Spirit , but try before we trust , and diligently examin Things till we be assured of truth : yet his pretended Vicar , with an Antichristian Pride and Impiety , Contradicts this , and Commands the contrary . He forbids all Examination ; Those under his Tyranny ( at least the unlearned and Common people ) must believe as the Church believes ; that is , all that he proposeth , though it be Transubstantiation , or any thing evidently repugnant to their Reason and Senses too . They must m renounce their own Reason , and if he say that is white , which they see black , they n are to believe what he says , and not their own Senses . All means for the People to examin , whether it be truth or error , which the Pope and his Church proposes , is prohibited , and deny'd them ; nor is it only the Books of Protestants which write of Religion , but the Bible and Sacred Scripture too ; even the whole Law of God , and the Gospel of Jesus Christ ( in any vulgar Language , which the People can understand ) come amongst prohibited Books , and damn'd at Rome ; and the reason they give of such prohibition is impious and blasphemous . For they say ( horresco referens ) the reading of the Holy Scripture by the People , in any vulgar Tongue , is more o pernicious then profitable , and brings more loss then benefit to the Reader . Although this Doctrine be ( as I said ) impious , and ( against God and his Holy Word ) blasphemous ; yet it is publickly own'd amongst those Rules for prohibited Books , contrived by a p Deputation ( or Committee ) of the Trent Fathers , according to the Decree of that Council ; and afterwards approved and confirmed by Pius the Fourth , Sixtus the Fifth , and Clemens the Eighth , as q the Title of the Trent Index assures us . After them ( that we may be sure they continue their Antichristian Tyranny , to prohibit and damne the Bible and all Books which make against them ) r Gregory the Fifteenth , and s Urban the Eighth do further approve and confirm the Impious Rules and Doctrine afore-mention'd ; and both of them expresly declare , and in the same words ; 1. That it is known that the Reading prohibited Books , ( the Bible is one of them ) brings t great detriment to the Professors of the sincere Faith. ( Roman Errors and Popery they mean , which they miscall sincere Faith ) . And what they say , is most certain ; for there is no Book under Heaven so destructive of their Popish Superstition and Idolatry ( which they call sincere Faith ) as the Bible , as it has been truly explain'd and preached by Protestants , since Luther ' s time . Which is evident in this , that so many Kingdoms and Provinces , by the help of Scriptures and Knowledge of the Gospel , have clearly seen the Errors of Rome , and justly abhorring her and them , are come out of Babylon . 2. All Licences to read any prohibited u Books , whosoever gave them , & to whomsoever they were given ) they recall , cassate , and declare null . 3. Then they Command ( under severest x punishments ) that all those who have any prohibited Books , ( the Bible is one , if it be in any Vulgar Tongue ) they are to bring them to the Bishop or Inquisitor , and they are presently to Burn them . 4. And then they declare , y That no man shall have any Licence for the future , to read or have any prohibited Book , ( no Bible or Protestant Book concerning Religion , in any Vulgar Tongue ) save only from the Congregation of the Sacred Office , ( the supream Office of the Inquisitors ) which sits every week before the Pope at Rome . By the Premisses , I think 't is certain , that these Papers of mine are ( in Antecessum , and ) already prohibited and damn'd at Rome ; and if their Papal Constitutions be obligatory and obeyed , not to be read or had by any Papist , save only such as have a faculty and licence from the Congregation of the Sacred Office , ( as they call it ) the Roman Inquisitors ; and we may be sure , that those watchful Fathers who guard the Capitol , and industriously study to preserve and promote the Papal Greatness and Interest , ( on which their own depends ) will give licence to none to read such Protestant Writings , save to those , who ( for fidelity to their Catholick Cause and Learning ) they judge able and willing to Answer and Confute them : That is , None shall have Licence to read such ( to them ) dangerous and damned Books , save such as have a solemnly Promised , Vow'd and Sworn firmly to believe and constantly to hold and profess to their last breath ( and , to the utmost of their Power , indeavour that others , under them do so too ) their new Trent-Creed , and so the whole Mass of their Popish Errors and Idolatries contained and commanded in it . The Case being evidently this ; that ( if their Papal Constitutions be obligatory and obey'd ) none are to read or have these Papers , save such as have promised , vow'd , and sworn never to believe them ; as I have little reason to desire or hope for their favour , so ( be it known unto them ) I do as little fear their Confutation , or ( what I am like enough to have ) their Calumnies . 4. Although I well know ( to say nothing of others ) that all our English Papists ( both in their Words and Writings ) do constantly call themselves Catholicks , and Roman Catholicks ; yet they must pardon me , if in these Papers , I neither do , nor justly can call them so : Papists I do call them , and ( I hope ) they will not be offended , or take it ill , that I do so . For b Baronius ( their great Cardinal and Annalist ) having said , That the Hereticks ( we know whom he means ) call'd them Papists ; he adds , That we could not honour them with a more glorious Title then that of Papists , and therefore he desires that they may have the honour of that Title while they live , and that ( after death ) it may be writ upon their Tombs and Sepulchral Monuments . For my part , so long as they believe and profess their new Trent-Creed , and the Popes Monarchical Supremacy , I shall ( according to the Cardinal's desire ) call them Papists , and if it be so honourable a Title ( as he saies it is ) let them have it , I shall not envy them that honour , but pity their error , who glory in that which is indeed their sin and shame : For the other Title of Catholick , which our Adversaries , ( without and against reason ) appropriate to themselves ; we grant , and know , that anciently it was , and ( when rightly used ) is a word of a good sound & signification , when it was applied to persons , ( as a Catholick Bishop , or Catholick Doctor , &c. ) it signified such persons as were , 1. In respect of their Faith , Orthodox ; who intirely believed and profess'd the true Christian Faith , rejecting all pernicious and dangerous errors , and so were no Hereticks . 2. In respect of their Charity , such as were in Communion with the Church of Christ , without any uncharitable Separation from it , and so no Schismaticks . Now that our Adversaries of Rome are ( as they pretend ) such Catholicks , is absolutely deny'd ; not only by Protestants , but ( except themselves ) by all Christians in the World , and that upon evident and great reason ; Considering , 1. Their many and monstrous c Errors ( contradictory to sacred Scripture , and the sense and belief of the Christian World for a thousand years after Christ our blessed Saviour ) which they approve and publickly receive as Articles of their Faith , in their new Creed , the Trent-Council , and Roman Catechism ; Considering also their many Superstitions and stupid Idolatry , professed and practised by them in their sacred Offices ( their Missal , Breviary , Horae B. Virginis , their Ritual and Pontifical , &c. ) I say , these things impartially considered , they may be ( and really are ) Idolatrous Hereticks ; but 't is impossible they should be , ( what they against greatest evidence pretend to ) true Catholicks . 2. Considering the unchristian ( indeed Antichristian ) Pride and Tyranny of the Pope and his Party , Excommunicating , Cursing and Damning all Christians , save themselves , ( without and against that Charity which the Gospel requires ) and so Schismatically cutting off from the Body of Christ whole Kingdoms at a Clap ( as Pius the Fifth does , d in the following Bull ) which are things inconsistent with the Christian Temper and Charity of a true Catholick ; I say these things considered , and that the Pope and his Party are really guilty of such uncharitable Actions , dividing and violating the Vnion of the Church ; it evidently follows , that they are so far from being true Catholicks that they are great and formal Schismaticks ; And therefore they must pardon me , if in these Papers , I do not call them ( what really they are not ) Catholicks ; and for the same Reason , I do not call them Roman Catholicks . For , as it is neither reason nor sense to call him an English Gentleman , who is no Gentleman at all ; or him a Sorbon Doctor , who never saw Paris , or ever had or desired that Degree ; so it is alike irrational to call him a Roman Catholick , who really is an Erring Schismatick , and no Catholick at all . 5. I know some ( otherwise learned and pious ) Writers , who say that those words Roman Catholick are inconsistent , and imply a Contradiction , as signifying a particular Universal . But this ( I confess ) is a manifest mistake . For not only particular Persons , ( of which before ) but particular Churches , in this or that City ( be it great or little ) have anciently and usually been call'd Catholick Churches , without any Contradiction or Impropriety . In an Epistle of a e great Council at Antioch , we find the f Bishop of that City call'd a Catholick , and that particular Church a g Catholick Church . So in the Subscriptions to Nazianzen's last Will and Testament , Optimus Bp. of Antioch , subscribes thus ; Optimus Bp. of the Catholick h Church at Antioch ; and the rest of the Bishops who subscribe that Testament , ( and they are six or seven ) use the same Form. So Nazianzen subscribes himself Bishop of the Catholick Church in Constantinople ; Amphilochius Bishop of the Catholick Church in Iconium ; and so all the rest . In the Appendix to the Theodosian Code , Pope Vigilius begins his Encyclical Epistle thus — Vigilius i Episcopus Ecclesiae Catholicae Urbis Romae : Bishop of the Catholick Church of the City of Rome . So Pope k Leo the Great ( and l many more Bishops of Rome ) uses the very same form . The Popes stiled themselves Catholicae Ecclesiae ( non Orbis , sed ) Urbis Romae Episcopos . The Antichristian stile of Universal Bishop , ( as Pope m Gregory the Great calls it ) was not yet usurped at Rome . The Bishops of Rome then , and their Church , were Catholick , and so was every Orthodox Bishop and his Church , as well and as much as they . Constantinople , Iconium , Antioch , &c. and their Bishops , were as truly Catholick as St. Peter's Successor , or Rome it self : The truth is evidently this ; the Pope and his Party are in this , nec Christi , nec Petri , sed Donati Successores ; they do not follow Peter or our blessed Saviour , ( as they vainly bragg ) but that impious Heretick Donatus , whose damnable Schism and Heresie they have espoused . St. Augustin ( who well knew it ) tells us , in n several places , That the Donatists assumed to themselves the Name of Catholick , said that their Sect was the only true Church , and so damn'd all other Christians ; and upon this Heretical Opinion , they Schismatically separated from the whole Catholick Church . The Pope and his Party ( with as little reason and charity ) do the very same thing ; they ( as the Donatists anciently ) Heretically affirm , That they , and they only , are truly Catholicks , and the only Members of the true Christian and Catholick Church : and then Schismatically Seperate from , Excommunicate and Damn all other Christians . 6. And further ( that I may freely speak , what I really believe ) I am so far from believing the Pope and his Party to be ( what they vainly pretend ) the only true Christian and Catholick Church ; that I do believe them ( and so did thousands before Luther , and many whole Kingdoms and Provinces since ) to be Ecclesia Malignantium an Antichristian Sect and Synagogue ( in side ) highly erroneous , and ( in facto ) as highly impious . And the Pope so far from being Peter's Successor , and our B. Saviour's Vicar-General , that he is o that man of Sin , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , That Adversary of our blessed Saviour , and the great Antichrist , the Apostle speaks of , who Exalts himself ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) above all Kings and Emperors . This ( I hope ) will in part appear by what is said in the following Papers . At present , I shall desire the Impartial Reader ( who possibly may read this short Epistle , and trouble himself no further , to read what follows ) to consider , That the Pope really and professedly does Exalt himself above all Kings and Emperors , and so has this Mark of the Beast , and Indelible Character of Antichrist . That he does so Exalt himself , will evidently appear , thus , 1. Pope Innocent the Third tells the p Emperor of Constantinople ( and with prodigious Error and Impudence , indeavours to prove it out of q Scripture ) That the r Pope is as much greater Then the Emperor , as The Sun is greater Then the Moon . So Innocent the third ; and ( that we may be sure his Successors liked it well ) Gregory the Ninth approves , and refers it into the Body of Canon-Law : And s Greg. the Thirteenth approves it too ; and ( with the other Decretals ) confirms it for Law ; and 't is continued in all Editions of that Law , ever since . It is then certain and confess'd , That the Pope Exalts himself above all that is call'd God , above all Kings and Emperors ; and that he is far greater then they : And if you inquire of the Proportion , how much he is greater ? I say , 2. That their approved and received Glosses on their Law , ( with some difference of Opinion ) calculate how many times the Sun is greater then the Moon , and then infer the Pope's Greatness above the Emperor . And here 1. The Author of the Gloss , ( Bernardus de Botono was the man ) a good Lawyer , but ( sure I am ) no good Astronomer , tells us , ( ignorantly and ridiculously ) — That the Sun is greater than the Moon , ( and consequently the Pope greater than the Emperor ) t Forty seaven times . This is pretty well , but much short of that Magnitude the Pope meant , ( if he knew what he said ) when he affirm'd , That he was as much greater then the Emperor , as the Sun was greater than the Moon . 2. And therefore another u Canonist , would have the Sun greater than the Moon ( and so the Pope greater than the Emperor ) Fifty seaven times . 3. But this ( as too little ) does not please the Pope's Party and Parasites ; and therefore Laurentius ( another Canonist ) says , That it is x manifest , that the Sun is greater than the Moon ( so the Pope than the Emperor ) an hundred forty seaven times . I omit the fractions ; for if the Pope be . 147. times greater than the Emperor , me thinks it might satisfie his Ambition , so that he needed not stand upon the fraction , or little overplus . 4. But this also comes far short of that Magnitude , which they ascribe to the Sun above the Moon , ( and so to the Pope above the Emperor ) for they tell us , y That the Sun is greater than the Moon ( 7744 ½ ) seaven thousand seaven hundred , forty four times , and one half more . To such a Prodigious greatness , does the Bishop of Rome exalt himself . So that if St. Paul say true , ( That he is Antichrist , who exalts himself above all Kings and Emperors ) then it will evidently follow , that the Pope is Antichrist ; for never man did , or ( without Antichristian Pride and Impiety ) can so exalt himself . They sometimes tell us in their Law , — z That the Papal Dignity is to be prefer'd to the Imperial , more then Gold is to Lead ; and if Gratian saytrue ) it was the Pope who said so . And the Gloss gives the reason of this Papal a Greatness above all Kings ; Because Kings and Princes are to submit their Necks to the Popes Knees ; ( he might have said , and their b Mouthes to the Popes Feet , which the Emperor is bound to kiss ) . That this is Impious and Antichristian Doctrine , I think evident ; and I have some reason to believe , that intelligent and impartial Judges will think so too , and yet it has heretofore , and still is approved , and ( as Catholick ) received at Rome . For , 1. That Decretal of Pope Innocent the Third , was by Gregory the Ninth made a Law , & ( amongst other Decretals ) by him commanded to be received as Law , in all c Vniversities and Papal Consistories , abont 450. years ago , and so continues to this day . 2. For the Glosses before-mentioned , they are not only in the d old Editions of their Law , but were approved and confirmed afterwards by e Gregory the Thirteenth ( and so stand approved and confirmed to this day ) who expresly tells us , That the Law being by his f command receiv'd , corrected and purged ; no man ( for the future ) should dare to add , detract , or change any thing in it . In short , whether the Champions of the Church of Rome and Catholick Cause , ( as they call it ) will think what is said in these Papers , worthy of any Answer , or no , I know not . But in case they do , I shall make them ( if I mistake not ) a very fair offer , which ( if accepted ) will much lessen their pains and labour , yet so , as ( if they perform the Condition annexed ) they may ( as to my self ) effectually do their business , and make me their Proselyte : The thing I mean is this ; If they can from Scripture , ( by any one Cogent and Concluding Argument ) prove any one of these following Propositions ( and unless they be all proved , their Papal Monarchy cannot stand ) I will grant the rest , and give them the Cause . I say then , if they can make it appear , 1. That our blessed Saviour before his Ascension , did constitute Peter his Vicar , and gave him such a Monarchical Supremacy and Jurisdiction ( as is g now contended for ) over the Apostles and the whole Church . For if Peter had no such Power he could not transfer it to his Successors ; it being impossible , that they should have that Power ( Jure Successionis ) which their Predecessor never had . 2. If they can prove , that St. Peter , while he lived , did exercise such Power and Supream Jurisdiction , even over the Apostles , &c. By their own h Computation , St. Peter lived 34. or 35. years after the Ascension of our blessed Saviour , and was ( as they say ) Bishop of Antioch , 7. and of Rome , 25. years . Now if it neither do , nor can appear , that in all that time he exercised any such Monarchical Power or Jurisdiction ; we may safely conclude , either that he had no such Power ( which is most true ) or betray'd his trust in not making use of it , for his Masters Glory , and his Churches good ; which ( I suppose ) our Adversaries will not say . In this Case , Idem est non esse & non apparere ; and therefore our Adversaries must pardon us , if we do not believe ( what they cannot prove ) St. Peters Monarchy . 3. But let it be supposed ( which neither has been , nor can be proved ) that Peter had , and executed such Power ; let them make it appear that it was not Personal and Temporary , to cease with his Person , ( as the Apostleship did ) but to be transferred to some i Successor . For if it was temporary , and ceas'd with St. Peter's Person , then whoever ( after Peter's death ) pretends to that Power , is not bonae fidei possessor , but an Impious and Antichristian Usurper . 4. But let all those Particulars be supposed , ( which being untrue , cannot possibly be proved ) that Peter had and executed such Power , and that it was to be transmitted to his Successor ; Let them make it appear that the Bishop of Rome was that k Successor , that Peter was ( as they say ) 25. years Bishop of Rome , or 25. days , or that he ever was at Rome : For , if it be so far from truth that Peter was 25. years Bishop of Rome , that it cannot appear from Scripture , that he was ever Bishop there at all , or that he ever was at Rome . It will evidently follow , that the Pope is not St. Peter's Successor , and so can have no Title ( Jure Successionis ) to that Supremacy , they say , Peter had : It being impossible that the Pope should succeed Peter , if he never preceeded him in the Bishoprick of Rome . 5. Let them make it appear , that our blessed Saviour , while on Earth , either exercis'd or had such a Temporal Monarchy , as the l Pope now challenges as his Vicar . For unless this appear , all their pretences to such Power , ( as Vicars of our B. Saviour ) will be vain and irrational ; it being impossible that the Pope or Peter should derive from him that power which he himself neither had , nor ever here on Earth exercis'd . These are the Foundations upon which the Papal Monarchy ( Spiritual and Temporal ) is built ; and if these fail , the whole Fabrick will and must fall ; and therefore they are concern'd , by some real and rational proof , to make them good . Now if our Adversaries can and will make it appear , from Sacred Scripture , that Peter ever had or exercised such a Power , as is pretended ; that ▪ it was not personal in him , but to be transmitted to his Successor ; that he was 25. years Bishop of Rome , and actually transferred that Power to his Successor there ; or that our blessed Saviour ever had or exercis'd such a terrene and temporal power , as they pretend the Pope ( as his Vicar ) has from him : I say , let them make all , or any one of these Pariculars appear from Scripture , and I will confess , and retract my error . Nor is the Condition unjust or unequal , when I require Scripture proof . For they themselves constantly affirm that the Pope has Right to his Monarchical Supremacy Jure Divino ; by the Constitution of our blessed Saviour , and Divine Right ; and this their Popes , Canonists and Divines ( with great noise and confidence , but no reason ) endeavour to prove from Scripture , miserably mistaken and misapply'd . I know , that their late m Jesuitical Methodists ( so much n magnify'd by their Party ) require of Protestants to confute their Popish Doctrines ( Transubstantiation , the Sacrifice of the Mass , Purgatory , &c. ) by express words of Scripture ) not admitting of Consequences , however deduced from plain Texts as Premisses . This method of theirs ( being irrational and o demonstrated so to be ) I shall not tye them too : But if they can prove any of the aforesaid Positions by the express words of Scripture , or by good Consequences deduced from it , or ( what they pretend to ) Vniversal and Apostolical Tradition ; I shall admit the proof . Nay , I shall make our Popish Adversaries two further , and ( if that be possible ) fairer offers . 1. Let them prove by any just and concluding reason whatsoever , that any Christian Church in the World acknowledg'd , or the Church of Rome her self assumed and publickly pleaded for such a Papal Supremacy , as p now they pretend to , for 1000. years after our B. Saviour ; and ( for my own part ) I will confess and retract my Error . 2. Let them prove , by any such concluding reason , that any Church in the World ( Eastern or Western , Greek or Latin ) did acknowledge ( what now the Pope and his Party so earnestly and vainly contend for ) the Popes Infallibility , and his Supremacy over all General Councils , for 1500. years after our blessed Saviour ; and for my part , Cedat Jülus Agris , manus dabimus captivas , I will retract what here I have affirmed , and be ( what I hope I never shall be ) their Proselyte . To Conclude , I have no more to say , ( my Adversaries will think I have said too much ) save only to desire the Readers , who sincerely and impartially desire truth and satisfaction , to read and consider the Margent as well as the Text. In this , they have my Positions , and the proofs of them , in plain English : In the Margent , the Authorities and Authors I rely upon , in their own words , and the Language in which they writ : and I have ( for the Readers ease , not my own ) cited not only the Authors and their Books , but the Chapter , Paragraph , Page , and mostly the Editions of them : That so the Reader may with more ease , find the places quoted , and judge whether I have cited and translated them aright . It is notoriously known , that our Popish Adversaries have published many forged Canons and Councils , many spurious a Decretals , and supposititious Tracts , under the names of Primitive Fathers , and ancient Bishops ; that they have shamefully corrupted the Canons of Legitimate b Councils , and thousands of other Authors ; making them ( by adding and substracting words or Sentences ) say what they never meant , or not to say what indeed they did both mean and say : and this they themselves have ( without shame or honesty ) publickly own'd , in their Expurgatory Indices ; and after all this fraud and falsification of Records , these Apocryphal Books and supposititious Authors , are continually produced by them ( for proofs of their Errors ) against Protestants who well know , and ( as many sober men of their own Communion ) justly condemn such impious Roman Arts — Nec tali auxilio , nec defensoribus istis Christus eget . Truth needs no such forg'd and false ; Medium's to maintain it ; nor will any honest man use them . Sure I am , I have not , in this Discourse , built the truth of my Positions upon the Testimonies of our own Protestant Authors , ( knowing that our Adversaries would with scorn reject their Testimony ) nor of any supposititious or spurious ones . The Testimonies and Proofs I have quoted , and rely upon , are drawn from Scripture , the genuine Works of the ancient Fathers and Councils , or ( which ad hominem , must be valid ) from their own Councils , the Popes Bulls , their Canon Law , their Casuists , Schoolmen , Summists , the Trent Catechism , the Book of the Sacred Ceremonies of the Rom. Church , their approved and received Publick Offices , ( such as their Missal , Breviary , Ritual , Pontifical , &c. ) which Authorities ( if I do not misquote , or mistake their meaning ) are , and ( to them ) must be just proofs of those Positions for which I have produced them . But let the Evidence of the Testimonies , and the Authority of the Authors quoted , be what it will ; I have little hope , that they will gain any assent from our Adversaries ; so long as they believe the Infallibility of their Pope and Church , and their Learned Men are solemnly sworn , firmly to believe their new Trent Creed , ( the whole Body of Popish Errors ) to their last breath , and to Anathematize and Damn what Doctrine soever contradicts it . For while they are possess'd with these Principles , it may be truly said of them , what was said of the Luciferian Hereticks in St. Hierome — Facilius cos Vinci posse , quam persuaderi , you may sooner bassle , then perswade them : They will ( in despite of Premisses ) hold the Conclusion ; nor shall the clearest demonstration overcome their blind Zeal and Affection to their Catholick Cause . However , that God Almighty would be graciously pleased to bless us and them , with a clear knowledge of Sacred Truth , with a firm belief , and ( in dangerous times ) upon undanted and pious profession of it , is and shall be the Prayer of Oct. 3. 1680. Thy Friend and Servant in Christ , T. L. The Damnation and Excommunication of Elizabeth Queen of England , and her Adherents , with an Addition of other Punishments . Pius Bishop , Servant to God's Servants , for a perpetual memorial of the matter . HE that reigneth on High , to whom is given all Power in Heaven and in Earth , committed one Holy , Catholick and Apostolick Church ( out of which there is no Salvation ) to one alone upon Earth , namely , to Peter the Prince of the Apostles , and to Peter's Successor the Bishop of Rome , to be governed in fulness of Power . Him alone he made Prince over all People , and all Kingdoms , to pluck up , destroy , scatter , consume , plant and build , that he may contain the faithful that are knit together with the band of Charity in the Unity of the Spirit , and present them spotless , and umblameable to their Saviour . Sect. 1. In discharge of which Function , we which are by God's goodness called to the Government of the aforesaid Church , do spare no pains , labouring with all earnestness , that Unity , and the Catholick Religion ( which the Author thereof hath for the trial of his Children's Faith , and for our amendment , suffered to be punished with so great Afflictions ) might be preserved uncorrupt : But the number of the ungodly hath gotten such power , there is now no place left in the whole World , which they have not assayed to corrupt with their most wicked Doctrines : Amongst others , Elizabeth , the pretended Queen of England , a Slave of Wickedness , lending thereunto her helping hand , with whom , as in a Sanctuary , the most pernicious of all men have found a Refuge . This very Woman having seized on the Kingdom , and monstrously usurping the place of Supream Head of the Church in all England , and the chief Authority and Jurisdiction thereof , hath again brought back the said Kingdom into miserable destruction , which was then newly reduced to the most Catholick Faith and good Fruits . Sect. 2. For having by strong hand inhibited the exercise of the true Religion , which Mary lawful Queen of famous memory , had by the help of this See restored , after it had been formerly overthrown by Henry the Eighth , a Revolter therefrom ; and following and embracing the Errors of Hereticks , she hath removed the Royal Council consisting of the English Nobility , and filled it with obscure men , being Hereticks , oppressed the Embracers of the Catholick Faith , placed impious Preachers , Ministers of Iniquity , abolished the Sacrifice of the Mass , Prayers , Fastings , choice of Meats , unmarried Life , and the Catholick Rites and Ceremonies . Commanded Books to be read in the whole Realm containing manifest Heresie ; and impious Mysteries and Institutions , by her self entertained , and observed according to the Prescript of Calvin , to be likewise observed by her Subjects ; presumed to throw Bishops , Parsons of Churches , and other Catholick Priests , out of their Churches and Benefices ; and to bestow them and other Church Livings upon Hereticks , and to determine of Church Causes , prohibited the Prelates , Clergy , & People to acknowledge the Church of Rome , or obey the Precepts and Canonical Sanctions thereof , compelled most of them to condescend to her wicked Laws , and to abjure the Authority and Obedience of the Bishop of Rome , and to acknowledge her to besole Lady in Temporal and Spiritual matters , and this by Oath ; imposed Penalties and Punishments upon those which obeyed not , and exacted them of those which persevered in the Unity of the Faith , and their Obedience aforesaid , cast the Catholick Prelates and Rectors of Churches in Prison , where many of them , being spent with long languishing and sorrow , miserably ended their lives . All which things , seeing they are manifest and notorious to all Nations , and by the gravest Testimony of very many so substantially proved , that there is no place at all left for Excuse , Defence , or Evasion . Sect. 3. We seeing that impieties and wicked actions are multiplied one upon another ; & moreover , that the persecution of the faithful , & affliction for Religion , groweth every day heavier & heavier , through the instigation and means of the said Elizabeth ; because we understand her Mind to be so hardned and indurate , that she hath not only contemned the godly Requests and Admonitions of Catholick Princes , concerning her healing and conversion , but also hath not so much as permitted the Nuncios of this See , to cross the Seas into England ; are strained of necessity to betake our selves to the Weapons of Justice against her , not being able to mitigate our sorrow , that we are drawn to take punishment upon one , to whose Ancestors the whole State of Christendom hath been so much bounden . Being therefore supported with his Authority , whose pleasure it was to place Us ( though unable for so great a burthen ) in this Supream Throne of Justice , we do out of the fulness of our Apostolick power , declare the aforesaid Elizabeth , being an Heretick , and a favourer of Hereticks , and her Adherents in the matters aforesaid , to have incurred the sentence of Anathema , and to be cut off from the Unity of the Body of Christ. Sect. 4. And moreover , we do declare Her to be deprived of her pretended Title to the Kingdom aforesaid , & of all Dominion , Dignity , and Priviledge whatsoever . Sect. 5. And also the Nobility , Subjects , and People of the said Kingdom , and all others , which have in any sort sworn unto her , to be forever absolved from any such Oath , and all manner of Duty , of Dominion , Allegiance , and Obedience ; As we also do by Authority of these presents absolve them , and do deprive the same Elizabeth of her pretended Title to the Kingdom , and all other things abovesaid . And we do Command and Interdict all and every the Noblemen , Subjects , people , and others aforesaid , that they presume not to obey her , or her Monitions , Mandates , and Laws : And those which shall do the contrary , We do innodate with the like Sentence of Anathema . Sect. 6. And because it were a matter of too much difficulty , to convey these presents to all places wheresoever it shall be needful ; our will is , that the Copies thereof , under a publick Notaries hand , and sealed with the Seal of an Ecclesiastical Prelate , or of his Court , shall carry altogether the same credit with all people Judicial and Extrajudicial , as these presents should do , if they were exhibited or shewed . Given at Rome , at St. Peters , in the Year of the Incarnation of our Lord , 1570. the Fifth of the Calends of May , and of our Popedom the Fifth year . Damnatio & Excommunicatio Elizabethae Reginae Angliae , eique Adhaerentium , cum aliarum poenarum Adjectione . Pius Episcopus , Servus Servorum Dei , ad perpetuam Rei memoriam . REgrans in Excelsis , cui data est Omnis in Coelo & in Terra Potestas , unam Sanctam , Catholicam & Apostolicam Ecclesiam ( extra quam nulla est salus ) soli in terris , videlicet , Apostolorum Principi Petro , Petrique Successori Romano Pontifici , in Potestatis plenitudine tradidit Gubernandam . Hunc unum super omnes Gentes , & omnia Regna Principem constituit , qui evellat , destruat , dissipet , disperdat , plantet , & aedisicet , ut fidelem populum , mutuae Charitatis nexu constrictum , in unitate Spiritus contineat , salvumque & incolumem suo exhibeat salvatori . Sect. 1. Quo quidem in munere obeundo , Nos ad praedictae Ecclesiae gubernacula Dei Benignitate vocati , nullum laborem intermittimus , omni operà contendentes , ut ipsa Vnitas , & Catholica Religio ( quam illius Auctor ad probandam suorum fidem , & correctionem nostram , tantis procellis conslictari permisit ) integra conservetur . Sed Impiorum numerus tantum potentia invaluit , ut nullus jam in Orbe locus sit relictus , quem illi pessimis doctrinis corrumpere non tentârint , adnitente inter caeteros flagitiorum servâ Elizabeth , praetensâ Angliae Reginâ ad quam , veluti ad asylum , omnium infestissimi profugium invenerunt . Haec eadem , Regno occupato , supremi Ecclesiae capitis locum , in omni Angliâ , ejusque praecipuam Auctoritatem atque Jurisdictionem monstruose sibi usurpans , regnum ipsum jam tum ad Fidem Catholicam & bonam frugem reductum , rursus in exitium miserum revocavit . Sect. 2. Vsu namque verae Religionis , quam ab illius desertore Henrico VIII . olim eversam , Clarae Mem. Maria Regina legitima , hujus Sedis Praesidio reparaverat , potenti manu inhibito , secutisque & amplexis Haereticorum erroribus , Regium Concilium ex Anglicâ Nobilitate confectum diremit , illudque obscuris hominibus Haereticis complevit , Catholicae Fidei cultores oppressit , improbos Concionatores , atque Impietatum Administros reposuit , Missae Sacrificium , Preces , Jejunia , Ciborum delectum , Ritusque Catholicos abolevit . Libros manifestam Heresim continentes , toto Regno proponi , impia Mysteria , & Instituta ad Calvini Praescriptum à se suscepta , & observata , etiam à subditis observari mandavit . Episcopos , Ecclesiarum Rectores , & alios Sacerdotes Catholicos , suis Ecclesiis , & Beneficiis ejicere , ac de illis & aliis Ecclesiasticis rebus , in haereticos homines disponere , d●que Ecclesiae causis decernere ausa , Praelatis , Clero , & Populo , ne Romanam Ecclesiam agnoscerent , n●ve ejus Praeceptis , Sanctionibusque Canonicis obtemperarent , Interdixit ; plerosque in nefarias leges suas venire , & Romani Pontisicis Auctoritatem atque obedientiam abjurare ; seque solam in Temporalibus & Spiritualibus Dominam agnoscere jurejurando coegit ; poenas & supplicia in eos qui dicto non essent Audientes , Imposuit ; easdemque ab iis , qui in unitate sidei , & praedicta Obedientia perseverârunt , Exegit . Catholicos Antistites , & Ecclesiarum Rectores in vincula conjecit , ubi multi diuturno Languore & Tristitia Confecti , Extremum vitae diem miserè siniverunt . Quae omnia cum apud Omnes Nationes perspicua & notoria sunt , & gravissimo quamplurimorum Testimonio , it a comprobata , ut nullus omnino locus Excusationis , Defensionis , aut Tergiversationis relinquatur . Sect. 3. Nos , multiplicantibus aliis atque aliis super alias Impietatibus , & facinoribus , & praeterea fidelium persecutione , Religionisque afflictione , impulsu & Operâd . Elizabeth quotidie magis Ingravescente , quoniam illius animum ita obsirmatum atque induratum Intelligimus , ut non modo pias Catholicorum Principum de sanitate & conversione , preces , monitionesque contempserit , sed ne hujus quidem sedis ad ipsam hac de causâ Nuncios in Angliam trajicere permiserit ; ad Arma Justitiae contra eam de necessitate conversi , dolorem lenire non possumus , quod Adducamur in unam animadvertere , Cujus majores de Republicâ Christianâ tantopere meruêre . Illius itaque Auctoritate suffulti , Qui Nos in hoc Supremo Justitiae Throno , ( licêt tanto Oneri Impares ) voluit Collocare , de Apostolicae potestatis plenitudine declaramus praedictam Elizabeth Haereticam , haereticorumque fautricem , eique adhaerentes in praedictis , Anathematis sententiam incurrisse , esseque à Christi Corporis unitate praecisos . Sect. 4. Quin etiam ipsam praetenso Regni praedicti jure , necnon omni & quocunque Dominio , Dignitate , Privilegioque privatam . Sect. 5. Et etiam Proceres , subditos , & populos dicti Regni , ac caeteros omnes qui illi quomodocunque juraverunt . A Juramento hujusmodi , ac omni prorsus Dominii , Fidelitatis , & obsequii debito , perpetuo absolutos , prout Nos illos Praesentium Auctoritate absolvimus , & privamus eandem Elizabeth praetenso Jure Regni , aliisque Omnibus supradictis . Praecipimusque & Interdicimus Vniversis & singulis proceribus , subditis , populis , & aliis praedictis , ne illi ejusve monitis , Mandatis , & Legibus audeant obedire . Qui secus egerint , eos simili Anathematis Sententiâ innodamus . Sect. 6. Quia vero dissicile nimis esset , Praesentes quocunque illis Opus erit perferre , volumus , ut eorum exempla , Notarii publici manu , & Praelati Ecclesiastici , ejusve Curiae Sigillo Obsignata eandem illam prorsus fidem in Judicio , & extra illud , ubique Gentium faciant , quam ipsae Praesentes facerent , si essent exhibitae vel ostensae . Dat' Romae , apud Sanctum Petrum , Anno Incarnationis Dominicae 1570. 5. Cal. Maij Pontisicat ' nostri Anno 5. SOME ANIMADVERSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS Upon the Impious Damnation & Excommunication OF Q. Elizabeth BY PIUS V. Anno 1570. BEfore I come to a particular and distinct Examination of the several parts and paragraphs of this Impious Popish Bull , I shall in general observe , 1. That Pius V. was not the first or only Pope , who usurped this Extravagant and Antichristian power over Kings and Emperors ; to damn , depose , and deprive them of all their Royal Rights and Imperial Jurisdiction ; for both his Predecessors and Successors approved , and with prodigious pride and impiety , exercis'd such power . That this may appear , I shall give the Reader some Instances , extant upon Record , in their own Popish Annals and Histories . 1. Pope a Constantine in a Council of Italian Bishops ( it was about the Year 711. ) Anathematises all who deny'd the worshipping of Images , and b particularly , and by name damns the Emperor Philippicus to the Torments of Hell. So Carolus Sigonius tell us , and Martinus Polonus , and the Fasciculus Temporum concur with him . 2. After Pope Constantine , Gregory the second , and Gregory the third , succeed c ; and both of them Excommunicate the Emperor Leo Isaurus , for this only Crime , because he was against worshipping of Images ; and though the Italians had sworn Allegiance to him , yet they null that Oath : And the Historian commends these Actions of those two Popes , as excellent Examples for Posterity . And Platina says , that Gregory the third d Excommunicated the Emperor Leo , and deprived him of his Empire . 3. To Gregory the third , succeeded Pope Zachary , and ( if Gratian say true ) he e deposed Childericus King of France , and absolves his Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance , and gives his Kingdom to Pipin : And this he did , not for the great crimes of Childeric , but because he was unprofitable , and unfit for the Government ; not that he was Insufficient ( says the f Gloss ) but because he was Effeminate , and dissolute with Women . And from this Canon , Joh. Semeca ( the f Glossator ) infers , That the Pope may depose the Emperor ; and proves it by citing other Canons , And by the Authority of Pope g Gelasius , who tells Anastasius the Emperor , That he had power to Depose him , and proves it from the Example of this Pope Zachary . I know , that what Gratian , and the Canonist , say , of Pope Zachary's Deposing Childeric , is evidently untrue , ( and by many h demonstrated so to be ) yet it stands uncensur'd in their last and best i Edition of the Canon Law , which Pope Gregory XIII . k approved and publish'd , as most correct . And they further tell us , That Clement VIII . published an l Exact Correction of all the Glosses and Additions to the Canon Law , and yet this of Pope Zachary's deposing Childeric ( and , what the Gloss says of it ) is neither left out , nor any way censur'd . Whence it is evident , that they approve the Doctrine of deposing Kings , and ( having no just reason for it ) forge Instances to prove it . 4. Pope Hildebrand , or m Gregory VII . deposeth the Emperor Henry IV. by the Authority given n by God , ( as he says ) of binding and loosing both in Heaven and Earth : And then he o absolves his Subjects from their Oath of Fidelity , and then prohibits them to obey him . This Bull is dated at Rome , Anno Domini 1075. and five years after he ●xcommunicates , and Deposes him again 1080. And implores the Assistance of Peter and Paul , in this his Excommunication and Deposition of the Emperor ; that the World may p know , that as they have power to bind and loose in Heaven ; so they have power on Earth to give and take away Empires , Kingdoms , Principalities , Dukedoms , Earldoms , and ( according as they shall deserve , and he is q Judge of that ) the possessions of all men . This power , he says , Peter had ; and so he , and the Bishops of Rome have it too , and that from God , as Vicars of Christ , and Peter ' s Successors . And so by this most Erroneous and Impious Doctrine , the Popes have a Power ( which neither Peter , nor any , nor all the Apostles ever had ) to dispose of all mens Temporal Estates in the World , whether they be Supream or Subjects . 5. After this , Pope Gregory IX . r Excommunicates the Emperor Friderick II. Absolves his Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance , lays an Interdict on all his Cities , Castles , and Villages , Excommunicates all that favour him , or any way assist or obey him , commands the German Bishops ( upon pain of Excommunication ) solemnly to publish this Excommunication with all their Impious Solemnities , ringing of Bells , lighting , and then extinguishing Candles , &c. 6. After this , Pope s Innocent IV. ( in the like form ) Excommunicates and Deposes the said Frederick . The Lemma or Title prefix'd to the Bull is thus t , The Damnation and Excommunication of Frederick II. &c. And least this might be thought a rash and inconsiderate Act of the Pope , he himself tells us , That u he did diligently deliberate about it , with his Brethren ( the Cardinals he means ) and the Sacred Council , the General Council of Lions . ) I know , that Matthew Paris says , that he publish'd that Excommunication in that Council , not without the x Horror and Amazement of all who heard it . But Platina tells us , That it was done by the y general and concurrent consent of the Council . And Innocent himself expresly says , That it was done ( Friderick Excommunicate ) by the z Council it self ; ( and therefore the Major part must concur ) and if it was not so , that Pope was not only fallible , but actually false : And it is a considerable Observation which Matthew Paris has , ( and therefore I shall not omit it ) when he tells us — That some did positively affirm , ( and he believed it ) that a Innocent IV. did above all things earnestly desire to ruin the Emperor Friderick , ( whom he called the great Dragon ) that , he being trampled upon , the King of France , England , and other Christian Kings , ( whom he call'd diminutive Kings , and little Serpents ) affrighted with the sad Fate of Friderick , might more easily be kept under , and they and their Prelates spoiled of their Goods , and by him plundered . So that although he , and other Popes did pretend , ( as appears by their Bulls ) that they deposed Kings for the Extirpation of Heresie , the Preservation of the Catholick Faith , and Christian Religion ; yet 't is evident to any intelligent and impartial Judge of their Actions , that it was their prodigious ambition and covetousness , their inordinate and erroneous desire of Dominion , of Rule and Riches , which made them usurp and exercise a power to depose Kings and Emperors , which St. Peter ( from whom they pretend to have it ) never had , nor pretended to . 7. Pope Paul III. b Excommunicates , Curses , Deposes and Damns Henry VIII . of England , and all who adhere to him , favour or obey him ; absolves his Subjects from all Oaths of Allegiance ; commands them all , under pain of Excommunication , not to obey him , or any c Magistrate or Officer under him ; nor to acknowledge the King or any of his Judges or Officers to be their Superiors . And further ( with a strange Impiety and Impudence ) he declares King Henry and his Complices and Favourers , and their Children and Descendents to be Infamous , incapable to be Witnesses , make Wills , or be Heirs to any ; Incapable to do any legal Act , and that in any Cause d of Debt , or any other Cause Civil or Criminal , none should be bound to answer them , and yet they bound to answer every body . And to omit the rest , ( for I shall at the end of these Observations , set down the whole Bull ) he commands the e Ecclesiasticks ( Secular and Regular ) to quit the Kingdom , and not to return , till the Persons Excommunicate , deprived , cursed and damn'd ( the King and all his Loyal Subjects he means ) be absolved from their Censures . This Bull , though fram'd and ready to be publish'd , yet the Execution of it was suspended for three years , and then actually published in the Year 1538. which was the fifth year of Pope Paul III. as appears by the Date of it , in the aforesaid Bullary . And when it was published , as it was in itself highly Impious , so ( to Hen. VIII and his Loyal Subjects ) it was ridiculous ; and all the Effect it had was , that it increased their hate and contempt of the Antichristian pride and folly of its Author . It appeared ( what indeed it was ) Brutum fulmen , and that King had too great a courage and understanding , to be frighted with an Ignis fatuus , Papal Squibs and Wild-fire , which could neither warm or burn him . 8. Lastly ; as the Popes preceeding Pius V. so those who followed approved and ( so far as they were able ) put in practise that execrable Doctrine of Deposing Kings . Pope Gregory XIII . did immediately succeed Pius V. and renues and confirms his Bull for deposing Queen Elizabeth , and absolving her Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance ( as is testified not only by f Cambden , but by the Romish Priests themselves , ( the g Seculars , who seem'd most moderate ) and in prosecution of that damnatory Sentence , the said Pope Gregory did constitute Fitz-Gerald ( an Irish Rebel against the Queen ) General of all the Irish Rebels ; that so he and they by Fire and Sword might Execute the Sentence of those two Popes , deposing that Queen . This is expresly testify'd by Fitz-Gerald h himself , in an Edict publish'd by him , after he was General , declaring the Justice of that Irish War , which ( he says ) was undertaken for the Catholick Faith , and restoring it in Ireland . To Gregory . XIII . Sixtus Quintus immediately succeeds , and confirms the damnatory Sentences of his two Predecessors , and ( as he who well knew , tells us ) Excommunicates and i deposes the Queen , Absolves her Subjects from their Oaths of Fidelity , and published a Croisado , as against Turks and Insidels ( indeed as afterwards evidently appear'd against England and Queen Elizabeth ) and gave ( what he Never had ●o give ) plenary Indulgence to all who should assist in that War. Nor is this all ; Cardinal Allen k writ a Traiterous and Seditious Book , to Exhort all the English and Irish Papists , to joyn with the Spanish Forces ( against their Queen and Country ) under the Prince of Parma : and Pope Sixtus V. sends Allen ( with that Book , and his own Bull ) into the Low-Countries , and there a great number of those Books and Bulls were printed at Antverpe , to be sent into England . Were it necessary , many things now might be said , pertinent to this purpose ; but ( I suppose ) the Instances already given , will be sufficient to convince Intelligent and Imp●●tial Persons , That Pope Pius . V. was neither the first nor last , who usurped this Extravagant Power to Depose Princes ; seeing several of his Predecessors and Successors , for above . 600. years , have owned , approved , and ( as they had opportunity ) put that Power in practise : This in General premis'd , I come now to consider the Bull of Pius . V. wherein he damns and deposeth Queen Elizabeth ; wherein two things occur very considerable ; 1. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or Title prefix'd to the Bull. 2. The Particulars contain'd in it . For the first ; the Title prefix'd to the Bull is thus : — The Damnation of Elizabeth , &c. where , though Damnation may seem a very hard word ( as indeed it is , in the sense they use it , as shall by and by appear ) yet it is not unusual ; but occurs in other Bulls of the like nature : So we find it in the Bull of Pope Innocent . IV. wherein he Excommunicates the Emperor Friderick . II. For the Lemma or Title of that Bull is thus — l The Damnation & Deposition of Friderick . II. So in the Bull of Pope Paul III. Excommunicating Henry . VIII . the Title prefix'd to it is — m The Damnation of Henry VIII . and his Favourers , &c. So that Pius . V. Damning Queen Elizabeth , was not singular ( though Impious ) he had some of his Predecessors ; Forms to follow . I say , his Predecessors ; for I do not find that any Bishops in the World ( save those of Rome ) ever used such Unchristian , and indeed Anti-christian Forms of Excommunicating and Damning Kings and Emperors . And it is observable , and well known to those who diligently read and consider the Papal Bulls now extant , ( of which there is a vast n number ) that the Popes of later Ages , when they go about to justifie some extravagant Act of their unsurped Power ; they usually cite o the Bulls and Constitutions of their Predecessors , who had done the like ; not for matter of fact barely , but to prove a Right ; that because their Predecessors had done so formerly , therefore they ( who succeeded in the same Power ) might do it too . Now , although to Argue thus , à Facto ad Jus , be evidently inconsequent and irrational : ( no better than this — Peter ( de facto ) deny'd and forswore his Master : Ergo , His Successors ( de jure ) may do so to . ) Yet , if their Principles were true , ( as I suppose they may think them ) such Arguing would be more concluding . For , Pope Leo. X. expresly p affirms , and publickly declares , in one of their General Councils , that it is more clear than light it self ; That None of his Predecessors , Popes of Rome , Did ever Err , in any of their Canons or Constitutions . Now if this were true , ( as it is evidently false , and his Asserting it , an Argument not only of his Fallibility , but of his great Error and Folly ) That none of his Predecessors ever Err'd , then they might with more Security follow them ; for certainly , it can be no great fault or danger to follow an unerring Guide . Especially if it be true which they tell us . For 1. In their Laws and Canons , approved by their Supream Authority , and retained in publick use in their Church , we are told , q That all their Papal Sanctions are so to be received , as if the Divine Voice of Peter himself had Confirmed them : This ( as Gratian there tells us ) was Pope Agatho ' s Sentence , & is Received into the Body of their Canon Law , Revised , Corrected , and Purged from all things Contrary to Catholick Verity : So r Gregory XIII . says , and confirms it . Whence it evidently follows ; that ( in Pope Gregory's Judgment ) This Sentence of Agatho is not repugnant to Catholick Verity : And in the same place it is farther declared for Law , ( Pope Stephen . I. is cited as Author of that Sentence ) That , s Whatever the Church of Rome does Ordain or Constitute , it is ( without all Contradiction ) perpetually to be Observed . 2. Though this be ( beyond all truth and reason ) highly erroneous ; yet the Jesuits ( of late ) have gone much higher , and in their Claromont Colledge at Paris , publickly t maintain'd these two Positions . 1. That our Blessed Saviour left Peter and his Successors , the same Infallibility , he himself had , so oft as they spoke è Cathedra . 2. That ( even out of a General Council ) He is the Infallible Judge in Controversies of Faith , both in Questions of Right and Fact. This ( as to the main of it , though Erroneous and Impious ) is maintain'd by others , as well as Jesuits . F. Gregory de Rives , a Capuchin Priest , tells us ( and his Book is approved by the General , and several others of his Order , and by Father D. Roquet , a Dominican , and Doctor of Divinity , &c. ) u That as the Authority of Christ ( our blessed Saviour ) if he were now on Earth , were greater than all Councils , so by the Same Reason , the Authority of the Pope ( who is Christ's Vicar ) is greater than all Councils too . That the Priviledge of Infallibility was given to the Pope , not to Councils ; and then Concludes ; That the x Church of Rome ( he means the Pope ) is Judge of Controversies , and all her Desinitions and Determinations are De Fide. Thus De Rives . And three or four years before him , Lud. Bail ( a Parisian Doctor and Propenitentiary ) expresly affirms , That the y Word of God is threefold . 1. His written Word , in Scripture . 2. His unwritten Word , in the Traditions of the Church . 3. The Word Declared or Explain'd ; when doubtful passages in Scripture or Tradition are explain'd , and their meaning determin'd by the Pope , whether in , or out of Councils ; and this ( he says ) is the most approved way , in which men acquiesce , and think they need look no further . And hence he Infers , That seeing this is so ; we z ought not to be affraid to follow the Pope's Guidance in Doctrines of Faith and Manners , but acquiesce in his Judgment , and submit all our writings to be Corrected by him . I neither will nor need Cite any more Authorities , to prove the aforesaid Particulars ; That Their Popes may Damn and Depose Kings and Emperors ( especially if they be Hereticks ) and think they have ( as Christ's Vicars ) a just Prerogative and Power to do it . Sure I am , that these Positions ( though Erroneous and Impious ) are generally maintain'd by the Jesuits , Canonists , a Schoolmen , and their Followers ( which are very many ) receiv'd into the Body of their Canon Law of their best , and ( as they themselves say ) their most Correct Editions , and approved , and ( when they had opportunity ) practis'd by ( their Supream Powers ) their Popes and General Councils . I would not be mistaken ; I do not say that all who now do , or for this Six hundred years last past , have liv'd in the Communion of the Church of Rome , either do , or did approve such Papal Positions or Practices . I know the Sorbon and Vniversity of Paris , and many in other Countries , have publickly Declared their disbelief and dislike of them ; Especially in b Germany , in the time of Hen. III. Hen. IV. Friderick II. &c. not only private Persons , but some Synods declared the Papal Excommunications and Depositions of their Emperors , not only Injust and Impious , but Antichristian . I grant also , That Father Caron in his Remonstrantiâ Hibernorum ( if some have rightly told the Number ) has cited Two hundred and fifty Popish Authors , who deny the Popes Power to depose Kings : And though I know that many of his Citations are Impertinent ; yet I shall neither deny nor doubt , but that there are many thousand honest Papists in the outward Communion of the Church of Rome , who dislike this Doctrine . But this will neither Justifie or Excuse the Church of Rome , so long as her Governing and Ruling part publickly approves and maintains it . For , 1. Father c Caron himself tells us , that ( notwithstanding his Book , and all his Authorities for Loyalty to Kings ) The Divines of Lovane , The Pope's Nuncio , the Cardinals , four or five Popes , ( Paulus . V. Pius . V. Alexander . VII . Innocentius . X. ( he might easily have reckon'd many more ) did condemn his Doctrine , The Inquisitors damn'd his Book , and his Superiors Excommunicate him . 2. It is confessed , That the Supream Infallible Power of their Church , resides either in the Pope , or Council , or both together ; And 't is also certain , That their Popes , in their approved , and ( in d publick use ) received Canon Law , in their Authentick Bulls , ( publish'd by themselves ) in their General Councils ( and e with their Consent ) have approved , and ( for this Six hundred years last past ) many times practis'd this Doctrine of Deposing Kings ; nor has the Church of Rome ( I mean the Governing and Ruling part of it ) by any Publick Act or Declaration disown'd or censur'd it , as doubtless she would , had she indeed disliked it . Quae non prohibet , cum possit , jubet . If any man think otherwise , and can really shew me , that their Popes and General Councils have not formerly approved , or since have disown'd and disapprov'd this Doctrine : I shall willingly acknowledge my mistake , and be thankful to him for a Civility , which ( at present ) I really believe I shall never receive . However , Grata supervenient quae non sperantur . 3. Seing it is Evident that Pope Pius . V. ( and his Predecessors in the like Cases ) calls the Anathema and Curse contain'd in this Bull , The Damnation of Q. Elizabeth ; The next Query will be , What that hard word signifies , and what they mean by it , in their Bulls ? For the Solution of which doubt , and Satisfaction to the Query : 1. I take it to be certain and confess'd ; That the word Damnum ( from whence Damnation comes ) signifies a f diminution , or g loss of some good things , had and enjoyed before , or of a right to future good things , and then Damnation ( as to our present Case ) will be a judicial sentence , which ( by way of punishment ) imposes such loss and diminution . 2. As the Damnum or loss may be either of Temporal things here ( as loss of Honours , Liberty , Lands or Life ) or of Spiritual and Eternal things , ( as Heaven and Salvation ) hereafter ; so the Damnation also ( according to the Nature of the sentence , and the mischief intended by it ) may be Temporal or Eternal , or both ; if it penally inflict the loss both of Goods Temporal and Eternal . 3. I say then ( and I hope to make it evident ) that the mischief intended by this Papal Bull , and Excommunication ( so far as the malice and injustice of an Usurped Power could ) endeavoured to be brought upon that good Queen , was not only Temporal , but also Spiritual and Eternal . This the word Damnation , in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or Title of the Bull , ( in their Popish Construction ) intends and signifies . For the Temporal mischiefs intended to be brought upon that Good Queen , there is no question ; they are all particularly named in the Bull it self , as we shall see anon . For the Spiritual , that is , a seclusion out of Heaven and Happiness , and Eternal Damnation of Body and Soul ; that these also were the intended and designed Effects of this Impious Bull and Excommunication , is now to be proved . And here it is to be Considered , 1. That they constantly say , and ( having strong Delusion ) possibly may believe it ; That Hereticks ( and such the Queen is declared to be in the Bull ) dying Excommunicate , ( as that Queen did , and all true Protestants do ) are Eternally Damn'd . For , 1. A very great h Canonist of our own Nation , ( while Popish Superstition unhappily prevail'd here ) tells us , That every Excommunicate Person is a Member of the Devil . And for farther proof of this , he Cites i Gratian and their Canon Law , ( and he might have Cited other as pertinent places in Gratian ) who tells us , in another Canon k , That Excommunication is a Damnation to Eternal Death . And John Semeca the Glossator gives us their meaning of it ; That it is certainly true , when the l Person Excommunicate is incorrigible , and contemns the Excommunication , ( as for my part I really do contemn all their Excommunications , as Bruta fulmina , which neither do , nor can hurt any honest Protestant ) so that by their Injust Law , and most uncharitable Divinity , not only Queen Elizabeth , but all Protestants ( who are every Year Excommunicated by the Pope , in their Bulla m Coenae Domini ) are Eternally damned , and that è Cathedra . A Sentence Erroneous and Impious ; and ( though it be the Popes , whom they miscall Infallible ) inconsistent with Truth , or Christian Charity . 2. But we have ( both for Learning and Authority ) a far greater Author than Lindwood or Gratian , and ( in our days ) long after them ; I mean Cardinal Baronius ; who tells us — n That Pope Gregory . VII . did not only depose the Emperor Hen. IV. but Excommunicate , and Decree him to be Eternally Damn'd . And for this he o Cites Pope Gregory's own Epistles , who surely best knew his own mind , and the meaning of his own Decree . 3. But we have greater Authors and Authority for this , than Baronius ; for Pope Paschal . II. tells us , p That he had Excommunicated the Emperor Hen. IV. in a Council ; and adds , That by the Judgment of the whole Church , he lay bound under An Eternal Anathema . And after this Pope Paul. III. q Damns ( that 's the word ) and Excommunicates our King Hen. VIII . and all his Favourers and Adherents ; And we smite them ( saith he ) with the Sword of an Anathema , Malediction , and Eternal Damnation . In the Year 1459. Pius . II. ( with the Vnanimous Consent of his Council , at Mantua , Excommunicates and Damns all those ( even r Kings and Emperors ) who shall Appeal from the Pope to a General Council , and that they shall be punish'd as s Traytors and Hereticks . Pope Julius . II. afterwards confirms this Constitution of his Predecessor , as to all the Punishments contain'd in it ; Excommunicates and Curses all Persons , Ecclesiastical and Secular , of what Dignity soever ( though Kings ) who shall offend against that Constitution ; and Decrees that they shall have t their Portion and Damnation with Dathan and Abiron . The Damnation then intended and threatned in this Impious Bull of Pius V. ( as in other Papal Bulls of the like nature ) is not only some Temporal loss and damage ( though that also be included and expressed ) but the Eternal Damnation of Body and Soul. Which further appears by that Famous ( or indeed Infamous , Erroneous and Ridiculous ) Constitution of Boniface VIII . wherein having said , That there is but one Catholick Church , out of which , there is no Salvation ; and that our Blessed Saviour made Peter and his Successors his Vicarij , Vice-Gerents , and Heads of that Church ; he adds , That u whoever are not of that Church , and in Subjection and Obedient to the Pope , can have no Salvation . And Pius . V. in this very Bull , expresly says the same . For , 1. He says , That out of the Apostolick x Church ( he means evidently his own Roman Church ) there is no Salvation . 2. He Declares Queen Elizabeth an y Heretick , that she and all her Adherents had Incurr'd an Anathema and Malediction , were Excommunicate , and cut off from the Body of Christ. So that Queen Elizabeth , and all her Loyal Protestant Subjects , who never were , nor could be , ( as without great Error and Impiety they could not ) subject to the Pope , nor Members of his Apostolical Church , are ( by this Bull ) Eternally Damn'd . 4. But this is not all ; for we have greater Evidence , that by the word Damnation in their Bulls , wherein all Hereticks , ( Protestants you may be sure , who without Truth or Charity , they call so ) are Curs'd and Excommunicated , they do and must mean Eternal Damnation . For , 1. Pope Leo. X. in the Lateran z Council , ( which with them is General and Oecumenial ) innovates and establisheth ( with the Approbation and Consent of that Council ) the aforesaid Doctrine and Constitution of Pope Boniface . VIII . 2. The Trent Council does so too , and absolutely Anathematizes and Damns all those who do not believe their whole new Creed ; ( in which there is not one true Article , but all Erroneous , many Superstitious and Impious ) and tells us , It is the Catholick a Faith , without the belief of which , no man can be saved , and swear firmly to believe it to their last breath , and Anathematize all who do not . And ( which is further very considerable and pertinent to confirm what is abovesaid ) they do in that Oath promise , vow , and swear to receive and imbrace b All Things delivered , defined , and declared in their General Councils , and All c the Constitutions of their Church ; For these Particulars are parts of that new Creed , to the Belief and Profession of which they are sworn . And the Trent Council it self ( as well as the Pope in that Creed ) d requires that they make such a Profession . Whence it evidently follows , that all their Bishops , all Regulars of what Order soever , who are provided of Monasteries , Religious Houses , &c. All Canons and Dignitaries in their Church , all who have any Cure of Souls , and all who profess and teach any of the Liberal Arts , &c. ( for all these are required to take that Oath ) are sworn to receive , believe , and profess all the Desinitions of the Lateran Council under Leo. X. and the Constitution of Pope Boniface . VIII . which denounces Damnation to all those who submit not to the Pope , and imbrace not their Popish Religion ; and hence it further , and as evidently follows , that not only Queen Elizabeth , but all good Protestants then , and ever since , ( who neither did , nor without great Error and Impiety , could so submit to their Popes , or believe their New Creed ) are , by their Papal and uncharitable Divinity , Eternally Damn'd . So that it is not only some Temporal mischief or loss , but the Eternal Damnation of Body and Soul , which is threatned , and Declared to be the Effect and Inevitable Consequence of this against Queen Elizabeth , and such other Excommunications of those whom they call Hereticks . 4. In the beginning of this Impious Bull , we are told by the Pope , That our Blessed Saviour committed the Government of His Church ( with all plenitude and fulness of Power ) to Peter and his Successors . And that we might know , how great the Power was over all Kings and Kingdoms , he miserably misapplies a Text in e Jeremy ; and says — f That our blessed Saviour did Constitute Peter alone a Prince , over All Nations , and All Kingdoms , to Pull up , and Throw down , to Dissipate and Destroy , to Plant and Build ( in Ordine ad Spiritualia ) in Order to the Salvation of his Faithful People ; so that ( if we may believe this Infallible Expositor ) the same Power which God gave Jeremy over all Nations and Kingdoms , to pull up and destroy them ; the very same did our blessed Saviour give to Peter and his Successors . Nor is Pius . V. the only Pope who makes use of that Text to prove their extravagant Papal Power over Kings : Pope Alexander . III. having told some of his Brethren , how the g Emperor held his Stirrup when he mounted his Palfrey ; In his next Constitution , ( having said , That the Diligence of the Bishops and Pastors was necessary to pull up , and cut off Hereticks , and wicked men in the Church ) he Cites the place of Jeremy to prove it ; and says , That the Power over Nations and Kingdoms , to pull up , cast down , and destroy , was Given to Jeremy h , and In Him , to the Evangelical Priest , to Peter and his Successors , as he there expresly explains it . And Pope Paul. III. tells us ; — i That he was Vicar of Christ , our blessed Saviour , and plac'd in the Throne of Justice Above All Kings in the whole World , According to the Prophecy of Jeremy ; And then Cites the words of Jeremy before mention'd . And ( to omit others ) Pope Boniface . VIII . Cites the same Text ( though to as little purpose ) to the same end ; to prove the k Popes power above Kings , so as to punish and depose them . And before him Innocent . III. in his wild and irrational Epistle to the Emperor of Constantinople l , Cites the same Text of Jeremy , and another ( Gen. 1. 16. ) more impertinent ( if that be possible ) to prove the vast Power of Popes above all m Kings and Emperors . By all which , Papal Bulls and Constitutions ( as by many others of the like nature ) it may evidently appear , that they challenge a Power to depose Kings , and that they bring the Text of Jeremy as a ground and proof of it . But although their Popes brag , That they have n all Laws in the Archives of their own breasts , and that they are Supream and Infallible Judges in all Controversies of Faith ; yet their whole Discourse and Deductions from the Text of the Prophet Jeremy , is inconsequent , and indeed ridiculous , and no way concerns either Peter , or any of his pretended Successors . For , 1. This Power which God gave to Jeremy , was Personal , to himself only , not hereditary or after his death to be continued to any Successor ; much less to Peter , who came above Six hundred years after . That the Popes of this or former Ages , were Successors to Peter , both the Popes themselves , and Popish Authors universally affirm ; but ( as yet ) I have found none ( except the Pope and some few of his Party ) who say that either Peter , or any Pope , was Successor to Jeremy . It 's true , Pope Alexander . III. ( in the Place quoted a little before ) says ; That that Power over Nations and Kingdoms , to pull up ▪ dissipate , and destroy , &c. was ( by God ) given to Jeremy , and in Him to Peter . So that ( by this wild Supposition ) Peter succeeded into that Power , which before him , Jeremy had . But ( notwithstanding his Infallibility ) this is gratis dictum without any shadow or pretence of Reason : For he who succeeds into a Right which another possess'd before him , must do it either , 1. Per generationem & Jure Sanguinis ; as a Son succeeds his Father , or the next Heir , In jus defuncti : and that Peter , or any Pope did this way succeed Jeremy , as none ( with any reason ) can , I suppose none will say . 2. Per Consecrationem & Jure Ordinis ; so one Bishop succeeds another in the same Bishoprick . Neither could Peter succeed Jeremy this way ; for Jeremy was never Bishop of Rome , or any other place ; and then 't is impossible that they should succeed him in a Place he never had , and be Successor to one who never was their Predecessor . 3. A man may be said to succeed another , who has a new Commission given him , to Execute an Office which ( though intermitted ) some had lo● before him . So suppose the King should give one a Commission to be High Constable of England , after the Place had been long void ; he who had such Commission , may be said to succeed him , who had that Office last , though One or Two hundred years before . Now if the Pope ( or any for him ) can shew , that our blessed Saviour gave Peter the same Commission , which God gave Jeremy , and set him over Nations and Kingdoms , to pull up , dissipate , and destroy , &c. ( as Pope Pius . V. expresly says o he did , in this His Impious Bull against Q. Elizabeth ) then I will Confess , that in this Sense Peter may be called Jeremy's Successor . But that our blessed Saviour gave Peter any such Commission ( though the Pope say it ) is absolutely untrue ; not only without any foundation or ground of Reason for it in Scripture , ( and nothing else can prove it ) but point blank a-against it . As our Saviour's Kingdom was not of this World , no Temporal Power or Dominion ; so he neither exercis'd any such Power himself , nor gave Peter or his Apostles , ( who , all of them had Equal Power with Peter ) any such p Temporal Power over Nations and Kingdoms , to pull up , destroy , and dissipate , &c. All the Power they had was Spiritual ; they could punish no man ( unless miraculously , which the Pope pretends not to ) in his person , by loss of Life , or Liberty ( by Imprisonment ) nor in his purse , by imposing and exacting Pecuniary Mulcts ; as has been , and might be farther demonstrated , were it now my business : Only ( by the way ) I crave leave to observe , That Pope Pius in this Bull , makes that Commission , which he says , our blessed Saviour gave Peter , far larger than that which God gave Jeremy . For he tells us , 1. That our blessed Saviour did q Constitute Peter a Prince , to pull up , and destroy , &c. but there is no such thing in Jeremy's Commission . 2. That Peter was Constituted a Prince over r All Nations , and All Kingdoms ; but Jeremy had not such Universal Power , as is evident from the s Text. But to make this further appear , it is to be Consider'd , 2. That Jeremy was a Priest , and a Prophet ; so that if Peter and his Successors succeeded him , it must be in one of those two Capacities . But , 1. 'T is certain , that neither Peter , nor any Christian Bishop did , or could succeed him , as a Priest ; he being a Priest of Aaron's Order , which absolutely ceased at our Saviour's death . 2. Nor did he succeed Jeremy as to his Prophetical Office. 1. Because that was , Extraordinary , Temporary , and Expired with his Person . The Prophetical Office was not Hereditary or Successive . 'T is true , some Prophets preceded in time , and some afterwards followed : So t Jeremy was after Isaiah about One hundred sixty five years ; Ezekiel after him Four and thirty years ; Daniel after him Twenty years . But each Prophet had a new Call and Commission , and that for particular and different purposes , as is evident by the Prophecies themselves . 2. Jeremy and those Prophets were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Divinely Inspired , and that to an Infallibility , and their Prophecies ( as Divine , and the Word of God ) referr'd into the Sacred Canon of Scripture ; Now although Peter , ( not by Succession from Jeremy , but by a new Call and Commission from our blessed Saviour ) was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and had such an Assistance of the Holy Spirit , as made him Infallible , and his Doctrine Divine Truth ; yet such assistance being personal in him , ( as it was in all Prophets before him ) his Successors cannot , without Impudence and Impiety pretend to it ; though some of the u Canonists , the Jesuits , and Papal Parasites , would have us believe ( what the x World knows to be false ) that they are Infallible . 3. But that I may ( in short ) come to the main scope and hinge of the Question ; the truth is Evident , That all these Popes in the Exposition and Application of this Text in Jeremy , ( notwithstanding their pretended Supremacy and Infallibility ) are miserably mistaken , and put a sense upon it , which , before them , never any Father or Ancient Author did ; no nor their own Learned Writers of later times , even when Popery most prevail'd ; a sense ( if I may call it so ) inconsistent with the true and certain meaning of Jeremy . For when 't is in that Text , I have set thee over the Nations and Kingdoms , to pull down , dissipate , destroy , plant , and build ; That which y Alexander . III. ( and other Popes after him ) Cite this Text for , is , to infer a Power in Jeremy , ( and from him , in them ) so far , to pull down , dissipate , and destroy , as to Depose Kings and Emperors , and Absolve their Subjects from all Oaths of Allegiance : Though the Text mean nothing less ; nor can any such Impious Conclusion , by any ( save possibly Popish ) Logick , be deduced from it . For when the z Text says , I have set thee over the Nations , to pull down , and destroy , &c. 1. The meaning is not , that Jeremy ( by this Commission ) had Power and Jurisdiction , ( per modum Imperantis ) as a Prince and Superior , to pull down and destroy any man , much less Kings and Emperors ; nay so far was he from that , that he quietly and patiently submitted to the Authority and Commands of Injust and Impious Superiors , ( as is evident in his Prophecy ) and was several times a Imprison'd and cast into Dungeons , with great danger of his Life , at Jerusalem ; and when carried Captive into Egypt , by some Rebellious Jews , who would not obey the Word of God by him , he was more miserably used , and at last , by them b murder'd and martyr'd . So far was Jeremy ( after God had given him that c Commission ) from pulling down , or destroying any man , that ( on the contrary ) he patiently submitted to his Superiors , and was by them ( though most injustly ) punished , pull'd down , and at last destroy'd . 2. But the meaning of that Text evidently is , I have set thee o-over Nations and Kingdoms , to pull down , destroy , and dissipate , &c. Per modum Prophetantis , & Quid Judicio Justo facturus esset Deus , praedicentis ; As a Prophet , to foretell what God would do ; that ( unless they repented ) he would pull down , destroy , and dissipate those Nations and Kingdoms , against which ( by God's express Command ) he Prophesied . Jeremy had no Commission , no Power or Authority to pull down , or destroy any one single Person , much less Kings and Emperors ; nor did he ever do , or attempt any such thing ; he only Prophetied , and premonish'd them from God , that Destruction would come upon them for their sins , but it was God only who could and did execute that Sentence , and when they repented not , destroyed them . So in Scripture , the Prophet is said to do that , which he foretells will be done . Joseph in Prison , tells Pharaoh's Butler and Baker , That within three days the one should be restored to his Place , and the other hanged . This coming to pass ( not by any Power of Joseph , for he was a Prisoner ) yet the d Text says , That He restored the one , and that He hang'd the other . And this , those Popes , who so often urge this Text of Jeremy , might have easily and certainly known , had they studied Scripture and Divinity as much as Human Policy ( as too e many of them do not ) For what I have said is expresly said in the very Text of Jeremy's Prophetie ; as he who compares and considers f two or three Chapters in it , may evidently see . Sure I am , ( to say nothing of the Fathers and Ancient Writers of the Church ) what I have said of the true meaning of this place in Jeremy , is acknowledg'd even by the Jesuits and Canonists ( the greatest Flatterers of the Pope , and Sticklers for his pretended Supremacy ) who Expound the Text as I have done . I shall instance in One or Two. 1. Corn : A. Lapide ( a Noted and Learned Jesuit Expounding this Place of Jeremy , says thus — g I have set thee over the Nations , that thou should pull up : That is ( saith he ) that thou shouldst Threaten my Enemies , that unless they repent , I will pull them out of the Countries , where I have placed them . And then he tells us truly , that this is the Opinion of Hierome , Theodoret , Rabanus , Vatablus , Lyranus , Dion-Carthusianus , and others . And then he adds — h That it is God ( not Jeremy ) who Pulls up , and Plants the Nations . So that when 't is said — I have set thee To pull up , and plant the Nations : it is all one as● if he had said — I have set thee to Threaten and Preach that God would Pull up and Plant those Nations . This is that we say and prove to be th● meaning of that Text in Jeremy , and the Jesuit fully Consents , and Acknowledges it to be true . 2. Pope Innocent . III. in his i Epistle to the Emperor of Constantinople , ( amongst several other places of Scripture ) brings this Text of Jeremy , to prove the Priest ( especially Peter's Successor the Pope ) to be k Superior to all Kings : and yet Bernardus de Botono ( the l Author of the Gloss there ) when he comes to Explain that Text — I have set thee over the Nations , to pull up , and plant ; he has nothing of Deposing and setting up Kings : but Conceives the meaning to be — That Jeremy was set over m Nations , To pull up Vices , and plant Virtues . He truly Conceives , that Jeremy was not Constituted a Prince , with Dominion and Jurisdiction over Kings and Emperors ; to set them up , or pull them down , at his pleasure ; ( to which purpose many of the Popes produce it ) but a Prophet , to foretell them , what God would do . That is , He would plant them , if they were Penitent ; if not , pull down and destroy them . So the Author of the Gloss ; and they tell us , that he n writ most Learned Glosses upon the Decretals of Gregory . IX . which o afterwards had the Approbation of Pope Gregory XIII . Be it concluded then , that Pius . V. and those other Popes before mention'd ( notwithstanding their Infallibility ) have miserably mistaken the true meaning of this place of Jeremy . And indeed he who reads and seriously Considers the several Places of Scripture , which the Popes of the last 600. years have explained in their Bulls and Decretals , and produc'd as proofs of their extravagant & usurp'd Supremacy ; I say , he will have just reason to believe , that Popes are not the best Expositors of Scripture . For Instance ; ( to omit others ) I shall refer the Reader to those p 8. or 9. Places , which Pope Innoc. III. and Bonif. VIII . have Cited , and Explain'd , in two of their Constitutions , both Extant in their q Canon Law , in the places before Cited , where the Expositions and Applications of those places , by those Popes , are not only evidently Erroneous , but ( being repugnant to all good Sense and Reason ) exceedingly ridiculous : such as may give their Adversaries reason to believe that the Authors of such wild Interpretations , are rather Fools than Infallible . 5. Pope Pius . V. here in the beginning of this his Bull , calls r Peter ( as other Popes and their Parasites usually do ) Prince of the Apostles ; and tells us , that our blessed Saviour did set and constitute him a Prince over all Nations and Kingdoms . From whence , they ( Illogically and without any shadow of Just Consequence ) would Conclude , Peter's Supremacy , his Dominion and Authority even over all the Apostles . For although Peter in the Gospel ( when the Names of the Twelve Apostles are numbred ) is called s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Primus ; and amongst Latin Authors anciently ( Princeps Apostolorum ) The Prince of the Apostles ; yet that t Papal Supremacy , which the Popes and their Party generally attribute to him , that they ( as his Successors ) might have it themselves , cannot thence be concluded . So u Erasmus tells us , ( out of St. Hierome ) That the Apostles in the other Evangelists , are not reckon'd in the Order they are in Matthew ; lest any man should think , that Peter were first of all the Apostles , because he is reckon'd in the first Place . Matthew reckons Thomas before himself ; but Mark after him : Matthew reckons Andrew before James and John , but Mark after them . So St. Paul reckons James before Peter and John , though Matthew puts Peter first . And Erasmus there says further , that Hierome intimates , That the Apostles were all ( as to their Apostolick Office ) Equal . That which makes me believe , that what Erasmus Observes out of Hierome , is true , is this ; The Spanish Inquisitors have damn'd it , and ( in their Index x Expurgatorius ) Commanded it to be blotted out . But Erasmus adds further , — y That it cannot Logically and firmly be concluded , from the Order wherein the Apostles are number'd , which of them is to be preferr'd before the rest , because where many are number'd , there is a necessity we begin with some one , and 't is not material which we begin with . And This the Inquisitors let pass , without a Deleatur ; they do not condemn it to be blotted out , and so seem to approve it , otherwise it had not pass'd ; so that ( even by our Adversaries consent ) all that can be rationally Inferr'd , from that Text , where in numbering the Apostles , Peter is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , first , is only z a Primacy of Order , ( which we willingly grant ) but no Primacy ( much less a Supremacy ) of Authority , Dominion , and Jurisdiction over the rest of the Apostles ; which the Pope and his Party desire , and we justly deny . 2. And as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Primus ; so Princeps , or Prince ( amongst the best Latin Authors ) usually signifies Order Only , or some Excellent Quality in those who are call'd Principes , without any a Authority or Jurisdiction over those in relation to whom they are so call'd . And that the Rest of the Apostles were call'd Principes as well as Peter , I have Authentick warrant , even the Roman Breviary , restored according to the Decree of the Council of Trent , publish'd by Pius V. ( The very Pope who publish'd this Impious Bull a-against Queen Elizabeth ) and then Revised by the Authority of Clement . VIII . and Vrban VIII . and Printed at Antverp . 1660. In this Breviary , we have this b Hymn , in the Office for the Feast of St. Peter and Paul ; Ecclesiarum Principes , Belli Triumphales Duces , Coelestis Aulae Milites , Et vera Mundi Lumina , &c. Now in this Hymn Peter and Paul too , are call'd Ecclesiarum Principes , Princes of the Churches ; For being a Hymn for the Feast of those two Apostles ; Ecclesiarum Principes cannot relate to less than two ; nor Properly to any but them two in that Place . Though elsewhere it c relates to all the Apostles ; as in the Place cited in the Margent ; when after the Invitatory , ( as they call it ) d Come let us adore the Lord , King of the Apostles ; it follows thus , Aeterna Christi munera , Apostolorum Gloria , Palmas & Hymnos debitos , Laetis canamus mentibus . Ecclesiarum e Principes , Belli Triumphales Duces , Coelestis Aulae Milites , Et vera Mundi Lumina , &c. So that if we may believe their own Authentick Breviary , Publish'd and Carefully Revised by these Popes , according to the Decree of the Trent Council ; All the other Apostles ( under our blessed Saviour , and by his Authority ) were Princes of the Christian Church as well as f Peter . Now I desire to know , how these things will Consist ? g Pius . V. in this Bull against Queen Elizabeth , says , That our blessed Saviour Committed the Government of his Church to One Only , to Peter , and Constituted him Only a Prince over all Nations and Kingdoms ( so he in his Bull ) and yet the same Pope , in this Roman Breviary , ( for it was Approved and Published by him ) and the Hymn here cited , says , That all the Apostles were Ecclesiarum Principes ; and if so , then Peter was not the Only Prince to whom the Government of the Church was Committed ; no , the Commission of every Apostle ( given by our blessed Saviour ) was as unlimited and as large as Peters . This will appear in all the Particulars of it , equally given to all , as they are expresly set down in Scripture , from whence alone , we can surely know , what their Authority and Commission was . Our blessed Saviour tells them , and us , — h 1. As my Father sent me , so send I you . There we have the Author and Authority of their Commission . The same blessed Saviour of the World sends them all . 2. Then he breath'd upon them , and said , i Receive ye the Holy Ghost . There we have the Principle inabling them to discharge that great Office and Trust reposed in them ; It was that Holy Spirit , which gave them , 1. Infallibility in their Doctrine . 2. Power to work Miracles for k Confirmation of it . 3. Then he adds , l whose sins ye retain , they are retained , &c. Here we have the great Spiritual Power given them for the calling and governing the Church , which is elsewhere called , m The Power of the Keys ; which Consists in binding and loosing , retaining and remitting sins . For so 't is Explain'd by our blessed Saviour in the Place last cited , and is ( by our Adversaries ) n confess'd . So that 't is Evident that the Power of the Keys , the Power of binding and loosing , of retaining and remitting sins , is Equally given to all the Apostles , to every One as well as Peter . 4. He Assigns them their Place and Province , where , and the way how they were to Exercise their Apostolical Power — o Go and Teach All Nations , baptizing them , and teaching them to observe all things , whatsoever I have Commanded you . Their Diocese was the World — p Go ye into All The World , and preach the Gospel to every Creature ( every man. ) And the administring the Sacraments , and teaching men to believe and observe the whole Go●pel , was the business they were to do in that their Diocese . 5. And to incourage them to this great and difficult Work , he graciously promises his Presence and Divine Assistance ; Lo , I am q with you Always , even to the End of the World. These are the Powers and Promises given to the Apostles , and ( which to me seems Evident ) without difference or distinction ; Equally to all ; to Simon the Cannite , ( for r so it should be writ ) as well , and as much as to Simon Peter . If any think otherwise , if he can , and will ( by any Cogent Reason ) make it appear either , 1. That the foregoing Powers and Promises were not Equally given to all the Apostles . 2. Or that some other Power or Promise was ( in Scripture ) given peculiarly to Peter , whereby he had an Authority and Dominion over the other Apostles and the whole Church , to make him Only a Prince over all Nations and Kingdoms , ( as Pope Pius . V. in this his wild Bull confidently affirms ) I say , he who can and will make both or either of these appear , shall have my hearty thanks for the Discovery , and I shall ( for the future ) have a better Opinion of Peter's Supremacy ; which ( at present ) I take to be a groundless Error , without any proof or probability . I know that the Popes in their s Constitutions , and their Party usually urge that place in t Matthew to prove Peter's , ( and thence their own ) vast and Monarchical Supremacy over the whole Church , ( even the Apostles themselves not excepted ) the words These — Thou art Peter , and upon This Rock , I will build my Church . — And I give unto thee , The Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven . From this Place , ( most irrationally , and without any Sense or Consequence ) they infer , That u Peter , and every Successor of his , was Constituted Supream Head , Prince and Monarch of the Vniversal Church . So that what Peter or his x Successor shall ( è Cathedrâ ) Determine and Decree , is to be received , as if God himself had decreed it . So Tirinus , and their Canon Law , in their most Correct Editions . Though this be Erroneous , and evidently Impious , yet Tirinus , Gratian , and their Canonists are not singular in this point , another Learned Jesuit ( in his Commentary on this Place ) tells us , That when our blessed Saviour says , On this Rock will I build my Church ; he speaks of y Peter , as the Fundamental Rock , on which the Church is built . And he adds — z That though our blessed Saviour was chiefly that Fundamental Rock , yet Peter and the Popes of Rome succeeded him , as his Vicars , with Supream Power , &c. This place , they conceive ; concerns no Apostle but Peter , and proves his , and his Successors Supremacy . To this , I say , 1. That all they say , in this particular , is gratis dictum ; for they only say it , without any pretence of proof . If we will take their bare word , we may ; otherwise we may chuse ; for they bring no proof to prove their Exposition of this Text , such as might command and necessitate our Assent . And then a bare denial , is Answer enough to a bare Assertion . For ( as St. Hierome says in the like case ) an unproved Position , eâdem facilitate rejicitur , quâ Affirmatur . 2. When they say , our blessed Saviour was the chief Fundamental Rock on which the Church was built , and that St. Peter and the Popes succeeded him , with Supream Power . They consequently must say Two things ; 1. That our blessed Saviour left his Place and Office of being the Fundamental Rock , to Peter , when he left this World. For if he kept it , and still do keep it , neither the Pope nor Peter could be his Successors . No man can be Successor and succeed into a Place till his Predecessor leave it . Linus neither did , nor could succeed Peter in the Bishoprick of Rome , whilst Peter liv'd , and possess'd it himself ; so that by this Erroneous and Impious Doctrine , they have displac'd our blessed Saviour from being the Fundamental Rock , on which the Church is built , and instead of him , have plac'd Peter first , and then particular Popes successively . And then let the World judge , in what a miserable Condition the Church of Christ must be . 1. When the Fundamental Rock on which it was built , was an a Idolater , as Marcellinus was . 2. Or an Heretick ; as b Liberius , c Honorius , d Vigilius , &c. were . 3. Or an Impudent whorish Woman , as Johannes Anglicus , or Pope e Joan certainly was . 4. Or when many Popes together , no less than Fifty ( by the Confession of their own Learned men ) were f Apostatici potiùs quam Apostolici . 5. Or when the Popes were such g Monstrous Villains , as were put into , and out of St. Peter ' s Chair by Impudent Whores , made Popes by Violence and Simony , such ( as even in Baronius his Judgment ) none should , or dared call true Popes , whose names were recorded only to fill up the Catalogues of the Roman Bishops . 6. Or in the Vacancies , when for h two or three years , and ( if some i Writers say true ) sometime for Eight years , there was no Pope at all , and so ( by this Doctrine ) the Church had no Fundamental Rock at all , for several years together . 7. Lastly , Or when they had for near k Fifty years together , two or three Popes at the same time ; when it was Impossible they should be all Legitimate , and true Successors of St. Peter , and ( what they pretend to ) Vicars of Christ our blessed Saviour ; and which , or whether any of them , were such indeed , none did , or could know : Nay , 't is certain , ( and must by our Adversaries be confess'd , ( unless they will deny their own received Principles ) that sometimes , all of the Pretenders were Impious Usurpers of the Papal Chair , without any Just Right or Title to it . Then the first Council of l Pisa met ( and it was a General One , consisting of above . 600. m Fathers ) there were Two Popes in being ( such as they were ) Gregory XII . and Benedict . XIII . who were both n Damn'd and Deposed , as Perjur'd Persons , Schismaticks , and Hereticks , &c. and that by an unanimous Consent and Decree of that Great Council . At the Council at Constance ( four or five o years after ) there were three Popes ; the two beforenamed , Gregory and Benedict , ( who would not sit down , though damn'd at Pisa , and John. XXIII . For the two former , what Villains they were , the Council of Pisa has told us . For John. XXIII . the Council of Constance gives him this Character — p That he was a Person ( all the time he was Pope ) notoriously Scandalous to the Church , that his Life was damnable , and he in his Conversation guilty of Impieties not to be nam'd : And the Council adds , ( in their Definitive Sentence of his Deposition ) q That he had broke his Vow , his Oath , and Promise made to God , and his Church , that he was Notoriously Simoniacal , and by his dishonest and detestable Life and Manners notoriously Scandalous , &c. Now if these ( and such other ) Popes be the Fundamental Rock upon which the Church is built , ( and this they say , and would have us believe it ) She must of necessity be in a miserable Condition , and the Gates of Hell must prevail against Her ; when they evidently prevail against the Rock , upon which ( they say ) she is built ; for if the Rock and Foundation fail , that which is built upon it , must evidently fall and come to Ruin. This is the first Consequence of their Doctrine , manifestly Erroneous : but this is not all ; For there is a second Consequence of it , both Erroneous , and indeed Blasphemous . For , 2. when they say , that our blessed Saviour was the Fundamental Rock on which the Church was built , and that Peter and the Popes aft●r , did succeed him in that Place and Office , cum Potestatis plenitudine , ( says Pius . V. here ) Cum Summâ Potestate ( as others Generally ) Hence it follows , That the present Pope has ( and every one of his Predecessors had ) the same Power required to the being of a Fundamental Rock , which our blessed Saviour had . For if they succeed him in the same Place , and with a Supream Power , then they have the same Place and Power our blessed Saviour had . His Power neither was , nor could be greater then Potestas summa ; ( summo non datur Superius , there can be nothing higher then the highest , nor superior to the Supream ) and if Peter had , and every pitiful Pope has potestatem summam , Then they have a Power as great , and equal to that our Blessed Saviour had before he Resigned it to his Successors : But I might have saved the Labour of proving this ; for 't is Acknowledg'd and expresly Affirm'd in their Roman Catechism ( ex Decreto Concilij Tridentini , juslu Pii . V. Edito ) in which they say , that Peter was r Caput & Princeps Omnium Apostolorum . And then it there follows , Christus s Petrum Vniversi Fidelium Generis Caput , ut Qui ei successit Eandem Plane Totius Ecclesiae Potestatem habere voluerit . It was our blessed Saviour's will , That Peter should have The same Power our blessed Saviour had . Sed Apage nugas Impias & Blasphemas . The bare recitation of such wild Positions , should and will be Confutation enough to all sober Christians , who are solicitous to maintain our blessed Saviour's Honor , and will never give that Place or Power to the Pope or Peter , which is solely and eternally due to their Redeemer . 3. But further , when our Adversaries , upon that Place of Matthew [ Thou t art Peter , and upon this Rock I will build my Church ] would have us believe , That Peter was that Rock , while he liv'd , and his Successors after him ; And thence infer their Supremacy . They must pardon our Infidelity , if we believe it not . For , 1. They do or might know , that not only Protestants , but the Fathers , and u Ancient Ecclesiastical Writers generally , by Rock in that Text , understand not Peter's Person , but either the Profession of his Faith he there made , or our blessed Saviour . But our Adversaries like not this Doctrine ; And therefore when Hilary had truly said — Vnum hoc est immobile fundamentum , Vna Haec est foelix fidei Petra , Petri Ore Confessa ; and Erasmus had put this Note in the Margent , Petram Interpretatur Ipsam Fidei Professionem ; and when the same Erasmus on Matth. XVI . 18. had cited Augustin for the same sense of the place , which Hilary gives ; And had put in the Margent — Ecclesia non est fundata super Petrum . The x Spanish Inquisitors command it to be blotted out of Erasmus his Text and Margent ; Although Hilary and Augustin ; and many others ( as they well knew ) said the same thing . 2. And this truth is so Evident , that not only the Fathers , and Ancient Authors , but Sober and Learned men in the Church of Rome , even in darkest times when Popery unhappily prevailed , were of the same Judgment ; And by the Rock in this Place of Matthew , [ upon this Rock I will build my Church ] understand not Peter , but that Confession of his Faith there made , to be meant . So y John Semeca , Author of the Gloss upon Gratian , and z Nic. Lyranus , and Ansel. Laudunensis , Author of the a Interlineary Gloss , upon his Text of Matthew ; by the Rock on which the Church was built , understand Christ ( our blessed Saviour ) and not Peter b . And a late Learned Sorbon Doctor ( though he would seem to say , that Peter was that Rock ) yet acknowledgeth , that by that Rock , the c Faith of Peter might be meant , and not his Person . Nay , which is more considerable ( and may seem strange to the Reader ) the Fathers of the Trent Council expresly say , That the d Creed or Profession of Faith , which the Church of Rome useth , ( the Constantinopolitan Creed they mean , and there set it down ) , is The Firm and Only Foundation , against which the Gates of Hell can never prevail ; and our present e Text is in the Margent Cited for it , whence it evidently appears , that those Fathers at Trent have Declared , That the Creed , or true Faith of Christ , is that firm Rock , and The Only Foundation on which the Church is built , and against which the Gates of Hell cannot prevail ; and if that Faith be the only Foundation of such firmness , then the Pope is not . For if there be another , then that is not ( what the Trent Fathers say it is ) the Only Foundation . And lastly , it is very considerable , what f Stapleton ( their Learned Professor at Doway , and great Champion of their Church ) confesseth ( and without great Impudence , he could not deny it ) that not only Chrysostome , Cyril , and Hilary ; but four Popes , Leo , Agatho , Nicolas , and Adrian ( each of them the first of that name ) have , in their Decretal Epistles , declared , That the Rock on which the Church was built , was not Peter's Person , but his Faith or Confession of it . This was the Opinion of those ancient Popes , and they as infallible sure as any of their Successors . By the way , ( that we may observe the Contradiction amongst our Adversaries , notwithstanding the pretended Infallibility of their Church ) The Trent Catechism says — g That Peter Only was the Rock on which our blessed Saviour built his Church . And this the Author ( or Authors ) of the Catechism pretends to prove out of Cyprian , & some others there named . So that if the Trent Council say True : the Creed , or the Confession of the Cathol . Faith , is the Only Foundation on which the Church is built , but if the Trent Catechism be in the Right , Peter Only is that Rock and Foundation . Now seeing it is impossible , that both these Positions should be true , it Evidently follows , that there is an Error in the Council or Catechism , or ( which I rather believe ) in both . That this may further appear , I say , 4. That 't is certain , and generally Confess'd , That a Lively Faith , and a firm belief of the Gospel , is a Rock and Foundation against which the Gates of Hell cannot prevail . Our blessed Saviour tells us , That he who h hears his sayings , and doth them ; ( he who really and practically believes the Gospel ) builds upon a Rock . And St. John tell us , That such Faith is i victorious , nay victory , and cannot be overcome . Hence it is , that in the Liturgie of St. James , in the Administration of the Eucharist , they pray — That God would bless the Sacred Elements , that they might be Effectual , to the k Establishment of the Holy Catholick Church , which he had Founded and Built upon the Rock of Faith. But though Faith and a firm belief of the Gospel , be a Rock , yet 't is not ( as the Trent Fathers say ) the Only Rock , on which the Church is built . Peter was a Rock too ; this our Adversaries Confess , and earnestly Contend for . But neither was he the Only Rock ( though the Trent Catechism and Popish Writers commonly say so ) nor such a Rock , as they ( without any Reason or Just Ground ) would have him . That this may Appear , it is to be Considered , ( 1. ) That ( by Evident Scripture ) our blessed Saviour is the Prime and Chief Fundamental Rock on which the whole Church is built . l Behold ( says God by Isay ) I lay in Sion , for a Foundation a Stone , a precious Corner Stone , a Sure Foundation , &c. I know that in the Vulgar Latin of m Sixtus . V. and n Clemens . 8. it is untruly render'd — Lapide● pretiosum in Fundamento Fundatum . Whence o Bellarmine will have it meant of Peter , and so of the Pope ; who ( in his Opinion ) is Lapis pretiosus in Fundamento fundatus . But had the Cardinal consulted the Hebrew Text , or the Version of the Septuagint , or p Hieromes Version of both , and his Notes upon them ; he might have seen his Error : But though Bellarmine Expound this Place of Isay , to be meant of Peter ; yet q Peter himself ( who understood that Text as well as the Cardinal ) refers it to our blessed Saviour , so does r Paul too ; and if this be not sufficient to Convince the Cardinal , and such other Papal Parasites ; our blessed Saviour expounds it not of Peter , but himself , and that after he had s said to Peter — Thou art Peter , and upon this Rock I will build my Church . ( 2 ) . This being granted ( as of necessity it must ) that our blessed Saviour is the first Immoveable Rock , and most sure Foundation on which the Church is built ; It is also granted , and must be so , ( Scripture expresly saying it ) That Peter is a Foundation too , on which the Church is built . But in a way far different from that our Adversaries dream of ; ( for they do but dream , nor will any Considering and Intelligent Person think them well awake when they writ such things ) For , 1. When we say , That Peter is a Foundation on which the Church is built ; our meaning is not , that he has by this , any Prerogative or Superiority , much less ( what our Adversaries pretend ) any Monarchical Supremacy over the rest of the Apostles , and the whole Church ; for every one of the Apostles is , as well and as much a Foundation of the Christian Church , as Peter . The t Apostle tells us , That the Church is a spiritual House , which is built upon u The Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets , Jesus Christ being the Chief Corner-stone . And St. John to the same purpose speaking of the Church , the New Jerusalem , says — x The City had Twelve Foundations , and in them the names of the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb. In these Texts , all the Apostles ( James and Paul , as well as Peter ) are Foundations of the Church equally , and without any distinction or difference ; no Prerogative given to Peter above the rest ; much less that vast Monarchical Supremacy which is pretended to . Both the Greek and Latin Fathers say , That the Gospel , the Christian Faith , or the Creed ( which contains the Sum of it ) or Peter's Confession of our blessed Saviour to be Christ the Son of the Living God , ( which is the Chief Fundamental Article of our Faith , I say , That ( in those Father's Judgment ) this Faith is the Foundation on which the Church is built ; St. Augustin , Explaining the Creed to the Catechumens , has these words — y Know you ( saith he ) that this Creed is the Foundation on which the Edifice or Building of the Church is raised . To the same purpose Theophylact tells us — z That the Faith which Peter Confess'd , was to be the Foundation of the faithful , that is of the Church . This is a Truth so evident , that a Learned Jesuit , having Cited and approved a Alcazar , ( a Zealous Roman Catholick ) for this very same Opinion , does not only receive and approve , but largely and undeniably prove it , out of Clemens Romanus , Augustin , Hierome , Russin , the b Trent Council , and c St. Paul : And then adds — d That other Councils and Fathers say the same . Another e Learned Jesuit confesses , that it was the opinion of many Ancient Fathers ( yet he endeavours to Confute it ) that those words — ( upon this Rock I will build my Church ) ; ] are thus to be understood — Upon this Faith , or Confession of Faith which thou hast made , ( That I am Christ the Son of the Living God ) will I build my Church ; And then he Cites many Fathers to prove it ; and immediately quotes St. Augustin , and ( with little respect or modesty ) says — That f Augustine ' s Opinion was further from sense , then those he there Cited ; because he made Christ the Rock on which the Church was built . ( 3. ) I take it then for Certain , and Confess'd , ( and so does a very g Learned Jesuit too , that the Twelve Foundations , in that Place in the Revelation before Cited ( Cap. 21. 14. ) signifies the Twelve Apostles on whom the Wall of the New Jerusalem , or the Church of Christ was built ; and therefore their Names ( as St. John says ) were written on those Foundations , to signifie , that the Apostles ( Paul as well as Peter ) were Founders or Foundations of the Christan Church . And that this may more distinctly appear , and from Scripture it self , that every Apostle , ( as well as Peter ) is a Foundation of the Christian Church ; we are to Consider , First , That in Scripture the Church is commonly call'd h a House , the House of God ; and every good Christian is a i Lively Stone which goes to the building of that spiritual House . 2. Our blessed Saviour call'd and sent all his Apostles ( as well as Peter ) to k build this House . He gave some Apostles — for the Edifying ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) or building the Body of Christ ; That is , the l Church . 3. The Apostles all of them , ( Paul m as well as Peter ) were Master-Builders of this House . Evident it is ( in the Text Cited ) that St. Paul was a Master-Builder , and St. Peter was no more ; nor is he any where in Scripture , expresly said to be so much ; though I believe , and grant he was . 4. The Means by which these Master-Builders edify'd and built the Church , were these : Their diligent Preaching of the Gospel , ( first , and more Infallibly Communicated to them , then to any others ) Their Pious and Exemplary Conversation , which made their Preaching more Effectual , and gave Reputation to it , and themselves ; Their Confirming with Miracles , and Sealing the Truth of it , with their Blood and Martyrdom . 5. Hence , the Gospel it self and our Christian Faith , is call'd the Foundation of the Church ; as may appear by what is said before , and by St. Paul , who expresly n calls it so . For that Foundation , which he there says he had laid at Corinth ( as may appear from the Context ) was the o Gospel he had preach'd among them . So that ( by the Authorities above Cited ) I think it may appear , that Divines ( Ancient and Modern , Protestant and Papist ) seem to agree in this ; That there is a double Foundation of the Church , Doctrinal and Personal : The first is the Gospel , or those Holy Precepts , and gracious Promises contain'd in it ; On the belief and practise whereof , the Church solely relyes for Grace here , and Glory hereafafter ; And therefore , they are Commonly and Justly call'd the Foundation on which the Church is built . Whence it is very usual in Scripture , to say , that by Preaching the Gospel , the p Church is Edify'd or Built . And because our blessed Saviour immediately call'd all his Apostles , gave them Authority , and the Infallible Assistance of his Spirit , and sent them to Preach the Gospel , and they ( with great success ) did it , Converting Nations , building or founding Churches ) therefore they were call'd Master-Builders , Founders , and Foundations of the Christian Church ; as our q Adversaries Confess . Now ( as to this Particular ) as the Apostles were Founders or Foundations of the Christian Church ; Peter had no Preheminence or Prerogative above the other Apostles ; He was no more Petra , a Founder or Foundation of the Church , then the other Apostles . Nay in this ( if any ) certainly St. Paul might challenge a Preference and Preheminence above Peter himself , or any of the Rest. For he ( with truth and modesty enough , r tells us — That in Preaching the Gospel he laboured More then they All : ( And s Irenaeus gives the Reason of it ) His Sufferings were t more , He planted more Churches , He writ more Epistles , then they all ; ( his being Fourteen , and all the rest but Seven , and they ( in respect of his ) short ones too ; which then were , and ever since have been , and ( while the World stands ) will be Doctrinal Foundations of the Christian Church . But that which makes more against Peter's Supremacy , and for St. Paul's Preference before him , ( at least his Independence upon Peter ( as the Supream Monarch of the Church ) is ; That he tells the Corinthians , That the care of u All The Churches lay upon him . Nor that only , but that he made Orders and X Constitutions for All those Churches , which they were bound to observe — So I Ordain ( saith he ) in All the Churches . So our English truly renders it . I know the Vulgar Latin ( which the Trent Y Fathers ridiculously declare Authentick ) renders it otherwise — So I teach in all Churches : but the z word there , signifies not to teach , but properly to a Ordain and Legally Constitute , Define , and Command . So that thereupon Obedience becomes due from those who are Concern'd in such Constitution or Ordinance . And this Theodoret took to be the true meaning of that Text ; and therefore he says , That Paul's Ordaining in all Churches , was giving them a b Law , which they were to obey . So that here are two things expresly said of Paul in Scripture , and that by himself , who best knew , and was Testis idoneus , & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a Witness beyond all Exception . 1. That the care of All the Churches lay upon him . 2. That he made Ecclesiastical Laws and Constitutions for them All : whereas ( in Scripture ) no such thing is said of Peter , or any other Apostle . Upon consideration of the Premises , some of the Ancients have call'd St. Paul , A Preacher to the whole World ; So c Photius and Nicolaus Methonensis Episcopus , speaking of several Apostles Officiating at several places ; as of James at Jerusalem , John in Asia , Peter and Paul at Antioch , &c. He adds ; concerning d Paul — That he did particularly Officiate to the whole World. And to the same purpose Theodoret , Expounding the words of the Apostle — That the care of All the Churches lay upon him ; He says , That the e sollicitude and care of the Whole World lay upon Paul. More than this cannot be said of Peter , nor is there half so much said of him , as of St. Paul in Scripture . Had Peter told us — That the care of All the Churches lay upon him ; and that He made Orders and Constitutions , to be observed In All Churches , ( both which are expresly said of St. Paul ) the Canonists and Popish Party , would have had some pretence ( who now have none ) for Peter's Supremacy . I urge not this , to Ascribe to Paul , that Supremacy we deny to Peter ; ( For neither had they , nor any other Apostle , any such thing ) but only to shew , That St. Paul ( his Labo●s , Sufferings , the many Churches founded by him , and His Canonical Writings consider'd ) may be thought ( not without reason ) a more eminent Founder of the Christian Church , then St. Peter . 2. But as it is , and must be confess'd by Divines , Ancient and Modern , Protestants and Papists , That the Gospel is the Doctrinal Foundation , and that Petra , on which the Church is Built ; So there is also a Personal Foundation , evidently mention'd in Scripture . I mean Persons , on whom the Christian Church is built : And they are 1. Our blessed Saviour . 2. His Apostles . 1. That our blessed Saviour is a Rock , and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the most firm and immoveable Rock on which the Church is Built , is evident from the f Scriptures before Cited . Such a Rock , as Peter neither was , nor could be , much less any of those they call his Successors . For , 1. Our blessed Saviour was , and still is a Rock on g which ( as Irenaeus tells us ) the Vniversal Church , both before and since his coming into the World , was built . He was h promised by God presently after the fall of Adam , and then successfully by i all the Prophets ; His Death and Passion was a Propitiation , as well for the Sins of those who k lived before , as ours who live after it ; and those Promises of the Messiah were such , as all the Patriarchs , Prophets , and Pious men before Christ did l know and believe . Nay , ( if we believe Eusebius ) the Promises of the Messias , were m clearly and distinctly revealed to the Ancient Patriarchs and Prophets ( though in a less degree and measure of clearness ) and their Belief and suitable Obedience such , that ( though they had not the name , yet they might truly be n call'd Christians before Christ. The Apostle tells us , That the o Gospel was preached to Abraham , and so it was to all the Ancient Church , by the p Prophets ; who foretold them of the Incarnation , Passion , and Resurrection of Christ. It was the Gospel St. Paul every where preach'd , and yet he says , that He preached No q other Things , then those which The Prophets And Moses did say should come . And this is a truth so manifest , that ( to say no more of the Ancient Christian Writers ) r Peter Lombard , and the Popish School-men , writing De fide Antiquorum , of the Faith by which the Saints , before our blessed Saviour , were saved ; they all say , that they then ( as we now ) were saved by Faith in Christ their Redeemer . The difference was , 1. They believed in Christo Exhibendo , we in Christo Actu Exhibito . 2. Their Faith before our blessed Saviour's coming , was more Imperfect and Implicit ; Ours ( since he is come , and the Gospel clearly publish'd ) much more Perfect and Explicite . This I say , to prove that our blessed Saviour was the Rock , on which the Church under the Old Testament was built , and ( in this Particular ) such a Rock and Foundation of the Church as Peter never was , nor could be ; it being impossible he should be a Foundation of that Church which was founded almost Four thousand years before he was born . 2. Our blessed Saviour is a Rock and Foundation , on which the whole Christian Church is built , even the Apostles themselves , as well as others : who ( all of them , s Peter● as well as Paul ) in respect of Christ ( who is the great Immoveable Rock , which sustains the t whole Building ) are Superstructions ; though otherwise , in respect of the Christian World converted by their Preaching , they are call'd Foundations ; yet only Secundary Foundations , all of which are built upon the Principal and prime Foundation Jesus Christ u So in the like Instance , all the Apostles ( Peter as well as the rest ) were both Sheep and Shepherds . 1. Sheep , in respect of Christ , who is the x great and y chief Shepherd . My z Sheep hear my voice , ( says our blessed Saviour : ) The Apostles did so ; when he call'd them , they heard and obey'd him . Again , I lay a down my life for my Sheep ; so he did for his Apostles , else they could not have been saved ; And therefore they also are his Sheep . 2. Yet they were Shepherds too ( sent by , and subordinate to the great and chief Shepherd Jesus Christ ) in respect of the Church and Christians , over which the b Holy Ghost had set them . 3. Our blessed Saviour is such a foundation and Founder of his Church , as does not find , but make these Lively Stones , which are the Materials with which he builds it . He gives his Spirit , and by it Grace and a Lively Faith , which things alone make men Lively Stones , and fit for that Building . This no Apostle , ( not Peter , much less any succeeding Pope ) ever did , or could do ; nor ( without great folly and impiety ) can pretend to . 4. Our blessed Saviour is such a Rock , such a Foundation and Founder of the Church , as was and is Proprietary and the sole true Owner of it ; 't is his House , purchased with his precious Blood ; and he ever had , and still hath a Magisterial and Imperial power over it , to rule and govern it ; He is c King of Saints . 'T is true , the Prophets and Apostles are called Foundations and Founders of the Church ; Those of the Judaical Church , before our blessed Saviour's Incarnation ; these of the Christian Church , after it . But the Power , and the Authority , the Prophets or Apostles had , ( even the greatest of them ( Moses , or Peter ) was only Ministerial , the Authority of Servants , deriv'd from our blessed Saviour , and Exercised under him . So the Apostle tells us — d That Moses was faithful in all his House , ( i. e. in the Judaical Church ) As A Servant ; but Christ as a Son , over his Own House , whose House Are We , &c. So in the Christian Church , the Apostles ( All of them ) were Prime and Principal Ministers , from and under Christ , to call and build the Church . They were Servants of Christ , and ( for his e sake ) of the Church : they had Ministerium , but not Imperium . Neither Peter , nor any other , had that vast Monarchical Supremacy over the whole Church , which is ( not without great Error and Impiety ) pretended to ; when they blasphemously say — That Peter f was our blessed Saviours Successor , and ( by him ) Constituted the Head of the Vniversal Church , with the very same Power our blessed Saviour had . But this they say only , without any Proof or Probability ; and so transeat cum caeteris erroribus . 2. But although we say , ( and have evident Reason and Authority for it ) That our blessed Saviour was the one and only prime and chief foundation and founder of the Church , and all the Apostles ( Peter as well as the Rest ) Superstructions in respect of him ; yet we know and acknowledge , that ( both in Scripture and Antiquity ) they are called Foundations and Founders of the Christian Church in respect of the Churches , call'd , Converted , and Constituted by them ; but all Equally so ; Peter was no more a foundation then Paul , or James , or John. For , 1. They were all immediately call'd by our g blessed Saviour , without any dependence h upon Peter , or any body else , ( as is Evident in the Text it self ) And this is generally Confess'd by the Popish Commentators , even the Jesuits , such as Tirinus , Menochius , &c. I say , all the Apostles had this immediate calling to their Apostleship , from our blessed Saviour , except Matthias ; and he was not chosen by Peter ( who neither knew nor had any such Supremacy , as without all reason , is now ascribed to him ) but the i Colledge of the Apostles , and consent of the faithful there present . And though a Learned Jesuit , ( zealous for Peter , and the Popes Supremacy ) would have Peter to be the k Directior in that business ( the Election of Matthias ) yet he cannot deny , but it was done by the Common l Consent of the Apostles and Brethren . 2. As the Apostles all of them , ( Matthias excepted ) had their call Immediately and Equally from our blessed Saviour , without any dependence upon St. Peter ; so they had their Commission immediately from him , and in it , the very same Power , equally given to all . The same power given to any one , ( even St. Peter ) was given to every one . This is Evident , 1. From those plain Texts where their m Commission and Apostolical Power is given them by our blessed Saviour , before the Resurrection ; when they were sent to the n Jews only ; and the very same Power equally given to all . 2. And from those other ( as clear and plain ) Texts , wherein ( after the Resurrection ) they had Commission and Authority given them by our blessed Saviour , to preach to o all Nations ; where it is — As my Father sent me , so I send you , and Go ye , &c. All equally sent , no difference or distinction of the Persons , as to any Priviledge or Precedence , no Degrees of Power more or greater in one , then every one . Their Commission and Authority given in it , was the very same , and equally given to all the Apostles . These Truths are so evident in the Text , that some sober Popish Writers do both profess and industriously prove them . Franc : A Victoria , ( prime Professor of Divinity at Salamanca in Spain , and ( as they esteemed and called him ) an p Excellent and Incomparable Divine ) Proposes and proves these two Conclusions . 1. All the q Power the Apostles had , was ( by them ) received Immediately from Christ. 2. All the r Apostles had Equal Power with Peter : And then he Explains his meaning thus — f That every Apostle had Ecclesiastical Power in the whole World , and to do Every Act , which Peter had Power to do . But then ( to please the Pope and his Party ) he Excepts those Acts which were proper and belong'd t peculiarly to the Pope ; as Calling of a General Council . But this is gratis dictum , without any pretence of proof , or probability from Scripture , and evidently contradictory to the known Practise of the Christian World , after the Emperors became Christians , who alone ( and not the Pope ) call'd all the Ancient Councils ; as is fully proved by a late and Learned u Sorbon Doctor . 5. But to proceed ; That Place in x Matthew is urged in the foregoing Objection , to prove the Monarchical Supremacy of Peter — I Give unto thee , the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven , and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth , shall be bound in Heaven , &c. Now that I may give a short and distinct Answer to this place : I consider , 1. That this Text is generally urg'd ( though most Impertinently ) to prove Peter's and the Popes Power over Kings and Emperors . So y Innocent . III. Cites it to prove , that the Emperor is subject to the Pope . To the same purpose Pope Boniface VIII . produceth it , in his Impious and ( as to the Nonsense and Inconsequence of it ) ridiculous z Extravagant ; which a Bellarmine approves , and Leo. X. and his b Lateran Council ( which they call a General one ) Innovates and Confirms ; and yet a late c Jesuit , expresly tells us , ( and you may be sure , with the d Approbation of his Superiors ) That the Keys were given Only to Peter . These , and many more , quote this Place to the same purpose . 2. It is certain ( and e Confess'd ) that our blessed Saviour in this place of Matthew , does not Actually give St. Peter the Power of the Keys ( be what it will ) but ( pro futuro ) promise that he will give it . For it is in that Text , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dabo , I will give , not I have given , or do give ; and therefore they must shew some other place in Scripture , where that Power is Actually given to Peter , and that to him alone ; else , ( if it be given to the other Apostles as well as to him ) it will be Impossible to prove his Prerogative and Supremacy over the other Apostles , from that Power , which they have as well as he . 3. But it is certain , that the Power of the Keys ( b● what it will ) was ( by our blessed Saviour ) afterwards given to all the Apostles , as well , and 〈◊〉 much , as to Peter . So it evidently Appears b● St. f Matthew , in the place Cited . Where ou● blessed Saviour speaking to all his Disciples , a● well as Peter , hath these words — Verily I say unt● You , ( 't is all g of them he speaks to ) whatsoeve● you shall bind on Earth , shall be bound in Heave● and whatsoever you shall loose on Earth , shall loosed in Heaven . Here his Promise made befor● to Peter , Chap. 16. 19. is made Good to him and the Power of the Keys given him ; but ' t●● manifest , that it is ( in the same time and Plac● equally given to all the Apostles , as well as 〈◊〉 Peter . Their own Authentick Offices , no● and heretofore in Publick use in the Church Rome , do attest this truth . In one of which they are taught to Invocate the Apostles in th● Form — h Orate pro eo Omnes Sancti Aposto●● Quibus à Domino data est Potestas Ligandi & S●●vendi . The Power of Binding and Loosin●● ( and so the Power of the Keys ) was given to the Apostles , as well as to Peter . This the i Manual of the Church of Salisbury acknowledg● that the Power of binding and loosing , was given Paul as well as Peter ; and further adds — k Th● Every Priest is Vicar of Peter and Paul , and 〈◊〉 Petri & Pauli ligat & solvit ) binds and looseth their stead and place . The l Ancient MS. M●●sal belonging to the Abbots of Evesham , says the ●ry same thing ; So does m their St. Anselme : a●● the Old n Ordo Romanus expresly says ; That the Power of the Keys , or the Power of binding and loosing , was ( by our blessed Saviour ) given to all the Apostles , and ( in them ) to all their Successors . Vide Bandinum , Lombardum , &c. Sent. lib. 4. Dist. 18. 19. and the rest there . Their Trent Catechism ( published by Pope Pius . V. according to the Decree of the Trent Council ) assures us , That every o Bishop and Priest has the Power of the Keys given him by our blessed Saviour . Hence it is , that in their Roman p Pontifical , in their Ordination of a Priest , this Power of the Keys , of remitting and retaining sins , is given to every one Ordain'd to that Office , and ( which may seem strange ) in the very q same words our blessed Saviour used , when he gave that Power to Peter and the other Apostles . Nor is this all ; Their Oecumenical Council of Trent approves and ( by a Synodical Definition and Decree ) confirms all this ; And says further , That our r blessed Saviour , before his Ascention , left All Priests His Vicars , as Presidents and Judges , who By the Power of the Keys , should Pronounce Sentence of the Remission and retaining of Sins . And this they there prove out of this very Place s of Matthew , from which they would ( and generally endeavor to ) prove the Popes t Absolute Monarchical Supremacy , And Power to Depose Kings and Emperors . To omit all other Instances ( which are too many ) sure I am , that Pope Innocent . IV. builded his Power to Depose the Emperor Friderick upon this one Text — u We ( saith that Pope ) being Christ's Vicar , and it being said to us , in the Person of Peter , whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth , shall be bound in Heaven , &c. do Depose that Emperor , and Absolve all His Subjects from their Oaths of Allegigance , &c. From the Premisses , and Authorities above Cited , I think 't is Evident , 1. That in that Text Matth. 16. 19. The Power of the Keys , was only promised , but not Actually given to Peter . 2. When it was really and ( de facto ) given him , Matth. 18. 18. It was as well , and as much given to all the other Apostles as to him : as ( besides what is aforesaid ) is attested , and expresly affirmed by Pope x Gregory the Great , in his Book of the Sacraments , published by Hugo Menardus , a Learned Benedictine Monck ; where Pope Gregory ( and he as Wise and Learned , and as Infallible as those who follow him ) teaches them to pray thus ; O God , who hast Committed the Power of Binding and Loosing To the Apostles , &c. He knew not ( it seems ) any Supremacy given to Peter by our blessed Saviour , when he gave him Potestatem Clavium , The Power of the Keys ; seeing the same Power was given to other Apostles , who never claim'd any such Supremacy . 3. Lastly , I desire then to know , by what Logick they can prove St. Peter's Supremacy over all the Apostles , for having a Power ( the Power of the Keys ) which every Apostle had as well as He. 4. There is one place y more ( and but one ) wherein the Power of the Keys is Actually given to Peter ; The words are these — As my Father sent me , so send I you ; And he breathed on them , and said ; Receive the Holy Ghost ; whose soever sins ye remit , they are remitted , and whose sins ye retain , they are retained . Where , 1. It is certain and confess'd , That though the Power of the Keys , be not here expresly nam'd , yet to retain and remit here in John signifies the very same thing , That to bind and loose in Matthew , where only the Power of the Keys is named . This the Trent Catechism , and the Trent Fathers themselves must , and do acknowledge , ( as will manifestly appear by the Places cited in the z Margent ) and the most Learned Commentators on this Place in John , allow it , and tell us truly , a That remittere here in John , is the very same with solvere , to loose , in Matthew ; and so retinere here , the same with ligare in Matthew . 2. And 't is as certain , ( from the express words of the Text ) and the undoubted meaning of them ) that the Power of the Keys is here given Equally to all the Apostles , as well as Peter ; For so the words of their Commission , I send You ( mine Apostles ) and he Breathed on Them ; ( his Apostles ) whose sins Ye ( my Apostles ) retain , &c. The Authority and Power here mention'd , is ( without distinction or difference of Degree ) Equally given to all ; to James , and John , and Jude , as well as Peter . 3. Nay more ; it is b Confess'd , and positively and truly affirm'd , by a very Learned Popish Author , That all the Apostles ( as well as Peter ) are by this Commission Vicars and Successors of Christ , and have the Power of the Keys ( to bind and loose , retain and remit sins ) Equally given to them All. Now , if this be true , then it will inevitably follow , That all the Arguments they usually bring to prove the Pope's Monarchical Supremacy ( even over Kings and Emperors ) because he was Christ's Vicar , and had the Power of the Keys given him ; I say , All such Arguments , from such Topicks , will not only be inconsequent , but indeed altogether impertinent and ridiculous . For if this Argument be good and concluding , The Keys were given to Peter , and he is the Vicar of Christ : Ergo , He is the sole Supream Monarch of the whole Church . Then this will be as good and concluding — Every Apostle ( as well as Peter ) was the Vicar of Christ , and had the Keys given him : Ergo , Every Apostle was sole Supream Monarch of the whole Church . And then ( by this wild Logick ) we shall have Twelve or Thirteen Persons , and every one of them sole Supream Monarch of the whole Church . That the Power of the Keys , was by our blessed Saviour , given to All the Apostles as well as Peter , seems to me Evident by the Premisses , and that all of them ( as much and as well as He ) were Christi Vicarij , Christ's Vicars , may be as Evident , and must be Confess'd , even by our Adversaries ; unless they will deny the plain Truth of Scripture , and their own received Principles . For , 1. Our blessed Saviour tells us — As my c Father sent me , so send I you . Christ was our great d Apostle sent immediately by his Father , so that he was Legatus & Vicarius Patris , his Father's Vicar and Ambassador ( as St. e Ambrose says ) And our blessed Saviour sends his Apostles , as his Vicars and Ambassadors . So the same Father tells us , in the f same place ; and St. Paul says as much of g himself and the other Apostles — He hath Committed to us the Word of Reconciliation ; now then We are Ambassadors , for Christ , as though God did beseech you by us ; we pray you in Christs's stead . All the Apostles were ( by our blessed Saviour ) Commission'd and sent as his Ambassadors , what they did was in Christ's stead and place . They were his Vicars , and what they did was as his Deputies , Vice-Christi , supplying his place . Thus h Lyranus , and the Interlinatory i Glossator , ( and they no Lutherans ) Explain that place ; so the Famous Bishop of Paris , and Father of the School-men , Peter k Lombard ; so Pope l Gregory the Great ; nay the Jesuits ( Instituta Societat . Jesu . Tom. 3. pag. 262. 263. acknowledge their Superiors ( though they be neither Popes nor Apostles ) to be Vicarios Christi , Christ's Vicars . And that I may neither trouble the Reader , nor my self with more Testimonies ; Their own Authentick Offices , which have been ; or are Approved , and publickly used in their Church , expresly say the very same thing ; That the Apostles ( All of them as well as Peter ) were Christ's Vicars ; particularly , the present Roman m Missal , as does manifestly appear by the place quoted in the Margent . This then being certain , and ( by our Adversaries ) Confess'd , That every Apostle ( as well as Peter ) was Christ's Vicar , and had the Power of the Keys given him by our blessed Saviour , at the same time , and in the very same n words when and wherein they were given to Peter : I say , this being granted ( as it is , and must ) it will be absolutely impossible for them to prove any Superiority in Peter ( much less a Monarchical Supremacy ) over the other Apostles , from his Title of Christ's Vicar , or the Power of the Keys , both which every Apostle had as well and as much as He , unless you will say , That very Power which only makes Peter Equal to the rest , makes him their Monarch and Superior . Sure I am , if this Argument be good ( and they have no better ) Peter is Christ's Vicar , and has the Power of the Keys : Ergo , he is Superior to John. Then this will be good too — John is Christ's Vicar , and has the Power of the Keys : Ergo , He is Superior to Peter . But enough ( if not too much ) of this . For the Arguments they bring for the Popes Supremacy , drawn from his being Christ's Vicar , and having the Power of the Keys , are such as rather deserve pity , or scorn , then any serious Answer , were it not that their greatest men ( for Place and Learning , even o their Infallible Popes in their Authentick Bulls ) perpetually urge them , to prove the Pope Superior to Kings and Emperors , and to have ( what Pope Pius . V. in This Impious Bull against Queen Elizabeth pretends to ) Power to Depose them , and Absolve Subjects from all Oaths of Allegiance and Fidelity . The Premises considered , I think it is Evident , and ( I doubt not but ) Impartial and Intelligent men think so too : 1. That every Apostle , as well as Peter , was Christ's Vicar , and had the Power of the Keys Committed to him , by our blessed Saviour , and that Immediately without Any dependence on Peter , or any other ; Sure I am , that Cardinal Cusanus ( though a zealous Assertor of the Pope's Supremacy ) was convinc'd of this Truth ( as to St. Paul , and so he might for the Rest ) and does in Terminis Acknowledge it . He says , That both Peter and Paul were p Ecclesiae Principes , Princes of the Catholick Church ; That they ( both of them ) had the q Power of the Keys , power to bind and loose ; and both of them had it r Immediately from our blessed Saviour ; That as Peter was s Primate , as to the Jews ; so Paul was Primate as to the Gentiles ; and so , that ( in this Primacy ) Peter was not subject to Paul , nor t Paul to Peter , but each of them had that Primacy Immediately from Christ , without any dependence on each other . And this Cusanus there proves out of Ambrose , Augustine and Hierome . 2. And as every Apostle , as well as Peter , was Vicar of Christ , and had the Power of the Keys ; so it appears by the Premises , and is Confess'd by our Adversaries ( in the Places before Cited ) that all of them transferred that Title and Power to their Successors ; so that every Bishop , and every Priest , after the Apostles , is Christ's u Vicar , and has the Power of the Keys . Whence it Evidently follows , that the Bishops of Rome ( notwithstanding their great Noise , and groundless pretence to the contrary ) are no more our blessed Saviour's Vicars , nor have any more Power of the Keys , then any , ( I say again , then any ) other Bishop in the World ; The Pope and Bishop of Rome no more , then the Bishops of Roan and Rochester . For their own Oecumenical and ( with them ) Infallible Council of Trent , assures us of two things . 1. That all Bishops are x Apostolorum Successores , Successors of the Apostles . 2. That our blessed Saviour , when he was about to Ascend into Heaven , y left Sacerdotes ( that z is Bishops and other Priests ) his Vicars , and gave them the Power of the Keys , to bind and loose , to remit and retain sins . To conclude this Point ; If the Pope and his Party , have no better ground in Scripture , ( then the Places above mention'd ) to prove and support that vast Papal Supremacy , they most vainly and irrationally pretend to ; the whole Fabrick must of necessity fall . It being impossible that so vast a Superstruction as their Popish Monarchy should be so sustain'd , by such Reasons which are so far from being Cogent , that they are altogether Impertinent . Well ; but if these will not prove ( what they are produc'd for ) the Popes Supremacy ; other Texts they bring , with as much Noise and Confidence as they did the former , and ( if that be possible ) with less Reason or Consequence . For Instance , they Ci●e ( to prove the Pope's Supremacy over the whole Church , even over all the other Apostles ) Joh. 21. 15. 16. 17. Pasce Oves meas , Feed my Sheep . And tell us — a That our blessed Saviour leaving the World , did create Peter his Vicar , and highest Priest , and Prince of the Vniversal Church , which he had promised before , Matth. 16. 18 , and now perform'd that promise . And again ( they say ) — b It appears from this place , That Peter ( and his Successors Popes of Rome ) is Head and Prince of the Church , and that all the Faithful , even the Apostles are made Subjects to him , to be fed and ruled by him . This place is urged by Pope Innocent the Third to the like ( though God knows little ) purpose : who would have us understand by those words , Feed my Sheep ; that our blessed Saviour c meant all his Sheep , all good Christians . That he might shew , ( says that Pope ) that they were none of our blessed Saviours Sheep , who would not Acknowledge Peter and the Popes of Rome to be their Masters and Pastors . And ( to name no more ) Pope Boniface . VIII . indeavours to prove , that our blessed Saviour by those words , Feed my Sheep , meant Vniversally all his Sheep d — because he does not say singularly these or those , but generally Feed my Sheep : And from this Place so Expounded , they would prove Peter ' s , and so the Pope's Monarchical Supremacy over all Christians , even the Apostles , Kings , and Emperors . 1. Were it not certain , that there is no possibility that any man should bring a true and concluding Reason to prove an erroneous and false Position ; it would hardly be credible that otherwise Learned men , furnished with great Parts of Art and Nature , should bring such miserable Stuff , such misapply'd and misunderstood Scripture , to prove that great e Article of their Popes Supremacy ; which being a manifest Errour , without any Foundation in Scripture or Primitive Antiquity , I cannot blame them , for not bringing ( what they neither have , nor can have ) better Arguments ; but that they bring any at all , to establish that , which they ought , and with evident and cogent Reasons , might confute . 2. As Antiquity did , so we do grant ( all that with any Reason or Just ground they can desire ) that Peter had a Primacy of Order ( but not of Power or Jurisdiction ) amongst the Apostles . For the Evangelist naming the Apostles , f says — The First was Peter . First in Order , or ( if you will ) first respectu vocationis ; as first call'd by our blessed Saviour ; not to be one of his Disciples ; for so Andrew was call'd before him ( as is evident in the g Text ) but in respect of his Call to be an Apostle . For when , out of his Disciples he chose Twelve to be his Apostles , Matthew ( in the Place Cited ) saith ; The first was Peter . So we grant to the Bishop of Rome ( what anciently was given him ) a Primacy of Order , and Precedency , before all the Bishops in the Roman Empire ; But not Jure Divino , by Divine Right ( which without all Reason , h they pretend to ) but by the Consent of the Ancient Fathers and Councils . And for this , we have the Synodical Definition and Declaration of Six hundred and thirty Fathers in an Ancient and received General Council ; who said — i That because old Rome was the Imperial City , therefore the Fathers had rightly given Priviledges to the Episcopal Seat of that City . Where it is evident , that in the Judgment of that great and good Council , ( and of the General Council of k Constantinople too , which they there Cite . ) 1. That the Priviledge and Precedency the Bishop of Rome had , was not Convey'd to him by any Divine Right ( as they now pretend ) non à Christo vel Petro , sed à Patribus ; it was the Fathers who gave them . 2. And the Reason why they gave him such Priviledge , and Precedency , was not because he was Christ's Vicar and St. Peter's Successor , but because Rome was Vrbs Imperialis , the great Metropolis of the Roman Empire . I know the Popes Legats in that Council , did what they could to hinder the passing that Canon , and Pope Leo out of it , ( when the Canon was passed ) did oppose it , as much as he was able , but in vain . For the Canon was Synodically passed , by the Concurrent Consent of the whole l Council , ( the Popes Legats excepted , which was acknowledg'd by the m Judges , and then n Confirm'd by the Emperor , and Received into the Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Vniversae . That which troubled the Pope , was , that Constantinople should have Equal Priviledges with Rome ( Precedency only expected ) even in all Ecclesiastical business ; and that ( by the Canon of that great Council , and Confirmation of the Emperor ) the Patriarch of Constantinople should have so vast a Territory under his Jurisdiction , to wit , Three whole Dioceses , ( Thracica , Asiana , Pontica , ) more then ( by any Law of God or Man ) the Pope ever had under him . And 't is here observeable , that although this Canon ( giving Equal Priviledges to the Bishop of Constantinople , as to him of Old Rome ( Precedency only excepted ) absolutely deny'd that Monarchical Supremacy and Jurisdiction over all Patriarchs , ( which the Popes were then nibling at , and have since openly own'd ) yet Leo in his Epistles to the o Emperor , p Anatolius , q Pulchoria Augusta , &c. wherein he writes fiercely against this Canon , never pretended ( as afterwards , and now they do ) That the Bishops of Rome had by Divine r Right , ( as Vicars of our blessed Saviour ) a Supream Jurisdiction over all Bishops and Patriarchs in the whole World : but complains of Anatolius s his pride , ( Catalina Cethegum ) the Violation of the Nicene Canons , and the wrong done to the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch . To talk of such a Monarchical Supremacy then , as the Popes have since pretended to ; Pope Leo neither did , nor durst ; it was a Doctrine unheard of in those purer times ; and had he challenged it then , as due to him by Divine Right , as he was Christ's Vicar , he would have made himself Odious , and ( having no ground for such a Challenge ) ridiculous to the Christian World. But when ( notwithstanding all his Legates could do in the Council , or he out of it ) the Canon pass'd , by the Unanimous Consent of the Council , and was Confirm'd by the Imperial and Supream Power of the Emperor ; ( for the Pope does Petition and t Supplicate to him as his Superior ) though the Pope in a Private Epistle to Pulcheria Augusta ( with great Insolence , and without any Ground ) pretends to u Cassate and null that Canon by the Authority of St. Peter , ( who never had any such Authority to Null any Just Imperial or Synodical Constitutions ) yet that Canon was approved , received , and ( as de Jure it ought ) Obey'd by the Eastern Churches , both then , and ever x after . When these Pretensions of the Pope and his Legats prevailed not , nor were regarded by the Council , or Emperor , or the Eastern Church ; other Arts were used at Rome , to Conceal that Canon ( which they could not Cassate ) from the knowledge of the Western Church . And to this end , 1. They Corrupt the Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Vniversalis ( the most Authentick Book , next to the Bible , the Christian Church has , or ever had ) y Dionysius Exiguus a Roman-Abbot , begins that Impious Work ; and in his Latin Translation of that Code ( amongst other things ) leaves out that Eight and twentieth Canon of the Council of Chalcedon , and z others of the Popish Party , follow him . 2. They Corrupt the a Canon it self ; and by putting in other words in their false Translation , they make it contradict the Greek Canon , and the certain Sense of the Council that made it . So in Gratian , the Corruptions of this Canon , are thus — 1. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( aequalia Privilegia ) in the Original Greek ; Gratian has Similia Privilegia ; like , but not equal Priviledges . 2. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( Senior Roma ) Gratian has Superior Roma — Old Rome must be Superior to New Rome , or Constantinople , if Forgery and Falsification of Records can do it : for better Grounds they have none . 3. For , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , etiam in Ecclesiasticis magnificetur ut illa . Gratian impudently reads , Non Tamen in Ecclesiasticis , &c. But notwithstanding all that Pope Leo or his Legats could do , and all their other Indirect Arts afterwards , this Eight and twentieth Canon of the Council of Chalcedon was received in the Christian World , and long after Confirmed by General Councils , not only by the Synodus 6. Generalis , which was held Anno 681. ( of which a little before ) But the Eighth General Council under Pope Adrian . II. about the Year 870. gives that b Precedency to the Patriarch of Constantinople , which the Canon of Chalcedon before gave him ; And this acknowledged and referred into the Body of their c Canon Law , in the best Editions of it , Revised and Corrected by Pope d Gregory . XIII . And 't is to be observed , that this Synodus . 8. was Subscribed by the Pope or his Legats there , and was then , and still is approved and received at Rome : Nor need we wonder at it , For what it did , was carried chiefly by the Popes Authority , who was by that Council , basely and servilly flatter'd ; they Calling him Most e Holy and Oecumenical Pope , and Equal to the Angels , &c. This Title Oecumenical , the Pope took kindly then , though his Predecessor f Gregory the Great abhorr'd it , as Antichristian . But to return to the Objection . 3. And here before I give a Particular and Distinct Answer to this Place of John , ( Feed my Sheep ) on which they commonly ( and vainly ) build the Popes Supremacy ; I shall crave leave , a little to Explain , the nature and measure of that Power which they give the Pope under the name of his Supremacy . And here they say , That our blessed Saviour gave His own Power to Peter , made him his Vicar , Head and Pastor of all the Faithful in the World ; and that in most ample Words , when he bad him , Feed his Sheep , and that it was our blessed Saviours Will , that all Peter ' s Successors should have the very same Power , which Peter had ; ( so the Trent g Catechism tells us ) And this is that Plenitude of Power by which they Erroneously and Impiously Depose Kings and Emperors , and ( as Pius . V. does , in this Bull , we are now speaking of , against Queen Elizabeth ) absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance , and sworn or natural Fidelity . This premised , I shall proceed to a direct ( and I hope a full and satisfying ) Answer to that place in John , Feed my Sheep : &c. And here I consider , 1. That , if the Supremacy was first given to Peter , in those words — h Pasce Oves , Feed my Sheep , ( as is confess'd , and by our Adversaries positively affirm'd in the Objection ) which was after our blessed Saviours Resurrection : then it is Evident he had it not before : It being impossible he should have it before it was given him . And then it will as Evidently follow , that all those Places in the Gospel , spoken of , or to Peter , before our blessed Saviour's Passion , are Impertinently urged to prove Peter's Supremacy , which he had not till after the Resurrection . And yet Innocent . III. Boniface . VIII . and other Popes in their Bulls and Papal Constitutions , the Canonists , School-men , and Commentators usually Cite many places in the Gospel ( besides this , Pasce Oves ) to prove that Peter had the Supremacy before our blessed Saviour's Passion ; which here they Confess was not given him till after the Resurrection . That they do urge many such Places is known to all Learned men , vers'd in these Controversies ; but if any man doubt of it , and desire Satisfaction , I shall refer him to what a Learned Popish Writer ( and Capucine ) has said in the i Margent , where he tells us , how many places are Cited for the Supremacy . 2. When our blessed Saviour says , Pasce Oves , Feed my Sheep , and Feed my Lambs ; he useth two words — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Both which words the Vulgar Latin renders , Pasce , feed my Sheep and Lambs : Now their Commentators on this place , ( to very little purpose ) make a great stir and pudder to shew ( what k none denys ) that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to rule and govern . But let the word signifie what it will , in the Civil State , yet in the Ecclesiastical and Scripture Sense of the Word , where our blessed Saviours Lambs and Sheep ( that is the Faithful ) are to be fed , every Bishop and Presbyter ( as well as Peter ) are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Pastores , and may and ought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to feed the ●lock of Christ. So , 1. St. Paul tells us , l who from Miletum , sends for the Presbyters of Ephesus , ( I say Presbyters , for Timothy , who was their first Bishop , was with Paul at m Miletum , and so was none of those he sent for ) and when they came , he Exhorts them to take heed unto themselves , and the Flock , n To feed the Church of God , &c. where St. Paul ( when he bids the Presbyters feed the Church ) useth the very same word our blessed Saviour doth , when he bids Peter feed his Sheep . 2. So o . Peter himself ( who little dream'd of any Supremacy given him by those words , Feed my Sheep ) writing to the Asiatick Dispersion of the Jews , and Exhorting the Jewish Elders , ( or Presbyters ) to a diligent care , in feeding the Flock ; he useth the very same word to them , our blessed Saviour did to him , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( says he ) Feed the Flock ; He thinks it their duty , as well as his , to feed our blessed Saviour's Sheep . And that which further , and ( ad hominem ) more strongly confirms what I have said ( in this Particular ) is ; That our Adversaries grant ( though in Contradiction to the Sense many of them ●ive of those words , Feed my Sheep , when they ●ould build the Popes Supremacy upon them ) ●hat the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , both as it signifies to rule and feed , and so the duty of ruling and feeding our blessed Saviours Sheep , is so far from being Peculiar to Peter , or proving his Supremacy , that it is the Duty , not only of Peter , but of every Bishop in the Christian World , both to rule and feed our blessed Saviour's Sheep . This the p Trent Catechism expresly affirms , That all Bishops ( as well as Peter ) are Pastores , Pastors to Rule as well as Feed the Flock and Sheep of our blessed Saviour ; and to prove this , they Cite the Two very q places which I ( a little before ) produced to the same purpose , whence it manifestly appears , That even in our Adversaries Judgment , ( when the Popes Supremacy is a little out of their Head ) the feeding our blessed Saviour's sheep , is not Peter ' s Supream Prerogative , but a Duty required of every Bishop in the World. 3. But this ( though enough ) is not all ; we have greater ( and with them Infallible , and therefore undeniable ) Authority to confirm what I have said , and Confute our Adversaries , as to their proof of Peter's , or the Pope's Supremacy , from those words , Feed my Sheep . For their Trent Council ( which if the Pope say true , was r Divinely Inspired , and therefore Infallible ; and if he do not say true , he himself was not only fallible but actually false ) expresly tells us , That not only every Bishop , but every one s who had Cure of Souls , was bound by the Law of Christ in the Gospel , to rule and feed his Sheep , by offering Sacrifices for them , by preaching the Word , Administring the Sacraments , by good Example , by a Paternal Care of the Poor , and All Other Pastoral Offices . And this is there proved by Texts , quoted in the Margent ; which ( with some others ) are the very same with those I have ( a little before ) cited out of the t Acts of the Apostles , and u St. Peters Epistle : Nor those only , but this very place of x St. John ( on which they would build Peter's Supremacy ) is Cited in the Margent , as containing a Precept obliging ( not Peter only , but ) All , who had Cure of souls , to feed Christ's sheep . Now if those words , Feed my sheep , contain Praeceptum , a Precept , Obliging all Pastors to a Pastoral Duty ; then they do not contain ( what they pretend ) Donum , a Donation of Supremacy . 4. But Pope Boniface . VIII . and Pope Innocent . III. in their before mention'd y Constitutions , tell us ; that by Oves meas , our blessed Saviour means , All his sheep , All Christians in the World ▪ Because he does not speak singularitèr of these or those ; but Generalitèr of his sheep . Whence they , ( and many after them ) conclude , Tha● our blessed Saviour Committed all his Sheep Universally to Peter's Care , so that even the Apostles , ( being his Sheep ) were committed to Peter's Care , and by Consequence , he became their Pastor and Superior . Certainly they who reason at this rate , and so irrationally may possibly be fit Pastors to feed Sheep and Oxen , and such other brutish Cattle , but surely not to feed Men and Christians . For ▪ 1. Feed my sheep , ( as all know , unless they b● such as those two Popes were ) is an Indefinite Proposition : and then any Novice or young● Sophister in the University , could have truly told them , That Propositio indefinita in materi● Contingenti , ( as this evidently is ) aequivalet particulari . When we say men are young or wise , or learned ; we mean , not all , but some are such . So he who says , Christ's sheep are to be fed by Peter ; must mean some of them are to be fed by him , pro loco & tempore , as he had place and time to meet with them . It being impossible he should feed them z all . There were many thousands of our blessed Saviour's Sheep , whom Peter never did , nor could see , nor they hear him : And certainly his gracious Lord and Master would not tye him to Impossibilities . 2. When they say , ( which is evidently untrue ) that by those words — Feed my sheep , all the Faithful are meant , and are Committed to Peter's care and charge ; and therefore the a Apostles themselves ( being our Saviour's Sheep as well as others ) are part of his Charge ; and under his Jurisdiction . This they say indeed usually , but ( miserably mistaken ) only say it . For they neither have , nor can have any Just Ground or Reason for it . For it is certain , 1. That our blessed Saviour , is ( to his whole Church ) the only b High Priest , the c Prince of all the Pastors , and the Grand d Shepherd of the sheep ; and as King , has Imperial Power to Rule and Govern them . 2. It is certain , the Apostles ( from and under him ) are Pastores and Shepherds , as well as Peter , to feed the Flock . But their Power is Ministerial , not Imperial . Even the Apostleship it self is e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Ministery , and they Ministers of Christ , and his f Church . Now though in respect of Christ the great Shepherd , they are Sheep , even Peter himself : yet ( on Earth ) they are Shepherds only , not Sheep , neither in respect of the Church , over which our blessed Saviour has set them to be Shepherds ; nor in relation one to another . Paul , or James , or John , are no more Sheep in Respect of Peter , to be fed and ruled by him , then he to be fed and ruled by them ▪ And therefore to say ( as our Adversaries vainly do ) that in those words , Feed my sheep ; Peter is Commanded to feed and rule the rest of the Apostles , as his Charge , ( who were Shepherds only , and Sheep to no Superior Pastor , except our blessed Saviour ; And by their Apostolical Commission g Equal to himself ) is irrational ; without any ground in Scripture , or purer Antiquity . There is another Metaphor concerning the Apostles , and their Feeding and Building the Church , which may illustrate this business , All the Apostles ( as well and as much as Peter ) are in Scripture call'd Foundations 〈◊〉 the Church , converted , fed , and confirm'd by them . In respect of Christ , our blessed Saviour ( who is the only prime and principal firm● Rock on which the Church is built ) they are ( all of them ) Superstructions ; but in respect of the Christian Church , Foundations ; and that without any dependence upon Peter ; he is not the Foundation on which they are built , but but both he and they immediately upon the Prime Rock and Foundation , Jesus Christ : So that as the Apostles are Superstructures in the House of God ( the Church ) in Respect of Christ , the Prime firm Foundation ; and none of them Superstructures , in respect of Peter : being neither built upon him , nor made Superstructions by him , by his Feeding or Ruling them : So they ( and Peter too ) are Sheep in Respect of our blessed Saviour , the great Shepherd of the Sheep ; but not in respect of Peter ; they are Shepherds as well as he , and never Committed to his Care or Cure , that ( as his Sheep ) he should feed and govern them : And as all the other Apostles ( in Respect of Peter ) were Foundations & Shepherds of the Church , coordinate with , and equal to him : So all other Bishops , the Apostles Successors , were Equal to Peter's pretended Successor ( the Bishop of Rome ) and no way bound to give any Reason of their Administration to him , as to their Superior ; much less as to a Supream Prince and Monarch of the Christian World , as the Canonists , Jesuits , and the Popish Party , do now Erroneously and Impiously miscall him . This was Cyprian's Opinion , in the Place but now Cited ; And Rigaltius ( a Learned Roman Catholick ) though he h seem to say much for Peter's and the Popes Supremacy ; yet he Confesseth , ( as upon a serious Consideration of several Passages in i Cyprian , and the African Councils , well he might ) That Cyprian's k Opinion was , That all Bishops were equal , and were bound to give an Account of their Administration to our blessed Saviour Only , and not to any Superior Bishop , no not to Peter ' s Successor , the Pope . Nor is it any way probable , that a Person so Excellent and Knowing as Cyprian , should think otherwise ; seeing in his time ( as is notorious and well known to all who know Antiquity ) there was no Patriarch or Archbishop Superior ( by any Law of God or Man ) to the Ordinary Bishops , ( as may , and when there is an Opportunity , shall be made Good. ) It is true , Cyprian ( if it be he , and not the Interpolator of that Tract ) says , That the Primacy l was given to Peter ; and that the Church of Rome was The m Principal Church . Now this Primacy , and Principality Cyprian speaks of , is , by me before , and now freely granted . A Primacy of Order and Precedency , not of Jurisdiction , or that Monarchical Authority , which ( Anciently was not pretended to by themselves ) they now contend for . And this Primacy , which anciently was allowed to the Bishop of Rome , was not from our blessed Saviour's gift , but the greatness of that Imperial City ; Non à n Petro , sed à Patribus , ( as the Canon of Chalcedon tells us . ) And that which makes it more probable , that I have given the true Sense of Cyprian , is ; That Rigaltius ( a Learned Roman Catholick ) in his Dissertations , and Notes on Cyprian , Explains Cyprian's meaning just as I have done , reducing the Primacy and Principality of the Roman Church , not from any Prerogative given to that Bishop or Church by our blessed Saviour , but from the greatness of that o Imperial City : And then Cites the Canon of the General Council of Chalcedon , which in Terminis , and ( when Translated ) in plain English , says the very same thing I have done . And indeed that Canon , made by Six hundred and thirty Fathers Synodically met , in a legitimate General Council , confirm'd by p Imperial Edicts , and received into the Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Vniversae , does Authentickly and utterly overthrow that vast Monarchical Supremacy , which the Pope and his Party for some Ages last past ( without any just ground ) contend for . If any of our Adversaries think otherwise , ( as possibly they may ) I shall make them this fair offer ; Let them bring me any Canon , of any General Council ( of equal Authority and Antiquity with this of Chalcedon ) by which they can prove the Popes pretended Supremacy , ( or any one Article of their own new Trent Creed ) . And for the future , I shall acquiesce , and they shall have my Thanks and Subscription . 6. Pius . V. in his Bull says further — q That our blessed Saviour Committed the Care and Charge of the Vniversal Church , with a plenitude of Power to govern it , to one only , that is to Peter the Prince of the Apostles , And His Successors . Here I consider , 1. That although it be certain , ( from Scripture , and evident Testimonies of pure and primitive Antiquity ) that Peter never had , nor Executed any such Monarchical Supremacy over the other Apostles , and the whole Christian Church , as is now vainly pretended to ; yet 't is as certain , that the Pope ( and his Party ) cry up , and magnifie St. Peter's Power , that he ( as his Heir and Successor ) may possess the same Power . For this they say , ( and without any just proof , say it only ) That it was our blessed Saviour's will , that Peter ' s Successor should have r The Very same Power Peter had ; and this because he was s Christ's Vicar , ( though every Bishop in the World , ( as shall , God willing , appear anon ) be Christ's Vicar as well , and as much as he ) and sat in Peter ' s Chair , as his lawful Successor . 2. But admit , ( dato non Concesso ) which is absolutely untrue , That Peter had such a Supremacy and Monarchical Power ( as they Erroneously pretend to ) yet it might be Personal , to himself , and for his Life only , ( as his Apostolical power was ; as to that part of it , which was properly Apostolical ) and not Hereditary , to be transferred to any Successor . So that the Hinge of the Controversie will be here , and our Adversaries concern'd to prove two Things . 1. That Peter's Power ( be what it will ) was not Personal , but Hereditary , and to be Transmitted to his Successor . 2. And that the Pope and Bishop of Rome was his Legal Successor . For if they do not , upon just Grounds , make both these good , good night to their pretended Supremacy . For the First ; That the greatest Power St. Peter and the Apostles had , was Extraordinary and Personal , not to be Transmitted to any Successor ( what Power they did transmit , I shall anon shew ) will be Evident , in these Particulars . 1. Peter and the Apostles , had Vocationem à Christo Immediatam . Our blessed t Saviour call'd them all ( except Matthias ) Immediately ; as is evident from the Text. And , sure I am , that the Pope cannot pretend to such an Immediate Call. 2. The Apostles ( every one as well as Peter ) had a Power given them to do Miracles , to Cast out u Devils , and heal all manner of Diseases , and Sicknesses . Nor can Peter's Successor ( whoever he be ) pretend to this . 3. The Jurisdiction , which was by our blessed Saviour given to every Apostle , ( to James and John , and Paul as well as Peter ) was Universal ; the whole World was their Diocese . Not that every one could possibly be in every place , but where ever any of them came , they had Authority to Preach , Administer the Sacraments , Constitute and Govern Churches . So Paul did at x Antioch and Rome , as much , and y more than Peter ; though they pretend that Peter alone ( and not Paul ) was first Bishop of both those Places . That every Apostle ( as well as Peter ) had Universal Jurisdiction and Authority over the whole World , is in Scripture Evident by the Commission our blessed Saviour gave them — z Go and teach all Nations , baptizing them in the Name of the Father , Son , and Holy Ghost : Teaching them to observe whatsoever I have Commanded you . And again , — a Go ye into all the World , and Preach the Gospel to every Creature . Here I observe , 1. That the Apostles in their first Mission , were sent to the b Jews , and them only . But now their Commission is Inlarged ; and they are Equally sent ( every one as much as any one ) to all Nations ( says Matthew ) To All the World , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as c Eusebius Explains it ) says St. Mark ; Jidem Jurisdictionis Apostolicae & Orbis Termini ; The whole World was their Diocese ; every ones Jurisdiction Extended so far , and Peter's could not extend no further . 2. For the Persons they were to Preach to , they were Every Man in the World. It is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to every Creature , ( every Rational Creature , who ( if Infancy and Infirmity hinder'd not ) was capable . They were to Convert Pagans , and make them our blessed Saviour's Disciples and Sheep , and then feed them , with the Word and Sacraments : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( says Matthew ) Convert , and make them Disciples , and then Baptize and Teach them to observe whatever I have Commanded you . Those words , Feed my sheep ( on which without any just Reason , they would build Peter's Supremacy ) contain only an Indefinite Proposition , which ( as every one who understands Logick , must Confess ) is only equivalent to a Particular ; But here the Commission , given by our blessed Saviour , ( to every Apostle as well as Peter ) is expresly Vniversal ; Preach to every Creature : That is , Feed All my sheep . This is a Truth so evident , that a Learned d Roman Catholick Confesseth and fully proves it . Only ( to save the Popes and his own Credit ) he says , That to call General Councils belong'd only to Peter and the Pope , by their Supremacy , and not to any other , But this is , gratis dictum , and an evident Untruth . For the Pope ( by no Law of God or Man ) has , or ever had Power , to call any General Council : And for many Ages never pretended to it ; which I only say now , and ( when there is a Convenient time ) can and will make it e Good. In the mean time , I think 't is certain , either , 1. That by those words , Feed my sheep , ( on which they build the Popes and Peters Supremacy ) our blessed Saviour gave Peter no supream Power to call General Councils , that by them he might feed his Sheep : Or , 2. That the Apostles and Primitive Christians in their times , knew no such thing . For , 1. When a Controversie arose at Antioch , about Circumcision , they send not to Peter , as supream Head of the Church , desiring him to call a Council ; but to the f Apostles and Elders . Had they known and believ'd , that Peter had been Invested with such Power and Supremacy , as is now pretended ; it had been Civility and Duty in them , to have sent to him in the first place ; But they send to the Apostles and Elders ; without any notice taken of ( what they knew not ) Peter's Prerogative . 2. It neither does , nor can appear , that Peter call'd that Council . 3. Nor did he ( as Head and President of the Council ) speak g first ; but the Question was much disputed , before Peter spoke any thing . 4. Nor did Peter ( after the Question was debated ) give the Definitive Sentence ; For 't is Evident h in the Text , That James the Less , Son of Alphaeus , and Bishop of Jerusalem , gave the Definitive Sentence , which both Peter and the whole i Council acquiesc'd in . 5. Nor did Peter send his Legats to Antioch , to signifie what he , and the Council had done , but the k Apostles and the whole Church chose and sent their Messengers . 6. Nor are the Letters sent in Peter's Name , or any notice taken of any Primacy or Prerogative of his , above the other Apostles ; No , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is , l The Apostles , Elders , and Brethren send Greeting . 7. Nor was that Decree publish'd To the Churches in Peter's Name , as made or m confirm'd by him , more than any other Apostle . 8. Nay , the Apostles send Peter on a n Message to Samaria ( and he obeys and goes ) which had been a strange piece of Presumption , had either he or they known his ( now pretended ) Monarchical Supremacy , 9. So far were those Primitive Christians , from knowing or acknowledging the now pretended Monarchical Supremacy of Peter , that even in the Apostles times and Presence , they question and a call him to an Account for his Actions . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , disceptabant adversus illum ( says the Vulgar Latin ) tanquam valde offensi expostulabant ( says Chrysostom . ) And honest John Ferus ( a Roman Catholick ) tells us , b That he was Compell'd to give a Reason of his Actions to the Church ; nor was Peter offended at it , because he knew that he was not a Lord , but Minister of the Church . But now ( as c Ferus there goes on ) the Case is alter'd ; for wicked Popes , ( as though they were Lords and not Ministers ) will not be Question'd for any thing , or reprov'd . Had the Canon Law been then in force , ( which his pretended Successors have approved , and by their Supream Authority publish'd ) he might have told those who Question'd him , d That he was to judge all men , and none him ; nor was he to be reprov'd by any mortal man , though by his Impiety and ill Example , he carried thousands to Hell with him . 10. Nay , St. Paul does not only e question St. Peter's Actions , but to his face , before the People publickly condemn them , and that justly ; for ( he says ) he was to be blamed : which he neither would , nor indeed well could have done , had he known Peter to have been so far his Superior as to have ( by Divine Institution ) a Monarchical Jurisdiction and Power over him . 11. Lastly , St. Paul himself tells us , f That he was in Nothing Inferior to the Chiefest Apostles ; not to Peter , James , or John , whom g elsewhere he reckons the chiefest . I know they say , That Paul was equal to Peter as to his Apostolical Office , but Inferior to Peter , as he was h Supream Pastor over the Apostles , and the whole Church . But this is gratis dictum , and indeed a begging of the Question , and taking that for granted , which never was , nor ever will be proved . However , 't is certain , 1. That every Apostle ( as well as Peter ) had an Vniversal supream i Authority and Jurisdiction , in any Part of the World , and over any Christians wherever they came . 2. That this largeness of their Jurisdiction , was Apostolical , and Personal to themselves , which they neither did , nor could transmit to their Successors ; whose Jurisdiction was limited to some City and Territory , and that particular Place , the Care and Charge whereof was committed unto them ; as Ephesus was to Timothy , and Creet to Titus . 3. Our Adversaries confess this , ( as to all the other Apostles ) but for Peter , they say , He k transmitted his Supremacy and Vniversal Jurisdiction over the whole Church to his Successor , and that by the Institution of our blessed Saviour , and Divine Right . If they could prove this , the Controversie were at an end ; we would acquiesce , and admit ( what upon undeniable evidence we deny ) the Popes Supremacy . But this they neither do , nor is there any possibility they ever should prove . For there is not one Syllable in l Scripture , of Peter's Successor , or of what Power he received from him : and nothing but Scripture can prove our blessed Saviour's Institution , and Divine Law , whereby Peter's Supremacy is transmitted to his Successor . The truth is , that Pius . V. in the beginning of this his Impious Bull , and other Popes many m times in their Bulls , Breves , and Decretal Constitutions , and their Writers generally , take it for granted , that our blessed Saviour gave Peter the Supremacy over the whole Church , and to his Successors after him : And when n some of them , sometimes go about to prove it , the Reasons they bring , are so far from Sense and Consequence , that they may deserve Pity and Contempt , rather than a serious Answer . But when Reason will not Convince , they have other Roman Arts to Cosen men into a Belief , that what was given to Peter , was likewise given to the Pope his Successor ; and that is ( amongst other ways ) by Corrupting the Ancient Fathers with false Translations . So when Chrysostom had faid , That the Power of the Keys , was not given to Peter only , but to the rest of the Apostles : Pet. Possinus adds , Successors ; and renders it thus — The Power of the Keys was not given only to Peter And His o Successors , &c. where Chrysostome ( whom he Translates ) has nothing of Peter's Successors : but truly and plainly says — That the Power of the Keys was not given only to Peter , but to the rest of the Apostles , when our blessed p Savionr told them , whose sins ye remit they are remitted , and whose sins ye retain , they are retained . So in the Epistle of Pope q Leo to the Bishops of France , and of his Legat Paschasinus about the Condemnation of Dioscorus , in the Council of Chalcedon , these Words occur in the Latin Copies — The most holy and most blessed Pope Leo , Head of the Vniversal Church : Where these words — Head of the Vniversal Church , are not in the Greek Copies ; ( as that Learned Archbishop ingenuously and truly r Confesseth ) but ( by Roman Arts ) falsly and basely interserted , that so they might by fraud ( what by no Reason they can ) maintain , the Pope's impiously usurped Supremacy . And that we may know , how unpleasing the publishing of such things ( though evidently true ) are to the Pope and his Party at Rome , ( who are resolved , in despight of truth ) to maintain the Popes pretended Supremacy ) this Learned Work of that great Roman Catholick Archbishop s , is damn'd by the Inquisitors , not to be printed , read , or had by any . He who seriously reads ( and understands ) the Latin Versions of the Greek Councils , Fathers , and other Greek and Latin Writers , may find an hundred such Frauds , to maintain ( what they know , they have no just reason for ) their Papal and Antichristian Tyranny : And their Jndices Expurgatorij are Authentick Evidences , to Convince them of these Unchristian Practises , to conceal truth , and cosen the World into a belief of their pernicious Papal Errors . Nor is this all , ( nor the worst ) for so desperately are they set upon it , that if their Interest and the Papal Monarchy cannot otherwise be maintain'd ( as 't is impossible it should by any just and lawful means ) they speak impiously and blasphemously of our blessed Saviour . Thomas Campegius Episcopus Feltrensis , in his Book of the Power of the Pope , to Paul. IV. says , — t That our blessed Saviour had not been a Diligent Father of the Family , to his Church , unless he had left such a Monarch over his Church , as the Pope , of whom he is there speaking : And the Cites Pope Innocent , and Aquinas to justifie it . Albertus Pighius is as high to the same impious purpose , and expresly says — u That our blessed Saviour had been wanting to his Church in things necessary , if he had not Constituted and left such a Monarch and Judge of Controversies . And a great x Canonist ( if that be possible ) more blasphemously says — That our blessed Saviour , while he was on Earth , had power to pronounce the Sentence of Deposition , and Damnation against the Emperor , or any other ; And by the same Reason , His Vicar now can do it . And then he impiously adds — That our blessed Saviour would not have seem'd Discreet , unless he had left such a Vicar , as could do all these things , &c. So if it be granted ( which is most evident and certainly true ) that our blessed Saviour left no such Monarchical Vicar , as the Pope ; then they are not affraid to accuse him of want of Diligence and Discretion . And this impious Gloss is approved and confirm'd by Pope y Gregory . XIII . as ( we may be sure ) what makes for his Extravagant Power and Papal Monarchy ( how Erroneous and Impious soever ) shall not want his Approbation . And thus much of the third Priviledge of the Apostles , their Vniversal Jurisdiction ; equally in them all , in James , and John , and Paul as much as Peter ; and this Jurisdiction Personal to all , and never transmitted to any of their Successors . 4. Besides the Immediate call of the Apostles , their Power of doing Miracles , and their Universal Jurisdiction over all the World ; they were ( all of them ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Divinely Inspired by the Holy Ghost , so that they had Infallibility , so far , as whatever they preach'd or writ was Divine , and the undoubted Word of God. This Priviledge also was Personal , nor ever was Communicated to any of their Successors . I know that the z Canonists and a Jesuits , ( in the last and worst of times ) would make the World believe ( without any shadow of rational ground ) that Peter transferred his Infallibility to the Pope , and made him the Infallible Judge of all Controversies of Faith , and Fact too . A thing so evidently false , and without any possibility of proof , that 't is a wonder , tha● any should have the Confidence to assert it , especially in Paris , the great Metropolis of 〈◊〉 Church which constantly does , and has deny● the Popes Infallibility and Superiority to a General Council . 2. But that which might fo● ever silence this Irrational and Injust Claim 〈◊〉 Infallibility in the Pope , is , that ( for Matter o● Fact ) none of them , ( though they were some times nibling at a kind of Supremacy ) for above a Thousand Years after our blessed Saviour , either did or dared pretend to Infallibility ; and if they had , they had made themselves ridiculous . For , 3. It was notoriously known , that several of their Popes were Hereticks . For instance , b Liberius , c Honorius , d Vigilius , &c. And for Heresie Condemn'd in General Councils , as is evident from the Acts themselves . and has been demonstrated , not only by Protestants , but by very Learned men of the Roman Communion . 4. And he who seriously reads , and impartially considers their Papal Bulls , Breves , and Decretal e Constitutions ; and in them how ridiculously they reason , and prophane ( rather than expound ) Scripture ; will have abundant reason to believe , that those Popes were so far from Infallibility , that their own Writings Convince them guilty of Gross Ignorance and Folly. 5. Lastly , All the Apostles were Fundamenta Ecclesiae , Domus Dei , Foundations of the Church , or House of God , ( as has before been evidently proved from Scripture ) and this was in all the Apostles Extraordinary , and a Personal Apostolical Priviledge , to which , ( as it was in the Apostles ) none of their Successors ( no not the Pope , ) ever did , or ( with any reason ) could pretend . And as this Apostolical Priviledge , so the other four before mention'd ( 1. Immediate Vocation . 2. Power to work Miracles . 3. Vniversality of Jurisdiction . 4. Infallibility in all things they preach'd or writ . ) I say , all these Priviledges , were Extraordinary and Personal to the Apostles , and never were transmitted to any of their Successors . And this being granted , ( as of necessity it ought and must ) it will evidently follow , that Peter neither had , nor could have , that Monarchical Supremacy over the Apostles and Universal Church , to which the Pope and his Party vainly , and without any reason or ground pretend . For that Papal Supremacy and Monarchy they pretend Peter had , ( according to their Hypothesis ) consisted principally , in the Universality of his Jurisdiction over the whole Church , and his Infallibility , as a Judge , to determine Controversies of Faith ; both which every Apostle had , as much and as well as he ) and therefore it was impossible , that ( in these respects ) he should have any Superiority ( much less Supremacy ) over the other Apostles , more than they over him ; especially , seeing in Scripture , ( to men who have good Eyes , and will Impartially use them ) there is not one Syllable looks that way . Nay , seeing our blessed Saviour hath expresly determin'd the contrary . The Apostles were disputing and reasoning amongst themselves , which of them should be greatest : ( they had their Infirmities and ambitious desires ) . But our Saviour tells them — f Whosoever will be great among you ( though Peter be the man ) let him be their Minister ; and whosoever will be g chief , let him be your Servant . And again , — h Be not ye call'd Masters , for one is your Master , even Christ ( not Peter ) and ye are Brethren ; but he that will be greatest among you , shall be your Servant . The Apostles had no Master under Heaven , but their blessed Saviour ; it was of him , and him Only , that they learned the Gospel , and that Immediately ; they had it not from i any man , nor one from another . Our blessed Saviour was their only Master and Superior , and they his Scholars , subordinate to him , and co-ordinate amongst themselves . He tells them , that they are Brethren ; Condiscipuli , School-fellows . Names which ( in themselves , and in their Master's meaning ) import Equality ; especially as to any Jurisdiction one over another . There may be amongst Scholars of the same School , and Brethren , an inequality , ( and so there was amongst the Apostles ) 1. In respect of Age ; Some might be elder , some younger . 2. In respect of their coming to that School ; some might come before others ; So Andrew was first call'd to our blessed Saviours School , ( before Peter * ) . 3. In respect of Natural Parts and Abilities , some might have greater Capacities then others . 4. In respect of their Masters Love and Kindness , he might love one more then another , So amongst the Twelve , John was the belovod Disciple . Such inequality there was amongst them , and we willingly grant it . But to say , ( as the Pope , and many of his Party most vainly do ) that amongst these Brethren , and School-fellows in our blessed Saviour's School , Peter , ( or any other ) had not only an Authority and Jurisdiction , but a Monarchical Supremacy , over all the rest , this is so contradictory to our blessed Saviour's plain words , and the manifest and undoubted meaning of them ; that were it not , that we know men may be sway'd with worldly Interests , and sometimes have strong Delusions to believe a Lye ; it were incredible that any Learned men should ( with so much Confidence , and no Reason , assert the Contrary . To pass by all Testimonies of Ancient Fathers for many hundred years , and many sober Papists before Luther , ( who neither knew , nor believed Peter's Monarchy over the Church and his fellow Apostles , his Equals ) sure I am , 1. That Francis k Lucas Brugensis , a Roman Catholick ( in our days ) eminent in their Church for Dignity and Learning , says the same thing I have done ( and on the same Texts ) for the Equality of the Apostles , against Peter's pretended Monarchy . 2. And a greater then he , ( I mean , l Petrus de Marca Archbishop of Paris ) convinc'd with the Evidence of the former Texts , and Truth , was of Opinion , and has publish'd it to the World , That our blessed Saviour , at his Ascension , did not leave the Church establish'd in Peter , and a Monarchy ; But in an Aristocratie , or the Colledge of the Apostles . In which Colledge Peter was one , not Superior ( much less a Monarch ) to the other Apostles ; and the Apostles left the Government of the Church Establish'd in the Bishops , and Aristocratical ; only he thinks , that both in the Colledge of the Apostles , and Councils of Bishops after them , there was ( for Orders sake ) to be a President , ( not a Monarch , for that was Inconsistent with Aristocratie ) And ( if this will content them ) we will grant it . Because we do know , that the Ancient Church allow'd the Pope the prime Place and Precedency in Councils , ( for Orders sake ) and that not by any Divine Right , ( which was not in those days , so much as pretended to ) but because Rome was the m Imperial City , and Metropolis of the Roman Empire ; the greatness of the City usually giving greatness and precedency to the Bishops ; such were Constantinople , Alexandria , Antioch , &c. I know the Inquisitors at Rome have damned this Book of n Petrus de Marca , but this is no Argument , that what he has said , is not true ; Grande aliquo● bonum est , quod à Nerone ( ab Inquisitoribus ) damnatur . To conclude this Point , if our Adversaries assent not to this manifest Truth , as ( being Contradictory to their worldly Interest and misconceived Infallible Pretensions ) 't is probable they will not ; I shall make them this ( to all unprejudiced Lovers of Truth ) fair offer . Let them give me any one cogent Argument from Scripture or Universal Tradition ( and nothing else can do it ) whereby they can prove , the following Positions ; I will thank God and them for the discovery , and promise hereby to be their Proselyte . 1. If they can ( by any such Argument ) prove that Peter ( by Divine Right ) had such a Monarchical Supremacy and Jurisdiction over the Apostles , and the whole Church , ( as is vainly pretended ) I will yield the Cause . But if he had no such Power , 't is impossible he should transmit the Power ( he never had ) to his Successors . 2. Let it be suppos'd , ( which yet is evidently untrue ) that St. Peter had such a Monarchical Authority and Jurisdiction , even over the rest of the Apostles , let them prove by any such Argument as is before mention'd ; that it was not only Temporal , & his only for his life ; that it was not to have an end and period with his Person . For if it was , then his Successor ( whoever he be ) can have no pretence to it . For 't is impossible , that any Successor , can have any legal or just Claim to that Power , which vanish'd and ceas'd to be , with his Predecessor , who possess'd it only for his life . 3. Admit both these to be true , ( which yet are equally and evidently false ) that Peter had such a Power , and that it was not Personal , but to be transmitted to his Successor , seeing such transmission must either be done by our blessed Saviour immediately , or ( by Power deriv'd from him ) by Peter . Let our Adversaries make it appear , that either our blessed Saviour himself , or Peter ( by Power deriv'd from him ) did actually transmit that Power to any Successor , and I submit . 4. Lastly , Suppose all these to be ( what not one of them is ) true ; yet unless it do appear , that the Bishop of Rome ( and not the Bishop of Antioch , ( where they say Peter was Bishop first ) was that Successor of St. Peter , to whom such Supremacy was transmitted ; he can have no pretence to it . For in this Case , Idem est non esse & non apparere . Let our Adversaries then make it appear , that either our blessed Saviour immediately by himself , or Peter ( by Authority from him ) did o transmit the Supremacy to the Pope , and we shall be satisfy'd ; and thankful for the Discovery . And this brings me to the Second thing proposed before . 2. The thing next to be enquired after is , Whether , and how it may appear that the Bishop of Rome is Peters Successor . Our Adversaries say , ( and vainly say it only ) that Peter was Supream Head ( after our blessed Saviour's Ascension ) and Monarch of the Church ; and from him , ( Jure Successionis ) the Pope derives his Monarchical Power and Supremacy ; and that by the Institution and p Command of our blessed Saviour , and so not by Humane , but q Divine Right . This is a Position of greatest Consequence , and will require good proof . Nor is it possible to prove the Bishop of Rome to be Peter's Successor in that Bishoprick , unless it first appear that Peter was his Predecessor in that See. Linus , Clemens or Cletus cannot ( with any Truth or Sense ) be said to succeed Peter , unless it appear first , that he preceeded them . Our Adversaries ( I confess ) do constantly ( with great noise and confidence ) affirm , That Peter did preceed in the Bishoprick of Rome ; but sure I am , that hitherto , they have not brought any , so much as probable ( much less cogent and concluding ) Reason to prove it : nor do I think it possible they should bring ( what they neither have , nor can have ) any true and concluding proof , to prove ( what this is ) an erroneous and false Position . And that this may not be begg'd and gratis dictum , I shall offer to the Impartial Reader , these Considerations . 1. When they r say , That Peter fix'd his Episcopal Chair at Rome , Jubente Domino : Let them shew that s Command , and there will be an end of the Controversie ; we will obey our blessed Saviour's Command , and the Pope too . But this they have neither done , nor can : It being impossible , they should shew that to be , which never was , nor ever had any being . 2. That ever Peter was at Rome , ( much less that he was Bishop there , for Five and twenty years ( as is vainly pretended ) cannot be made appear out of Scripture , or any Apostolical or Authentick Record ; and therefore that he was there at all , ( where he might be , as he was in many other good Cities , and not Bishop of any of them ) must depend solely upon human and fallible Testimonies , ( I say , Testimonies certainly fallible , if not absolutely false ; which many Learned men have , and do believe ) . Now seeing the whole Papal Monarchy and Infallibility , depend upon Peter's being Bishop of Rome , and the grounds we have to assure us , that he ever was there , are fallible and dubious ; and seeing it is irrational ( if not impossible ) that any considering Person , should give a firm and undoubted assent to any Conclusion , inferr'd only upon fallible and dubious premisses . Hence it evidently follows , That our Faith and belief of the Papal Monarchy and Infallibility is , and ( till they find better , and more necessary premisses ) must be fallible and dubious . And here I desire to be inform'd how it comes to be an Article of Faith , in their new Roman Creed ; That the Bishop of Rome is Vicar of Christ , and t Peter ' s Successor ; which Article ( with the rest in that Creed ) they promise , u swear and vow , to believe and profess most Constantly , to their last breath . With what Conscience their Church can require , or they take such an Oath , Most Constantly and firmly to believe , to their last breath , such things , for the belief of which , they have no grounds ( if any ) save only fallible and very dubious , Ipsi viderint . 3. I know , that the Assertors of the Papal Monarchy ( according to their Interest ) are very desirous to prove out of Scripture , that Peter was at Rome ; and to that end produce those words in his first Epistle — x The Church which is at Babylon salutes you : And by Babylon , they say , the Apostle meant Rome : And for this , they cite Papias in y Eusebius , That by Babylon , Rome is figuratively to be understood . So that ( if this be true ) Peter writ that Epistle at Babylon ; that is , at Rome , and so must be at Rome when he writ it : And the proof of this depends upon the Authority of Papias Bishop of Hierapolis , and those who follow him . Now how little Credit is to be given to Papias in this , ( or any thing else ) will manifestly appear out of the same Eusebius ; who tells us , 1. That Papias was much given to Tradition ; z inquiring ( of the Elders who had heard the Apostles ) what Peter , or James , or John , &c. had said : thinking he g●t●less benefit by reading Scriptures , then by the talk of those who heard the Authors of them . 2. That he had by such a Tradition , strange Parables and Preachings of our blessed Saviour , and other things very Fabulous : Such as the Heresie of the Millenaries ; which he believed and propagated . That he thus err'd , by b Misunderstanding the Apostles Doctrine : For ( as Eusebius goes on ) he was a man of very little understanding . 4. And yet ( as the same Author says ) he was the occasion that , c most of the Ecclesiastical Writers who followed him ( Reverencing his Antiquity ) err'd with him . I know , that in Eusebius ( both in the worst Edition of him , by d Christopherson , ( sometime a Popish Bishop of Chichester ) and the best by e Hen. Valesius ) we have a high Commendation of Papias ; f At the same time ( says Eusebius , as Valesius renders him ) Papias was famous ; a man very Eloquent and Learned , and well skill'd in Scripture . But Christopherson ( his other Translator ) goes higher , ( as usually he does when it makes for the Catholick Cause ) and in his Translation says more in Commendation of Papias , then is in the Text : For he tells us , That Papias ( besides his knowledge of Scripture ) was a man g certainly most learned in the Knowledge of All Other Arts. Now if this be true , then that Character I have given him before , is not so ; and then his Antiquity ( which was h great ) and his great Learning ( in all Arts and Sciences , as well as Scripture ) consider'd ; his Testimony , that Babylon , whence St. Peter writ , was Rome , will be more valid , and of greater Authority . In Answer to this ; I say , 1. That all this Commendation of Papias before mention'd , is so far from having any Authority from Eusebius , that 't is a plain Forgery . Eusebius ( as to this passage ) is evidently corrupted ; and this Commendation of Papias ( by whose Ignorance or Knavery , I know not ) shuffled into the Text , long after Eusebius his death . For , 2. Ruffinus ( who Translated Eusebius his History above One thousand two hundred years ago ) in the place above quoted , says only thus — About this time flourished Polycarpe Bishop of Smyrna , and Papias Bishop of Hierapolis . So the Printed Edition of i Ruffinus by B. Rhenanus ; and a very Ancient and Compleat MS. of Ruffinus ( in my Keeping and Possession ) exactly k agrees with it ; and there is not one word of that Commendation of Papias , which is now extant in Eusebius : And therefore we may Conclude , that Anciently it was not there , but the Text of Eusebius ( by fraud or folly ) is since Corrupted : For had it been in Eusebius when Ruffin Translated him , there had been no reason he should have left it out . 3. And which is yet more considerable , Valesius ( a very Learned Roman Catholick ) who last published Eusebius , Ingenuously Confesses , that of three or four Greek MSS. of Eusebius , which he made use of in his Edition , not any one of them l had that Commendation of Papias ; and therefore he doubts not , but these words were m added by some Ignorant Scholiast , contrary to the Judgment and Sense of Eusebius . For ( says n he ) how is it possible that Eusebius should call Papias a Most Learned Man , and Most Skill'd in Scripture , who in the same o Book says , he was A Rule and Simple Person , of Very Little Wit or Judgment . And his Ignorance especially appears ( as in other things ) in that 1. He says that Philip , whose Daughters were Prophetesses , was Philip the p Apostle ; when the q Text , ( had he read or remembred it ) expresly says , That it was Philip the Deacon . 2. Papias said , ( and in his Writings published his Opinion ) That hearing r Oral Traditions , was more profitable , then reading Scriptures ) . That is , to hear the Stories and Tales of private and fallible Persons ( and that in Matters of Religion ) was more profitable , then to read the Sacred Oracles of God , penn'd by Divinely Inspired Infallible Persons . St. s John tells us , he had writ so many and such things , as were necessary and sufficient to Salvation , yet left out thousands of things , which he thought not necessary . But Papias ( with great Ignorance and Impiety ) prefers the unwritten Tradition of those things concerning our blessed Saviour , which the Apostles had omitted , as not necessary , nor so useful as those things they had writ . And so in Contradiction to the Holy Spirit and St. John ( his Infallible Amanuensis ) calls the Tradition of those unwritten things more useful , which they had omitted as not useful at all . And this his Ignorance and want of Judgment further appears , 3. Because Eusebius tells us , That he had ( amongst his Traditions ) t strange and novel Parables and Doctrines of our blessed Saviour , and other things more Fabulous ; and amongst them his Millenary Heresie , of which he was Father , and ( to the Infecting many others ) did propagate it : And he fell to those wild Opinions chiefly by his Ignorance and Misunderstanding of Scripture ; as Eusebius and Nicephorus tell us . And yet this simple Person , and Arch-Heretick , is the principal and prime Witness Rome has , to prove that Babylon ( in the Epistle of Peter ) signifies Rome , and that Peter was there . For other place in Scripture , they have none , and only Papias ( and his Followers ) for that . By the Premisses , I think it may appear to Impartial Persons , That seeing Papias preferr'd Tradition ( or some mens talk before the Scriptures ) that he was a man of very weak understanding , and err'd by misunderstanding Scripture , that he writ Fables rather than History , and maintain'd the Millenary Opinion , which Rome now calls Heresie : I say these things Consider'd , his Authority and Credit is , ( if any at all ) very little ; and yet 't is all our Adversaries have ( his Followers Testimonies being derived from , and depending upon his ) to prove out of Scripture , that Peter writ that Epistle at Rome , or ever was there . This is a Truth so manifest , that not only u Protestants , but most Learned Roman x Catholicks , say and prove ; that Peter writ that Epistle , not at Rome , but Babylon in Chaldea . And further ; that he did not write it at Rome , will be evident from Scripture , and what their own most Learned Author Confesses . For , 1. y Baronius tells us , It was writ , Anno Christi 45. 2. To make this probable , both he , Petavius , and others , generally say ; That Peter went to Rome in the second year of Claudius ; which was Anno Christi 44. 3. But this a very Learned Roman Catholick evidently z Confutes from Scripture , and good Authorities ; and plainly shews , that Peter was always in Judea or Syria , till the death of Herod Agrippa , which was in the fourth year of Claudius , and the Six and fortieth year of our blessed Saviour . And therefore it was impossible that Peter should write that Epistle at Rome , in the Five and fortieth year of our blessed Saviour , who never came thither till the year Forty six , unless they will say ( and they do say things as impossible ) that he writ an Epistle at Rome when he was not there . 4. Nay , 't is certain from what Luke says in the a Acts of the Apostles , that Peter continued in Judaea till the Council met at Jerusalem about the Question concerning Circumcision , and the Ceremonial Law. Sure it is , that he was present at that Council ; which was Anno Christi 51. says b Baronius , Bellarmine , and others ; the Learned c Valesius thinks ( and gives his reason for it , ( more probable to me , then any brought for the Contrary Opinions ) that the Council was held , Anno Claudij . 7. and Christi . 49. take which Computation you please , if St. Peter wrote that Epistle at Rome , Anno Christi 45. he must have writ there , several years before he came thither . 5. Nay , 't is further Evident , ( let that Council be when they will ) that Peter was not at Rome , in the year . 51. which Baronius mentions , but at Jerusalem . For St. d Paul tells us , that three years after his Conversion , ( which was about the year . 37. ) he went to Jerusalem to see Peter , and found him there : And then e fourteen years after , ( which was about the year . 51. ) he went to Jerusalem again , and then found Peter there . According to our Adversaries Computation , in the year . 51. Peter had sate Bishop in Rome about f eight years ; and yet St. Paul neither found , nor sought him at Rome ( where he was not ) but at Jerusalem , where he was , with the Jews , who were Committed to his Charge and Cure. 6. Lastly , 'T is Evident , St. Peter writ that first Epistle to the Asiatick g Dispersion of the Jews , of which Babylon was the Metropolis : And sure it is , that when he says , The Church of Babylon salutes you ; he intended ( as all men do , who write Epistles of that Nature ) that they should know where he was , and who they were who saluted them ; which was Impossible for them to do , if by Babylon he meant Rome . For at that time , Rome neither was , nor could be known to any by the name of Babylon ; no Author ( Sacred or Civil ) having ever call'd it so . 'T is true , St. John above h Fifty years after , call● Rome , Babylon . But he writing Mysterious Propheties , spoke ( to use Eusebius's word ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used many Types , Figures and Metaphors , to express future things . But that Peter , 〈◊〉 writ no such Mysterious Prophetical Predict●ons , but the plain Duties , and Promises of th● Gospel , should use such Types or Figures , ha●● neither truth nor any probability . By the Premisses , I hope it may appear , that it cannot be proved out of Scripture , that ever Peter was at Rome . 4. But let it be granted , that it could be proved out of Scripture ( which is manifestly untrue ) that Peter was at Rome , yet thence it will not follow that ever he was Bishop there : much less for Five and twenty years , as is vainly pretended . For , 1. That he was Bishop of Rome ( or any place else ) there is not one syllable in Scripture ; and so from thence there can be no proof of his Roman Bishoprick . And , 2. If it be granted ( which is evidently untrue ) that it could ( out of Scripture ) be clearly proved , that he was at Rome a longer time , yet hence it does not follow that he was Bishop there : For he was at Jerusalem , Samaria , Joppa , &c. ( as is evident in Scripture ) and yet our Adversaries neither do , nor ( with any sense or reason ) can say , that he was Bishop of all those places . 3. Irenaeus ( an ancient and an approved Author ) expresly says , i That Peter and Paul Constituted Linus first Bishop of Rome ; That Anacletus succeeded him , and that Clemens ( after the Apostles ) was the third Bishop there . After him , Eusebius says the same thing ; That after the k Martyrdom of Paul and Peter , Linus was the first Bishop of Rome . And again , speaking of the Bishops of Rome , he says , That l Linus was the first , and Anencletus ( or Anacletus , as he is usually call'd ) the second . And though Eusebius say , That Linus was m Primus post Petrum , the first Bishop of Rome after Peter ; yet his meaning is not , that Peter was Bishop of Rome before him , as is evident by what he says afterwards ; That Clemens n was the third Bishop of Rome , After the Apostles Paul and Peter ; and by what Irenaeus said before him , That Clemens was the third Bishop of Rome After the Apostles . For if this be good consequence — Linus was first Bishop of Rome after Peter ; Ergo , Peter was Bishop Rome too . Then this ( in Irenaeus and Eusebius , who both say it , ) will be good Consequence also ; Clemens was third Bishop of Rome after Paul and Peter ▪ Ergo , Paul and Peter , were both Bishops of Rome . The truth is , that neither Consequence is good . Irenaeus and Eusebius did indeed believe Paul and Peter Founders of the Roman Church , but neither of them to be Bishops there ; which a Learned Roman Catholick evidently saw , and publickly o acknowledges . By the way , let me observe ; That Eusebius in two places here p cited , puts Paul before Peter : and not only Eusebius ( a fallible Author ) but St. Paul himself puts James before q Peter . Now if Eusebius or St. Paul had known and believ'd St. Peter to have been ( what the Pope and his Party , without any ground vainly Imagine ) the Supream Monarc● over the whole Church and the Apostles themselves ; it had been a great Affront and Injury to St. Peter , and such an Incivility as St. Paul would not have been guilty of . 4. And 't is yet more Considerable , what St. Paul says r in the place last cited ; For there we have these things certain in the Text , 1. That Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision ; the Jews were Committed to him , as his s Charge and Cure , as the Gentiles to Paul. 2. It was our blessed Saviour who t Commission'd both of them , and appointed them those Provinces ; for none else could . He only could assign them their Provinces , who gave them the Apostolical Power to govern them . Peter ( as our Adversaries say ) was Supream Monarch of the whole Church , had no Superior but our blessed Saviour , and so none else to Commission him , or Appoint him his Province . 3. Both of them till that time , had diligently , and ( with great Success ) effectually labour'd in their u several Provinces ; Peter amongst the Jews , Paul amongst the Gentiles . 4. By a mutual Agreement , they x consent and promise , That Peter ( as he had y before , so ) for z the future , He should go to the Jews , and make them his Charge and Cure , and Paul to the Gentiles . 5. And this Agreement was about the year of our Lord. 51. when ( according to our Adversaries Computation ) he was , and had been Bishop of Rome Eight or Nine years . 6. I desire then to know , Whether Peter ( after this Consent and Agreement of the Apostles ) continued Bishop of the Gentiles at Rome , ( as our Adversaries pretend he did ) or not ? If he did , he contradicted his Commission , which our blessed Saviour had given him , to be the Apostle of the Circumcision , and Neglected the Jews , whom he had a Concredited to his care , and Committed to him , as his proper Charge . For to take the charge of the Gentiles and Jews too , was not only against his Commission , but against that Solemn Consent , and Agreement of the Apostles before mention'd , wherein it was agreed and promised , That Peter should go ( not to Rome ) but to the Circumcision , and Paul to the Gentiles . Nor can it be credible that Peter would Act in Contradiction to his Commission , and his Agreement so solemnly made with the Apostles . But if at the time of that Agreement , ( which was Anno Christi . 51. ) he either was not , ( which is most true ) Bishop of Rome , or then left it ; then it evidently follows , That he Continued not Bishop of Rome for Five and twenty years , as is by our Adversaries , ( with great confidence and no reason ) asserted . 7. And this is further manifest , from our Adversaries own Principles and Positions : Baronius tells us , That Peter was b Bishop of Antioch seven years ; and at Rome five and twenty years : And for this he Cites Eusebius his Chronicon . By the way , ( concerning what Baronius says of Peter's being Bishop for so many years at Antioch and Rome ) Observe , 1. That Eusebius says indeed , that Peter c founded the Church of Antioch ; and then , by our blessed Saviour's Command , ( as they say ) went to Rome . But so far is he from saying that he was seven years Bishop there , that he expresly says , That Euodius was the First d Bishop of Antioch . 2. When he Cites Eusebius his e Chronicon to prove that Peter was Five and twenty years Bishop of Rome , and refers us , to what Eusebius f says ) ad Ann. 2. Claudij . The man ( who understood no Greek ) is miserably mistaken ; as Universally he is , when he meddles with Greek Authors , unless their Translations be true ) for Eusebius in his Greek Text , ( as all know , and may see ) has no such g thing , as Five and twenty years ; nay , he does not so much as say , that he was Bishop of Rome at all ; much less that he was Five and twenty years Bishop there . But the Latin Copies ( Interpolated and Corrupted , as thousands others are by Roman Arts ) deceived him . But to let this pass ; Baronius says , That Peter was Seven years Bishop of Antioch , and Five and twenty of Rome . So that ( in the whole ) he was Two and thirty years Bishop in Syria and Italy , and took upon him the Charge and Cure of the Gentiles in those Provinces . Now our blessed Saviour's Passion and Ascension was h Anno Christi . 34. to which if 32. be added ( the time wherein Peter was Bishop of Antioch or Rome ) the product will be . 66. So that from the Ascension of our blessed Saviour till the year . 66. Peter had taken the Episcopacy and particular Charge of a Gentile-Church ; and his i Martyrdom was . 13. Neronis , that is , Anno Christi , 68. or ( as Baronius Computes ) 69. whence ( by this their Account ) it evidently follows , that during all the time from our blessed Saviour's Ascension to his Martyrdom ( about two years only excepted ) Peter was the Apostle and Bishop of a Gentile-Church . Which is , 1. Manifestly untrue , and inconsistent with what is said of Peter in the Acts of the Apostles , with his Commission , in which the care of the Circumcision was concredited to him by our blessed Saviour , and with his Solemn Agreement with the Apostles to go to the Circumcision , as Paul was to the Gentiles . And , 2. It is without any the least ground in Scripture , by which , it neither does , nor can appear that ever Peter was at Rome , so much as for one Day , much less that he was Bishop there Five and twenty years . Nor can it appear in Scripture , that ever he was at Antioch , save k once ; nor is there any mention of any thing he then did there ; save that he dissembled , and was justly reprehended for it , by St. Paul ; whereas it is evident in Scripture , that St. Paul was at Antioch for a whole l year at one time , constituted the Church there , confirmed them m afterwards in the Faith , and n ordain'd Elders to govern them , staid there a o long time ; and p continued there preaching the Gospel ; and yet ( notwithstanding all this ) if we will believe them ; Peter was Bishop there , and not Paul. The truth is ; though it be Evident that Paul , as Apostle , did all Episcopal Acts there ; yet 't is certain , that neither he nor Peter , was particularly Bishop of that , or any other place . 3. It is utterly incredible , that Peter the Supream Head and Monarch of the Church ( as they pretend ) should for Two and thirty years be Bishop , and have the particular Charge and Cure of two of the greatest Cities in the Roman Empire , and that while the Apostles liv'd ; and yet none of them ( nor he himself ) in any of their Writings , should say one Syllable of it , nor mention so much as one single Episcopal Act done by him , in either of those Cities , in those two and thirty years ; no nor St. p Luke in the Acts of the Apostles , nor St. Paul , who liv'd long in Antioch , and longer in Rome , and had opportunity , nay ( had it been true ) a necessity to mention it . He had need of a strong Faith , who can believe this ; for my part , Credat Judaeus Apella , &c. 4. And as for Peter's being Seven years Bishop of Antioch , and Twenty five of Rome ; it is further Considerable , That the greatest Patrons of this Popish Position , although they agree in the Conclusion , that Peter was so long Bishop at those two places ; yet they Contradict each other , and the Truth ; and by their own Positions , ( to save their Adversaries that Labour ) utterly Overthrow and Confute that Position they indeavour to prove . This Evidently appears in this Case , as it is stated by Onuphrius , Baronius and Bellarmine . 1. q Onuphrius tells us ; That Peter remain'd constantly in Judea , for Nine r years next after our blessed Saviour's death , that is till the year of Christ. 43. after this , he was Bishop of Antioch Seven years ; to the year of our blessed Saviour . 50. And then Five and twenty years he● sat Bishop of Rome ; that is , ( by his own Computation ) till the year of Christ , 75. So that by this Account , Peter was Bishop of Rome , Anno Christi . 75. And yet he there says , That Peter s died , Anno Christi . 69. And then ( by his Calculation ) Peter was Bishop of Rome Six years after his death . t 2. Baronius states the Question thus . Peter came to Antioch Anno Christi . 39. and was Bishop there u Seven years ; that is , till the year of Christ. 46. And then he says , that from Antioch Peter went to Rome , and sate there Bishop x Five and twenty years ; that is , till the year . 71. And so ( by his own account ) Peter must be Bishop of Rome two years after he was dead : For the same Baronius tells y us , that Peter died Anno Christi . 69. And though this Account of Peter's Episcopacy at Rome , be not only Erroneous , but ( to all Intelligent Persons ) Ridiculous ; yet z Bellarmine maintains the same Opinion , not only in Contradiction to Onuphrius , but to Eusebius , Hierome , Epiphanius , &c. a whose Opinions Baronius endeavours to confute . In short , as there is no ground in Scripture , that Peter ever was at Rome ; so that he was Twenty five years Bishop there , neither Scripture nor purer Antiquity affords them any proof , or probability : Eusebius his Greek Chronicon , basely b corrupted in a Latin Version of it , about Four hundred years after our blessed Saviour , being that they must rely upon . 5. Our Adversaries had ill luck , when they made Peter first Bishop of Rome , attributed the Supremacy to him , and ( that he might have it ) made the Pope his Successor . For had they chosen Paul in stead of Peter , they might have had far more ( though not enough ) to prove ( and that out of express Scripture ) both Paul's Supremacy , and the Popes Succession to him . For these following Particulars ( every one of them ) may evidently be proved out of Scripture . 1. That the Romans were c Gentiles . 2. That Paul ( by our blessed Saviour's d Appointment ) was the Apostle of the Gentiles , Peter was not , but of the e Jews . 3. Paul was two whole f years at Rome , Converted , and Established a Church there ; but it cannot appear by Scripture , that Peter was ever there . 4. The Care ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) g of all The Churches lay upon St. Paul ; no such thing in Scripture ever said of Peter . 5. St. Paul made Orders and Constitutions for the good government of h All the Churches ( without any Authority , Leave , or Commission from Peter ) no such thing ever said of Peter , either in Scripture , or primitive and pure Antiquity . 6. St. Paul writ a Long and Excellent Epistle to the Romans , Peter did no such thing . Had the Holy Ghost in Scripture expresly told us , 1. That our blessed Saviour had Appointed , and Commission'd Peter to be the Apostle of the Gentiles ( and such were the Romans ) , 2. That he was two whole years residing at Rome , Converting and Establishing a Church there . 3. That the Care and Cure of All the Churches lay upon him . 4. That he made Orders and Constitutions for the Government of All The Churches . 5. That he had writ an Epistle to the Romans , to Confirm them in that Faith he had preach'd amongst them : I say , had all these things been in Scripture expresly said of Peter , our Adversaries with great noise and confidence would ( and with far more reason and probability might ) have asserted Peter's Supremacy , and his Roman Episcopacy , and that the Pope was , and is his Successor . But seeing not one of all these is said of Peter , and every one of them expresly said of Paul , it is Evident , that there is far more reason and probability ( and that grounded upon express Scripture ) that Paul was Bishop of Rome ( and not Peter ) and so the Pope might be his Successor . And yet our Adversaries i reject Paul , and will have Peter their first Bishop ( though some of them impiously say , our k blessed Saviour was their first Bishop ) That St. Paul was not Bishop of Rome ( notwithstanding all the former things said of him , in Scripture ) we believe and know , and willingly grant . But on the other side , to say , that Peter was Bishop of Rome , concerning whom no such things are said in Scripture , either in express terms , ( as they are of Paul ) or by Equivalence or any just Consequence ; this we say , is very irrational . For in things Moral or Historical ( and of such we are now speaking ) which are Incapable of Physical or Mathematical Demonstration , the highest Prudential Motives and Probabilities will , and ought to carry the Assent of all wise men : and therefore seeing it is deny'd ( and justly too ) that Paul was ever Bishop of Rome , though the Probabilities , grounded on Scripture , that he was so , be far greater then Peter can pretend to ; for our Adversaries to say , that Peter was Bishop of Rome , must be , and is , evidently irrational . If the great probabilities we have that Paul was Bishop of Rome deserve not our Assent , certainly we cannot rationally conclude from far less Probabilities that Peter was so . But when they would magnifie the Pope's Power and Supremacy , ( having no better Arguments ) they make use of several Honorary Titles given to the Bishop of Rome , and his See , and of some Priviledges which they take ( or mistake rather ) to be peculiar to the Popes , such as ▪ these . 1. The Bishop of Rome in many Stories and Canons , is called l Apostolicus . 2. His See is call'd Sedes Apostolica , and Cathedra Apostolica . 3. He is call'd Successor Petri. 4. Vicar of Christ. 5. That our blessed Saviour gave him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven , &c. I confess that these , and many such m Particulars have been urged , and ( as pertinent ) stood upon by several Popes in their Bulls , their Decretal Constitutions and Epistles , and generally by all their Party ; especially the Clergy ( Secular and Regular ) whose great and principal Interest it is , to maintain the Papal Supremacy : for if that fail , they irrecoverably fall with it . In some Centuries past , while gross Ignorance and Tyranny , benighted and overaw'd this Western Part of the World , such Arguments did their Business ; For few could , and ( the danger being very great ) few , or none , durst Answer them . But after Luther arose , and Learning reviv'd , all knowing and impartial Persons did see and know , that all the Arguments they did ( or could ) bring from such Topicks , were not only Inconsequent , but indeed impertinent and ridiculous . That this may not be gratis dictum , I shall indeavour to make it Appear by plain Instances , ( and I hope Effect it ) that none of those Honorary Titles or Priviledges do , or can afford any just ground of that Supremacy , and Papal Monarchy , they now so earnestly contend for ; And here 1. It is to be observed , that the word Apostolicus , which ( for some Ages last past ) the Pope has Assumed , and his Flatterers given him , as peculiar to himself , was Anciently a Title given to all Archbishops . So n Alcuinus Flaccus tells us , That when a Bishop was Elected , they sent him , ad Apostolicum , that he might Consecrate him . The Learned Archbishop o of Paris , tells me this ; and also that this was the use of that word in the Sixth Century , in the time of Gregorius Turonensis , who was made Bishop about the Year . 572. but afterwards , That Title was p appropriated to the Pope . Now I desire to know of our Adversaries , how The Title , being Appropriated to the Pope , does make more for his Supremacy , then it did for the Archbishops , when it was common to them all ? 2. That Rome was Sedes Apostolica , and Cathedra Apostolica , we grant . Because we are sure St. Paul ( though not as Bishop ) sate there . But that Peter ever was there , neither we nor our Adversaries are , or can be sure . But it is , and ( by our Adversaries ) must be granted too ; That Jerusalem , Antioch , and other q Churches ( besides Rome ) were Sedes Apostolicae , and Ecclesiae Apostolicae , and eo Nomine , were of great Esteem in the Ancient Church . But the Bishops of none of them then did , or could pretend to any Supremacy , much less to an Ecclesiastical Monarchy : And why Rome should more then they , when our Adversaries can , and will give ( which as yet they never did ) any Just and Cogent Reason , I shall submit . r Tertullian also reckons the Apostolical Churches , such as Corinth , Ephesus , Thessalonica , Philippi , Rome , &c. and tells us , That Cathedrae Apostolorum , the Chairs of the Apostoles were then in those Apostolical Churches ; That Bishops presided in them ; that if they had great Curiosity and Care of their Salvation , they should make their Address to those Apostolical Chairs and Churches . He sends them not all to Rome , and Peter's Chair there : But ( saith he ) if thou art near Macedonia , thou hast Philippi and Thessalonica to go to ; If in Asia , Ephesus ; If in Achaia , Corinth ; If thou art near Italy , thou hast Rome to Address to . He knew no Supremacy or Infallibility annex'd to Peter's Chair at Rome , more then to Paul's at Corinth , or Philippi . He directs them to that Apostolical Chair and Church which was next them , and Judged that sufficient , without going to Rome . The Bishop of Rome in those days , pretended to no more Supremacy or Infallibility in the Apostolical Church and Chair at Rome , then the Bishop of Ephesus or Corinth , in the Apostolical Chairs and Churches of those Cities . If Sedes Apostolica , and Cathedra Apostolica be a sufficient ground to infer and prove Supremacy ; then either all such Churches must be Supream , ( which is impossible ) or none at all , which is certainly true . 3. But they say ; The Bishop of Rome is Peter ' s Successor , and on this they principally and generally ground his Supremacy ; as derived to him , s Jure ●●●cessions , and t Jure Divino too ; by Divine Right and Succession . Now if this be true ; if Succession to Peter carry Supremacy with it , Then seeing they constantly say , 1. That Peter was u seven years Bishop of Antioch before he was of Rome . 2. And that x Euodius was his Successor there . I desire to know , why the Supremacy did not descend to Euodius , his first and immediate Successor ? For admit , that Peter had such Supremacy , and that it was not Personal , but to be transmitted to some Successor ; ( both which are manifestly untrue ) yet seeing such Transmission of his Supremacy , must be done either , 1. By some Act of our blessed Saviour . Or , 2. By some Act of Peter , transmitting his Supremacy to his Successor at Rome , and not to Euodius at Antioch : it will concern our Adversaries to shew such Act of our blessed Saviour , or Peter . For if they can , we will submit , and give the Cause ; but if they cannot , then seeing , idem est non esse & non apparere ; they must pardon our unbelief , if we assent not to that , which they cannot prove . I say , cannot prove ; there being not one syllable in Scripture or Antiquity for Six hundred years , ( I might give more ) either expresly affirming , or from which it may ( by good Consequence ) be deduced , that either our blessed Saviour or Peter did transmit such a Monarchical Supremacy and Infallibility to the Bishop of Rome , more then to the Bishop of Antioch . If any man think otherwise , let him give us good proof of the contrary , and we will give him thanks and the Cause . 2. But admit , that the Pope succeeds Peter , and really sits in Cathedrâ Petri , as his Successor , ( which is evidently untrue ) yet this will not prove his Monarchical Supremacy ; if it do appear that any other Apostle succeeded our blessed Saviour ( before Peter was Bishop any where ) and by his own Appointment , sat in our blessed Saviour's Place and Episcopal Chair , as his Successor ; I say , if this appear , then as our blessed Saviour is far greater then Peter , so his Successor will be greater then the Pope , and have a fairer pretence for the Supremacy , as our blessed Saviour's immediate Successor , then the Pope can possibly have , as Peter's . Now for this , let our Adversaries consider , what Epiphanius says , Thus ; y James the Brother of 〈◊〉 Lord was the first Bishop , when our blessed Savio●r concredited and resign'd to him , before all others his Throne or Episcopal Chair on Earth . And he● let it be consider'd , 1. That in Scripture 〈◊〉 blessed Saviour is call'd z a Bishop , Vnivers● Bishop of the whole Church ; with a Monarchi●cal and Kingly Power . 2. He was in a particula● and peculiar way , Bishop of the Jews ; he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a Peculiar Oversight and Cure 〈◊〉 them . He was sent ( in Person ) only to b them : He Constituted a Church among● them , Ordain'd Apostles , and Seventy othe● c Inferior Ministers , whom he sent to Preac● and do Miracles in Confirmation of their Doctrine ; he constantly preached the Gospel amongst them , and did all those Acts a Bishop should do in his Diocese . 3. And Jerusalem being the Metropolis of the Jews , Epiphanius tells us , that it was ( on Earth ) his Throne , ( Thronus suus ) his Episcopal Seat , or Chair ; where he usually was , preach'd and did Miracles . 4. He says , That our blessed Saviour chose James , before all the Rest , even before Peter ) and concredited and resigned to him , Thronum suum , his Episcopal Seat , and that James was Bishop of Jerusalem , is attested by all Antiquity . And this probably was the Reason , 1. Why Paul d names James ( as Bishop of Jerusalem ) before Peter . 2. Why in the Council of the Apostles , James ( and not Peter ) gave the definitive e Sentence . So that these things seem to me certain , 1. That our blessed Saviour , though Bishop of the Universal Church , yet he had a Particular Episcopal Cure , and Charge of the Jews , As his Father was King of all the World , yet Particularly of the Jews . f 1. Sam. 12. 12. it was g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 2. That James was his Successor in that Cure. 3. And ( if Epiphanius say true ) our blessed Saviour himself appointed him his Successor . Let our Adversaries ( by so good Authority ) shew ; that Peter was our blessed Saviour's Successor , either at Rome , ( as some of them , before mention'd , only pretend ) or any where else ; and ( for my part ) let them take the Cause . Otherwise , if they cannot , then we may evidently conclude , That if James never did , nor could pretend justly to a Monarchical Supremacy over the whole Church , though our blessed Saviour's Successor ; much less may the Pope for succeeding Peter . Q. E. D. 4. But the Pope ( they say ) is Christ's Vicar ; and that he is , or should be so , we grant . But we further say ; that many thousands ( besides him ) are Christ's Vicars as well , and as much as he . This has been manifestly proved before . I shall only add ; that the Trent Fathers ( who , far they , h were inspired by the Holy Ghost , and so surely Infallible ) expresly say , and Synodically define , That our blessed Saviour before his Ascention , left all Priests his i own Vicars , to whom , as to Presidents and Judges , all Mortal sins were to be Confess'd . And k Aquinas , ( and their Schoolmen ) say ; That in the Church , the Bishop is Christ's Vicar ; and they prove it well , from the express and plain words of the l Apostle ; and they might have added also 2. Cor. 5. 20. And Henry Holden , a Learned Sorbon Doctor , in his Annotations upon those Texts , says the same thing . And now if to be Christ's Vicar , give any ground or pretence to Supremacy , then all Bishops and Priests ( who are Confess'd to be Christ's Vicars ) may pretend to Supremacy as well as the Pope . And they being Christ's Vicars as to the Power of Absolving and Retaining Sins , m every poor Priest has as much power to absolve the Pope , as he him . So that any Argument drawn from this Title , that he is Christ's Vicar , to prove the Popes Supremacy , is not only Inconsequent , but Impertinent , and indeed Ridiculous : And yet upon this ground , and another as Insignificant , Pope Innocent the Fourth , in their General Council at Lions , Excommunicates and Deposes the Emperor Friderick ; Seeing ( says the Pope there ) we are Christ's n Vicar on Earth ; and it was in the Person of Peter said to us , Whatsoever thou binds on Earth , shall be bound in Heaven ; we declare and denounce the said Friderick deprived of all his Honour and Dignity , absolve his Subjects from all Oaths of Allegiance , and Excommunicate all who shew him any favour , or obey him as Emperor . And to the same purpose their Trent Catechism tells us ; o That the Pope has ( by Divine Right , ( not by any Human Constitutions ) that Supream Degree of Dignity and Jurisdiction , over the Vniversal Church , as Peter's Successor , sitting in his Chair , and as Vicar of Christ. 5. But that which they press with most Noise and Confidence , is , That our blessed Saviour gave Peter the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven . They seem to be in Love with these words , Dabo Tibi Claves , &c. For in their p Offices , for only two of St. Peter's Festivals , they are repeated almost Twenty times . But how Impertinent this is , to prove any Supremacy ( much less their Papal Monarchy ) will evidently appear , in that this Power of the Keys , which they would appropriate to the Pope , was given to the rest of the Apostles , as well as to Peter ( as is proved before ) nay to every Bishop and Priest in the World. For , 1. So their own Roman Breviary , published by the Authority of Pope Pius the Fifth , and afterwards revised by Clement the Eighth , and Vrban the Eighth expresly says ; for having told us , that our blessed Saviour gave the Keys to Peter : it follows ; q That this Power did pass to the other Apostles and Princes of the Church . 2. Their Trent Catechism , having r spoke of the Power of the Keys ; afterwards tells us , to whom our blessed Saviour gave and concredited that Power before he Ascended into Heaven ; And it was To the s Bishops and Presbyters . So that Catechism , publish'd according to the Decree of the Council of Trent , by Pope Pius the Fifth . And , 3. Their Roman Pontifical gives the Authentick Form how they Ordain a Priest ; in which the Power of the Keys is given to every Priest , in the very same t words our blessed Saviour did give it to the Apostles — u Receive the Holy Ghost , whose sins you remit , they are remitted ; And whose sins you retain , they are retained . 4. Lastly ; The Trent Fathers are yet ( if that be possible ) more express ; For speaking of the Sacrament of Pennance and Absolution , They x declare all their Opinions to be false and erroneous , who think that the Exercise of the Ministery and Power of the Keys , belong to any , save The Bishops and Presbyters ; and who think those words — Whatsoever you shall bind on Earth , &c. And whose sins you remit shall be remitted , &c. to be spoken indifferently to all the Faithful ; and so think that any of the faithful may bind and loose , remit and retain sins . In which words the Council does ( I suppose ) Infallibly Declare ( at least in our Adversaries Opinion ) 1. That those two y Texts ( which are cited in the Margent of the z Council ) are to be understood of the Power of the Keys ; though in one of them ( that of John ) the Keys be not expresly named . 2. That the Exercise of that Power of the Keys belongs To the Bishops and Presbyters , but to none else ; neither to Lay-men nor any Inferior Orders . By the Premisses , I think it evident , ( and confess'd by our Adversaries ) that every Apostle had the Power of the Keys , as well as Peter , and ( since they left the World ) every Bishop and Priest , as well as the Pope . Whence it further ( and manifestly ) follows ; That 't is impossible that the Bishop of Rome , or any of his party , should ( as they vainly indeavor ) prove his Supremacy from his Power of the Keys ; which is common , and really possess'd by so many thousands beside himself . For this is just as if Titius should brag , that he is far richer then Sempronius , because he has Five hundred pounds per Annum ; when Sempronius has an equal Estate , and of the very same Value . Or as if Sejus should say he had far greater Power then Cajus , when the Power given them by the Emperor was equal and the same . And yet such is the vanity and folly of their pretended Infallible Judges , that in their Bulls , and Papal Constitutions , received into the Body of their Canon Law , Dabo Tibi Claves , this Power of the Keys , is laid as a ( Sandy and Insignificant ) Foundation , on which they build the vast and Insupportable Fabrick of their Supremacy . I shall Instance only in two ( though I might in many more , ) 1. In that famous Decretal of Innocent the Third ( before cited ) wherein he impiously and ridiculously indeavors to prove , that the Papal Dignity , is as much a greater then the Imperial , as the Sun is greater than the Moon : And amongst other wild and ridiculous Arguments to prove his equally wild and extravagant Position , he comes at last , to this , Dabo Tibi Claves , to the Power of the Keys , as the most known ground of his Supremacy . 2. The second Instance , is that of Pope Innocent the Fourth , in his Impious Excommunication and Deposition of the Emperor Frederick , ( who had been before Excommunicated by his Predecessor Gregory the Ninth ) in the Council of Lions . It is b Extant in the Canon Law , and two things there prefix'd to that most Impious Decretal . 1. That he depos'd Frederick in the Council , for a perpetual c memory of it . And so it stands for a perpetual memory of his Antichristian Pride and Impiety . 2. That the Pope can Depose the d Emperor for lawful Causes . And then , in that Impious Decretal , he grounds his Power to Depose the Emperor principally upon the Power of e the Keys ; which ( he says ) was given to him in Peter , when our blessed Saviour said , Whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth , should be bound in Heaven , &c. so he , ( and his Predecessors and Successors generally for this Six hundred years last past ) applies that Power of the Keys ( which is purely spiritual ) to carnal and temporal ends , and impious purposes . And here it seems to me , Considerable , ( and I believe will seem so , to pious and dis-interessed Persons ) that in former f Roman Breviaries ( as also in our Portiforium or g Breviary of Sarum ; and in the h Missals of Salisbury and i Hereford , we have this Prayer ; 1. Deus qui Beato Petro Apostolo tuo , Collatis Clavibus Regni Coelestis , Animas Ligandi atque Solvendi Pontisicium tradidisti ; Concede , ut Intercessionis ejus Auxilio , &c. O God , who by giving the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to thy Apostle Peter , hast concredited and delivered to him the Pontifical Power of binding and loosing mens Souls , grant that by the help of his Intercession , &c. Where it is evident that , ( in the sense and plain meaning of this Prayer and Scripture too ) the Power of the Keys is spiritual , to bind mens souls , ( if Impenitent ) and ( if Contrite and truly Penitent ) to loose them . I say spiritual , for edification and saving mens souls , and not temporal , for Deposing Kings and Emperors , and absolving their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance . 2. But this Doctrine was not pleasing to the Pope and his Party ; And therefore in their late k Breviaries and l Missals , they have left out the word Animas , Souls , and say only , that God had given Peter Power of binding and loosing ; not mentioning in that Prayer , what it was he had Power to bind and loose . 3. But that we may better know their meaning and reason why they left out the word Souls ; it follows , a little after in those late Offices — m Tu es Pastor ovium , Princeps Apostolorum ; Tibi n tradidit Deus Omnia Regna Mundi ; & Ideo Tibi traditae sunt Claves Regni Coelorum . They all agree , That the Power of binding and loosing is ( as they call it in that Prayer ) Pontificium , the Pontifical or Papal Power ; and having told us , That God had given All the Kingdoms in the World , to Peter and his Successors ; they add , That Ideo , Therefore he gave him Pontificium , the Papal Power of binding and loosing , superior to all Kingly o Power ; so that they might , by it , Depose Kings and Emperors , if they were not Obedient to the Pope ; for so their Popes ( as appears before ) have , in Thesi , affirm'd , and ( in their Bulls , their Publick and Authentick Constitutions approved , and publickly maintain'd that Doctrine ; and ( in Praxi ) to the fatal Mischief and Disquieting of the Western World , the ruin of many Princes , and scandal of Christian Religion , impiously acted according to it , and put it in practice ; when they had advantage and opportunity . By the Premisses , I hope it may ( and does ) appear , that all those Honorary Titles given to the Pope , or his See , ( Apostolicus , Sedes Apostolica , Cathedra Apostolica , Peter's Successor , Christ's Vicar , the Power of the Keys , Prince of the Apostles , &c. having been Anciently given to Thousands ( beside the Pope ) who never had , nor dream'd of any Supremacy : Though in these late , and worst Ages , they have been appropriated to the Bishop of Rome , and ( though Old and Innocent Titles ) made use of , to amuse and deceive the Ignorant , to cover , and give some Colour and Credit to New Errors , and made Arguments to prove ( what he never had ) the Popes Supremacy ; yet 't is Evident , that all such Arguments , drawn from such Topicks , are not only inconsequent , but ( as I said before , and still believe ) Impertinent , and indeed ridiculous ; and Conclude nothing , save that surely they who bring so bad , had no better Arguments . Two other words there are ( Papa and Summus Pontifex ) now appropriate to the Bishop of Rome , and as generally and impertinently used ( as the former ) to Insinuate ( what they can never prove ) the Popes Supremacy . For many Learned men have evidently proved ( or confess'd ) that Anciently , every Bishop was called p Papa , a Pope , and Summus q Pontifex too . Baronius a most Zealous and Partial Assertor of the Popes Supremacy and Monarchy over Kings and Emperors ) has , in the Place quoted in the Margent , confess'd ( what without great Impudence he could not deny ) that Anciently every venerable Presbyter was usually call'd Papa , or Pope . Afterwards ( he says ) the word Papa became common to all the Bishops , though more particularly given to the Bishop of Rome ; and he further adds , That the name Papa continued common to All the Bishops , for Eight hundred and fifty years ; till Hildebrand ( Pope Gregory the Seventh ) in a Council at Rome , ) in the Year , 1073. decreed , That there should be but one Pope ( meaning himself ) in the whole World. Here we see , that Hildebrand ( that Prodigy of r . Antichristian Pride and Tyranny ) appropriates the name Pope to himself and See , which had for Eight hundred years ( he might have said a thousand ) been commonly given to Bishops and Presbyters , as well as to the Pope . Now I desire to know , how this , or any of the aforesaid Honorary Titles or Priviledges , ( which were common to all Bishops , and usually given them , for many Ages , as well as to the Bishop of Rome ) ; can be an Argument or Ground of the Popes Supremacy , which were confessedly no ground of any such Supremacy in other Bishops , who had the very same Titles and Priviledges , as well , and as much as he ? Suppose twenty Swans ( possibili posito in esse , nil absurdi sequitur ) to have equal whiteness , and the same Degree of that Quality ; To say that any one of those Swans was , by far , the whitest Swan in the World , when as nineteen others were as white as that one : Or suppose twenty men of Equal Piety , all having the same Degree of Goodness and Vertue ; to say , that any one of them , was , by far , the most Pious man in the World , when nineteen others were as Pious as he ; this were certainly irrational , and ridiculous . And yet our Adversaries reason no better , when they say ; The Pope being Christ's Vicar , and having the Power of the Keys , has a Monarchical Supremacy over all the Bishops in the World ; when all those Bishops are Christ's Vicars , and have the Power of the Keys , as well as he . But enough ( if not too much ) of this . For were it not for the great noise , number , and confidence of our Adversaries , such miserable inconsequent Reasonings , might deserve Pity and Contempt , rather than any serious Answer . 7. Having made some Observations upon the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or Title and Preamble of this Impious Bull ; I come now to the Penal part of it , to observe what Punishments and Curses are contain'd in it , and the Persons against whom they are denounc'd . For although in the Title prefix'd to the Bull , 't is call'd , The Damnation and Excommunication of Queen Elizabeth only ; yet Thousands besides the Queen , are concern'd in those Curses , ( as will appear anon ) . Here then , it is to be Observed , 1. That in this Uncharitable Bull , the Pope Anathematizes and Excommunicates the Queen , as a Slave of s Impiety , as an t Heretick , and a Favourer of Hereticks , and Cuts her off from The Vnity of Christ's Body . 2. He deposes and deprives her ( so far as the Plenitude of his Usurped Power and Tyranny could ) of her pretended u right to the Crown of England , and of all , and all manner of Dominion , Dignity , and Priviledge . By the way ; what the Pope speaks here ( notwithstanding his Infallibility ) is neither Reason , nor Sense ; for if her Right to the Crown , was only ( as he calls it ) Pretended ; he could not possibly take it away , no not by his Plenitude of Apostolical Power ( if he really had it ) : For , 1. ( Notwithstanding all his Excommunications and Cursing ) she might keep that Right , and as strongly pretend a Right to the Crown after , as before his Anathema's . 2. And if she had only a Pretended Right , then he could not deprive her of any real Right ; it being impossible to deprive her of a Right she had not . 3. He Absolves all her x Subjects , and All Others , who were bound to her by Any Oath , from their Oaths , and all Debt of Fidelity and Obedience , and that For ever . Where observe , 1. That 't is not only her own Subjects he absolves from Oaths of Allegiance ; but All Others , who were bound to her , by Any Oath whatsoever . So that if any French-man , Dutch , or Spaniard , any Pagan , Jew , or Turk had sworn to pay her Ten thousand pounds , really ( and by the Law of God and Man ) due to her ; he absolves them from their Oaths ; and so ( if they had not more Honesty and Conscience then he ) she must loose her Money . The Pope , in the mean time , being more kind to Turks , and Pagans , then to ( a far better Christian then himself ) Queen Elizabeth . 2. He absolves them from all such Oaths For ever . So that , if the Queen had y turned Papist , none of her Subjects ( if the Popes Absolution had been valid ) were , by an Oath , ( unless they took a new one ) bound to Obey her , as their Sovereign . 4. Nor does he only Absolve all the afore mention'd ( Subjects and all others ) from all Oaths made to the z Queen ; but also severely interdicts and prohibits them all , to Obey any of her Laws or Commands . That is ; he forbids them to do that , to which ( by the Indispensable Law of God and Nature ) they were absolutely bound . 5. And if any of the Persons mention'd in the aforesaid Particulars , did a otherwise , and obey'd any of her Laws or Commands ; he pronounces the same Excommunication and Anathema against them . So that , 1. If any French , Spanish , or Italian Papists lived in England in Queen Elizabeths days ; ( after the Bull and Excommunication was publish'd , ( as many did , and do , either as Merchants or Travellers ) and obey'd the Laws of England ; ( as of necessity they must , and ought to conform to the Civil Laws of the Country where they live ) all these , ( by this wild Bull ) did stand Excommunicate . Nor had they any way to Escape it , but either by Leaving the Kingdom , and all their Trade and Interest in it , to their great loss , and possibly the ruin of some : Or by staying here , and disobeying the Queens Laws , ( which never was , nor would be permitted ) to undergo all the Severity and Penalties of those Laws . 2. But ( which is yet much more strange ) suppose any Jews , Turks , or Pagans in England in the Queens time ; he Excommunicates all those , if they obey the Queen ; But surely this Rash and Impious Sentence , was not pronounc'd è Cathedrâ ; for ( which is no good Sign of his Infallibility ) he does in this undertake a thing beyond all the Power he did or could pretend to , an absolute Impossibility . For Excommunication being a Selusion and Depriving a man of Ecclesiastical Communion , a turning out of the Christian Church ; it was absolutely Impossible that either Peter , or the Pope his pretended Successor , should deprive those of a Communion they never had , or turn them out of a Church in which they never were . 6. He Excommunicates all Papists , as well as Protestants , if they obey'd any of the Queens Laws or Commands . So that their Case was this ; If they obey'd the Queen , their Sovereign , ( to whom they ought a natural and sworn Allegiance ) the Pope Curses and Damns them ; and if they did not obey her , ( as St. b Paul assures us ) God himself would Condemn them . Certainly , all pious and considering Persons will think this an easie choice ; and that it is better rather to Obey God then Men , and believe St. Paul rather then the Pope ; and yet such is the Power of Error and strong Delusion , that the generality of the Papists , ( I do not say all ) choose to obey the Pope ; as shall appear evidently anon , by their many open Rebellions , and continual Plots and Conspiracies to disquiet the Government , and their Indeavors ( by Pistol or Poyson ) to Assassinate and take away the Queens Life . 2. That all Papists who gave any Obedience to the Queens Commands or Laws , were Excommunicate , as well as Protestants , is evident by this : That the Popish Party c petion'd Pope Gregory the Thirteenth , Ann. 1580. Elizabeth . 13. That he would declare , that the Bull of Pius the Fifth should always bind the Queen , and all Hereticks , but not the Roman Catholicks , As Things then stood ; but hereafter only , when That Bull might be put in Execution . They were willing to Obey the Pope , and Disobey their Queen , when they had an Opportunity ; They Petition the Pope to give them leave to do , what God ( by Divine Law , Natural and Positive ) had Commanded them to do ; that is , to obey their Lawful Sovereign , and that they will Obey no longer , then till they have a Power and Ability , ( with Security to themselves and Estates ) to Disobey . 7. It is a certain Rule of Law and Justice , that before any Judge can Legally Condemn any ; Two things are necessary to preceed ; 1. Cognitio d Causae , a Convenient Knowledge of the Cause ; What Accusation the Actor or Plaintiff brings ; what Answer and Defence the Reus , or Defendant makes . 2. That the Proofs and Evidence be such , as may be a just ground for a Damnatory Sentence . If either of these be wanting , either the Judge or Sentence , ( or both ) are unjust . Qui aliquid Statuit , parte inaudita alterâ , Aequum licet Statuerit , haud aequus fuit . And hence it was that a Pagan Judge could truly say , It is e not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to Dye , before he which is Accused have the Accuser face to face , and have Lycence to answer for himself . Such was the Justice of Pagan Rome . But as Christian ( or , I fear , Antichristian ) Rome , the Case is alter'd . Pius the Fifth , the pretended Vicar of Christ ( our blessed Saviour ) Anathematizes and Damns many hundred Thousands , even Two whole Kingdoms at once , Causâ indictâ f & inauditâ . An Action so prodigiously Impious , as hath no ground or pretence for it in Nature or Scripture , or any Precedent amongst Pagans or Christians for a Thousand years after Christ ; till Hildebrand , one of the worst in the Papal Catalogue ( to the Scandal of Christianity , and fatal Disturbance of Christendom ) unhappily Introduc'd it , and his Successors since , have ( with like Antichristian Pride and Tyranny ) impiously practis'd it . 8. Seeing it appears by this Bull of Pope Pius the Fifth , ( as by many more such , published by his g Predecessors and h Successors ) that the Bishops of Rome Usurp and Exercise such a vast Extravagant Power , to Excommunicate Kings and Emperors , to Depose and Deprive them of all their Dominions , Honour , and Dignity ; to Absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance and Fidelity : To Inhibit and Interdict them ( against the Laws of God and Man ) to give any Obedience to their Lawful Sovereigns ; and if they do , to Anathematize and Curse them for so doing ; and lastly , to Excommunicate whole Kingdoms at once ( Causa indicta & inauditâ ) if they do their Duty , and give any Obedience to their Prince , when they forbid them , &c. I say for this , ( and many other Reasons ) I believe the Bishop of Rome has the fairest Plea , of any in the World , to be than Man of Sin , and the great Antichrist spoken of in the Gospel . It is neither my intention or business now , fully to dispute that Question . Whether the Pope be Antichrist ? ( many have with great success , already , done it ) I shall only ( in short ) give the Reader two or three Arguments , or Motives , which ( at present ) induce me to believe that the Pope is Antichrist ; And those Motives , either grounded on Scripture , the Confessions of our Adversaries , the Testimonies of many and great men before , or the concurrent Consent of the Reformed Churches since Luther . Here consider , 1. That it is not only i Confess'd by our Adversaries ( in their Commentaries on 1. Pet. 5. 13. The Church of Babylon salutes you ) but indeavour'd to be proved by many Arguments they bring , That Rome is that Babylon , St. John speaks of , in the Revelation ; which he calls the Great Whore , Mother of Harlots , and Abominations of the Earth , and ( in more plain Terms ) The k Great City which reigns over the Kings of the Earth ; which cannot possibly be meant of any but Rome , that being then the only great City , which Reigned over the Kings of the Earth . I know that some of them would have l Pagan Rome meant : but this evidently untrue ; for , 1. It must be Apostatical Rome ; ( as indeed it is ) for the Apostle expresly tells us ; That Antichrist will not come , till an m Apostasie and falling from the Faith come first : which cannot be meant of Pagan Rome ; it being impossible they should fall from the Faith , who never had any . 2. It is meant of that Babylon , or Rome , which St. John calls the n Great Whore , and Harlot : but in Scripture , none but Apostates from the Faith , and true o Religion , are call'd so ; none but she who was once a Wife , and afterwards falls into Spiritual Whoredom ; which of Pagan Rome neither is , nor can be true . 3. The Actings of Antichrist are call'd p Mysterium , a Mystery , things hard to be understood : but that Pagan Idolaters should persecute and oppress Christians , and be drunk with the Blood of the Saints , this is no Mystery . But that all this should be done in pretence of the only True and Catholick Religion , in Honour of Christ , and by his Vicar ; this is indeed a Mystery , not easily understood . So that it is evident , and confess'd , that Rome is Babylon , ( Mystical Babylon ) call'd so , ( as she is call'd q Sodom and Egypt ) in respect of that Analogy and Similitude between the Literal and Mystical , the Pagan and Antichristian Babylon , ( Babylon Chaldaeae & Italiae . ) Some of the Particulars wherein that Similitude consists , are here in the r Margent ; and he who considers what St. John says of the Mystical , and what Isaie and Jeremy of the Literal Babylon , may find more . I take it then for a manifest Truth , ( and confess'd by our Adversaries ) that by Babylon in the Revelation , Rome is meant , and that it is the Seat of Antichrist . The next Query will be , Who that great Antichrist is , whose Seat is to be at Rome ? And this will best appear by the Description and Characters of him in Scripture . 2. One Characteristical Note and Mark of Antichrist , is given by s St. Paul ; That he is an Enemy , an Adversary to Christ ( our blessed Saviour ) so the word in St. Paul properly t signifies ; so their Authentick ; Vulgar Latin u translates it , and their Learned x Commentators prove it . So that we are agreed on this ; That Antichrist ( whoever he be ) is an Adversary to our blessed Saviour ; and though he may pretend ( as we know he does ) to be Christ's Vicar , and Act by his Authority , and for him ; yet he is really his Adversary , and acts in Opposition , and Contradiction to him . Now if this be a true Character of Antichrist ( and it is St. Pauls ) then the Pope has a fairer Plea to be that Beast , then any man in the World. For under the Name and Notion of Christ's Vicar , and by a vainly pretended and usurped Power from him , he acts contrary to Christ , and the express Commands of the Gospel . I shall ( of many ) give two or three Instances , 1. Our blessed Saviour , at the Institution of the Eucharist , expresly Commands his Disciples ( and so all Christians , who are of Age and rightly qualify'd ) y Drink Ye All of this : And another Evangelist tells us , that they obey'd , and z Did All Drink . But the Pope , in Contradiction to this , a absolutely forbids all ( save the Priest who Consecrates ) to drink the Eucharistical Cup ; and so ( in Contradiction to our Saviour's Command ) deprives them of half that Sacrament . And this they do with a blasphemous Impiety , forbidding bidding all Laicks to have the Communion in both kinds , Notwithstanding the b Institution of Christ , and notwithstanding that in the c Primitive Church it was Received in both kinds : and they further declare them d Hereticks , who think otherwise ; and Command , that no Priest shall administer it in both kinds to any Lay-man , under pain of e Excommunication . By the way ; it is observable , That it is Confess'd by our Adversaries f Lindanus , Cardinal g Bona , &c. ) that the whole Church of God ( Lay and Clergy ) for about One thousand two hundred years , Received in both kinds , even the Church of Rome her self : And after that , in h Aquinas his time , it was but in some i Churches , that the Cup was deny'd to the Laity . The sum is this ; He who acts in Opposition and Contradiction to our blessed Saviour's Commands in the Gospel , abrogates them , ( so much as in him lies ) calls them Hereticks , and Excommunicates those who obey them , and Incourages those who disobey Christ , and obey him ; he ( I say ) is an Adversary to Christ and Antichrist . But ( by the Premisses ) it appears , that the Pope does all this , more signally in taking away the Cup in the Eucharist then any ( who pretends to be a Christian ) in the whole World ; Ergo , he is Antichrist . 2. The next Instance whereby it may appear , that the Pope is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , an Adversary to our blessed Saviour , and so has one Character of Antichrist , is this ; St. Paul in his Epistle to the l Corinthians , tells them , ( and he says they are the m Commandments of Christ he writes ) 1. That it is the Commandment of our blessed Saviour , that in their Assemblies all things be done to n Edification . 2. That speaking in an unknown Tongue , does not o Edify or p Profit the Church to which he speaks ; q because they understand not what he says . 3. He absolutely forbids all speaking in their Assemblies ( if there be none to Interpret ) in any r unknown Tongue . Now whether the Pope be not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , an Adversary to Christ , let the Reader Judge , by that which follows . Our blessed Saviour expresly Commands , that in the Assemblies of Christians all things should be in a Tongue understood by the People , for their Edification , ( and the Apostle thinks it s madness to do otherwise ) that they might know his Precepts and gracious Promises ; and so their Duty , and Incouragements to do it . But the Pope ( as all know ) in Contradiction to this , absolutely forbids what our blessed Saviour expresly Commands ; and prohibits all Publick Prayers in any Vulgar Tongue ; nay , the printing , reading , or having their own t Roman Missal in French u , into which it was faithfully Translated , ( not by any Hereticks , but by good Roman Catholicks ) . This evidently appears by the Authentick Bull of Pope Alexander the Seventh , and some of his words cited in the Margent . And he there tells us , That the Translators and Publishers of that Missal , were Studiers of Novelties , to the x ruin of Souls ; Contemners of the Sanctions and Practise of the Church ; and that they were Sons of Perdition . But in this , I think his Holiness was not well advised . For if the Apostles y Character of Antichrist be true , he himself has a better claim to that Title , and really is ( what he calls them ) The Son of Perdition . What they say in Answer to St. Paul , and the clear Texts against all praying to , or praising God in an unknown Tongue , is most Irrational , and Indeed Impertinent . It is not my Business or Intention ( in this place and time ) particularly to Examine it ; but refer the Reader to their z Learned Writers for their Latin Prayers , where he may see what they say ; and if he be Intelligent , and an Impartial Seeker , and Lover of Truth , he will find that St. Paul Condemns all Prayers to , and Praises of God in an unknown Tongue . Sure I am , a very Learned Sorbon Doctor in his a Notes on that place in St. Paul ( convinc'd with the Evidence of the Text and Truth ) does acknowledge it , and explains St. Paul as I have done . If they damn and burn their own Offices in any Vulgar Tongue , ( which deserve to be burnt for many other better Reasons ) we may easily guess ( when they have power to do it , which I pray and hope they never will ) what they will do with ours . 3. But that which is the highest and most evident Instance , that the Pope is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , an Adversary and Enemy to our blessed Saviour Christ , and true Christianity , is ; That whereas the Gospel was writ to be read and studied ( by all who had ability ) as the great means of their Salvation ; and accordingly was Translated into all Christian Languages , and all permitted to have and read it ; that they might ( for their direction and comfort ) know the holy Precepts , and gracious Promises contain'd in it ; and continued so to this Day in all Christian Churches ( except Rome ) and in that too , for many hundred years after Christ , while Latin was their Vulgar Tongue . But when the Impiety and Tyranny of the Bishops of Rome unhappily prevail'd , the Gospel it self , and the whole Book of God , was reckon'd amongst Damned Books ▪ and Authors , and not permitted to be b read in any Vulgar Tongue ; no not so much as any Summary or Historical Compendium of it . And further , amongst the Rules of the Index Expurgatorius , publish'd by the Command of the Trent Council , we are told , ( with great Impiety and Blasphemy ) that by permitting the Scripture to be commonly read in Vulgar Tongues , there comes c more Mischief than Bene●it . Pope Vrban the Eighth says d the very same , ( with as much Impiety as his Predecessors ) and further adds ; That all who have any prohibited Books , ( of which number it is Evident the Bible in any Vulgar Language is one ) they must bring them to the Bishop or Inquisitor , and they must Burn them presently , by the hand of the Hangman , or some such Officer , ( for I suppose they are not to do it themselves ) . And we have a late and further Instance of this Antichristi in Impiety , in a Bull of Pope Clement the Ninth . The New Testament ( as appears by the Bull ) was Translated into French , and Printed at Lions ; The Pope ( Animus meminisse horret ) e Damns and prohibits it , under the very Name , The New Testament of our Lord Jesus Christ ; and Excommunicates all , of what dignity soever , who shall print , sell , read , or have it ; and Commands ( under pain of Excommunication ) that they who have it , bring it to the Ordinary or f Inquisitors ; and what they must do , with it , the Bull of Vrban the Eighth , ( but now Cited ) will tell you ; they must burn it , and ( as a damned Book ) abolish it . So Clement the Ninth Commands the g Roman Ritual in French , to be burnt . But that which makes their Error and Impiety more evident , is ; That even then and there , where they absolutely prohibit the Gospel in any Vulgar Tongue , and Damn it to the Fire , they permit the h the Turkish Alcaron in a Vulgar Tongue , with leave had from the Inquisitors , who yet could give no leave to any ( as appears before by the Rules of their Expurgatory i Index ) to have the Gospel , or any part of it , in any Vulgar Tongue . Prodigious Impiety ! The Turkish Alcoran ( the contrivance of a Monstrous Impostor , and Enemy to Christ and Christianity ) is permitted ; and the Gospel of our blessed Saviour is absolutely prohibited and damn'd . And though in doing this , they Act very Impiously , yet ( in their Generation and Circumstances ) very wisely . For neither the Alcoran , nor any Book in the World , is so fatal to their miscall'd Catholick Religion , as ( when truly understood and believ'd ) the Bible . That Book evidently discovers , and condemns their Errors ; and therefore they are concern'd to keep it from the People , least they should find ( as by that Divine Light they easily might ) and forsake their Errors . The Premisses consider'd , let the Reader judge , Whether the Pope have not this Mark of the Beast , and Character of Antichrist , that he is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Adversary of Christ , and that Religion Establish'd by him ; who prohibits the having and reading ( and so the Understanding ) of the Gospel , Damns it to the Fire , and burns it ; and yet at the same time permits the Alcaron . 3. Another Characteristical Note or Mark of Antichrist given by St. Paul , is ; That he Exalts himself above all that is called God , or Worshipped ; So our English Translation ; so their Authentick Vulgar k Latin ; and their own Learned l Commentators justifie it . The word in the Text properly m signifying , Id quod Colitur , any thing or Person , which is the Object of Honour and Veneration . So that thus far we are agreed , That Antichrist will Exalt himself above all that is called God , ( as all Magistrates Subordinate and Supream , Kings and Emperors in Scripture are ) or worshipped . This then ( in Thesi ) being granted ; we must next ( in Hypothesi ) Inquire , Whether this Characteristical Note and Mark of Antichrist , may be truly affirm'd of the Pope , and be really found in him ? In Answer to which Query , I say ; I hope it may , and does appear by the Premisses , That the Pope does Exalt himself , far above all Kings and Emperors , more then any man in the World ever did , or ( Antichrist excepted ) ever will ; and therefore I shall only add two or three things in Confirmation of the Premisses . 1. Then , his Favourers and Flatterers give him ( and he approves and assumes it ) The n Title of Emperor of the Vniverse . Upon this account , That the Pope is Emperor of the Vniverse , of the whole World ; it follows , That all Kings and Emperors are his Subjects , and he their Supream Lord and Sovereign , and so , far greater in Power , then any one , or all of them together . And least we should mistake , and undervalue his Papal Greatness ; Pope Innocent the Third told the Emperor of Constantinople , ( and has told us in the Body of their approved and received Law ) That the Pope is as much greater then the Emperor , as the o Sun is greater then the Moon . And here the Author of the Gloss , ( Bernardus de Botono , a great Lawyer , but no good Astronmer ) tells us , That the Sun is 47. times greater then the Moon ; and so ( by that Computation ) the Pope is 47. times greater then the Emperor . This is pretty well , and gives so vast a Magnitude to the Pope above the Emperor , that a man would think it might satisfie his Ambition , so that he needed not ask , nor his greatest Flatterers give him more . Yet they do give much more . For in a Marginal Note on the said Chapter , ( in their most p Correct Editions of their Law ) we are told , That the Sun is greater then the Moon , Quinquagies Septies , 57. times ; and so the Pope so much greater then the Emperor . But this is not all . Laurentius ( a Canonist ) in the same q place , tells us ; That it is evident , that the Sun is 7744 ½ greater then the Moon ; and so the Pope ( omitting the Fraction ) Seaven thousand , seaven hundred , and forty four times greater then the Emperor . This is so prodigiously erroneous and impious , as none , save their most Holy and Infallible Guide , could be guilty of such Error and Impiety . But a Learned Roman r Catholick ( who understood Astronomy , and the Magnitude of the Sun , ( much better then the Pope , or his Parasites ) seriously tells us , that the Sun is greater then the Moon . 6539. times . And so by the Popes Logick and Decretal Definition , and the Computation of his best Artists , he must be . 6539. times greater then the Emperor . Monstrous Pride and Ignorance ! which is so far from proving him to be our blessed Saviours Vicar , that it evidently proves him , to be that s Man of Sin , the great Antichrist , who exalts himself ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) above all Kings and Emperors . Certainly Antichrist cannot exalt himself more , then to declare to the World , ( as the Pope here does ) in his Publick Laws and Constitutions , that he is . 6539. times greater then any King or Emperor . So that although St. t Paul , and u Peter too , acknowledged the Emperors Power Supream , and required that all men ( even the Pope if he were a man ) should conscienciously obey them ; though St. Paul x appeal ( not to Peter , but ) to Caesar , as Supream : Though Athanasius say , That there lay no y Appeal from the Emperor , but to God ; and though z Tertullian say , That the Emperor was , Solo Deo minor ; and the Bishops of Rome , for almost One thousand years after our blessed Saviour , acknowledged the Emperors their Sovereign Lords , yet Hildebrand and his Successors , have ( as above ) exalted themselves far above all that is call'd God , and have that indelible Character of Antichrist . Q. E. D. 2. And they further say , That this Vniversal Monarchy is given him by God himself ; and so he has it , ( not by any Human Right or Injust Usurpation , but Jure Divino ) by the Law of God , and a Right derived from him ; and this is said , not once only , nor by any private a Person , ( whose Authority might be question'd ) but many times in their Authentick Roman b Breviary , restored according to the c Decree of the Council of Trent , and revised and publish'd by the Authority and Command of d three Popes successively ; so that we may be sure they approve it . That Breviary has it thus , ( speaking of Peter ) — Thou art Prince of the Apostles ; And God hath Given Thee All the Kingdoms of the World. These are the words of that Authentick Breviary , approved and confirm'd by the Authority of those three Popes before mentioned , ( as appears by their Bull prefix'd to the Edition ) and is now in publick use in their Church . So that he Exalts himself , as Universal Monarch , over all the Kings and Kingdoms in the World ; and that ( as he impiously pretends ) by a Divine Right , and the Donation of God himself ; And hence it is , That not only the Canonists ( the constant and great Parasites of the Pope ) but even the Learned Divines of the Roman Church , give the Pope ( and he Approves and Assumes ) such Extravagant and Blasphemous Titles , as none but the Man of Sin , who Exalts himself above all that is called God , would approve . To pass by many hundreds of the like nature , I shall Instance only in one . Stapleton ( an English man , and a very Learned Professor of Divinity at Doway , in his Dedicatory Epistle to Pope Gregory the Thirteenth , calls that Pope e — The Highest Top and Prince of the Catholick Church , The Master of the whole World , and on Earth The Supream God or Deity . Certainly , ●he who approves and admits such Titles to be given him , Exalts himself above all that is called God , and so has the Character of Antichrist mention'd by the Apostle , 2 Thess. 2. 4. And here ( though I intended it not ) I shall crave leave to add two or three Passages more , which casually come in my way and memory , and are very pertinent to our present purpose . 1. The Gloss on their f Canon Law tells us , That the Pope is neither God nor Man , but something more then Man. And though this Impious and Blasphemous Gloss was g Censured to be left out , by the Master of the Sacred Pallace . Yet h Clement the Eighth thought otherwise ; and those words are still in the best Edition of the i Canon Law ; only with this Note in the Margent , Haec verba sunt sano modo intelligenda , pr●lata enim sunt , ad Ostendendum Amplissimam Pontificis Rom. Potestatem . But this Gloss is something modest , though it make the Pope more then Man ; and being in Verse , may have some Poetical Licence allow'd . 2. But another Gloss in plain Prose expresly says , That it is k our Lord God the Pope . For although in some l Old Editions of the Canon Law , it was only Our Lord the Pope ; yet now in the most m Correct Editions of that Law , confirmed by Gregory the Thirteenth , it is ( without any Qualification in the Margent ) our Lord God the Pope . 3. And to make the Blasphemy full , and evidently Antichristian , Ant. Puccius in an Oration made by him in their General Lateran Council , speaking to Pope Leo the Tenth , says , n That the Rayes of His Divine Majesty did dazle his Eyes . Impious and Antichristian Pride and Blasphemy ! yet approved at Rome , and by themselves ( to their shame ) published to the World. Nor is this all : He pretends to , and assumes an Infallibility , and that of so high a Nature , that all his Definitions and Determinations of Doubts ( whether è Cathedrâ or not ; whether in a General Council , or out of it ; to be the Word of God. So a Learned Popish o Author tells us ; That the Word of God is threefold ; 1. His written Word , the Scriptures : 2. His unwritten Word , Traditions : 3. His explained or declared Word ; when Scripture or Traditions are declared and explained by the Pope ; whether in or out of a Council . And he says ; p That this Last word of God , ( the Popes Definitions and Explications ) is the most approved , and most men do with greater pleasure acquiesce in it . Though this be much , yet not all . For the Pope does not only pretend to , and assume to himself an Universal Monarchy , over all the Kingdoms of the World ; but such an Absolute Power to dispose of them ; that he can ( parte inconsultâ ) give away Kingdoms ( pro Arbitrio ) to whom he pleases . A Memorable , and ( for Papal Pride and Injustice ) a Prodigious Instance we have of this , in Pope Alexander the Sixth , who at one Clap , gave to q Ferdinand and Elizabeth , ( King and Queen of Castile ) and their Heirs for ever , All the West-Indies , from Pole to Pole , and all the Isles about them ( which lay One hundred Leagues Westward from Cape Verd , and the Azores ) with all their Dominions , Cities , Castles , Villages , all the Rights and Jurisdictions belonging to them . And this , he says , he gives , of his own meer Liberality , by Power deriv'd from Peter , and as Vicar of Christ. Then he Excommunicates all of what degree soever , Kings and r Emperors ( by name ) who shall dare to trade into the West-Indies ( given to Ferdinand by him ) without the leave and licence of the said Ferdinand . Here we see , the Pope gives away almost half the World , from the true Owners , Causa incognita , inaudita , indicta ; the Persons and their Quality being utterly unknown to him . If it be said , They were Pagan Idolaters : Grant that . Yet , 1. What they all were , he neither did , nor could know . 2. If they really were such , ( as probably they were ) yet dominium non fundatur in gratiâ ; a Pagan and Idolater may ( jure naturae ) have as just a Temporal Right to his Estate , as a Christian. Caesar was a Pagan in our blessed Saviours time ; and yet he Commands them to s give to Caesar the things which were Caesars . Some things were Caesars in which he had a propriety , and to which he had a right , and his Subjects an Obligation to pay him tribute , and other things t due to him . But I hope this will not be deny'd : For if none , but pious men , and true Christians have any just Right to what they possess , it will ( I fear ) go hard with his Holyness , and he will have no Propriety in St. Peters Patrimony , or any other thing he does possess . And therefore ( if he Impartially consider it ) he may find some reason , if not for Truths sake ( which with him is not always a prevailing Motive ) yet for his own , to be ( in this ) of my opinion : By the Premisses , I hope it may , and does appear , That the Pope Exalts himself above all that is called God , or worshipped ; and so really has the Characteristical Note and Mark of the Beast , that Man of Sin , and is indeed that great Antichrist described and foretold in Scripture . 4. Nor am I singular in this Opinion ; many Excellent Persons ( both for Learning and Piety ) have said as much : and some have given us a Catalogue of their u Testimonies . I shall say nothing of the Fathers ; many of which make Rome Babylon in the Revelation , some of them I have Cited before , and Schardius ( in the Place last Quoted ) has more . Nor shall I say any thing of the poor persecuted Waldenses and Wiclisists , or the Reformed Churches since Luther ; who both believ'd and constantly affirm'd and prov'd the Pope to be Antichrist ; especially the Church of England , as appears , both by her ablest Writers , and her Authentick x Homilies , confirmed by the Kings Supream Authority in Convocations and Parliaments . Omitting all these ( which yet were abundantly sufficient to shew , that I am not singular in this Opinion ) I shall only ( of very many more ) give a few Evident Instances and Testimonies of those who lived and died in the Communion of the Church of Rome . And here 1. The Emperor Frederick the Second , in a Letter to the King of France , complaining of the Prodigious Pride and Tyranny of the Pope , and his Impious Practices to divide the Empire , and ruin him ; he says , That he Indeavour'd to build the y Tower of Babylon against him . And that we may know what and whom he meant by Babylon , in another Epistle to the King and Nobility of France ; he Complains of the horrid Injuries and Injustice done him by the Pope and his Party ; he calls them z the Elders of Babylon , &c. 2. A faithful Historian ( speaking of Pope Hildebrand , or Gregory the Seaventh , and his Prodigious Tyranny and Impiety ) tells us , a That in those times , Most Men , both Privately and Publickly , curs'd Hildebrand , call'd him Antichrist : that under the Name and Title of Christ , he did the work of Antichrist ; that he sat in Babylon , in the Temple of God ; and ( as if he had been a God ) Exalted himself above all that is worshipped , &c. And much more to the same purpose ; abundantly Testify'd by the Historians of those times , who were neither Lutherans , nor ( by the Roman Church ) then reputed Hereticks . And afterward ( speaking of the same Hildebrand ) we are told — b That he laid the Foundation of the Kingdom of Antichrist One hundred and seaventy years before that time ( when that was said ) under a colour and shew of Religion ; He begun the War with the Emperor , which his Successors continued to that Day , ( till the time of Friderick the Second , and Pope Gregory the Ninth ) where we have many things more , concerning the Prodigious Pride , Impiety , and Tyranny of the Pope , to prove that he was Antichrist . The same Historian also tells us ; That almost All Good , Just , and c Honest Men did in their Writings publish to the World , that the Empire of Antichrist begun about that time , ( the time of Hildebrand he means ) because they Saw those things then come to pass , which were foretold long before . 3. But this is not all . We have further Testimonies of this Truth . 1. Robert Grosthead , who ( both for Learning and Piety ) was Inferior to none in his Age : He ( on his Death-bed ) having spoke of many horrid Enormities of Rome , and loss of Souls by Papal Avarice ; he adds — d Is not such a one deservedly call'd Antichrist ? Is not a Destroyer of Souls ( the Pope he means ) an e Enemy of God and Antichrist ? And after a long List of Papal Tyranny and Impieties , he calls Rome Egypt ; ( so Saint John calls it f Spiritually Sodom and Egypt ) and concludes that the g Church will never be deliver'd from that Egyptian Servitude , but by the Sword. 2. Nor is this all : we have great Councils of whole Nations , in their Publick Edicts and Constitutions , expresly declaring the Pope , to be that Antichrist , who Exalts himself above all that is called God. We have a Publick Edict , published by Ludovicus Bavarus Emperor , and his Counsel ; wherein Pope John the Two and twentieth is call'd h Antichrist , the Disturber of the Peace of Christendom , and the Bishops and Clergy who adhered to him , Messingers of Antichrist . And not long after , the same Emperor , in a Diet or Counsel of the Bishops and Nobility of Germany and Italy too , and with their joynt Consent , publishes an Edict , in the Year 1328. wherein we have a long Catalogue of the Prodigious Impieties and Tyranny of the Pope , and then and there they call him — i A Personated Pastor , ( one who would seem to be a Pastor of the Church ) but was indeed , That Mystical Antichrist . And in the same great Counsel , they publish another Imperial Decree or Constitution , wherein having set down that Character of k Antichrist , That he should Exalt himself above all that is called God , or worshipped , and assume a Power and Domination over the whole World : They add , That by many l Experiments , they saw these Predictions , come to pass , and ( unless they were as stupid as Asses ) they must be sensible of them ; And then m Declare , That all who adhere to , and follow the Pope , are Antichristians , and He Antichrist . I know that the Roman n Inquisitors have call'd Aventine , Author damatus , an Author damn'd by them ; and have noted all these places , I have Cited , to be Expunged ; ( I have the Inquisitors own Book , wherein all the Places in Aventine are to that purpose , Vncis inclusi , and to be left out in all following Editions of Aventine ) . But the World knows , that they have ( with great Impieties and Impudence ) corrupted thousands of Authors , putting out whatever makes against their Errors , and putting in , what makes the Author say , what he never meant . But their damnation of what Aventine says , out of the Imperial Constitutions , is no refutation of it ; nor are those things untrue because they would have them Expunged : as the Second Commandment is no less Divine , and a part of the Decalogue , because they leave it out . But enough of this ; The Case is too plain , to need more proof . But some say , That Antichrist is not yet come ; nor will come till towards the end of the World. And o Bellarmin says , That this is the Opinion of Catholicks . And some Learned Protestants ( as Grotius and Doctor Hammond ) say , That Antichrist is both come , and gone , 1600. years ago . For Caius Caligula ( Grotius his Antichrist ) died p Anno Christi , 43. And Simon Magus ( who by Dr. Hammond is supposed to be Antichrist ) died q Anno Christi , 68. So that both Caius and Simon Magus , ( who are their supposed Antichrists ) are dead above a thousand six hundred years ago . Whence it will follow , That the Pope neither is , nor ever was , or can be Antichrist . For if either Caius the Emperor , or Simon Magus were then , when they lived , Antichrist , then the Pope was not ; ( neither of them being Bishop of Rome ) and both of them being ( so many Ages since ) dead ; the Pope neither is , nor ever can be Antichrist , unless you will have two great Antichrists ; which no man yet ever did , or ( with any Reason or Sense ) can say . In Answer to this , I shall say a few things : And , 1. For Bellarmine ( who says , That the Catholick Opinion is , That Antichrist is not yet come ) I confess he , and all his Party are highly concern'd to say so . For if Antichrist be Actually come , then the Pope must be that Man of Sin ; He ( and none in the World but he ) having all the Characters and Marks of Antichrist mention'd in Scripture , so plain , that he who runs may read them . 2. Though Bellarmine say , 'T is the Catholick Opinion , that Antichrist is not yet come ; yet it evidently appears ( by the many Authentick Testimonies before Cited , and the Authors were Papists ) That Antichrist is come Six hundred years ago , and that the Pope was he , Plerique Omnes Boni , &c. ( says the Historian before Cited ) Most Good Men believed Rome to be Babylon , and the Pope Antichrist . 3. Bellarmine r Cites one , ( and he Bishop of Florence ) whose s Opinion was , That Antichrist was then come , ( almost t Six hundred years ago ) and was severely rebuked for it by Pope Paschal the Second , in a Synod call'd by him at Florence . But Bellarmine might have named Five hundred more , ( which he wisely conceal'd , because they were against him ; and he neither had , nor could have any just Answer to so many , and so evident Testimonies ) I shall only add ( besides those before mention'd ) one signal Testimony more , to shew , That even at Rome it self , it was believ'd , that Antichrist should come in the end of the Tenth Century . I have seen ( and the Book , if any desire it , is still to be u seen ) a very Ancient and Excellent MS. Missal , belonging anciently to the Church and City of Rome , ( for there are some particular Services in it , to be said in some of the chief Churches in Rome ) In this MS. Missal , in the beginning of it , there is a Chronological Table , in which ( amongst other things ) we are told , That à Christo ad Antichristum sunt Anni . 999. So that it was believ'd then at Rome , that Antichrist should come in the last year of the tenth Century : and if he did so , ( and so it was believed then ) Sylvester the Second ( a Prodigious x Villain was then Pope , who was a famous ( or rather infamous ) Magician , and obtain'd the Popedom by the help of the Devil , as their own Platina , and Johan . Stella tell us . I know their Writers and the Popes Parasites since Luther , do ( but without any just reason ) question the truth of what Platina , Stella , and others more ancient have said of this Sylvester ; so y Onuphrius , Papirius z Massonus , and others ; who against Truth , and the Faith of all former Historians , indeavour ( Aethiopen lavare ) to quit Sylvester of all these Crimes , and make him ( what he was not ) an Excellent Person . 2. For a Grotius , who would have Caius Caligula to be Antichrist , and Dr. Hammond , who thinks , that Simon b Magus and his Gnosticks better deserv'd that Name : I confess they were very Learned and Worthy men , but men ; and had ( as the best have ) their Errors . Optimus ille non qui nullis , sed minimis urgetur . Certainly it is as lawful for me ( and not more immodestly ) to contradict them , as it was for them to contradict all ( Ancient and Modern ) who ever writ on those Passages in the Second to the Thessalonians , conconcerning Antichrist . I had , and have great respect and reverence for their Persons , and Memory , but more for Truth ; and therefore , the Apology of Aristotle ( concerning the Errors of his Master Plato ) may , and shall be mine . Amicus Plato , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . He ( whoever he be ) who out of Reverence and Respect to any men ( how great soever ) either imbraces , or ( when he knows them ) conceals their Errors , wants Charity to himself , and others ; who possibly ( if he had not conceal'd them ) might have avoided those Errors , and gain'd the knowledge of Truth . In short then , I consider 1. That it is evident in the Apostle , that Antichrist was not come when St. Paul writ that Epistle ; for he tells them , c That an Apostacy must first come , and that which hindred the Appearing of Antichrist , must be taken out of the way , ( neither of which was done , when he writ that Epistle ) Grotius saw this , and therefore ( unless he would Contradict Truth and the Apostle ) he could not make Caius Antichrist , unless the Epistle were so dated , that it was writ before Caius appear'd . For this purpose , he tells us , That Paul writ the Epistle , Anno d Christi , 38. or , 40. in the Second year of Caius Caligula ; and ( he says ) that although Caius was Emperor before St. Paul writ this Epistle , yet his Impiety did not appear till afterwards ; He in the beginning of his Reign carrying himself like a good Prince . So that the main Hinge on which Grotius his Opinion turns , is this date of Paul's Epistle : For if it was not writ before Caius appeared , ( or the year , 40. ) then 't is evident that Caius cannot be Antichrist , nor Grotius his Hypothesis true . Now that this Epistle was writ in the Second year of Caius Caligula ( which Grotius affirms ) is so far from being true , that ( by the Judgment and Consent of the most Learned Chronologers ( Papists and Protestants ) it was writ at least Seaven or Eight years after Caius was dead . Such , I mean , as the late Lord Primate of Ireland Dr. e Vsher , f Baronius , g Simpson , h A Lapide , i Calvisius , &c. all of which Authors ( and many more ) say , and prove , that it could not be writ before the year of Christ , 50. and some of them , that it was writ Anno Christi , 53. or , 54. So that the Learned Primate of Ireland ( Second to none in Exactness in Chronology ) speaking of Grotius his date of this Epistle , says , k That Grotius erred exceedingly , when he said this Epistle was writ in the time of Caius Caligula . 2. But that it may evidently appear , that St. Paul did not write this Second Epistle to the Thessalonians Anno Christi . 40. ( as Grotius says ) but at least Ten or Eleven years after ; let it be consider'd , 1. That it is a received Truth , that Paul was Converted Anno Christi . 34. 2. 'T is certain in the Text , that Paul had been at l Thess alonica , before he writ his First Epistle to them . The Query then will be , When he came to Thessalonica : For if he had not been there , before the year 40. Grotius his Hypothesis will be evidently untrue . And that he was not , will appear from that Account Scripture gives of him , after his Conversion ; Thus , 1. He himself tells us , that immediately after his Conversion , he m went into Arabia , and returned to Damascus ; And then n after three years , he went to Jerusalem ( which was Anno Christ. 37. and o fourteen years after , he and Barnabas went up to Jerusalem ( Anno Christ. 51. ) 2. He and Barnabas ( sent from Antioch ) went to Jerusalem , and were at the p Council of the Apostles there ; which Council was held , Anno Christ. 47. says q Simpson ; Ann. 48. as the r Magdeburgenses think ; Ann. 50. says s Helvicus ; Ann. 51. so t Baronius , u Funccius , x A Lapide , y Bellarmine , &c. Anno Christ. 52. says z Archbishop Vsher. Now let the Council be held which of these years you please , it will utterly overthrow Grotius his Hypothesis . For , 3. It is evident in the Text , that Paul at the time of that Synod , had not been at Thessalonica , and so had writ no Epistle to them ; seeing he says , a that he had been with them before he writ his First Epistle . That he had not been at Thessalonica at or before the time of the Council , appears by what Luke says of him after the Synod : who tells us , that he went to b Antioch ; then through c Syria and Cilicia ; then to d Derbe and Lystra , Circumcised Timothy , and took him along with him . Then he went through e Phrigia , Galatia , and Mysia , and so to Troas . And ( in a Vision ) being call'd to f Macedonia , he went to Neapolis and Philippi : and having pass'd through Amphipolis and Apollonia , he came to g Thessalonica ( the first time he ever was there ; but , as yet , had never writ to them . Thence he went to h Berea , i Athens , and k Corinth ; At Corinth , Aquila and Priscilla ( banish'd from Rome , as all Jews were , by Claudius ) came to him : and this was the Ninth year of Claudius , ( that is , Anno Christ. 51. ) as Josephus , Orosius , Baronius , and all Chronologers testifie , as a very Learned l Historian tells me : And he himself confesses , that Paul came into Greece m Anno Claudij . 9. that is , Anno Christ. 51. And yet Paul had writ no Epistle to the Thessalonians , till Timothy ( whom he left at Thessalonica ) came to him into n Greece , ( as he himself tells us ) so that by the Premisses , I think it may , and does appear , that the First Epistle to the Thessalonians , was not only writ after the Synod of the Apostles , Act. 15. but after Paul had pass'd through and preach'd in all those Countries before mention'd , after he had been at Thessalonica , left Timothy there , came into Greece , met Aquila and Priscilla come from Rome , ( which was Anno Christ. 51. ) and Timothy was returned to him ; then ( and not till then ) he writ his First Epistle to the Thessalonians ; and therefore it is impossible Caius Caligula should be Antichrist ; who was not come ( as o St. Paul tells us ) when he writ his Second Epistle , who yet was come and dead , at least Seaven or Eight years before he writ the first . 3. And Dr. Hammond confirms what I have said ; who grants , that the Second Epistle to the p Thessalonians was writ Anno Christ. 51. which was at least Seaven or Eight years after Caius ( Grotius his Antichrist ) was q dead and gone . So that ( by r Dr. Hammond's Principles ) Gretius his Hypothesis is utterly overthrown , and Caius the Emperor cannot possibly be that Antichrist St. Paul speaks of ; who was not come , when he writ that Epistle . 2. And by the same . Principles , Dr. Hammond has evidently Confuted his own Opinion , and Excluded Simon Magus from all possibility of being Antichrist . For that Doctor expresly affirms two things ; 1. That the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians , was writ , in the year of our blessed Saviour , 51. 2. That then Antichrist ( when that Epistle was writ ) was not come or reveal'd : which two things being granted , ( as they must , for the Doctor says the one , and the Apostle the other ) it evidently follows , that Simon Magus neither was , nor could be that Antichrist the Apostle speaks of in that Epistle . For it is certain , that Simon Magus was come , and his Heresie and Prodigious Impiety discovered many years before . For , 1. It is certain , that when Peter and John were sent to s Samaria , they met Simon Magus there ; who though he had been t baptiz'd by Philip the Deacon , was no better for it , and Impiously offer'd u Money to purchase Power to give the Holy Ghost ; Peter ( cursing both x him and his Money ) told him , That he was in the y Gall of Bitterness , and the Bond of Iniquity . 2. Now this was done , in the year of our blessed Saviour z 35. which was Fifteen or Sixteen years before , the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians was writ , or Antichrist come and revealed , ( according to Dr. Hammond's own Computation ) And therefore it is impossible that Simon Magus should be that Antichrist , the Apostle speaks of . For that from the year . 35. till after . 51. ( for Sixteen years together ) he should not discover , but conceal his Impiety , ( who was a Magician and an Impious Villain before , and then declared by Peter , to be in the Gall of Bitterness , and Bond of Iniquity ) is utterly Incredible . Sure I am , that a Baronius and b Nicephorus , ( to name no more ) tell us , That after the Apostles were gone from Samaria , Simon Magus set himself against our blessed Saviour and his Apostles , ( whom he thought only better Conjurers then himself ) and by his Magick and Diabolical Arts seduced many Samaritans and Jews , and made them believe that he was the Son of God , &c. So far was he from Concealing his Impiety , till after the writing of that Second Epistle to the Thessalonians , and the year . 51. That by all the Magick and Malice he had , he publickly seduc'd both Jews and Gentiles , long before that time ; and so could not be that great Antichrist St. Paul speaks of . 2. But I neither shall , nor need bring any further proof of this Particular , ( that Simon Magus had before the year . 51. discovered himself to be an Adversary to our blessed Saviour , and his Apostles and Christianity ) because Dr. Hammond himself ( though in Contradiction and Evident Confutation of his own Hypothesis ) doth both Confess , and ex professo , prove it . For he tells us — c That after he was baptiz'd , Act. 8. he went on in his way of deceiving the People by Sorceries , as appears , by his desiring to buy the Power of working Miracles from the Apostles , and being deny'd that , Soon after he set up , and opposed himself against Christ , and accordingly is here call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Adversary , &c. where Dr. Hammond tells us , That soon after Simon ' s being with the Apostles at Samaria , he discovered himself to be an Adversary to Christ , our blessed Saviour . Now 't is certain , that his meeting the Apostles at Samaria , was Anno d Christ. 35. and so ( by Dr. Hammond's Computation , who says that Epistle ( the Second to the Thessalonians ) was writ Ann. 51. that is , Fifteen or Sixteen years before Antichrist came , and therefore it is impossible Simon should be that Antichrist Paul speaks of , who was not come when he writ that Epistle , unless you will say , ( which is highly irrational ) that Antichrist came Fifteen or Sixteen years , before St. Paul says he was to come . 3. Nor is this all ; for the same Learned and Reverend e Doctor tells us , out of f Eusebius ; That Simon Magus came to Rome , in the Beginning of Claudius his Reign ; where he did such Miracles by the help of the Devil , that he was taken for a God , and had a Statue erected for him . And almost all the Samiritans , and some of other Nations confess'd him to be the first and principal God , and worshipped him with all sorts of Sacrifices , &c. These are his words ; by which it is Evident ( in the Doctors Opinion ) that Simon was at Rome , In the Beginning of Claudius his Reign , and sufficiently revealed to be an Adversary to our blessed Saviour and the Gospel , and prevailed so far , that ( as g Hierome tells us ) Peter went to Rome , Anno Claudij . 2. ( which was Anno Christ. 44. ) to oppose Simon and defend the Gospel . Now all know , that Claudius began his Reign , Anno h Christ. 43. which was at least Seaven or Eight years ( in Dr. Hammond's own Computation ) before the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians was writ , or Antichrist come ; And therefore Simon Magus could not be that Antichrist Paul speaks of , who was not come or reveal'd , when that Epistle was writ ; whereas Simon was both come and reveal'd some years before . 3. Many things are said of Antichrist in Scripture , which cannot be applied to Caius , or Simon Magus , with any truth or probability . 1. Antichrist was ( by usurpation ) to have a Supream Power and Authority , ( as our i Adversaries confess ) and should make war with , and persecute the Servants of Christ , and ( as to killing the Body ) overcome k them , till he was drunk l ●ith the Blood of the Saints . This neither Caius nor Simon Magus did . Caius ( though he had a Supream Power ) was no persecutor of Christians ; much less so far , as to be drunk with their Blood. Nero m was the first Roman Emperor who persecuted Christians ; three and twenty years after Caius n was deed : And as for Simon Magus ( a despicable and beggarly Magician ) he never had any Power of the Sword , nor ever did , or could make War against the Christians , much less overcome them , and be drunk with their blood . 2. But ( that I may not trouble the Reader , nor my self , with any more Particulars ) I say ( and think it an Evident Truth ) that there is nothing said in Scripture , or in the Works of the Fathers , or in any Writings of Ecclesiastical Authors , for Sixteen hundred years after our blessed Saviour , from which it may but probably be concluded , that Caius the Emperor , or Simon Magus , was that great Antichrist mention'd by St. Paul and St. John ; But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on the contrary , it does appear both by Scripture and the Consent of Christendom , for Sixteen hundred years , that neither of the two was , or possibly could be that great Antichrist . For , 1. It does appear ( by what is above said ) that what St. Paul says of Antichrist , 2. Thess. 2. cannot be meant of Caius or Simon Magus ; because St. Paul in that place says expresly , that when he writ that Epistle , the Man of Sin , and Son of Perdition was not come and reveal'd . And yet that Epistle being writ ( as Dr. Hammond Confesseth ) Anno Christ. 51. Caius was both come and dead at least Seaven or Eight years before the year . 51. and therefore could not possibly be that Antichrist who was not come till after it . And for Simon Magus , he was ( as Dr. Hammond grants and proves ) both come and reveal'd as many years ( as Caius was dead ) before St. Paul writ that Epistle ; and consequently before Antichrist was come or revealed . And so he ( who was come and reveal'd ) could not be that Antichrist , who ( as St. Paul assures us ) was not then come or revealed . 2. St. Paul elsewhere gives us some Characters of Antichrist , and his Adherents ; as o men giving heed to seducing spirits , speaking lies in Hypocrisie , forbidding to marry , and commanding to abstain from meats , which God had created to be received , &c. Where I observe , 1. That in the former place , ( but now p spoken of ) he told the Thessalonians , that an Apostasie must precede the coming of Antichrist ; and he tells us , what kind of Apostasie it must be ; q A departing or falling from the Faith. 2. That these two Ma●ks of Antichrist ( forbidding marriage , and commanding to abstain from meats ) are such as none but the Pope can pretend to ; who so severely forbids the marriage of the Clergy ( Secular and Regular ) that it is a r greater sin ( with them ) for a Priest to marry ( though God Approves and Commands it ) in such as otherwise have not the gift of Continence ) then it is for him to commit Fornication , and keep a Concubine . Nay they say , that a Priests marriage is s Incestuous , Sacrilegious , and worse then All Adulteries . Nor is this Abominable Doctrine , the Opinion of any private Doctor only , but is approved as Orthodox , by t several Vniversities . So that in both these [ forbidding to marry , and commanding to abstain from meats ] what God in his Word expresly approves , the Pope condemns ; and what God Commands , he Impiously Contradicts ; and so evidently proves himself to be , That Man of Sin , who Exalts himself above all that is called God. 3. What the Apostle in this Epistle speaks of the Apostasie and Antichrist which followed , is not of things past or then in being , but of things to come afterwards . For he expresly says — u That in the Latter Times some should depart from the Faith , &c. Neithe Apostasie nor Antichrist were then come ; but afterwards , in the Latter times , should come . 4. Now he writ this Epistle , as some x think , Anno Christ. 54. or as some y others ( and they far more ) Ann. 57. or ( as the most Exact z Chronologer ) Anno Christ. 65. Now let my Adversaries chuse which Computation they will , for the date and time of writing this Epistle ; let it be ( if they please ) the year 54. which is furthest from Truth , yet most favourable to their Opinion . I say , admit that this first Epistle to Timothy was writ by St. Paul , Ann. 54. yet it will appear by the Premisses , 1. That Antichrist was not then come , nor revealed , because St. Paul says so . 2. And therefore , that neither Caius nor Simon Magus could be Antichrist ; Because Caius was both come and dead ten or eleven years before ; and Simon Magus was come , and his Heresie and Impieties revealed ( as Dr. Hammond grants and proves ) long before that time . 3. After a this , St. Paul speaks of this Apostasy from the Faith ; but still as of a thing not yet come , but to come in future b times ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the last times ; so that if St. Paul say true , that great Apostasie ( which was to c preceed the coming of Antichrist , was not come when he writ that Epistle , which was ( as the Learned Primate of Ireland Dr. Vsher thinks ) Anno Christ. 66. or ( as Baronius ) Anno Christ. 59. And therefore it is impossible that Caius or Simon Magus should be Antichrist , both come , and their Villanies revealed long before . 4. St. Peter writ his Second Epistle a little before his Martyrdom ; for so he himself says — d Knowing that I must shortly put off this Tabernacle , ( or that my death hastens ) now an Exact e Chronologer tells me ( and proves ) that he died Ann. 67. and writ this f Epistle Anno Christ. 66. I do know that some g say he writ it Anno Christ. 67. and Baronius says h he writ it Anno 69. But , 2. which of those years soever it was writ in , the great Apostasie ( which preceeded the coming of Antichrist ) was future and afterwards to come . So he himself tell us , i But there were false Prophets among the People , even so ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) there shall be false Teachers among you , who privily shall bring in damnable Heresies , &c. These false Prophets and the great Apostasie were ( when he writ that Epistle ) future and to come . And therefore 't is certain Caius or Simon Magus could not be Antichrist . For if it was writ in the year . 66. Caius was come , dead and gone three and twenty years before ; and Simon Magus his Heresies and Impieties publickly reveal'd and known , as is afore prov'd , even by Dr. Hammond himself . 5. In the Revelation , St. John does more fully describe Antichrist ; That k he rose out of the Sea , with seaven Heads and ten Horns , and on his Horns ten Crowns , &c. That he should make War l with the Saints , overcome them , and be drunk with their blood ; That his Seat should be m Rome , mystically , or n spiritually call'd Egypt , Sodom , and Babylon ; That ten o Kings should give their Power to that Beast , aid and assist him in his Tyranny and Impieties ; That those Kings should at last forsake him , and utterly destroy p him , and burn and utterly destroy q Babylon ( or Rome ) his Seat , never to be inhabited any more : Which is such a Description of the great Antichrist , as never can ( with any truth or probability ) be attributed to Caius Caligula or Simon Magus . 2. But that which here , I more particularly press , is , 1. That St. John in the Revelation speaks of Antichrist , ( not as past , or present , but ) as future , and yet to come , when he writ that Book ( as is evident in the Text , and is , and must be confess'd . 2. And it is as certain , and generally agreed upon , that he writ the Revelation in r Patmos ( whither he was banish'd by s Domitian ) Anno t Christ. 97. The Premisses being granted , ( as they ought and must ; being built upon better Authority , then any is , or can be for the contrary , 1. That Antichrist was future and to come , when St. John writ the Revelation . 2. That he writ it Anno Christ. 97. It will evidently follow , that it was impossible , that either Caius the Emperor , or Simon Magus , should be that great u Antichrist . Caius being dead four and fifty , and Simon x Magus nine and twenty years before St. John writ the Revelation , and so before Antichrist was to come . I know that the Reverend Dr. y Hammond indeavours to prove , that John was in Patmos , and writ the Revelation there in the time , and about the ninth year of Claudius , which was Anno Christ. 51. which was six and forty years before the time I have assigned for St. Johns being in Patmos , and writing the Revelation . Now for his Opinion , Dr. Hammond neither has , nor pretends to any Testimony of Antiquity , save only that of z Epiphanius ; who in that particular is miserably mistaken , ( as he is in many more ) as is a confess'd and prov'd by Learned men , and they such , who have a due Reverence for the Fathers , and particularly for Epiphanius . 2. That St. John should be banish'd , and write the Revelation under Claudius , ( which only Dr. Hammond and c Grotius say ( out of Epiphanius ) to give some Colour to their new and contradictory Hypothesis ) is evidently against the concurrent Sense and Testimonies of Ancient and Modern Authors . For besides Irenaeus , Clemens Alexandrinus , Eusebius , Acta Martyrij Timothei apud Photium , Hierome , and Orosius ( before Cited ) Johan . d Malela Antiochenus , e Haymo , f Arethas , Ado g Viennensis ( and many more ) constantly say ; That John was banish'd into Patmos , not by Claudius , but by Domitian , and writ his Revelation there . 3. But I shall not go about any further proof of this ; For Dr. Hammond has saved me the Labour , and confess'd it ; For it is certain from the Text , that Antipas had suffer'd Martyrdom , before John writ the Revelation ; John himself telling us h so , Thou hast not deny'd my faith , when Antipas my faithful Martyr was slain among you . So that 't is Evident , Antipas had suffer'd Martyrdom before John writ his Revelation . Now Antipas suffer'd , and was slain by Domitian , in the Second Persecution of the Christians , which was Anno Domitiani . 10. Christi . 92. So the Old Roman i Martyrology , and k Baronius assures us ; and Dr. l Hammond confesses it , That Antipas suffer'd Martyrdom under Domitian . Whence it evidently follows , That St. John speaking of Antipas his Martyrdom , as a thing past when he writ his Revelation ( and that in Domitian's time ) he could not write it in Claudius his time , who was dead m eight or nine and twenty years before Domitian came to the Empire . So that Antipas being put to death , in Domitian's time , ( as Dr. Hammond affirms ) and St. John in the Revelation , mentioning his Martyrdom as a thing past , when he writ ; 't is Evident , that he writ that Book after the death of Antipas , and so in , or after Domitian's time , and not in the time of Claudius . 6. St. John in his first n Epistle , speaks of Antichrist as then to come , when he writ that Epistle . It is the last time ( saith he ) and as you have heard that Antichrist shall come , even now there are many Antichrists , &c. Here two things ( I conceive ) are Evident ; 1. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , nunc , when St. John writ this Epistle ; there were many Antichrists ; that is , many o false Prophets and Hereticks forerunners of Antichrist , who made way for him . 2. And that the great Antichrist , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was to p come , when St. John writ . This Oecumenius , Bede , Estius , and generally all Commentators ( Ancient and Modern , Protestant and Papist ) which I have yet met with , constantly affirm . 'T is true , that when St. John says q afterward , that Antichrist was Now in the World already : they truly Explain it , that the meaning is , That he is now in the World ; Not r personally , but in respect to his Forerunners ( false Prophets and Hereticks ) who make way for him . I take it then for a certain truth , that when St. John writ this Epistle , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Antichrist , or ( as Venerable Bede calls him ) Maximus ille Antichristus , was future , and to come . And ( which is something strange ) Grotius confirms what I have said ( which makes much for mine , but little for his purpose ) For , 1. He grants , that this Text ( 1. Joh. 2. 18. ) speaks of s Antichrist , as future , and to come . For though the word here ( and cap. 4. vers . 3. ) be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; in the Present Tense , yet Grotius confesses , that it must be taken in the t future ; Veniet Antichristus , Antichrist will come . 2. He says , that amongst those many Antichrists St. John here speaks of , there shall be one u more Eminent , which he says was Barcochebas , who appeared not ( he says ) till the Emperor Adrian ' s time ( which was x long after St. John writ this Epistle ) . And he further says , ( in Confirmation of what is aforesaid ) y That the false Christs , Hereticks , and false Prophets , ( which John calls Antichrists ) do make way for that Great and Eminent Antichrist . I take it then for certain , ( and confess'd by Grotius ) that the great Antichrist was not come , when St. John writ this Epistle . The next thing to be inquired after , is , When this Epistle was writ ; for if it was writ after Caius Caligula , and Simon Magus were dead , then it will be undeniably Evident , that neither of them could be that great Antichrist , of whom St. John speaks ; who ( when he writ this Epistle ) was future , and to come . Now here it is to be considered , 1. That 't is a common and received Opinion amongst Learned men , that St. John writ this Epistle Anno z Christ. 99. or at least after a the death of Domitian ( which was Anno Christ. 95. ) So Baronius , Gavantus , Lyranus , ( in the places cited ) and many others . Now if this Computation be true , ( as in the Opinion of very many Learned men it is ) then Grotius his Antichrist ( the Emperor Caius Caligula , who died Ann Christ. 42. was dead seaven and fifty years before John writ this Epistle ; and therefore seaven and fifty years before Antichrist came ; for St. John says , he was future , and to come when he writ . And for Simon Magus ( Dr. Hammond's Antichrist ) it is b certain , he died Anno Christi 68. and so One and thirty years before Antichrist was come . 2. But be this as it will ; I shall not ( though I might ) stand upon it ; but take the Computation which both c Grotius , and Dr. d Hammond approve ; for they both agree in this , that St. John writ this Epistle a little before the destruction of Jerusalem ; and ( in the places cited ) indeavour to prove it . 2. This being granted ; it is further certain , that the Excidium Hierosolymorum , was in the second year of Vespasian ; that is , Anno Christ. 72. That this is so , e Josephus , f Eusebius , g Jac. Vsserius Armachanus , h Baronius , &c. assure us . 3. And hence it evidently follows , That both Caius Caligula and Simon Magus were dead before the year . 72. when Antichrist ( as St. John assures us ) was not come . Caligula being dead thirty , and Simon Magus four years before that time . By the Premisses ( I believe ) it may , and does appear , that in Scripture , Antichrist ( the great Antichrist ) is never spoken of , but as future and to come : and therefore it is impossible by Scripture , ( and there is no other Medium can do it ) to prove that Antichrist was come , in any part of that time in which Scripture was writ . 2. And as the Apostles believed and writ , that in their times , ( even in St. John's , who lived i longest ) Antichrist was not come . So the Fathers , and Ecclesiastical Writers after them , for about a thousand years generally , ( if not universally ) speak of Antichrist as still future , and ( in their several times ) to come . I know that some k anciently ( and wildly ) thought , that Nero was Antichrist , and as much might be said for him , as Grotius has said for Caligula ) but they said , that he was to rise again , and come Sub Seculi Finem , and Act as Antichrist . But I never yet read or heard of any , besides the Learned Grotius and Dr. Hammond , who ( in Sixteen hundred years after our blessed Saviour ) ever seriously affirm'd , that Caligula , or Simon Magus was Antichrist : The two Learned Persons ( before mention'd ) are the first , and they Contradict each other , themselves , the received Opinion of the Christian World , and gratifie Rome ; whilst they indeavour ( which neither they , nor any body else can do ) to free the Pope from being the great Antichrist . For if either Caligula , or Simon Magus ( who have been dead this Sixteen hundred years and more ) be that Antichrist , then ( unless you will have two or three such Antichrists ) The Pope is secure , and ( wrong'd by those who call him so ) miscall'd Antichrist . Sed salva res est , there is little danger from such extravagant Opinions ; they will neither be beneficial to the Pope , nor prejudicial to his Adversaries , to believe and prove him to be Antichrist . That Caligula , or Simon Magus , was that great Antichrist , none , or ( if any ) very few believe . The Reformed Churches say , that the Pope is Antichrist , and have great reason to say so : many of the Propheties , and Predictions of him in Scripture , being now actually fulfilled , and so the truth of the Prediction made Evident , and easie to be understood by the Event . On the other side the Popish Party say , that Antichrist is not yet come ; and so neither Party does believe Caligula or Simon Magus to be Antichrist ; because it is a Novel and Apocryphal Hypothesis ( take which of the two you will ) without truth or probability . Sure I am , that the Reasons those two Learned Persons bring for their Opinions , are evidently Illogical and Inconsequent . For , 1. If Grotius his proofs for Caligula , be cogent and concluding , then Dr. Hammonds for Simon Magus are Inconsequent ; and if Dr. Hammonds be Good , those of Grotius are not . Whence 't is evident , that all the proofs of the one Party , ( at least ) are Impertinent , and to prove his Position Insufficient . 2. But indeed all the Reasons they both bring , to prove their several Positions , are ( as I said ) Illogical and Inconsequent . That this may not be gratis dictum ; I say , 1. That both their proofs are built and rely upon the same ground ; they take ( not all , but ) only some of the Characters and Marks of Antichrist which the Apostles give him in Scripture . 2. They indeavor to accommodate and apply those Marks to Caligula , or Simon Magus ; and think they make it appear , that such Marks are really found in Caligula or Simon Magus . 3. And hence they Argue and Conclude thus — Such Marks of Antichrist are to be found in Caligula , or Simon Magus : Ergo , They ( the one of them at least ) are that Antichrist : Or ( which is all one ) Magus and Antichrist agree in some things ; Ergo , They are the same . 4. Now such Arguing is miserably Illogical and Inconsequent ; and no better then this — A Duck and a Goose do agree in many things ( each of them has one Head , two Legs , two Eyes , a flat Bill or Beak , and sometimes Feathers of the same colour , &c. ) Ergo , A Duck is a Goose. Or thus — Sempronius and Titius agree in many things ( they have the same Father and Mother , Romans both , born in the same Hour , ( being Twins ) bread at the same School , both good Scholars , &c. Ergo , Titius is Sempronius . The Reasons those Learned men bring to prove their several Antichrists , prove no more then those I have given ; that is , just nothing . 5. The reason of such Inconsequence , in such Arguments , is this ; Young Sophisters in the University can tell you , out l of Porphyrie , Aristotle , and their Scholiasts ) That every individual person or thing , is made up , and does consist of such Properties and Qualifications , Quorum Collectio nunquam in aliquo alio Eadem esse potest . It is certain , that a Collection of all the Properties and Qualifications which Constitute any Individual person , cannot be in any other person whomsoever ; though it is as certain , that some of them may . Now had Grotius or Dr. Hammond taken a Collection of all the Characters and Marks of Antichrist , given him in Scripture , and made it appear , that all those Marks had been really found in Caius Caligula , or Simon Magus , their proofs had been Logical and Consequent , ( This they neither did , nor could ) But their accommodation and applying only some of the Marks of the Beast , to Caius or Magus , and thence Concluding that they were Antichrist , such deductions are evidently Illogical and Inconsequent . And so much the more Inconsequent , because even those marks of Antichrist which they indeavour to prove to be really in Caligula or Simon Magus , never were in either of them , in that sense and extent , in which they were ( and since his coming are ) to be found in Antichrist . If any man censure me ( as may be some will ) for contradicting those two Learned Persons ( Dr. Hammond and Grotius ) all the Apology I shall make , ( for it needs none ) is only this ; It is as lawful for me to contradict them , in defence of evident truth ; as it was for them to contradict each other , and the Christian World , in defence of a manifest Error . 9. The Pope in this his Impious and Lying Bull , declares the Queen to be ( what he really was , and she was not ) a m Slave of Sin , a n Heretick , and a favourer of Hereticks : And then ( with a prodigious Antichristian Pride and Impiety ) pronounceth his Penal Sentence against her , of Damnation , Excommunication , Deprivation , &c. And here it is further to be observed ; 1. What this Papal Power is ( and whence he has it ) which he pretends to inable and authorize him , to sit Judge and pass such Damnatory Sentences against Princes and Supream Powers , for Heresie . 2. What that Heresie is , and who the Hereticks , who ( by the Pope ) are so severely damn'd for it . 3. What those punishments are , which they pretend they may , and actually do Inflict upon such Hereticks . 1. For the first , Pius the Fifth , in the beginning of this Impious Bull , tells us ; that this Papal Power is Divine . For he says — o That our blessed Saviour did Constitute Peter and his Successors , the Popes of Rome , Princes over all Nations , and Kingdoms , with a Plenitude of Power , to Pull up , Dissipate , and Destroy , &c. Thus he , and so others , in their Damnatory Bulls ; but with some variation ; and ( if it were possible ) in such words as are more Extravagant , Erroneous , and Impious . I shall only Instance in one ; Paulus the Fourth , who was next Predecessor ( save one ) to Pius the Fifth , who in his Bull p against Hereticks and Schismaticks and their Favourers , expresses his power to damn them , thus — q The Pope of Rome here in Earth is Vicar , or Vice-Roy of God and our Lord Jesus Christ , and has Plenitude of Power over Nations and Kingdoms , and is Judge of All men , and not to be Judged by any Man in the World. And that you may see , that they are not asham'd to pretend to , and usurp such an Antichristian Power ( for none but r Antichrist ever pretended to it ) . This Bull of Pope Paul the Fourth is referr'd into the s Body of their Canon Law ( almost One hundred years ago ) dedicated to Cardinal Cajetan ; and lately publish'd t again , as a part of their Law , without any Contradiction ( and therefore with the approbation ) of the Pope or his Party . That this their Opinion of the Papal Power is far from truth or probability , I have indeavoured to prove before ; & sic transeat cum caeteris erroribus . 2. As to the second point ; What is Heresie , and who is the Heretick , who is to be persecuted with such fearful Damnations and Excommunications ? I say in short , 1. That it is agreed amongst their u Casuists , and x Canonists , That Heresie is an Error against that Faith which they ought to believe , joyned with pertinacy ; or it is a pertinacious Error in Points of Faith ; and he who so holds such an Opinion , is an Heretick . 2. And he is pertinacious , they say , who holds such an y Opinion , which he does , or might , and ought to know to be against Scripture , or the Church . By the way ; I desire to be inform'd , how it is possible for their Lay-people and unlearned , to know ( with any certainty , or assurance ) what Truths are approved , or Errors damn'd in Scripture ; when they are z prohibited ( under pain of Excommunication ) ever to read , or have Scripture in any Tongue they understand ? Nor are Bibles only , in any Vulgar Tongue prohibited ; but all Books of Controversie between Protestants and Papists , in any Vulgar Tongue , are a equally prohibited . So that they are absolutely deprived of the principal means to know Truth and Error , what Doctrines are Evangelical , what Heretical . 3. And although they are pleased sometimes to mention Scripture in the Definition of Heresie ; yet 't is not really by them meant . For ( by their receiv'd Principles ) a man may hold a hundred Errors , which he Does , or Might and Ought to know to be against Scripture and the Articles of Faith , and yet be no Heretick . For thus Cardinal Tolet tells us — b Many Rusticks or Country Clowns , having Errors against the Articles of Faith , are excused from Heresie ; because they are Ignorant of those Articles , and are ready to Obey The Church . And a little before — c If any man err in those things he is bound to know ; yet so , as it is without pertinacy , because he Knows it not to be against The Church , and is ready to believe as the Church believes , he is no Heretick . So that ( by their Principles ) let a man believe as many things as he will , contrary to Scripture ; yet if he have the Colliers faith , and implicitly believe , as the Church believes , all is well ; he is ( by them ) esteemed no Heretick . 4. And hence it is , that they have of late , left the word d Scripture out of their definition of Heresie ; and they only pass for Hereticks at Rome , ( not who hold Opinions contrary to Scripture , but ) who receive not , or contradict what is believed to be de fide , by the Pope and his Party . And therefore they plainly tell us ; That None can be an Heretick , who believes that Article of our Creed , The Holy Catholick Church ( you may be sure they mean their own Popish Church , not only without , but against all reason ) For so their e Trent-Catechism tells us ; not only in the Text , but ( least we should not take notice of it ) in the Margent too ; where they say , Verus . 9. Articuli Professor ( that is , he who will believe what their Church believes ) Nequit dici Haereticus . That is , he who believes the Church of Rome , to be the Catholick Church in the Creed , and that Church Infallibly assisted by the Holy Ghost , he shall not ( we may be sure ) be call'd an Heretick at Rome . Nay , so far are they in Love with their most irrational Hypothesis ; That to believe as the Church believes , excuses their Laicks and the Vnlearned from Heresie ; that they expresly say , That such men may in some Cases , ( not only Lawfully , but Meritoriously ) believe an Error contrary to Scripture , which ( in another more knowing Person , would be a real and formal Heresie . The Case is this , ( as Cardinal Tolet and Robert Holkott propose it , f If a Rustick or Ignorant Person , concerning Articles of Faith , do believe his Bishop proposing some Heretical Opinion , he does Merit by believing , although it be an Heretical Error ; because he is Bound to believe , till it appear to him to be against The Church . So that in the mean time he is no Heretick . For , 1. He may lawfully do it . 2 He is Bound to do it , to believe his Bishop , and the Doctrines proposed by him . 3. Nay , it is a Meritorious action to believe such Heretical Errors , though it be contrary to Scripture and the word of our gracious God. This is strange Doctrine , yet publickly maintain'd by g their Casuists and Schoolmen , and approved by their Church . For I do not find it Condemn'd in any Index Expurgatorius , nor ( in any publick declaration ) disown'd by their Church ; & quae non prohibet peccare , aut errare cum possit , Jubet . And here , in relation to the Premisses , I shall further propose two things , and leave them to the Judgment of the Impartial Reader . 1. That seeing it is their Received Doctrine , that an Implicite Faith in their Church , and a profession and resolution to believe as she believes , is enough to free a Papist from Heresie , and the punishment of it : though otherwise ( through Ignorance ) he hold some heretical Errors , contrary to what his Church believes : why may not a Protestants Implicite Faith in Scripture , with a Profession and Resolution to believe every thing in it , as it comes to his knowledge ; free him from Heresie and the punishment of it ; though otherwise ( in the mean time ) he may believe some things contrary to Scripture ? Certainly , if an Implicite Faith in the Doctrines taught by the Pope and his Party , ( for they are the Roman Church ) with a resolution to believe them all , when they come to their knowledge , be sufficient to free a Papist from Heresie and the Punishment of it ; much more , will an Implicite Faith in the Doctrines taught by our blessed Saviour , and his Apostles in Scripture , with a Resolution to believe them all , when they really come to their knowledge , be sufficient to free a Protestant from Heresie and the punishment of it . Because the Doctrines taught by our blessed Saviour and his Apostles are Divine , and in such a measure and degree Infallible , as the Doctrines taught by the Pope , and his Party , ( without great Error and Impudence ) cannot pretend to . 2. Seeing it is their Received Doctrine ( as may appear by the Premisses ) that if any Bishop preach to his People , ( the Laity and Unlearned Rusticks ) some Heretical Doctrine , they are bound to believe it , and may not only Lawfully , but Meritoriously do so , till it appear that their Church is against it . Hence it evidently follows ; That if the Bishop preach'd this Doctrine , That 't is lawful to kill an Heretical King , who is actually Anathematiz'd , and Deposed by the Pope ; they were bound to believe it , and might lawfully and meritoriously do so ; and then , if it was meritorious to believe such a Doctrine , then to put it in Execution , and actually kill such a King , could not be unlawful and vitious . So that we need not wonder , that those prodigious Popish Villains who were hired to Assassinate our Gracious King in the late Conspiracy , undertook such an Impious Imployment , since besides great store of Gold given to incourage them , their Religion and Learned Casuists afforded them such Principles ( which they were bound to believe ) to warrant and justifie their Villany , so that without scruple of Conscience they might do it . In short , they are Hereticks whom the Pope and his Party are pleased to call so ; for ( by their h Law and Canons ) they are sole Judges of the Crime ( what Heresie is , ) and the punishment due to it . 'T is true , when they have passed Sentence upon any Heretick , they deliver him to the Civil Magistrate ; but he is only their Executioner , to hang or burn according to their Sentence ; but has no Power to reverse their Sentence , nor so much as to Examine whether it be just or unjust ; but ( right or wrong ) must do as they determine . And here ( to say nothing of the Impiety and Injustice of the Roman Church , in Condemning those they call ( or rather miscall ) Herericks ; I shall take notice of a strange piece of their Hypocrisie , used by them , when ( after Condemnation ) they deliver the Condemned Person to the Civil Magistrate : when the Bishop or Inquisitor who delivers him , thus bespeaks the Civil Magistrate — i Sir , We passionately desire you , that for The Love of God , and in reguard of Piety , Mercy , and our Mediation , you would free this miserable Person , from All Danger of Death or mutilation of Members . And it is there said , that the Bishop may do this , k Effectually and from his Heart . But notwithstanding all this seeming Piety and Tenderness , when they have Sentenced an Heretick to death ; they expect and require the Magistrate to Execute that Sentence , within l six days , upon pain of Excommunication , Deprivation , and loss of Authority and Offices . Hence it is , that Pope Alexander the Fourth , about the year . 1260. gives Authority to the Inquisitors , to m Compel All Magistrates to Execute their Sentence , ( be it what it will ) . And Pope Innocent the Eighth says , they must neither Examine n Nor see the Process against those they are to Execute . Nor is the matter mended since the times of Innocent the Eighth , and Alexander the Fourth ; their Successors are for the same Compulsatory Power . The Council of Trent expresly says — o That All Catholick Princes are to be Compelled to observe All the Sanctions and Constitutions declaring their Ecclesiastical Immunities , amongst which this of punishing Hereticks is not the least , &c. By the Premisses ( I believe ) it may appear , that the Hypocrisie of the Popish Church is inexcusable , when she takes God's Name in vain , and prays the Civil Magistrate , For the Love of God , &c. to do that which she knows ( if he were willing ) he neither can nor dare do ; nor will she permit him to do , having under pain of Excommunication ( and many other Penalties ) absolutely prohibited him to do it . I say , 't is not only the Bishop who so intercedes to the Civil Magistrate , but the Church of Rome her self , by him . Pope Innocent the Third is my warrant for saying so ; who ( in a Decretal Epistle to the Bishop of Paris ) tells us ; That when a Condemn'd Person is delivered to the Secular p Judge , The Church must effectually interceed , that he moderate the Sentence so , ( which she knows he neither dare , nor by their Law can do ) that the Condemn'd Person may be in no danger of death . I know that q Roffensis , ( & other of the Popish Party ) do endeavour , with many little shifts , to palliate the Hypocrisie of their Church , but in vain . For Omnia cum fecit , Thaida , Thais olet . Sure I am , that r Aquinas ( Bannes s and others who Comment on that part of Aquinas ) tells us , That the Condemn'd Heretick is deliver'd over to the Secular Power , to this very end , that he may be Put to Death , and taken out of the World ; and a great and famous t Canonist ( Hostiensis ) says expresly , what I have done ; that this Intercession of their Church to the Secular Magistrate , in behalf of the Condemned Heretick , is , ( in the Common Opinion ) barely a Colour , and verbal u only , not real . For thus I find him cited in Panormitan on the Decretals — Whatever ( says he ) may be said to the contrary ; yet To this end , is He Delivered to The Secular Power , That He may be punished with death . Upon these Premisses , I think it evident , that the Church of Rome , in this her Intercession to the Secular Power , does ( with strange Hypocrasie ) seem earnestly to desire that of the Magistrate , which she knows he dare not do ; nay , which she herself , by her publick Laws , has Commanded him not to do . How she will Answer God ( who Infallibly knows all her Hypocrisie ) or her Adversaries , objecting it , I know not ; ipsa viderit . In short ; it is x confess'd , that all those who will not be Inslaved to Rome , and believe as she believes , in every thing , are Hereticks ; and not only so , but damn'd , and while they continue so , and do not intirely believe their New-Trent-Creed , they are out of all Possibility of Salvation . So their y Casuists perpetually affirm , and their Trent Council ( in that Forma Juramenti Professionis Fidei , in the Bull of Pope Pius the Fifth , Extant in the z Constitutions of that Council ) requires all their Ecclesiasticks , to promise , vow , and swear to believe and maintain it to their death . For in the end of that Creed , the words are — a This is the Catholick Faith , out of which no man can be saved . And then , they must b promise , swear , and vow to believe and profess it , most constantly as long as they live . So that although mens lives be exemplary and innocent , their Doctrines which they believe , Ancient and Catholick , yet if they dissent from Rome in any one thing , ( and that too upon just grounds and evident reason ) yet they shall be call'd , and used as Hereticks . A signal Instance we have of this in the Waldenses anciently : and because many perhaps , ( I speak not of the Learned ) may neither know what it is , nor where to find it ; I shall here crave leave to set it down . c Reinerus , a Dominican Frier , an Inquisitor , a severe Persecutor , who writ against the Waldenses , does ( to their great honour , and the shame of Rome ) give them this signal Testimony . He tells us of more then Seaventy ancient Heresies , most of which ( he says ) in his time , were overcome and vanished ; But ( says he ) of all the Sects that were , or had been , d None was so pernicious to The Church of Rome , as the Leonists , or Waldenses : and that for three Reasons . 1 For the Antiquity and long Continuance of these Waldenses , from the time of Pope Sylvester ( who was made Pope , Anno Christ. 316. ) as some said ; or ( as others ) from the time of the Apostles . 2 For the Generality of that Sect ; because there was Scarce any Country where they were not . 3 When all other Hereticks ( by reason of their Blasphemies against God ) were abborr'd by those who heard them : The Waldenses had A Great Appearance of Piety ; because they Lived Justly Before Men ; Believ'd All Things well of God , and All the Articles of the Creed . ( The Twelve Articles of their New Trent Creed , were neither then believ'd , nor known , no not at Rome ) . Well , if all this be true , ( and it is their Enemy , who gives them this ample Testimony ) what was it , that made this Sect of all others the most pernicious to the Church of Rome ? Certainly , the Antiquity or generality of this Sect , the Piety of their Lives , their believing all things well of God , and all the Articles of the Creed ; none of these could be ●ernicious to any Truth , or any True Church . What was it then ? Why , he tells us , in the next words , that it was e only this ; They Blasphemed , ( or spake ill of ) the Church and Clergy of Rome ; And ( as he Confesses ) The Multitude of the Laity easily believed them : which is an evident Argument , that it was neither incredible nor altogether improbable , which the Multitude of the Laiety so easily believed . Two things indeed those poor persecuted Waldenses said , which were very true , and most pernicious to the Church of Rome ; ( for nothing is more pernicious to darkness and error then light and truth ) 1. They said , That the f Church of Rome was the Whore of Babylon in the Revelation . 2. That the Pope was the g Head of all the Errors in that Antichristian Church . And on this Account it was , that the Church of Rome did call those poor Waldenses Hereticks , and as such , did ( with Fire and Sword and the utmost Cruelty ) persecute them . For ( as is aforesaid ) he is an Heretick at Rome who contradicts or disbelieves the h Canons and Constitutions of that Church ; although he do not really disbelieve any Divine Truth contain'd in the Canon of Scripture . Now as it was with the poor Waldenses ; so we are sure , it has been , is , and will be with all Protestants ( Princes and People , Supream or Subjects ) they are ( at Rome ) declared Hereticks , and liable to all the Punishments of that , which they are pleas'd to call Heresie ; and ( when they have opportunity and ability ) those Punishments will certainly be Inflicted , without any Pity or Mercy . And this brings me to the third Inquiry , What those Punishments are ? And here , because the Punishments of Heresie are very many , and very great , it is neither my present business nor purpose , particularly to set them all down , and explain them ; Only I shall ( in favour to the Ordinary Reader , for to the Learned they are better known ) name some Authors , where he may find a Distinct and full Explication of the Nature of Heresie ( according to the Popish Principles ) and the Number of its Punishments . And here , 1. The Gloss of their Canon Law reduces the Punishments of Hereticks to Four Heads , in the General : Hereticks ( says the i Glossator ) are to be punished either , 1. By Excommunication . 2. Deposition . 3. Loss of all their Goods . 4. By Military Persecution : that is , by Fire and Sword , by War and armed Souldiers . This is k approved by several of their Learned Writers . 2. For the Body of the Canon Law , ( to pass by Gratian and his Decretum ) those who have a mind and leasure , may consult the Titles De Haereticis , which occur in the l Decretals of Greg. 9. of m Bonis . 8. in the n Clementines , Extravagantes o Communes ( and in the lately added p Seaventh Book of the Decretals ) with the Glosses , and Panormitan's large Comment upon them . 3. For the Punishment of Hereticks by the Civil Laws ; they who have a mind to know , may consult Justinians Code . Lib. 1. Tit. 5. De Haereticis & Manichaeis , with the Gloss there . And especially the Theodosian Code , Lib. 16. Tit. 5. De Haereticis , Manichaeis & Samaritanis , with the Larger and most Learned Notes of Jacobus Gothofredus ; in the Edition of the Codex Theodosianus at Lions , 1665. Tom. 6. pag. 104. To these may be added the Severe Laws of the Emperor q Friderick the Second , made in pursuance of the r Lateran Council , and ( though he had little reason for it ) to gratifie the Pope in his barbarous designs to ruin all those he call'd ( generally miscall'd ) Hereticks : which Laws ( as we may be sure they would ) the s Pope and his Party did highly approve . And have referr'd them into the Body of their Canon Law. 7. Decretalium . Lib. 5. Tit. 3. Capp . 1. 2. In Edit . Corporis Juris Can. Lugduni , Anno 1661. 4. And for a full and particular Explication of those Laws , and the Quality of the Punishments of Hereticks Inflicted by them , their Casuists and Canonists may be consulted : Amongst many others , such as these ; t Filliucius , u Durantus , x Antonius Archiepiscopus Florentinus , y Azorius , Paul z Layman , a Raynerius , Johan de b Turrecremata , Cardinal c Hostiensis , and Antonius Augustinus Archiepiscopus Terraconensis ( a most Learned Canonist , and a very useful Book ) has given us a Catalogue of their d Canons De poenis quae sunt Hoereticis Constitutae . In short , whoever has a mind , opportunity and ability to Consult the aforemention'd Authors , ( or such others ) may easily find the Number and Nature of those Punishments , which ( by their Impious Papal Canons and Constitutions ) are to be Inflicted on those ( better Christians then themselves ) they are pleased to call Hereticks . 10. Concerning this Impious Bull , containing the Damnation ( as he calls it ) and Excommunication of Queen Elizabeth , by Pope Pius the Fifth ; it is further to be observed , That it is no new thing . For Queen Elizabeth was actually Excommunicate before , 1. In their famous e Bulla Coenae Domini ( take famous in which sense you will , the worst is good enough ) wherein they do ( at Rome ) Anathematize and f Curse all Protestants ( both Kings and Subjects , Princes and Common People ) It is called Bulla Coenae Domini , because it is published every year on Maundy Thursday , the Day in which our blessed Saviour Instituted ( Coenam Domini ) the Sacrament of his last Supper . And here , ( by the way ) we may observe the difference between Christ , and ( his pretended Vicar ) Antichrist . 1. On that Day our blessed Saviour Institutes that Sacrament , as a blessing and seal of the mutual Love between him and his Church , and of the Communion and Charity of Christians amongst themselves ; but the Pope ( far otherwise and unlike him , whose Vicar he pretends to be ) on the very same Day , ( without and against Christian Charity ) Anathematizes and Curses the greatest part of Christians . 2. Our blessed Saviour was that Day ready to Dye for the Salvation of Sinners ; but his pretended Vicar is ready , ( on the same Day ) and ( so far as he is able ) does actually Damn the greatest part of the Christian World , and has been drunk with the blood of the Saints . 3. Nor did Queen Elizabeth stand Accursed ( before Pius the Fifth's Excommunication of her ) only in that Bulla Coenae , but in several other Papal Bulls . I shall only name one ; and ( because it is of signal Consequence , and to our present purpose ) give some short Account of the Contents of it . The Bull I mean , is that of Pope g Paul the Fourth , next Predecessor , ( save one ) to Pius the Fifth , and is h dated eleven years before that of Pope Pius the Fifth . Now concerning this Bull , I observe 1. That it was no rash Act of that Pope , but ( if he say true ) made with i Mature deliberation , by the Counsel and unanimous Consent of himself and the Cardinals . 2. And it is further k Confirmed by his Successor Pius the Fifth , who Approves and Commands it to be Inviolably kept and observed . Nor is this all ; but ( that we may see how such Doctrine is approved at Rome ) . This Bull of Paul the Fourth , and that of Pius the Fifth , which so fairly confirms it , are now both of them referr'd into the Body of their l Canon Law. Now in this Bull of Pope Paul the Fourth , thus confirm'd , approved , and received into the Body of their Law ; 1. He does m Approve , Innovate , and Confirm All the Censures and Punishments due to Hereticks and Schismaticks , by any Constitution of any former Pope , or those who were Reputed Popes , Howsoever those Constitutions were made and promulgated , and Commands them to be kept in fresh Memory , and perpetually Observed . 2. And then he n declares ( with as little Charity as Infallibility ) that All Hereticks which are , or For the Future shall be , do Incurr All these Censures and Punishments , and 't is his express Will and Decree they should do so . And that we may not mistake his meaning , as if All those Censures and Punishments were by him Inflicted and Denounced only upon and against some Inferior Persons and Hereticks ; he does seaven or eight times expresly name Counts , Barons , Marquesses , Dukes , Kings and Emperors : And further says ; That as Heresie and Schism in them is more Pernicious to others , so ought their Punishment to be more severe ; and then ( by his Constitution , which he declares to be o perpetually and for ever Obligatory , he actually and totally p Deprives them of their Counties , Baronies , Marquisats , Dukedoms , Kingdoms and Empires , and leaves them to the Secular Power , to q receive Due Punishment , that is , Death ; as is evident by the Consequents in that Constitution ) . Nor is this all ; He damns them to an r Incapacity and Perpetual Inability of being restored to their Honours or Possessions ; No , not if they seriously and truly repent , and become good Catholicks . For in that case of their true Repentance and forsaking their Heresie , they shall save their Lives ; yet they must be s Cast into Perpetual Prison , and there be fed with Bread of Sorrow , and Water of Sadness , and to have no Comfort or Humanity shew'd them by any , no not by Kings or Emperors . And though this be the height of Impious and Antichristian Tyranny , yet t it must be Imputed ( as he tells us ) to the Popes Clemency and Benignity . By the Premisses it may evidently appear , That Queen Elizabeth was ( by many Papal Bulls and Damnatory Constitutions ) actually Excommunicate , before this Bull of Pius the Fifth . I desire then to know , Whether those Anathema's of former Popes , ( which they Declared and Commanded to be in force against all Hereticks For ever , and Perpetually Obligatory ) were valid and did Actually and ( as they Intended ) Effectually Exclude that Queen out of their Church , or not ? If not ; then 't is certain , the Pope has not that Supream Power he pretends to . For when so many Popes , in their Damnatory Bulls , ( and that Ex Plenitudine Potestatis Apostolicae ) declare the Queen , and all such Hereticks , Excommunicate , and ( as their Phrase is ) cut u off from the Vnity of the Body of Christ , and Eternally damned : If this be not Effectually done , then all those Bulls are Bruta Fulmina , Inefficacious , Null and Insignificant . But if those Anathema's and Excommunications of former Popes , were valid , and the Queen by them , Actually put out of the Church , ( as will , I suppose , and must ( by them ) be granted ) then Pius the Fifth his Excommunication is a nullity , and indeed a ridiculous Impossibility . It being impossible , he should take from her , what she had not ; and deprive her ( by any Excommunication ) of that Ecclesiastical Communion , of which the stood Actually deprived before by his Predecessors ; especially by Pope Paul the Third , who Excommunicates and Curses not only Henry the Eighth , but particularly all x his Children , Male and Female , born or to be born of Ann Bolen ( Mother of Queen Elizabeth ) declares them deprived of all Power and Dominion , and of all their Goods and Patrimony , and Incapable of restitution to that Power and Patrimony , and of Acquisition of any other for the future . And that we should not doubt , that this was the Popes meaning , they have added a Marginal Note to that Bull in the Roman Edition , which tells us ; y That the Pope ( in that Bull ) did deprive the Children of Henry the Eighth , and his Adherents , of All their Goods and Dignities , and declared them Incapable of any other for the future . By the Premisses , I think it may be , and is Evident , that Queen Elizabeth ( by most Papal Bulls and Constitutions ) stood Actually Excommunicate and Depos'd before this Bull of Pius the Fifth . Sure I am , the Popish Party never own'd her as their lawful Sovereign , but call'd her an Usurper of the Crown , to which ( as a Declared and Excommunicate Heretick ) she had no right at all . And it seems , Pope Pius himself was of the same Opinion . For in this very Bull , he speaks of her only as z Pretended Queen ; and of her a Pretended right to the Crown . And hence we may with Reason and good Logick Infer , That when Pius the Fifth in this his Bull Excommunicates and Deposes her ; he does ( notwithstanding his Plenitude of Power and Infallibility ) ridiculously undertake ( what he could not do ) an Impossibility . For as it is impossible to turn Sempronius out of a House in which he never was ; or deprive him of a Dominion which he never had , ( turning out of a House , necessarily presupposing his being in it , and deprivation presupposing Right and Possession ) so it is a like Impossibility for the Pope , by any Excommunication , to turn the Queen out of the Communion of the Popish Church , in which she never was ; ( being born , baptiz'd and always bred in the Protestant Church and Religion ) or deprive her of those Dignities and Dominions , which ( according to their own b Principles ) she never had any right to , nor ever could have any ; being ( by their Law , and many Papal Anathema's and Decretals ) utterly disabled , and made incapable of any such Dominions or Dignities . 11. It is evident that the Pope in this Impious Bull , does ( by his usurp'd Antichristian Power ) Depose and Deprive Queen Elizabeth of all her Royal Authority , Dominion and Dignity , and so puts her into the Condition of a poor private Person , without any Power or Jurisdiction over all , or any of her Subjects . Whence these damnable Doctrines and Impious Conclusions evidently follow , 1. That if any Jesuit , any Villanous Raviliac , or through pac'd Papist had kill'd , or with Poyson or Pistol had taken away her Life , ( as they often Indeavor'd ) it had been no Treason . For all know , that Treason is Crimen c Majestatis , or Laesa Majestas ; a Crime against Sacred Majesty ; either Immediately , against the Person , or Persons in whom Majesty resides ; or mediately against those who are his nearer Representatives , as the Lord Chancellor , Treasurer and the Judges , when they are in Execution of their Office. And though there be an Inferior Degree of Treason , ( as of a Servant against his Lord and Master , a Wife against her Husband ) yet no Treason ever was ( either by the Imperial and Civil , or our National and Common Laws ) but against a Superior . And therefore the Queen being deposed by the Pope as an Heretick , and actually deprived , not only of all her Royal Power and Majesty , but of all Jurisdiction and Superiority over her Subjects ( and they absolved from their Oaths of Allegiance and Fidelity ) and so a private Person only , without any Power to command Obedience . I say , upon these Impious Popish Principles , to kill the Queen could not possibly have had the Nature or Name of Treason . Had they by open War , or privately by Poyson or Pistols , taken away her life ( as they Intended , and often Indeavor'd , as we shall see anon ) they might have been Murderers , but not Traitors . So that the Pope and his Party believing that the Queen was Actually deposed and deprived of all her Royal Dignity and Dominion , as a Heretick ; they must consequently believe , that the Murdering of her , by any of her former Subjects , neither was , nor could be Treason . But this is not all , For 2. Admit she had not been deposed , by any Papal Law , Bull or Decretal Constitution ; yet any of their Popish Clergy might have murder'd her , and been no way guilty of Treason , though they were English men , and born her Subjects ; nay , though they had actually taken the Oaths of Allegiance before they took Popish Orders . The reason of this is evident , and a necessary Consequent , from their Impious and Rebellious Principles . For they say , That the Clergy d Are no Subjects of any Prince ; and therefore they themselves conclude ( as well they may ) that if they Rebel and seek the Ruin of their Prince , yet ( in them ) it is no Treason . This Emanuel Sa , the Jesuit expresly tells us , in a Book ( not surreptitiously sent into the World , but ) publish'd with his e Name to it , Dedicated to the Virgin f Mary , approved , highly Commended , and Licenc'd by g Publick Authority . Thus is this Rebellious Doctrine approved , not only by the Librorum Censor at Antverp ; but in Heaven too ; at least in the Opinion of the Author , who otherwise would not have dedicated it to the Virgin Mary , and desired her Patronage , and Promotion of it , for the good of Souls . Sure I am , I do not find it Condemn'd in any of their Indices Expurgatorij ( neither in the h Spanish Index , nor that of i Portugal , nor that of Pope k Alexander the Seaventh at Rome , &c. Nay , so far are the Inquisitors from Condemning this Rebellious Doctrine of Emanuel Sa , that the Spanish Index does not so much as name , much less censure him or his Aphorisms . But the l Portugal Index , ( in which both the Author and his Aphorisms are expresly nam'd ) censures only two Propositions ( one about Pennance , the other about Extream Vnction ) which the Inquisitors ( the Supream m Congregation of them at Rome ) would have left out ; and then approved and permitted all the rest . And so that Erroneous and Impious Aphorism , That Clergy-men are not Subjects of Kings , and therefore not Capable of Committing Treason , although they actually Rebel against and Murder them . But the late Index of Pope Alexander the Seaventh , speaks more fully and home to our present purpose , and expresly , permits , and approves ( for we may be sure they will not permit what they do not approve ) all Editions of those n Aphorisms , ( Even at Rome ) before the year 1602. In all which this Rebellious Aphorism , we are speaking of , was , and so was approved by them . This does further and ( if that be possible ) more evidently appear out of these their Approved and Authentick Expurgatory Indices , wherein this Proposition — ( Priests Are By The Law of God Subject to Princes ) is damn'd as Erroneous and Heretical , both in the o Spanish Index , and that of p Portugal . For the Inquisitors finding it in the q Index of Chrysostom , Command it to be expunged and blotted out ; Although Chrysostom ( in the Text ) says the very same thing . Hence it evidently follows ; That if this Proposition ( Priests ( by the Law of God ) Are Subject to Princes ) be erroneous and false , as the Pope and his Party say it is , ( their Inquisitors Commanding it to be Expung'd , as Erroneous ) then the Contradictory ( Priests Are not by The Law of God Subject to Princes ) must of necessity be true , and by them approved and believed . Unless they will say , ( which were highly irrational and ridiculous ) that Contradictory Propositions may be both false , and they believe neither of them . But this they neither do , nor will say ; for their greatest Writers publickly say , and Indeavour to prove , That Priests Are not Subject to Princes . Nay , r Cardinal Cajetan expresly says , That the Clergy are so Sacred , that 't is Impossible they should be Subject to Princes . When he says , It is impossible , his meaning is , that 't is ( not naturally , but ) morally impossible ; because if any Prince should use his Priests and Clergy as Subjects , it were a great Sin , and ( in his Opinion ) Sacriledge ; and therefore Impossible : Because , according to the Rule of Law , Illud solum Possumus quod Jure Possumus . So we have that great Roman Cardinal expresly approving that Rebellious Doctrine , That Priests are not Subject to Princes . Nor ( we may be sure ) was it any private or singular Opinion of his , which died with him ; For when s afterwards , Emanuel Sa's Aphorisms ( wherein the same Doctrine was maintained ) were publish'd , as a t Work Profitable and Necessary for Divines , and All who had Cure of Souls . An Advocate of the Parliament of Paris ( eminent for Law and Learning ) tells us two Things : 1. That those Aphorisms were Approved at u Rome : 2. And then passes a just Censure upon them — x That such Doctrine was the Plague and Ruin of Commonwealths : Royal and Supream Powers being the Ordinance of God , by which All Men are made Subject to the Jurisdiction of Kings ; So that Learned Person . And ( to pass by all others ) an Excellent Person ) of great Judgment and Integrity , and a Roman Catholick , ( I mean Father y Paul of Venice ) tells us ; that in the Quarrels between Pope Paul the Fifth , and the Venetians , a World of Books were writ ( by Jesuits and others ) to vindicate the Popes Cause , and they z All Agreed in this , That the Clergy were Exempt from all Secular Jurisdiction , & quoad Personas & Bona ; Secular Princes had nothing to do with their Persons or Purses ; nor were They Subjects to Princes , no not in Cases of High Treason . Nor was this Rebellious Doctrine maintained only by the Popes Party and Parasites ; but the Pope himself ( whom the Jesuits and Canonists miscall Infallible ) approves and justifies it ; and in Decemb. 1605. tells the Venetian Ambassador , That a Ecclesiasticks were not Comprehended in the number of A Princes Subjects , nor could be Punished By him , though they were Rebels . A hundred such Passages ( out of their School-men , Canonists , Casuists , ( especially the Jesuites ) and their Canon Law ) might easily be quoted ; but these , to Impartial and Intelligent Persons , will be sufficient to Evince , That the Pope and his Party do publickly and expresly maintain this Rebellious Doctrine , and ( when it makes for their Catholick Cause , and they have Opportunity and Ability to put it in Execution ) do also practise it . The Sum of which Damnable Doctrine ( repugnant to the clear Principles of Nature and Scripture , and all Religions , save that of Rome ) is this ; If any King be Excommunicate and Deposed by the Pope , then any of his Subjects , Clergy or Laity , ( horresco referens ) may take Arms and Rebel against him , or Murder him , and yet ( by this Impious Popish Doctrine ) be neither Rebels nor Traitors : And if their King be neither Excommunicate nor Deposed , but stands rectus in Curia Romanâ , and be ( as they call it ) a good Catholick ; yet if any of his Ecclesiasticks ( Secular or Regular ) Rebel or Murder him , it can be no Treason or Rebellion in them ; seeing ( according to their Principles ) they are none of his Subjects , nor he their Superior ; and Treason or Rebellion against an Equal or Inferior , is ( in propriety of Law ) impossible . But this is not all . For ; 3. Let it be granted , ( which is both Impious and Evidently untrue ) That any Popish Assassin or Roman Raviliac , had not been Guilty of any Treason , if he had kill'd the Queen , after the Pope had Deposed her , as a Heretick ; yet sure , they must grant that it was Murder , and an Impious Act , to kill a Person overwhom he had no Jurisdiction . No ; this they deny : the approved and received Principles of the Popish Church acquit such Prodigious Villains not only from Rebellion and Treason , but from Murder too . He who had kill'd the Queen , after Excommunication and Deposition by the Pope , had been no Traitor , nor ( which is less ) so much as a Murderer . We are told in the Body of their Canon Law — b That they are no Murderers , who ( out of Zeal to the Church ) take Arms against Excommunicate Persons . So the Title prefix'd to the Canon cited in the Margent ; and the Text of the Canon says further ; Those Souldiers so armed , c Are not Murderers , if out of a burning Zeal to their Catholick Mother ( the Church of Rome he means ) they Kill any of such Excommunicate Hereticks : Thus the Case is deliberately determin'd by their Supream Infallible Judge , Pope Vrban the Second , a little before the d end of the Eleventh Century ; and about Twenty years after ( by Ivo Carnotensis ) referred into a e Collection of the Roman Canons : And Gratian ( about Forty years after Ivo ) Registers it in his Decretum , which Pope f Gregory the Thirteenth approves and confirms for Law ; and so it stands confirm'd , and received for Law , g in their last and best Editions of that Law , ever since . Whence it may ( and does ) appear , that this Impious and Rebellious Doctrine , ( That Killing Kings or Queens Excommunicate by the Pope , was no Murder ) has been approved at Rome ( since h the Devil was let loose , and Antichrist appeared ) above Six hundred years . I know that honest Father i Caron ( not so disloyal as most of his Party ) indeavours to mollifie this Rebellious Constitution of Pope Vrban the Second ; and tells us , that the meaning of that Canon is only this k — That if any man by Chance and Casually had kill'd an Excommunicated Person , ( si contigerit trucidasse ) then he was not A Formal Murderer : So Pope Urban ' s Sentence was not to l Excuse those from Murder , who Intended , and directly Purposed to kill Hereticks and Excommunicate Persons . For ( says he ) this were to m Overthrow all Truth and Fidelity to Princes . The good man was ( God forgive him ) a Roman Catholick , and believed ( though . Erroneously ) that the Supream Head of his Church , and St. Peter's Successor and Vicar of Christ , could not approve and maintain such a Rebellious and Impious Position and Principle , That men might lawfully be kill'd , because they were Hereticks or Excommunicate Persons : which he there truly calls — n A Horrible , Cursed and Execrable Principle . That the Doctrine is Cursed and Execrable , is easily believed , and ( by me ) willingly granted . But that Vrban the Second did not , in that Canon , approve it , ( notwithstanding what Father Caron has said to the contrary ) I absolutely deny . Sure I am , 1. That Cardinal Bellarmine ( as is confessed by Father Caron in the place cited ) expounds that Canon as I have done . 2. So does o Cardinal Turrecremato too ; who says , That Excommunicate Hereticks may be kill'd , not only Casually ( as Father Caron mistakes the Text ) but with an p Intention and Purpose to kill them ; and yet they who intend and do kill them , be no Murderers ; but both the Intention and Act Just and Innocent . But then their Intention must not be to get the Goods of those Hereticks they kill , but it must be Zelo Matris Ecclesiae , to secure the Church from the Mischievous Designs of those Hereticks . So that in the Opinion of this great Cardinal , and Canonist , ( who well knew the opinions and practise of their Church ) killing of Hereticks was so far from being Murder , that it was no Crime at all ; but sine Reatu ( as he says ) without all guilt ; and therefore ( nulla poenitentia erat imponenda ) it needed no Repentance . 3. Cardinal Peron in his Oration to the Estates of France , does expresly q affirm , That all Tyrants by Vsurpation , may lawfully be kill'd ; and such was Queen Elizabeth , and all Protestant Kings and Princes now are , ( in the Judgment of the Pope and his Party ) seeing they all did , and now do stand Excommunicate ( at Rome ) and deprived of all Dominion ; and therefore , their medling with the Government , after such Deprivation , is evidently Usurpation ( in the Opinion of our Adversaries ) and then it follows on their Principles ) that they may lawfully be kill'd , and therefore the killing of them cannot be Murder ; it being impossible that a Crime against the Indispensable Law of Nature , should be lawful . 4. But we have greater Evidence to prove , that ( at Rome ) the killing of Protestant Princes , ( as Excommunicate Hereticks ) is not Murder . For in the year 1648. when the Parliament was , ( or seemed to be ) severe against Papists , as believing and maintaining Principles Inconsistent with our Government : This Question ( amongst others ) was proposed to some of our English Popish Divines — r Whether the Pope could Depose or Kill Protestant Princes or Magistrates , as Excommunicate Persons ? Some of those Divines met , and ( whether out of Love of Truth , or fear of the Parliament , I know not ) s Subscribed the Negative ; That the Pope could not Depose or Kill such Protestants . But when this was heard at t Rome , the Pope and his Sacred Congregation ( as they call it ) Condemned that Negative Proposition , as Heretical , and Summon'd the Subscribers to Rome , where Prisons and Censures ( as Father Caron tells us ) were prepared for them . Whence it is Evident , that to deny the Popes Power to Depose and Kill Protestant Princes , is ( at Rome ) declared Heretical ; and therefore , that he has a Power to Depose and Kill , is a part of their Catholick Creed , and believ'd three . Whence it further follows , that they do think such Killing of Protestants to be no Murder , nor those who kill them , ( out of Zeal to the Catholick Cause ) Murderers . 5. When Raymundus u Lullus ( a x man famous in his time and after it ) had said , and in his Writings published , That it was y unlawful and impious to kill and murder Hereticks ; ( for he had seen and heard , of the bloody Persecutions of the Waldenses , and such as at Rome were call'd Hereticks , in , and before his time ) Nic. Eymericus ( Inquisitor of Arragon ) complains of him , and his Writings , to Pope Gregory the Eleventh ; who ( in full Consistory with the z Council of his Cardinals ) damns the Doctrine of Raymundus Lullus ; and declares for the Lawfulness and Justice of Killing Hereticks . 6. And Lastly , Pope Leo the Tenth in his Oecumenical ( so they call it ) Lateran Council ( Sacro approbante Concilio ) with the Consent and Approbation of that Council ) declares ; That our blessed Saviour a Did Institute Peter and his Successors his Vicars ; to whom ( by the Testimony of The Book of Kings ) it was so necessary to yield Obedience , that Whosoever would not ( as no true Protestant ever would or could ) was to be punished with Death . The Pope was not pleased to tell us , what Book of Kings ( for in their Vulgar Latin Version , there are four Books of that name ) nor what Chapter or Verse he meant : and he did wisely to conceal what Place in those Books he intended ; for had he nam'd any particular place , ( though he pretended to Infallibility ) his folly would have much sooner appeared . It is indeed ridiculous , for any man to think , that any thing said in those Books of Kings , can prove , that our blessed Saviour Constituted a Vicar General over his whole Christian Church , with power to kill all who would not comply with him , and that Peter and his Successors the Popes , were the men : seeing there is not one Syllable of all , or any of this , in any of the four Books of Kings ; Nor any Text from which it may ( with any sense or probability ) be deduc'd . Nor have the Publishers of that Lateran and other Councils ( Peter Crab , Surius , Binius , Labbe , &c. supply'd that defect , and told us , what place Pope Leo meant , and from which he , or they could prove the Popes Power to kill all who comply'd not with his Commands . I know that b Crab , c Surius , and d Binius ( though Labbe has omitted it , as Impertinent ) have , in their Editions of the Councils , cited in their Margents , Deut. 17. for a proof of that Erroneus and Impious Position , ( it seems their Infallible Judge mistook Kings for Deuteronomy , or that they could find nothing in any Book of Kings for the Popes purpose . ) But they name not the Verse ; though ( I believe ) it is the Twelfth Verse of that Seaventeenth Chapter they mean. Where 't is said , That he who will not hearken to the Priest or Judge , That Man shall Dye . This ( I say ) is altogether impertinent , as to the proof of the Popes Position . For admit ( which is e manifestly untrue ) that by Priest here , the High Priest only was meant : yet it will neither be consequence nor sense to say , Whosoever disobey'd the Sentence of the High Priest , in the Jewish Church , must be put to death : Ergo , Whoever disobeys the Pope in the Christian Church , must be so too . This ( I say ) is Inconsequent , for the Priests in the Jewish Church ( not only the High Priest , but other Priests and Levites ) by the express Law of God , had as Judges in many Cases , Power of Life and Death : but in the Gospel , our blessed Saviour left no such Power to his Apostles and their Successors ; Excommunication is the highest Punishment , Peter , or any , or all the Apostles could inflict , by any Authority from our blessed Saviour in the Christian Church , and this Power succeeded Intersection or putting to death in the Judaical Church . So St. f Augustin expresly tells us , and to him I refer the Reader . By the Premisses , I think it may appear , that , if ( after the Popes Damnation and Deposition of Queen Elizabeth ) any of her Popish Subjects , ( Laity or Clergy , Regular or Secular ) had by taking Arms publickly , or by Poyson or Pistol , Privately taken away her life , ( according to their approved Principles ) it had been no Rebellion , Treason or Murder , but ( in their Opinion ) an Action Just and Innocent . But this ( though too much ) is not all ; their Error and Impiety rises higher . For , 4. Had any of Queen Elizabeths Subjects ( after the Popes Excommunication ) kill'd her , that Execrable Fact had been so far from being Murder , that ( in their opinion ) it had been an Action not only Indifferent , or Morally good , but Meritorious . In the year 1586. ( which was the Nine and twentieth of Elizabeth ) in the Colledge of Rhemes , Giffard , Dr. of Divinity , Gilbert Giffard and Hodgson , Priests , had so possess'd the English Seminaries , with a belief of this Doctrine , That John Savage willingly and gladly vowed to kill the Queen . The Story is in g Cambden ( an Historian of unquestionable truth and fidelity ) After h this , Walpoole , the English Jesuite , perswades Edward Squire , that it was a Meritorious Act to take away the Queen ; tells him , it might easily be done , by Poysoning the Pomel of her Sadle ; gives him the Poyson ; Squire undertakes it , Walpoole blesseth him , and promises him Eternal Salvation , and so ( having sworn him to Secresie ) sends him into England : where ( notwithstanding all the Jesuits blessings ) he was taken , confess'd all this , and was Executed in the year . 1598. And Camdben i there tells us , That a Pestilent Opinion ( as he truly calls it ) was got amongst the Popish Party ( even amongst their Priests ) That to take away Kings Excommunicate , was Nothing Else , but to Weed the Cockle out of the Lords Field . It is true , none of those impious and damnable Designs , had their desir'd Effect ; God Almighty protecting that good Queen , ( it being impossible that any Power or Policy should prevail against his Providence ) yet the Matter of Fact ( confessed by themselves , or evidently proved by Legal Witnesses ) manifestly shews , that they thought killing the Queen , ( for the benefit of their Catholick Cause ) was a Meritorious Work , which they designed to do , and ( had their Ability been Equal to their Impiety ) would have done . 2. Nor was this the private opinion of some Priests and Jesuits only ; but the definitive Sentence of several Popes , ( their k Infallible and Supream Judges ) publickly declared , and ( that we may be sure they are obligatory at Rome ) amongst other Papal Decrees referr'd into the Body of their Canon Law , k confirm'd by Gregory the Thirteenth , and by their General Councils ( the fifth Lateran , and that of Trent ) Commanded to be obeyed , Tanquam Divina Inspiratione Edita , & Tanquam l Dei Praecepta . Now the Papal Sentences or Decrees I mean , are 1. That of Pope m Nicolas to the French Army : wherein the Pope tells them , That if any of them were slain in that War against the Insidels , that is , ( as Cardinal n Turrecremata explains it ) against the Hereticks , Heaven o should not be deny'd them : They should be sure of that . But the Lemma or Summary prefix'd to the Canon p says , That those Souldiers who faithfully fought against the Hereticks , if any one of them were slain in the sight , He should merit Heaven . Murdering Hereticks , was ( in the Popes Opinion ) a meritorious Work , and if the Souldiers could kill them , and take away their Temporal Life here , they should ( for that good Service to the Pope ) gain to themselves , an Eternal Life hereafter . 2. Pope q Leo ( to the same purpose , and almost in the same words ) Incourages a French Army to r sight stoutly against the Enemies of the Faith , and of the Church , ( you may be sure he means the Roman Church ) and tells them , that they need not be any way affraid , to kill Hereticks and the Churches Enemies , for God knew , that if any of them died in that Service , it was for the true Faith , for which Heaven should be their Reward . So the Pope in that Canon . And because some of those Souldiers might fear ( as there was great reason they should ) that the Persecuting those poor Christians , whom the Pope call'd Hereticks , with Fire and Sword , might rather deserve punishment then a Heavenly Reward ; John Semeca ( the Glossator ) tells us , That the Popes meaning was , f that ( being secured from Punishment ) Heaven should be their Reward . These , and such other Principles , must ( of necessity ) be a great Incouragement to the Popish Party , who believe ( though without , and in contradiction to Truth and Reason ) the vast usurped Papal Power and Infallibility , to Execute the Popes Damnatory Bulls and Excommunications , and kill all Hereticks ( even Kings and Emperors ) having Heaven promised for doing it . This is very much , but there are more and greater Promises made by the Pope , for killing Hereticks . For , 5. The Pope ( out of his great Ability and Bounty ) promises such Impious and Bloody Murderers of Hereticks , not Heaven only , but a higher Degree of Glory in it , and many other great Priviledges , to be injoy'd here , before they came to Heaven ; and this Promise the Pope makes , not singly by himself , but in , and with the consent of the greatest General Council Rome ever had . Innocent the Third is the Pope , and the t fourth Lateran is the Council I mean ; in which u there were , above Twelve hundred Fathers . By the Authority of this x Council , an Army was to be raised for the y Destruction of Hereticks ( the poor Wabdenses ) and they were to have the sume z Priviledges which were granted to those who fought against the Turks to recover the Holy Land. What those Priviledges were Pope Innocent ( in his a Bull ) tells us . 1. They were to be freed from b all Taxes , Impositions , and all Burdens whatsoever . 2. They were to be received into the c Protection of St. Peter and the Pope ; there is nothing of God's Protection mention'd . The Pope ( who sits in the Temple of God , d shewing himself that he is God ) thought ( and would have them think so too ) that he was sufficient to protect them . 3. If they had borrowed any Money upon Use , and had solemnly sworn to pay it ; yet the Pope Commands that they shall be freed both from their e Oath , and paying any Vse . 4. If they went to kill and exterminate Hereticks in Person , and at their own Expences , then A Full f and Plenary Pardon of All their Sins here , and A Greater Degree of Glory hereafter , is ( by the Pope and that great General Council ) promised them . By the Premisses I think it evident , that if any of Queen Elizabeths Subjects ( after her Damnation and Excommunication by the Pope ) had by raising Arms against her publickly , or by Poyson or Pistol privately taken away her Life , it had neither been Rebellion , Treason , nor Murder , but an innocent Action ; And that not one of those which Aristotle calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Naturae Mediae , and Indifferent , which are morally neither good nor bad ; but ( in the Judgment of the Church of Rome , and upon those her approved Principles ) it had been an Action Morally Good , nay , ( which is far more ) Meritorious : For which they should have Remission of All their Sins here , and not only Heaven , but ( in it ) A higher Degree of Glory hereafter : And if it happened , that any of them miscarried in this their meritorious Act of killing Heretical Kings , and were ( according to their desert ) hang'd for Treason , then ( with the Pope and his Party ) they pass for Martyrs , and as such , shall be honour'd , and highly commended to Posterity . I wrong them not , Ribadeneira the Jesuit ( to omit many others ) in a g Book Licenced by the h Vice-Provincial of Toledo , approved by the Bishop of i Antverp , and k other Grave and Learned Men ( as they are there call'd ) I say , in this Book he has a l Century of Martyrs of his Society ; and amongst them , reckons m Campian , n Walpoole , o Southwell , p Garnett , q Oldcorne , &c. and calls them Martyrs ; who were Legally Convict here , and Justly Executed as Impious Traitors . God Almighty preserve our Gracious King from the Traiterous and Pernicious Conspiracies of those men , who ( by a strange delusion ) believe such Principles , and call Impious Traitors Holy Martyrs . The Premisses consider'd , there can be little reason to doubt , but the Popish Party ( as ever since the Reformation they constantly have , so they ) always will indeavour by secret Plots and Conspiracies , by Poyson , Pistols , or ( when they have Ability ) by open War , to ruin and utterly extirpate and destroy all the Protestants of this Nation ( King and Subjects ) who are by the Pope Declared and Excommunicated Hereticks , seeing there are such exceeding great Rewards ( aforemention'd ) assured to them , for doing it ; not only by private and fallible persons , but by the Constitutions of their Popes , and the Canons of their greatest and approved General Councils ; their Supream Judge and Infallible Guide , which all Papists ( by the Principles of their Religion ) are bound to obey , and act according to such Canons and Constitutions . And were they indeed ( what they pretend to ) Infallible , it were great folly and midness not to do so . For he is certainly a Fool , who ( having a Journey to go , on which the Eternal misery or felicity of his Soul depends ) will not follow an Infallible Guide . And ( which is further very considerable ) All their r Dignitaries in all Cathedral and Collegiate Churches , All who have Cure of Souls , All who are provided for , and preferr'd to any s Monastery , or Religious House whatsoever , be they of whatsoever Order of Regulars . And not only these ; but t All Doctors , Masters , Regents , and Professors of any Art or Faculty , whether they be of the Laity or Clergy , or Regulars of any Order whatsoever , in any Vniversity , publick School , or any where else , in Cities , Vniversities , Towns , Churches or Monasteries ; whether they profess Divinity , Canon or Civil Law , Physick , Philosophy , Grammar , or any other Liberal Art , publickly or privately , and all who take any Degrees in any Vniversity ; All these ( that is , almost all the Learned men in the Papacy ) by the u Disposition and Appointment of the Pope and Council of Trent , are to x promise , vow , and swear to obey the Pope as Peter ' s Successor and Christ's Vicar , and to receive , and without All Doubting to Profess all Things deliver'd , defin'd , and declared in the Sacred Canons , and General Councils , Especially in the Council of Trent ; and all this they swear to do most constantly so long as they live , and to take care ( to the utmost of their Ability ) that all under them , or committed to their Charge , shall do so too . And the Pope there further tells us , y That God Almighty did by the Holy Ghost Inspire the Trent Fathers to require , That this Oath should be taken . Seeing then there are so many thousands in the Church of Rome , who do and must take this cursed Oath , to Obey the Pope , and receive , and without doubting believe all their Rebellious Canons before mention'd , and ( to the utmost of their Power ) to perswade and induce all who are under their Cure and Charge ( that is , all the Laity in the whole Roman Church , for all of them are under the Charge and Cure of some of those who take that Oath ) to receive and believe them too . Hence it manifestly follows , 1. That the Church of Rome approves those impicus and rebellious Doctrines to which so many thousands swear , by the Command of the Pope and Trent Council . 2. That all their Ecclesiasticks ( Secular and Regular ) who have any Cure of Souls and Charge over others , are bound , not only by their Papal Constitutions and Decrees of their General Councils ; but by a Personal Promise , Vow , and Oath , ( in facinus Jurasse putes ) to believe and profess , and ( as there is opportunity ) to practise according to these Principles . 3. And hence it appears , That Queen Elizabeth was ( and all Protestant Kings and Princes are , and in the like case , will be ) in most eminent Danger of assassination by her Popish Subjects , especially after Pope Pius the fifth had damn'd , and deposed her , absolved all her Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance , and Commanded them ( on pain of Excommunication ) never to obey her , or any of her Laws or Commands ; it being also declared , by their Supream Infallible Power , That the killing the Queen , by open War publickly , or privately by Poyson or Pistol , had neither been Rebellion , Treason , nor Murder , but an Act morally good and meritorious ; by which they should merit , not only Heaven , but a higher Degree of Glory in it , and be , as Glorious Martyrs ( if they died in that Cause ) commended to Posterity ; Nay , when their Ecclesiasticks ( both Secular and Regular ) who had any Cure of Souls , or Authority and Charge over others , had promised , vow'd , and solemnly sworn , That they would obey the Pope as Christs Vicar , &c. I say , those who had such great Promises to allure them , and their Promise , Oath and vow to oblige them to it , would certainly indeavour ( as indeed they did , as will appear anon ) the ruin and destruction of that good Queen . Neither is this all . For 6. Lastly ; the Pope and his Party have further Inducements , more efficacious and powerful to perswade their Instruments to Assassinate Princes and Extirpate Hereticks , especially z Protestants , the greatest Enemies of their Antichristian Tyranny , and Papal Usurpations . For although to pious men , ( who really desire , and use the just means to obtain it ) the promise of Eternal Joys in Heaven , is the greatest Motive and Incouragement imaginable ; yet to such Impious and Prodigious Villains ( who will undertake to kill Kings and murder Innocents ) Heaven signifies no more , then the Diamond did to Aesop's Cock in the Fable , who preferr'd a Grain of Barly before it . And therefore , for such , ( and none but such will serve them in the Execution of such Execrable Villanies ) they have present and more prevailing Incouragements ; I mean Money and great Sums of Gold , or some vast Temporal Advantages to be injoy'd here ; which prevails more with such Persons , then the Promise of Heaven hereafter : I shall ( out of many ) give two or three Instances . As , 1. In the year . 1594. a Roderigo Lopez ( a Jew and Physician ) Stephen Ferriera Gama , and Emanuel Loisie ( two Portugals ) by the Roman Arts and Impiety , were hired , and undertook to Poyson Queen Elizabeth . Lopez had a rich Jewel sent him , and was ( by Contract ) to have b Fifty thousand Duckets ; which evidently appeared ( at their Trial ) by their own Confessions . And though Letters intercepted , and the Good Providence of God ( by whom King's Reign ) their Villany was detected , and they ( as Traitors ) justly Executed ; yet their Popish Desires and Indeavours were not less mischievous and impious , because the Good Providence of God graciously prevented the Execution of their Designs . 2. This , by the Mercy of God not taking Effect , ( for there is no Power or Policy can prevail against Divine Providence ) a little after in the c same year , Edmund York and Richard Williams , were ( by the same Roman Arts and Impiety ) hired to Kill the Queen . York ( at his Trial ) confess'd , That Holt the Jesuit , Hugh Owen , Jacomo de Francisco , and others , had offer'd him an Assignment of d Forty thousand Duckets , if he would Kill the Queen himself , or assist Richard Williams in Killing Her. This York confess'd at his Trial ; and that Holt the Jesuit ( in whose Hand the Assignment of Forty thousand Duckets was deposited ) kissing the Holy Host , swore that the Money should be paid so soon as the Queen was kill'd ; and bound York and Williams by an Oath , and the Sacrament of the Eucharist , To Dispatch it . In short , many others ( besides these named ) conspired the assassination and death of the Queen . For Instance ; ( to omit others ) 1. Dr. e Story , Ann. 1572. 2. f Somervil , Ann. 1583. 3. Dr. g Parry , Ann. 1585. by the Approbation and Incouragement of the Pope and Cardinal Como . 4. John h Savage , Ann. 1586. 5. Ant. i Babington ; and five or six more with him are incouraged and perswaded to Murder the Queen , in the same year , 1586. 6. k Moody , Ann. 1587. 7. Patrich l Cullen , Ann. 1594. 8. Edward m Squire , Ann. 1598. 9. n Winter and Tesmond the Jesuit , Ann. 1602. &c. We see there were many ( too many ) desperate Villains , who valued not their own , so that they might take away the Queens life ; and yet too few ( Divine Providence preventing their Impious Designs ) to Effect and Compass that ( more then Pagan ) Popish Conspiracy , which at ( so vast an Expence of Money ) the Pope and his Party designed and earnestly desired , and indeavour'd to Execute . 3. When all this would not do ; and the Pope and his Party plainly saw , that they could not cut off the Queen by Pistol , Poyson , or private Assassinations , horrendum & majus machinantur scelus : they design by Fire and Sword , by open War , utterly to destroy that good Queen , and all her Heretical ( that is , Loyal ) Subjects . And to this end , ( besides Plenary Indulgence and Pardon of all sins here , and the Kingdom of Heaven hereafter ) Pius the Fifth promises , and immediately gives two whole Kingdoms ( England and Ireland ) to Philip the Second , King of Spain ; as is notoriously known , and o confess'd by their own Popish Writers His Successors , Gregory the Thirteenth , and Sixtus the Fifth , renue and confirm the Excommunication of Elizabeth , and the donation of her Kingdoms ; and accordingly ( not with Gods , but ) with the Popes p Approbation and Blessing , in that memorable year 1588. the ( vainly supposed ) Invincible Armado was sent to destroy the damn'd Hereticks ( the Queen and her Loyal Subjects ) and take Possession of her Kingdoms , which the Pope had given him . The Pretences the Pope had to give those Kingdoms , ( for they were but miserable Pretences , void of all Reason and Justice ) were Two. 1. King John's Donation and q Resignation of his Crown to Pope Innocent the Third , about the year , 1213. when that King and the whole Nation groaned under many Miseries and Papal Oppressions . Which Act of King John was invalid and absolutely Null ; he having no just Power to give away his Kingdom . And even then declared to be Null ; not only by the English Barons and Nation , but by the King of r France and his Nobility , as Matthew Paris tells us . 2. Nor is it only Matthew Paris who says that the Kings of England and Ireland ▪ are ( since King John's time ) Tribuiaries to the Pope , ( as they pretend ) but their Historians , Canonists , and the Popes themselves . So s Matthew Westminster , Henry t Knighton , Cardinal Tuscus , &c. The Cardinal tells us , That the Pope is the Supream u Judge of All. That he can Depose the x Emperor , Kings , Dukes , and All who Acknowledge No Superior ; and that the Kings of England , and Sicilie are y Tributaries to the Church of Rome . And he who denies this Papal z Power , is No Christian . And for Ireland ; Pope John the Two and twentieth , in a Bull to our King Edward the Second , tells him , That his Predecessor , Adrian the Fourth , Gave the Kingdom of Ireland to Henry the Second , King of England , upon certain Conditions , which Conditions our King had not kept . And this ridiculous Bull we have in Matthew Paris , ad Ann. 1156. pag. 95. where he tells us , That all the Islands in the World , which are Christian , belong to Peter , and so to the Pope . See Archbishop Vsher of the Religion profess'd by the Ancient Irish , pag. 51. 92. 93. 94. &c. And upon these ( and such like ridiculous ) Pretenses , the Pope required Edward the Third to do him a Homage for the Kingdoms of England and Ireland , and the Arrears of One thousand Marks per Annum . All the Popes pretences were in a full Popish Parliament declared vain and evidently null ; as appears by my Lord b Cooke , and the Record before mention'd . Besides ; 't is certain that John was an Usurper , and had only Possession of the Crown , but no just Right and Title to it . For Elinor , Daughter to Jeffery his Elder Brother , was living , and was the true Heir of the Crown ; so that King John's Resignation of the Crown to the Pope , was absolutely null ; it being impossible he should give a Just Title to another , who had none himself . His second Pretence was , that the Queen being an Excommunicate and Deposed Heretick , ( as he was pleased to miscall her ) her Kingdom was forfeited to him , by the Canon of their great Lateran Council . Wherein 't is c declared , That such obstinate Persons ( as they call the Queen ) when they stood Excommunicate , and would not give Satisfaction , the Pope was to absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance , and give their Lands and Kingdoms to Catholicks : who by that Canon , were bound to Exterminate or Extirpate d all Hereticks . Upon the aforesaid Sandy Foundations , the Popes successively since King John's time , build their Right to the Crown of England ; and believe , ( or at least say , and would have others believe ) that the Imperial or Royal Power of England and Ireland is in them ; and our Kings only Beneficiarij & Feudatarij ( as the Civil Law calls them ) Feudataries to the Pope , of whom ( as their Supream Lord ) they hold their Kingdoms . Whence it was , that Pope Innocent the Third , in his Letter to Philip King of France , calls the King of England his e Vassal . And his Successor , Pope Innocent the Fourth ( with a Prodigious Antichristian Pride and Impiety ) calls our King ( Henry the Third was then King ) His Vassal , and ( which is more ) his Slave . What ( says he ) f Is not the King of England our Vassal ? Nay , that I may say more , our Slave ? These are his words , and expressions , of such prodigious Pride , as is absolutely Inconsistent with that great and exemplary Humility , which our blessed g Saviour practis'd in his own Person , and Commanded all ( even h Peter and his Apostles ) to imitate : But yet congruous enough , and consistent with the Hypocrisie of him , who would be call'd Servus Servorum Dei , the Servant of all Gods Servants ; and yet as the Man of Sin ( mention'd by the i Apostle ) Exalts himself above all that is called God , and ( with Pope Innocent the Fourth , in the place now cited ) calls Kings his Slaves and Vassals . 'T is true , we believe and know , that the Pope indeed had no Power to performe those aforesaid Promises ; and so in making them was ( to all intelligent , sober , and pious Persons ) not only impious , but ridiculous ; yet to those of his Popish Party , who ( having strong delusion to believe a Lye ) were perswaded he had Power to make good his Promises ; that he was Christs Vicar , Supream Head and Monarch of the Church ; that he had the Power of the Keys , and so could shut and open , keep out and let into Heaven whom he pleased , that he could by this Power Depose k Kings , and was Infallible and l never Err'd ( for these Erroneous and Impious Positions are m approved and received at Rome ) I say , such Promises , made by such a Person , were very great . And ( to such deluded Persons , who were perswaded of the truth and reality of them ) prevailing Incouragements , to make them desperately indeavour to Assassinate and Murder Queen Elizabeth . Forty or Fifty thousand Duckets promised , was great and intic●ing Wages for doing such a Work , and actually prevail'd with many to endeavour it . But when ( what the Pope promised Philip King of Spain ) two whole Kingdoms here , and the Kingdom of Heaven hereafter are promised for destroying the Hereticks ( the Queen and her Loyal Subjects ) this was such an offer , as could not be refused by any who desired ( as most do ) Wealth or Honour here ; or ( as all should do ) the Joys of Heaven hereafter . These were the Impious Policies , and Bloody Practices of Rome , to destroy Queen Elizabeth and her Protestant Subjects : and as their fear of the Protestant Religion , ( destructive of their Superstition and Idolatry ) continued , so their hate of it , and their desire and indeavours to destroy all the Professors of it . For the Queen being dead , in the beginning of King James his Reign ( upon the aforemention'd , or the like motives ) they undertook the Gunpowder n Conspiracy , ( such a horrid and hellish Villany , as no Turkish or Pagan Story can parallel ) wherein they indeavour'd , and ( if the Powerful Providence of Heaven had not hinder'd it ) had Assassinated , not not the King only , but the whole Kingdom , in its Representative . And further , ( to omit the bloody and barbarous Assassinations of o Henry the Third of France , by Jaques Clement , and of Henry the Fourth , by Raviliac , p incouraged to those Villanies by Jesuitical and Popish Principles and Promises ; for Raviliac confess'd , That it was the Book of Mariana the Jesuite , and the Traiterous Positions maintain'd in it , which induced him to that Prodigious Villany , the Murder of the King ; for which Cause that Book ( Damn'd by the Sentence of the Parliament and Sorbon ) was publickly burnt in Paris . I say , to let these , and such Instances pass , it is too well known and believ'd , that in the late q horrid and hellish Conspiracy ( continued and carried on , principally by the Jesuits ) to take away the Life of our Gracious King ( whom God preserve ) one of the Assassins had Fifteen thousand pounds pay'd or promised , and another , Thirty thousand Masses to be said for him , if he miscarried , to Incourage them to that Monstrous Popish Villany . Now their Impiety in this their Ingagement , was equal ; both undertaking the Commission of the same Sin , the Murder of their King : But their folly seem'd unequal . For Fifteen thousand pounds might possibly ( in this World ) have been some benefit to him who contracted for it : But the 30000. Masses , were altogether Insignificant , and could be no way beneficial or profitable to him to whom they were promised , either in this , or the World to come . The poor Miscreant was cozen'd by his Party , with the noise and number of their Masses . For they knew , and ( had he not been a Fool as well as Knave and Villain ) so might he too ; that those Masses could never do him any good . For even by their own approved and received Principles , killing of Hereticks ( especially an Excommnicated Prince ) was such a meritorious Work , as ( without any Masses ) deserved a Plenary Indulgence and pardon of all his Sins , and an higher place in Heaven ; and therefore he could not go to r Purgatory ( had there been any such Place ) nor could the Devil or the Pope punish him there , for such Sins as were absolutely pardon'd , and all the Punishment due to them remitted ; I say , they could not justly do it : or admit the Devil ( had he power and permission ) might be willing to punish an innocent Soul , which had no Sin to punish ; yet sure his Holiness ( who as Christs Vicar has the Keys of Purgatory as well as Heaven ) would not do , or at least not own ( for otherwise he does , and has done as Impious things ) the doing of that , which is so evidently injust . So that ( if their own Principles be true ) those Thirty thousand Masses could no way be profitable to that miserable deluded Person , in Purgatory , whither he was never to come ; and I suppose , they will not say , that their Masses here , are profitable to the glorify'd Saints and Martyrs in Heaven . 12. And here , ( for a more clear and distinct Explication of their Jesuitical and Popish Assassinations ) it will neither be Impertinent nor Improper to observe further , That although since the time of Hildebrand or s Gregory the Seaventh , the Antichristian Pride or Tyranny of the Pope and his Party , has been exceeding great , and pernicious to the Western Part of the World ; they both approving and practising the Excommunications and Depositions of Kings and Emperors , Absolutions of their Subjects from all Oaths of Allegiance , with Injunctions ( against the Law of Nature and Scripture ) never to Obey them : yet I do not find that the Popes or their Party approv'd or practis'd the Assassinations of Princes before Ignatius Loyola , and the unhappy Approbation and Confirmation of his Society , Ann. 1540. Nay , I find it Condemned , as Impious , Inhuman , and Barbarous ; not only by their Learned men , ( even their Canonists ) but by their Popes and Councils . That this may appear , I desire it may be consider'd , 1. That Pope Innocent the Fourth , about the year 1245. or 1246. makes a t Constitution in the General Council at Lions , ( and with the u approbation of that Council ) wherein he calls Assassinations x Horrid Inhumanity , and Detestable Cruelty , and an indeavour to kill Body and Soul : and then adds , That if any Prince or Prelate , any Person Ecclesiastical or Civil , shall procure any Assassin to kill any Christian , ( though the Effect do not follow ) or receive , conceal , or any way favour such Assassin , then such Person is ( Ipso facto ) Excommunicate , Deposed , and Deprived of all his Honour , Dignity and Revenue . This was the Judgment of Pope Innocent the Fourth about 435. years since ; and although for Antichristian Pride and Tyranny ( as in other things , so ) in his Impious Excommunication and Deposition of the Emperor Frederick , he was as bad as his Predecessors ; yet neither they nor he , were ( as yet ) arrived at the height of Impiety to approve Mahometan and Turkish Assassinations of Kings and Emperors . 2. About Eight and forty years after the making of his Constitution by Innocent the Fourth , Boniface the Eighth ( as Impious and Tyrannical as his Predecessors , was made Pope , and approved this Constitution of Innocent against Assassinations , and referr'd it into the Body of their y Canon Law ; where it still z remains in all Editions of that Law , even to this Day : and that ( to give a Authority to it ) with the Approbation and Confirmation of succeeding Popes ; particularly of Pius the Fourth , Pius the Fifth , and Gregory the Thirteenth . 3. And hence it is , that eminent Writers of the Church of Rome ( except the Jesuites and their Party ) do , even to this Day , generally Condemn all such Assassinations , as Impious , and to the Publick Pernicious . This evidently appears ( to say nothing of the Gloss ) by Cardinal b Turrecremata , Cardinal c Cajetan , Cardinal d Tuschus , Henry e Spondanus ( Bishop of Pamiez in France , ) Didacus f Couvarruvias ( Bishop of Segobia in Spain , &c. ) And here it is further observable , 1. That Pope Innocent the Fourth , in the aforesaid Decretal Constitution , speaks only of those Ancient , and properly so call'd Mahometan-Assassins ; and though he censures their Assassinations as Impious , yet he appoints not their Punishment . I know that the Author of the Gloss upon that Constitution ( Joh. Andreas Boniensis , was the man ) tells us ; g That the Punishments express'd there , are denounc'd against the Assassins , as well as those who procur'd or hired them to Assassinate any Christians . But the man is miserably mistaken ; for 't is Evident , and h Confess'd , That the Punishments contain'd in the Constitution , are denounced only against those Christians who hire and imploy those Impious Assassins . Excommunication ( and the Consequents of it ) is the Punishment mention'd in that Constitution ; which neither did , nor possibly could concern those Mahometan Assassins . For although the said Author of the Gloss , elsewhere tells us , That the Pope is i more then a pure man ; and Gods Vice-Roy ; yet certainly , he cannot do Impossibilities , and Excommunicate Mahometans and Infidels ; unless he can turn those out of the Christian Church , who never were , nor would be in it ; and deprive them of that Communion , which they never had . But although Pope Innocent the Fourth ( in the afore-mention'd Constitution ) speaks only of the Infidel and Mahometan Assassins , and of those Christians who procure or hire them to Murder Princes , and has nothing of any other , who are not of that Mahometan Society ; though they undertake and act the same Villanies ; yet those Great and Learned Canonists and Writers of the Popish Church ( before-named ) upon proportion and parity of Reason , justly Condemn all Christians who shall undertake and effect , or indeavour such Assassinations . Of these Christian Assassins , Cardinal Cajetan says — k That though they be not comprehended under the Censures of that Constitution , yet they Deserve both a Temporal and Eternal Death . And to the same purpose Covarruvias tells us , ( and he says it is the Common Opinion ) l That whosoever he be ( Christian or Mahometan ) who for Money given or promised , undertakes the Assassination of any Christian ; in this Case , both the Mandans and Mandatarius , both he that hires , and he who is hired to do such Villany , are highly guilty , and under the Censures , and the Severity of them : though he who is hired , do not actually effect the Assassination , if he really indeavour it . Nor is it only these I have named , who Damn this Impious , Mahometan : and Turkish Doctrine of Assassinating Kings and Princes . I believe , and ( from good Authority ) know , that many thousands more in the Communion of the Church of Rome do equally abhorr and detest it , especially in France , where their Divines and Parliaments ( famous for Learning and their General Defence of the Liberties of the Gallican Church , against the Usurpations and Tyranny of Rome ) in the year 1594. publickly Condemn'd this Mahometan and Jesuitical Doctrine , and declared it to be ( what indeed it is ) m Heretical , Prodigious , and Diabolical . 4. But all this notwithstanding , the Jesuites ( and others of their Party and Principles ) did , and do approve and practise that Diabolical Doctrine ; and when they conceive Princes to be Enemies to their Interest , or the Catholick Cause , ( as they call it ) indeavour ( by Lying Calumnies ) to disaffect the People , and to raise Rebellions against those Princes ; that so they may cut them off , by Publick War and Seditions ; and when this succeeds not , by private Assassinations . This is ( by sad Experience ) notoriously known to our Western World ; as may appear by the Premisses , and further Testimonies of their own Roman Catholick Historians ( in this Case ) of Indubitable Truth and Veracity . Thuanus tell us , n That in those Bloody Wars in France , in the Reign of Henry the Third ; it was some of the Religious and Regulars , especially the Jesuites , who by an Industrious , and ( I add ) Impious Diligence , did first Alienate the People from their Obedience to their Prince , and then sollicited them to Rebellion . I know that those words ( Ac Jesuitarum Patrum Imprimis ) are not to be found in those Editions of Thuanus we have , being left out by the Arts and Frauds of those who corrupt all Authors who have any thing against their Errors or Impieties ; but we are assured that those words were in the o Original Copy of Thuanus his History . But when this would not do , and they saw the King could not be cut off by a Rebellious War , and publickly ; they perswade and incourage Jaques Clement ( a Desperate Villain ) to Assassinate his Prince ; who August the First , 1589. did the Execrable Act , and Murder'd his King. Thuanus tells us , p That Friar Clement was incouraged to Commit that Prodigious Parricide by the furious Sermons and Declamations of their New Divines , q Especially of the Jesuites , who publickly taught them , That it was lawful , nay r Meritorious to kill a Tyrant , and if he outlived the Fact , he should be a Cardinal at s Rome ; and if he died , a t Saint in Heaven . And accordingly when he was dead ( by a Death he deserved ) his Party caused his u Picture to be cut in Brass , adorned their Churches and Chambers with it , counted him a Saint and Martyr , and ( as such ) made their Addresses and Prayers to him . Horrid Superstition and Popish blindness , not to put a vast difference between a Martyr of Jesus Christ , and an Impious Traytor and Murtherer of his King. 2. After this , in the year 1594. Johan . Chastell undertakes and indeavours the Assassination of Henry the Fourth of France , struck him in the Mouth , but ( the good Providence of Heaven protecting that Prince ) did not effect his Impious Design . Now if you ask , How any who pretends to be a Christian , could have a Conscience so seared , or a Soul possess'd with so Prodigious an Insensibility , as not to tremble at the very thought of Committing such a horrid and inhuman Villany ? a Davila will tell you , That he was a Disciple of the Jesuites ; That he himself freely confessed , that he was bred up in the Schools of the Jesuites , and had often heard it discours'd , and disputed , That it was not Only Lawful , but Meritorious to Kill Henry of Bourbon , a Relapsed Heretick , and Persecutor of the Holy Church ; That Father Gueret a Jesuite , was his Confessor , &c. so that being possess'd with their Impious Principles and Perswasions , he undertook that prodigious and damnable Parricide . In short , it was notoriously known to all France , that the Jesuites both approved and designed the Execrable Assassination of their King. Whence it was , ( as Davila goes on ) that the Parliament of Paris pass'd this Sentence — That Father Guignard and Gueret ( Jesuites ) should be Condemned to the Gallows ; that the rest of the Jesuites ( profess'd or not profess'd ) should be banished out of France , as Enemies to the Crown and publick Tranquility , their Goods and Revenues Jeiz'd and distributed to pious Vses , &c. And it had been well for France had they stood banished still , and never return'd . For about Sixteen years after , what Johan . Chastell impiously indeavour'd , that bloody Villain Raviliac , May the Fourteenth , 1610. effected ; and with Monstrous Impiety , and a Cursed hand Murder'd his King , Henry the Fourth ; And it was the Jesuites , and their Traiterous Principles , which moved and incouraged him to Commit that Monstrous Unchristian and Antichristian Parricide . For ( after the Fact was done ) Raviliac freely and publickly confessed , That it was the Jesuite Mariana's Book which moved and incouraged him to that Impious Design . I know that the Jesuites did then indeavour to b free themselves from the Odium of that Impious Fact ; as if they had neither approved nor incouraged that Monstrous and Mahometan Assassination . Sed quid verba audiam , cum facta videam ? This c was only a ridiculous indeavour , Aethiopem Lavare , to wash a Blackamore , and do Impossibilities . It is evident , That their approved Doctrine and Principles in Mariana , ( and many others ) was the Motive which induced Raviliac to Murder his Prince . Which Doctrine has never been Condemned by any Publick Act of their Society , nor by the Inquisitors in any Index Expurgatorius ; now for them to approve those Traiterous Principles , and deny the Consequents of them , is most irrationally to approve and grant the Premisses , and yet deny the Conclusion . 5. But this ( though bad enough ) is not all . For it is not only the Jesuites and their Accomplices , but the Pope too , ( their Supream Judge , thom they d believe to be Infallible , both in Matters of Faith and Fact ) who approved their Seditious and Traiterous Principles of Rebellion and Assassination of Princes . Thuanus speaking of the Jesuites Practices to stir up the People to Rebellion in the time of Henry the Third of France ; he adds — e That these things were well known to the Pope , who sent Breves and Bulls secretly to the Heads of those Rebels , whereby they were incouraged to Rebel . Afterwards , when that Prodigious Villain Jaques Clement had Murder'd the said King , f Sixtus the Fifth then Pope , did not only approve the Fact , but ( in a premediated Oration , publickly spoke in the Consistory ) blasphemously compares it ( in respect of its greatness and amiableness ) to our blessed Saviours Incarnation and Resurrection : and then highly Commends the Murderer ( for his Virtue , Courage , and Zealous Love of God ) above Eleazar and Judith , &c. And ( to omit the rest ) pronounceth the Murder'd King Eternally Damn'd , as having Committed the g Sin against the Holy Ghost . This the Historian ( though a Papist ) modestly and justly Censures , as a Fact h Extreamly Insolent and Vnworthy the Moderation of a Pastor , ( especially the Supream Pastor of the Church , Christs Vicar , and St. Peter's Successor , as they call him ) . And then he tells us of Anti-Sixtus , ( or the Answer to Pope Sixtus his Oration ) and says , 1. That it had been more for the i Credit of the Pope and the Holy Apostolick Sea , that his Oration had been suppress'd , then ( as it was by those of the League ) Published . 2. That Anti-Sixtus ( or the Answer to it ) though it was something sharp and bitter , k yet the Popes Oration abundantly deserved it , in which were Many Things Absurd and Impious . This was the Judgment of that Faithful and Excellent Historian , ( though a Papist ) concerning the Erroneous and Impious Principles of the Pope and Jesuites . 6. Nor is this all ; For although , only privately to approve and incourage Rebellion and Assassination of Kings and Princes , be an Execrable Villany , to be abhorr'd by all men ( especially Christians ) as being repugnant to that clear Light of Nature and Scripture , to common Reason and Religion ; yet in Publick Writings to vindicate and justifie such Actions , to perswade the World , that they are not only morally good , but meritorious : This argues a higher degree of Impiety and Impudence . We know ( by sad Experience ) that many Pagans and Christians have blasphem'd their Gods , committed Adulteries , Murders , Perjuries , &c. yet we do not find , that any Christians , ( the Jesuites and their Accomplices excepted ) or any sober Pagan ( who acknowledg'd a God ) did ever justifie Blasphemy , Adultery , Murder , or Perjury ; but when they were Apprehended , Convict and brought to Execution , they would confess the Crime , pray for Pardon , and desire others to pray for them . But the Jesuites ( and those possess'd with their Principles ) though they be Convict , and Legally Condemn'd for Rebellion and Assassination of Princes , yet they neither do , nor can repent ; believing such Actions not to be any Vices , but Vertues ; and themselves ( if they suffer for them ) not Traytors or Murderers , but Holy Martyrs . That this is their approved and received Doctrine , which they publickly defend , and industriously ( in their Publick Writings ) indeavour to justifie , is evident to the Western World , and may appear by the Premisses . Yet being a thing of such great concern , ( omitting Mariana , Emanuel Sa , Sanctarellus , and others before mentioned ) I shall only add Two or Three Eminent Testimonies , in further confirmation of it . First then , Fran. l Suarez , Publick and Prime Professor of Divinity in the University of Conimbra in Portugal , handling that Point , how , and in what Cases a Tyrant may , ( by any private Person ) be Murder'd : And having told us , that a Tyrant was either , 1. Tyrannus m Titulo ; one who , ( without any just Title ) usurp'd the Government , to the ruine of the Common-weal . 2. Tyrannus n Administratione ; one who having a just Title , ruled Tyrannically . And he there tells us , That all Christian o Kings are such Tyrants , who induce their Subjects to Heresie , Apostasie , or Schism . So that all Protestant Princes ( we may be sure ) are such Tyrants , though he there name only King James of happy Memory . Having Premised this , he gives the state of the Question : Thus , 1. He does ( in the General ) give us two Cases , wherein it is Lawful for a Subject to kill his King. 1. In defence of his p own Life . If a King invade Sempronius to kill him , he may , in defence of his own life , take away the Kings . 2. In defence of the q Commonwealth . This in the General . But then 2. For a Tyrant in Title , he absolutely declares it , as a thing r commonly received amongst them ; That such a Tyrant may be lawfully kill'd , by Any Private Person , who is a Member of that Commonwealth , if there be no other Means to free it from such a Tyranny . And least it should not be observ'd , 't is set in the s Margent , That such a Tyrant may Lawfully be kill'd . So that the Case is ( with him ) out of all doubt , That any private man may kill a Tyrant in Title ; and the Pope is Judge who is such a Tyrant . Whence it evidently follows , That no Princes can have any Security ( as to the Preservation of their Kingdoms or Lives ) longer then they please the Pope . For if he declare any of them Tyrants , ( as many times , with Execrable Pride and Impiety , he has done ) Excommunicate and Depose them ; then by this Jesuitical and Papal Doctrine , any Private Person , ( any of their Subjects especially ) may Assassinate and Murder them . 3. For those Princes who have a just Title to their Dominions , and are ( as they call them ) Tyrants not in Title , but in their Injustice and Impious Government : He tells us , 1. That t all Protestant Princes being Hereticks are such Tyrants . 2. That being Hereticks , they are by their u Heresie , Ipso facto , and presently deprived ( aliquo modo ) in some manner , of all Right to their Dominions . 3. That the Pope ( as their x Superior , to whom even Supream Princes are Subjects ) may totally and absolutely depose and deprive them of all their Dominions and right to Govern. 4. When the Pope has pass'd such Sentence , and deprived them of their Dominions ; if afterwards they meddle with the Government , they become every y way Tyrants ( both Titulo & Administratione ) . And then , 5. After such z Sentence pass'd by the Pope , such Kings or Supream Princes may be dealt with , as Altogether , and Every Way Tyrants , and Consequently may be kill'd by Any Private Person . 4. And though these be Prodigious Errors , Unchristian , and indeed Antichristian Impieties ; such as neither ours , nor any Language can fully express ; yet this is not all : The Jesuite further declares , That though a Pagans anciently had , and still have Power , to Depose their Tyrannical Kings ; yet in Christian Commonwealths , they have such dependence upon the b Pope , that without his Knowledge and Authority , they should not depose their King : For he may Command and Prohibit the People to do it . And he gives Instances , when People have consulted the Popes , and by their Counsel and Consent Deposed their Kings . So ( he says ) c Chilperick was Deposed in France , and Sancius Secundus in Portugal . And ( to make up their Errors and Impieties full ) he further tells us , — d That all Christian Kingdoms and Commonwealths do so far depend upon the Pope , that he may not only Counsel the People , and Consent to their Deposition and Assassination of their Tyrannical Princes ; But he may Command and Compel them to do it , when he shall think it sit , for avoiding Schisms and Heresies : That is indeed , for the rooting out and ruine of the true Protestant Religion , and establishing their Roman Superstition and Idolatry . And to conclude , he further declares , That ( in such Cases ) the Popes Command ( to Murder a Deposed King ) is so far from being any Crime , that it is e Superlatively Just. I might here cite Cardinal f Tolet , Guliel . g Rossaeus , and a hundred such others , who approve , and in their Publicks Writings ( Approved and Licenced , according to the Decree of their h Trent Council , by the Auhority of their Church ) justifie this Impious and Antichristian Doctrine of Deposing and Assassinating Heretical Kings : but this I conceive a needless work . For , 1. Suarez himself declares it to be the received Doctrine of their Church , and cites many of their Eminent Writers to prove it ; which , any may see , who is not satisfied with those before cited . 2. The Licencers of Suarez and his Book are ( for Dignity in their Church and for Learning ) so great , and ( for Number ) so many , and the Commendations they give Suarez and his Work so high , that there neither is , nor can be any just Reason to doubt , but this Doctrine was approved at Rome , and by the Ruling part of that Church ( the Pope and his Party ) believed and incouraged , as a Doctrine asserting the Popes Extravagant , and ( as they call it ) Supernatural i Power , and so their Common Interest . Let the Reader consult the Censures prefix'd to Suarez his Book , and he will find all these following to Approve and Licence it . First , Three great Bishops , all of them Counsellors to his Catholick Majesty . 2. Two Provincials of the Society ; one of the Jesuites in Portugal , the other of those in Germany . 3. Academia , Complutensis , the University of Alcala de Henares approves it too . 4. Last●● the k Supream Senate ( Court or Congregation ) of the Inquisitors , do also approve and licence it , and this they do by l Commission from Peter de Castello , Vice-Roy of Portugal , and in Matters of Faith Supream inquisitor . The Premisses impartially consider'd , I think we may truly say , That it is not only Suarez , or some particular or private Persons , but the Church of Rome , and her Ruling part , which approves this Impious and Trayterous Doctrine : Which may further appear ( besides their Approbations and Licences ) from the great Commendations they give Suarez and his Book and Doctrine . And here 1. For Suarez ; They say , m That he was a Contemner of Humane things , and a most Valiant Desender only of Piety and Catholick Religion : And ( for his Excellent Wisdom ) the Common Master , and another Augustine of that Age. — That for his great Zeal for the Catholick Faith , he was a most Famous Author , and a most Eminent Divine . That he was a n Most Grave , and most Religious Writer ; whose Works the World , ( the Popish World ) does Honour , Admire , and Love , &c. 2. And for his Book , and the Doctrine contained in it , They say , That all o things in his Book , are Religiously Consonant to Sacred Scripture , to Apostolical Traditions , General Councils , and Papal Decrees ; ( this last we admit , and they profess it to be true ) . And hence , if they may be believed , who expresly affirm it themselves , it evidently follows , That this Traiterous Doctrine is approved by the Pope , and is Consonant to his Decrees . And those Publick Censors of Suarez his Book severally add ; That they find p Nothing ( and therefore not the Assassinations of Kings ) in it , against the Orthodox Faith , ( the Roman Faith they mean ) but many things which do defend the Faith. The University of Alcala de q Henares ( to omit the rest ) more fully testifies — That they read Suarez his Book with all possible Diligence , and found Nothing in it repugnant to the Catholick Faith ; nor was there Any Thing in it which ought not to be Approved and Commended . And then add , ( that we may be sure they spoke cordially and deliberately ) That there was Nothing in that whole Work , which All of them did not approve ; so that they were All of the same Mind and Judgment . Nay , we are further told , That he had Composed that Work , by r More then Human Helps ; and therefore they Judge it s Most Worthy to be Published , for the Publick , and Common Benesit of the Whole Christian World , and a Signal Victory of their Faith over Heresies . Such are the Commendations of Suarez his Book and Doctrine ; so that we may be sure that it is Approved and Received at Rome . And here let me further add , that when King James had Published his Apology for the Oath of Allegiance , and Sir Henry Savil Translated it into Latin ; the Latin Copy was ( by the Popish Party ) immediately sent to Rome , and ( by the Pope ) t Condemned there , as Impious and Heretical : From Rome it was sent to Suarez , who ( by the Popes Command ) was to Confute and Answer it . He undertook and finished the Answer , sent it to Rome , where it was highly approved , and afterwards Printed and Published with all those Approbations and Commendations before mention'd . But these Positions need no further proof , that they are own'd and publickly approved by the Pope and his Party . I shall only add ; When King u James had charged Bellarmine and the Church of Rome , with this Rebellious and Impious Doctrine , of deposing Kings , absolving Subjects from all Oaths of Allegiance and Fidelity , &c. x Gretser in his Answer , has these memorable words — y We do not deny , ( says he ) but freely Profess , that the Pope , upon just cause , ( and he is Judge of that ) may Excommunicate and Depose Princes , and Absolve their Subjects , from their Oath of Allegiance . And then he adds — z That the Subjects are bound in Conscience to Obey the Popes Sentence ; not only in the Cases mentioned , But in a All other of the like Nature . And this impious and traiterous Doctrine of Gretser , is not only approved by b the Provincial of the Jesuites in Germany , and the Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ingolstade ; but his whole Book ( and so those mentioned , and many more such Rebellious and Impious Positions ) Was Approved at Rome , by the Suffrage of Most Learned Divines . This the said Provincial of the Jesuites , and the c Rector of the University of Ingolstade expresly testifie , in their Publick and Printed Approbations of Gretsers Book . The Premisses , and Traiterous Popish Principles consider'd , ( which are received and believed at Rome ) though men may d wonder at the Beast , ( the Pope and his Party ) and that any , ( who would not only be thought Christians , but the only Catholicks in the World ) should maintain , and publickly justifie such Principles : yet we need not wonder , that such Persons should practise and act according to such Principles , and continually indeavour ( especially after the Anathema of Pius the Fifth ) by Rebellions at home , and Invasions from abroad , to rob Queen Elizabeth of her Crown and Kingdoms , and of her Life too , by Roman and Mahometan Assassinations . I say , we need not wonder at this . For let the aforesaid Doctrines ( which they approve and constantly contend for ) be granted , ( That the Pope is Supream Judge and Monarch of the World ( directè or indirecte ) that all Kings and Emperors are His Subjects , that he has Power to Depose and Deprive them of their Kingdoms , that when he has Judicially deprived them , any Private Person may Murder them ; that he has Power to Absolve their Subjects from all Obligations and Oaths of Allegiance , and to Command them , upon pain of an Anathema never to obey any of their Princes Laws or Commands ; that the People may depose their King , with His Consent and Counsel ; and that he may Command and Compel them to do it ; and this so d oft as he shall Think it Good for the Spiritual Health of the Kingdom . ( Prodigious Error and Impiety ! as if Rebellion , Assassinations and Murdering their Kings , conduc'd to the Salvation of the Subjects . ) I say , these Erroneous and Impious Doctrines granted , and ( as they are at Rome ) believ'd , it is certain , that ( so far as they have opportunity and ability ) they will ( as they ever have done ) prosecute their Interest , and practise according to those Principles ; and all Christian Kings will be in perpetual danger to loose their Crowns , their Kingdoms , and their Lives too ; unless they can please the Pope , and become his dutiful Servants , and indeed Slaves to his Anti-Christian Tyranny . I say no Christian King , Tros Tyriusve , Papist or Protestant can be out of eminent Danger , where such Doctrine is , by such Doctors maintain'd . We have sad and certain Instances of this Truth : For , 1. Henry the Third and Fourth of France were neither Calvinists nor Lutherans , but declared Sons of the Roman Synagogue ; yet because they did not Comply with the Popish Interest , in that degree and measure , the Pope and his Party expected , they fatally fell by the Traiterous and Prodigious Villany of bloody Assassins , Ridente & gaudente Roma ; The Pope and his Jesuitical Party , ( with an Extasie of Joy ) Approving and Commending the Treason , and ( in their Writings and Pictures ) Canonizing the Traitors . 2. For Protestants , and ( as they call them ) Heretical Princes , their danger ( proportionable to Romes hatred of them ) is greater . They may ( by the Power and Gracious Providence of God ) want ability , but they neither do , nor ( unless they renounce their Erroneous and Impious Principles ) ever will want a desire and indeavour to ruine those they call Hereticks , either by open Hostility and Rebellions , or by Poyson , Pistols , and private Assassinations . Their many known Plots and Conspiracies against Queen Elizabeth , King James , Charles the Martyr , and his Gracious Majesty now Reigning , ( whom God preserve ) are undeniable Demonstrations of this Truth . The Ark of God and Dagon , Light and Darkness , Truth and Error , the Bible and Popish Bullary , Protestancy and Popery cannot possibly Consist , and be in Peace . Nothing is ( or can be ) so destructive of Darkness and Error , as Truth and Light ; And 't is evidently known to this Western World , That the Evangelical Light and Truth , which the Protestants have haphily and clearly discovered , to the long deluded Church of God , have awakened thousands , to a detestation of that Superstition and Idolatry , under which they formerly lay , to the dishonour of God , and ruine of their Souls , and to a shaking and great diminution of the Papal Monarchy and Tyranny ; so many Kingdoms forsaking Rome , and shaking off the Heavy and Intollerable Yoke of Sin and Popish Servitude . Et hinc illae Lacrymae ; Hence it is , that the Pope , and his inraged Party , when they cannot , by any probable pretence of Reason confute , what they call Heresie , ( the Protestant Religion ) they indeavour to Confound and ( by Fire and Sword ) Consume the Hereticks — Aeterna bella , pace sublatâ , gerunt , Jurant odium , nec prius hostes esse desinunt , quam esse desinunt . They excite and incourage e Princes of their Profession , to persecute and destroy all Protestants in their Dominions ; and their barbarous and bloody Poet has told us , how they desire it to be done ; Vtere Jure Tuo Caesar , Sectámque Lutheri Ense , Rota , Ponto , Funibus , Igne neca . Use thy Power Caesar , let Lutherans be slain , By Fire , Rack , Halter , Sword , or drown'd i th' Maine . DAMNATIO ET EXCOMMUNICATIO Henrici VIII . REGIS ANGLIAE EJUSQUE FAUTORUM , Cum aliarum ADJECTIONE POENARUM . Paulus Episcopus , Servus Servorum Dei. Ad futuram Rei Memoriam . EJVS qui immobilis permanens , sua Providentia , Ordine mirabili dat cuncta moveri , disponente Clementiâ , vices , licet immeriti gentes in Terris , & in Sede Justitiae Constituti , juxta quoque Prophetae Hieremiae vaticinium Ecce Te Constitui super Gentes , & Regna , ut evellas , & destruas , aedisices , plantes , praecipuum super Omnes Reges Vniversae Terrae , cunctosque populos obtinentes Principatum , ac illum qui pius , & misericors est , & vindictam ei , qui illam praevenit paratam temperat , nec quos Impoenitentes videt severa ultione Castigat , quin prius Comminetur , in assidue autem peccantes , & in peccatis perseverantes , cum Excessus Misericordiae sines praeteriunt , ut saltem metu poenae ad Cor reverti cogantur , Justitiae vires Exercet , imitantes , & Incumbenti Nobis Apostolicae solicitudinis studio perurgemur , ut cunctarum Personarum nostrae Curae Coelitùs Commissarum salubri Statui solertius Intèndamus , ac Erroribus , & Scandalis , quae hostis Antiqut versutia imminere conspicimus , propensius obviemus , Excessusque , & Enormia , ac scandalosa Crimina congrua severitate Coerceamus , & juxta Apostolum inobedientiam ovium promptius ulciscendo , illorum perpetratores debitâ Correctione si Compescamus , quod eos Dei iram provocasse poeniteat , & ex hoc aliis Exemplum Cautelae salutaris accedat . Sect. 1. Sane cum Superioribus Diebus nobis relatum fuisset , quod Angliae Rex , licet Tempore Pontisicatûs Fel. recor . Leonis Papae decimi Praedecessoris nostri diversorum Haereticorum Errores saepe ab Apostolica Sede , & Sacris Conciliis praeteritis Temporibus damnatos , & novissimè Nostra Aetate per Perditionis Alumnum Martinum Lutherum suscitatos , & innovatos , Zelo Catholicae Fidei , & Erga dictam Sedem , devotionis servore inductus , non minus doctè , quam piè per quendam Librùm per eum desuper Compositum & eidem Leoni Praedecessori , ut eum Examinaret , approbaret , oblatum Confutasset , ob quod , ab eodem Leone Predecessore , Vltra dicti Libri cum magna Ipsius Henrici Regis Laude & Commendatione , approbationem , Titulum Defensoris Fidei reportaverit , à rectâ Fide & Apostolico tramite devians , ac propriae salutis , famae & honoris immemor , Postquam Carissima in Christo Filia nostra Catherina Angliae Regina , Illustri sua Progenie Conjuge , cum qua publicè in facie Ecclesiae Matrimonium Contraxerat , & per plures Annos Continuaverat , ac ex qua , dicto constante Matrimonio prolem pluries susceperat , nulla Legitima subsistente Causa , & contra Ecclesiae Prohibitionem dimissa , cum quadam Anna Bolena , Muliere Anglica , dicta Catherina adhuc vivente , de facto Matrimonium Contraxerat , ad deteriora prosiliens , quasdam Leges , seu Generales Constitutiones edere , non erubuit , per quas , subditos suos ad quosdam Haereticos , & Schismaticos Articulos tenendos ; Inter quos & hoc erat , quod Romanus Pontifex Caput Ecclesiae , & Christi Vicarius non erat , & quod ipse in Anglicâ Ecclesiâ Supremum Caput Existebat , sub Gravibus etiam mortis poenis cogebat . Et his non Contentus , Diabolo Sacrilegij Crimen suadente , quamplures Praelatos etiam Episcopos , aliásque Personas Ecclesiasticas , etiam Regulares , necnon Seculares sibi ut Haeretico , & Schismatico adhaerere , ac Articulos praedictos sanctorum Patrum decretis , & sanctorum Conciliorum statutis , immo etiam Ipsi Evangelicae veritati contrarios , tanquam tales alios damnaros approbare , & sequi nolentes , & intrepíde recusantès capi , & carceribus mancipari . Hísque similitèr non Contentus , mala malis accumulando , bonae mem . Jo. H. S. vitalis Presbyter Cardinalis Roffen . quem ob Fidei Constantiam , & vitae sanctimoniam , ad Cardinalatus Dignitatem promoveramus , cum dictis Haersibus & Erroribus consentire nollet , horrendà immanite & deterstanda saevitiâ , publicè Miserabili supplicio tradi , & decollari mandaverat , & secerat Excommunicationis , & Anathematis , aliásque gravissimas sententias , censuras , & poenas in Literis , ac Constitutionibus recolendae mem . Bonifacij Octavi , Honorij Tertij , Roman . Pontificum Praedecessorum Nostrorum desuper Editis Contentas , & alias in tales à jure latas damnabilitèr incurrendo ac Regno Angliae , & Dominiis , quae tenebat , necnon Regalis fastigiis Celstudine , ac praefati Tituli praerogativâ , & honore se Indignum reddendo . Sect. 2. Nos licet ex eo , quod prout non Ignorabamus , Idem Henricus Rex in Certis Censuris Ecclesiasticis quibus à Piae Memoriae Clemente Papa Septimi etiam Praedecessore nestro , postquam humanissimis literis , & paternis Exhortationibus , multìsque Nunciis , & mediis , Primo & Postremo , etiam Judicialiter , ut praefatam Annam à se dimitteret , & ad Praedictae Catherinae suae verae Conjugis Consortium rediret srustra monitus fuerat , innodatus Extiterat , Pharaonis duritiam imitando , per Longum Tempus in Clavium Contemptum Insorduerat , & Insordescebat , quod ad Cor rediret vix sperare posse videremus ob Paternam tamen Charitatem , qua in minoribus Constituti donec in Obedientiâ , & Reverentia Sedis praedictae permansit , eum prosecuti sueramus , útque clarius videre dere Possemus , an Clamor qui ad nos delatus fuerat ( quam certè etiam Ipsius Henerici Respectum falsum esse disiderabamus ) verus esset , statuimus ab ulteriori contra Ipsum Henricum Regem processu ad Tempus abstinendo , hujus Rei veritatem diligentius Indagare . Sect. 3. Cum autem debitis diligentiis desuper factis clamorem ad Nos , ut praefertur , delatum , verum esse , simúlque , quod dolentèr referimus , dictum Henricum Regem ita in Profundum malorum descendisse , ut de Ejus Recipiscentiâ nulla penitùs videatur spes haberi posse , reperimus . Nos attendentes veteri Lege Crimen Adulterij notatum , lapidari Mandatum , ac Auctores Schismatis hiatu terrae absorptos , eorúmque sequaces Coelesti Igne Consumptos , Elimámque Magum viis Domini Resistentem per Apostolum Aeterna severitate damnatum suisse , volentesque ne in districto Examine Ipsius Henrici Regis & Subditorum suorum , quos secum in Perditione trahere videmus , Animarum Ratio à Nobis Exposcatur , quantum Nobis ex alto conceditur providere contra Henricum Regem , Ejúsque Complices , Fautores , Adbaerentes & sequaces ; & in Praemissis quomodolibet culpabiles , contra quos , ex eo quod Excessus , & delicta praedicta adeo manisesta sunt , notiora , ut nulla possint tergiversatione celari absque ulteriori morâ ad Executionem procedere Possemus , benignius agendo , decrevimus infrascripto modo procedere . Sect. 4. Habita itáque super his cum venerabilibus Fatribus Nostris S. R. E. Cardinalibus deliberatione maturâ , & de Illorum Consilio , & Assensu praefatum Henricum Regem , Ejusque Complices , Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores & Sequaces , ac quoscúnque alios in Praemissis , seu eorum aliquo quoquomodo Culpabiles , tam Laicos , quam Clericos , etiam Regulares , cujuscúnque Dignitatis , Status , Gradus , Ordinis , Conditionis , Praeeminentiae , & Excellentiae existant ( quorum Nomina , & Cognomina perinde ac si Praesentibus Intersererentur , pro sufficienter expressis haberi volumus ) per viscera Misericordiae Dei Nostri hortamur , & requirimus in Domino , quatenus Henricus Rex à praedictis Erroribus prorsus abstineat , & Constitutiones , seu Leges praedictas , sicut defacto eas fecit , revocet , Casset , & annullet , & Coactione Subditorum suorum ad eas Servandas , necnon Carceratione , Captura , & Punitione illorum , qui ipsis Constitutionibus . seu Legibus Adhaerere , aut eas servare noluerint , & ab aliis Erroribus praedictis penitus , & Omnino abstineat , & si quos Praemissorum occasione Captivos habeat , relaxet . Sect. 5. Complices verò , Fautores , Adhaerentes , & Sequaces dicti Henrici Regis in praemissis , & circa ea Ipsi Henrico Regi super his de cetero non adsistant , nec adhaereant , vel faveant , nec ei Consilium , Auxilium , vel Favorem , desuper praestent . Sect. 6. Alias si Henricus Rex , ac Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores , & Sequaces hortationibus , & requisitionibus hujusmodi modi non audiverint cum Effectu , Henricum Regem , Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores & Sequaces , ac alios Culpabiles praedictos , Authoritate Apostolicâ , ac ex certâ nostra Scientiâ , & de Apostolicae Potestatis Plenitudine tenore Praesentium in virtute Sanctae Obedientiae , ac sub Majoris Excommunicationis Latae Setentiae , à quà etiam praetextu cujuscúnque Privilegij , vel facultatis , etiam in forma Confessionalis , cum quibuscúnque efficacissimis Clausulis à Nobis , & Sede praedicta quomodolibet Concessis , etiam iteratis vicibus innovatis , ab alio quam à Romano Pontifice , praeterquam in mortis Arliculo Constituti , ita tamen , quod si aliquem absolvi contingat , qui postmodum Convaluerit , nisi post Convalescentiam , Monitioni , & Mandatis nostris hujusmodi paruerit cum Effectu , in eandem Excommunicationis Sententiam reincidat ) absolvi non possint . Sect. 7. Necnon Rebellionis , & quoad Henricum Regem , etiam Perditionis Regni , & Dominiorum Praedictorum , & tam quoad eum , quam quoad alios Monitos supradictos , supra & infra scriptis poenis , quas si dictis Monitione & Mandatis , ut praefertur , non paruerint , eos , & eorum singulos , Ipso facto respectivè incurrere volumus , per Praesentes Monemus ; eísque , & eorum cuilibet districtè praecipiendo Mandamus , quatenus Henricus Rex per se , vel Procuratorem Legitimum , & sufficienti Mandato suffultum , Infra Nonaginta , Complices vero , Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores & Sequaces , ac alij in Praemissis quomodolibet Culpabiles supradicti , Seculares & Ecclesiastici , etiam Regulares , Personaliter , Infra Sexaginta dies Compareant Coram Nobis , ad se super Praemissis legitimè Excusandum , & Defendendum , alias videndum , & Audiendum Contra eos , & eorum singulos etiam Nominatim , quos sic Monemus , quatenus expediat , ad Omnes , & singulos Actus , etiam Sententiam Definitivam , Declaratoriam , Condemnatoriam , & Privatoriam , ac Mandatum Excusativum procedi . Quod si Henricus Rex , & alij Moniti Praedicti Intra dictos terminos eis , ut praefertur , respectivè praesixos , non Comparuerint , ad Praedictam Excommunicationis Sententiam per tres dies , post Lapsum dictorum Terminorum Animo , quod absit , sustinuerint Indurato , Censuras Ipsas aggravamus , & successive reaggravamus , Henricúmque Regem Privationis Regni , & Dominicorum praedictorum , & tam eum , quam alios Monitos Praedictos , et eorum singulos , Omnes et singulas alias poenas praedictas Incurrisse , ab omnibúsque Christi Fidelibus , cum eorum bonis , perpetuo diffidatos esse . Et si Interim ab humanis decedat , Ecclesiastica debere carere Sepulturâ , Auctoritate et Potestatis Plenitudine praedictis decernimus , et Declaramus , eósque Anathematis , Maledictionis , et Damnationis Aeternae mucrone percutimus . Sect. 8. Necnon quae praefatus Rex Henricus quomodolibet , et ex quavis Causa tenet , habet , aut possidet , quam diu Henricus Rex , et alij Moniti praedicti , & eorum singuli in aliis per dictum Henricum Regem non tentis , habitis , aut possessis permanserint , & Triduo post eorum inde recessum , & alia quaecunque , ad quae Henricum Regem , & alios monitos praedictos post Lapsum dictorum Terminorum declinare contigerit , Dominia , Civitates , Terras , Castra , Villas , Oppida , Metropolitanásque , & alias Cathedrales , ceterásque Inferiores Ecclesias , necnon Monasteria , Prioratus , Domos , Conventos , & Loca Raligiosa , vel Pia Cujuscunque , etiam S. Benedicti , Cluniacen . Cistercien . Praemonstraten . ac Praedicatorum , Minorum , Eremitarum . S. Augustini , Carmelitarum , & aliorum Ordinum , ac Congregationum , & Militarium quarumcunque in Ipsis Dominiis , Civitatihus , Terris , Castris , Villis , Oppidis , & Locis Existentiâ , Ecclesiastico supponimus Interdicto ; ita ut illo durante in illis etiam praetextu cujuscunque Apostolici Indulti Ecclesiis , Monasteriis , Prioratibus , Domibus , Conventibus , Locis , Ordinibus , aut Personis , etiam quacunque Dignitate Fulgentibus Concessi , praeterquam in Casibus à jure permissis , ac etiam in illis alias quam Clausis Januis , & Excommunicatis & Interdictis Exclusis , nequeant Missae , aut alia Divina Officia Celebrari . Sect. 9. Et Henrici Regis , Complicúmque , Fautorum , Adhaerentium , Consultorum , Sequacium , et Culpabilium praedictorum Filij , Poenarum ut hic in hoc Casu par est , participes sint , Omnes et singulos ejusdem Henrici Regis ex dictâ Annâ , ac singulorum aliorum praedictorum Filios natos , et nascituros , aliosque descendentes , usque in eum gradum , ad quem Jura poenas in Casibus hujusmodi extendunt ( Nemine excepto , nulláque minoris aetatis , aut Sexus , vel Ignorantiae , vel alterius cujusvis Causae habitâ ratione ) Dignitatibus et Honoribus in quibus quomodolibet Constituti Existunt , seu quibus gaudent , utuntur , potiuntur , aut muniti sunt , necnon Privilegiis , Concessionibus , Gratiis , Indulgentiis , Immunitatibus , Remissionibus , Libertatibus , et Indultis , ac Dominiis , Civitatibus , Castris , Terris , Villis , Oppidis , et Locis , etiam Commendatis , vel in Gubernium Concessis , et quae in seudum , emphyteusim , vel alias à Romanis , vel aliis Ecclesiis , Monasteriis , et Locis Ecclesiasticis , ac Secularibus , Principibus , Dominiis Potentatibus , etiam Regibus et Imperatoribus , aut aliis Privatis , vel publicis Personis quomodolibet habent , tenent , aut Possident , Ceterisque Omnibus bonis , Mobilibus et immobilibus , Juribus et Actionibus , eis quomodolibet Competentibus privatos , dicta bona feudalia , vel emphyteutica , et alia quaecunque , ab aliis quomodolibet obtenta , ad directos Dominos , ita ut de illis libere desponere possint , Respectivè devoluta , et eos qui Ecclesiastici fuerint , etiamsi Religiosi existant , Ecclesiis etiam Cathedralibus , et Metropolitanis , necnon Monasteriis et Prioratibus , Praeposituris , Praepositatibus , Dignitatibus , Personatibus , Officiis , Canonicatibus , et Praebendis , aliísque Beneficiis Ecclesiasticis per eos quomodolibet obtentis , privatos , et ad alia , ac alia in posterum obtinenda Inhabiles esse , simplicitèr decernimus , et declaramus ; eósque sic respectivè Privatos , ad alia et alia quaecunque similia , ac dignitates , honores , administrationes , et officia , jura , ac feuda in Posterum obtinenda , Auctoritate et Scientia , ac Plenitudine similibus Inhabilitamus . Sect. 10. Ipsiúsque Henrici Regis , ac Regni omniúmque aliorum Dominiorum , Civitatum , Terrarum , Castrorum , Villarum , Fortaliciorum , Arcium , Oppidorum , & Locorum suorum , etiam de facto obtentorum , Magistratus , Judices , Castellanos , Custodes , & Officiales quoscunque , necnon Communitates , Vniversitates , Collegia , Feudatarios , Vassallos , Subditos , Cives , Incolas , & Inhabitatores etiam Forenses , dicto Regi de facto Obedientes , tam Saeculares , quam si qui rationis alicujus temporalitatis Ipsum Henricum Regem in Superiorem recognoscant , etiam Ecclesiasticos , à Praefato Rege , seu Ejus Complicibus , Fautoribus , Adhaerentibus , Consultoribus , & Sequacibus supradictis deputatis , à juramento fidelitatis , jure vassilitico , & omni erga Regem , & alios praedictos subjectione absolvimus , ac penitùs liberamus , eis Nihilominùs sub Excommunicationis poena Mandantes , & ab ejusdem Henrici Regis , suorúmque Officialium , Judicum , & Magistratuum quorumcúnque . Obedientiâ penitùs , & omnino recedant , nec illos in Superiores recognoscant , néque illorum Mandatis obtemperent . Sect. 11. Et ut alij eorum Exemplo perterriti , discant ab hujusmodi Excessibus abstinere , eisdem Auctoritate , Scientiâ & Plenitudine , volumus , & decernimus , quod Henricus Rex , & Complices , Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores , Sequaces , & alij in praemissis Culpabiles , Postquam alias poenas praedictas , ut praefertur respectivè incurrerint , necnon Praefati descendentes , extunc Infames existant , & ad Testimonium non admittantur , Testamenta , & Codicillos , aut alias dispositiones , etiam Inter vivos concedere , & facere non possint , & ad alicujus Successionem ex Testamento , vel ab Intestato , necnon ad Jurisdictionem , seu Judicandi Potestatem , & ad Notariatus Ossicium , Omnesque Actus Legitimos quoscunque ( ita ut eorum Processus , sive Instrumenta atque alij Actus quicunque , nullius sint Roboris , vel momenti ) Inhabiles existant ; & Nulli Ipsis , sed Ipsi aliis super quocunque debito , & Negotio , tam Civili quam Criminali , de jure respondere teneantur . Sect. 12. Et Nihilominus Omnes , & singulos Christi sideles , sub Excommunicationis , & aliis Infrascriptis poenis , monemus , ut monitos , Excommunicatos , aggravatos , interdictos , privatos , maledictos , & damnatos , praedictos evitent , & quantum in eis est , ab aliis evilari faciant , nec cum eisdem , seu Praefati Regis Civitatum , Dominiorum , Terrarum , Castrorum , Comitatuum , Villarum , Fortaliciorum , Oppidorum , & Lecorum praedictorum Civibus , Incolis , vel Habitatoribus , aut Subditis , & Vassallis , Emendo , Vendendo , Permutando , aut quamcunque Mercaturam , seu Negotij Exercendo , Commercium , seu aliquam Conversationem , seu Communionem habeant , aut vinum , granum , sal , seu alia victualia , arma , pannos , merces , vel quasvis alias Mercantias , vel Res per Mare in eorum Navibus , Triremibus , aut aliis Navigiis , sive per Terram cum Mulis , vel aliis Animalibus deferre , aut Conducere , seu deferri , aut Conduci facere , vel delata per illos recipere , pulicè vel occultè , aut talia facientibus auxilium , consilium , vel favorem , publicè , vel occultè , vel indirectè quovis quaesito colore , per se , vel alium , seu alios quoquomodo praestare praesumant , quod si fecerint , ultra Excommunicationis praedictae , etiam Nullitatis Contractuum , quos inirent , necnon Perditionis Mercium , Victualium , & bonorum omnium delatorum , quae Capientium fiant , poenas similitèr eo Ipso Incurrant . Sect. 13. Ceterum quia Convenire non videtur , ut cum his qui Ecclesiam Contemnunt , dum praesertìm ex eorum pertinaciâ spes Corrigibilitatis non habetur , hi qui Divinis Obsequiis vacant Conversentur , quod etiam illos tutè facerè non posse dubitandum est , Omnium & singularum Metropolitan : & aliarum Cathedralium , Ceterarúmque Inferiorum Ecclesiarum , & Monasteriorum , Domorum , & Locorum Religiosorum & Piorum quorumcunque , etiam S. Augustini , S. Benedicti , Cluniacen . Cistercien . Praemonstraten . ac Praedicatorum , Minorum , Carmelitarum , alorúmque quorumcúnque Ordinum , & Militiarum , etiam Hospitalis Hierosolymitani , Praelatibus , Abbatibus , Prioribus , Praeceptoribus , Praepositis , Ministris , Custodibus , Guardianis , Conventibus , Monachis , & Canonicis , necnon Parochialium Ecclesiarum Rectoribus , aliísque quibuscunque Personis Ecclesiasticis in Regno & Dominiis praedictis Commorantibus , sub Excommunicationis , ac Privationis administrationum , & Regiminum Monasterirum , Dignitatum , Personatuum , Administrationum , ac Officiorum , Cannonicatuúmque , & Praebendarum , Parochialium Ecclesiarum , & aliorum Beneficiorum Ecclesiasticorum quorumcunque quomodolibet qualificatorum , per eos quomodolibet obtentorum poenis Mandamus , quatenus Infra quinque dies post Omnes & singulos Terminos praedictos Elapsos , de Ipsis Regno , & dominiis , dimissis tamen aliquibus Presbyteris in Ecclesiis , quarum Curam habuerint pro administrando Baptismate parvulis , & in Poenitentia decedentibus , ac aliis Sacramentis Ecclesiasticis , Quae Tempore Interdicti Ministrari permittuntur , exeant , & discedant , néque ad Regnum , & Dominia praedicta revertantur , donec Moniti , & Excommunincati , aggravati , reaggravati , privati , maledicti , & damnati praedicti Monitionibus , & Mandatis nostris hujusmodi obtemperaverint , & meruerint à Censuris hujusmodi absolutionis Benesicium obtinere , seu Interdictum in Regno , & dominiis praedictis fuerit sublatum . Sect. 14. Praeterea si Praemissis non obstantibus Henricus Rex , Complices , Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores , & Sequaces praedicti in eorum pertinacia perseveraverint , nec Conscientiae stimulus eos ad Cor Reduxerit , in eorum forte Potentia , & armis Considentes , Omnes & singalos Duces , Marchiones , Comites , & alios quoscunque , tam Saeculares , quam Ecclesiasticos , etiam sorenses , de facto dicto , Henrico Regi Obedientes , sub ejusdem Excommunicationis , ac Perditionis bonorum suorum ( quae , ut Infra dictus similiter Capientium siant ) poenis , requirimus , & monemus , quatenus Omni mora , & Excusatione Postposita , eos & eorum singulos , ac Ipsorum Milites , & Stipendarios , tam Equestres , quam Pedestres , aliósque quoscunque qui eis cum armis faverint , de Regno & Dominiis praedictis , etiam vi armorum , si Opus suerit , expellant , ac quod Henricus Rex , & ejus Complices , Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores , & Sequaces Mandatis nostris non obtemperantes Praedicti de Civitatibus , Terris , Castris , Villis , Oppidis , Fortalitiis , aut aliis Locis Regni , & Dominij Praedictorum , se non Intromittant , procurent , Eis sub Omnibus & singulis paenis praedictis Inhibentes , ne in favorem Henrici ejúsque Complicum , Fautorum , Adhaerentium , Consultorum & Sequacium , aliorúmque Monitorum Praedictorum Mandatis Nostris non obtemperantium , arma Cujusiibet Generis offensiva , & defensiva , Machinas quoque bellicas , seu tormenta ( artellarias nuncupata ) sumant , aut teneant , seu illis utantur , aut armatos aliquos , praeter Consuetam familiam parent , aut ab Henrico Rege Complicibus , Fautoribus , Adhaerentibus , Consultoribus , & Sequacibus , vel aliis in Regis Ipsius favorem paratos , quomodolibet , quavis occasione vel Causâ , per se , vel alium , seu alios publicè vel occultè , directè vel indirectè teneant , vel receptent , aut dicto Henrico Regi , seu Illius Complicibus , Fautoribus , Adhaerentibus , Consultoribus , & Sequacibus Praedictis , Consilium , Auxilium , vel quomodolibet ex quavis Causa , vel quovis quaesito Colore sive Ingenio , publicè vel occultè , directè vel indirectè , tacitè vel expressè , per se vel alium seu alios Praemissis , vel aliquo Praemissorum praestent , seu praestari faciant quoquomodo . Sect. 15. Praeterea ad dictum Henricum Regem facilius ad sanitatem , & praefatae Sedis Obedientiam reducendum , Omnes & singulos , Christianos Principes , quacunque etiam Imperiali & Regali Dignitate fulgentes , per viscera Misericordiae Dei Nostri ( Cujus Causa agitur ) hortamur & in Domino Requirimus , eis Nihilominùs , qui Imperatore & Rege Inferiores fuerint , quos propter Excellentiam Dignitatis à Censuris Excipimus , sub Excommunicationis poena Mandantes ne Henrico Regi Ejúsque Complicibus , Fautoribus , Adhaerentibus , Consultoribus , & Sequacibus , vel eorum alicui per se vel alium seu alios , publicè vel occultè , directè vel indirectè , tacitè vel expressè , etiam sub praetextu Confoederationum aut Obligationum quarumcunque , etiam Juramento , aut quavis aliâ firmitate roboratarum , & saepius geminatarum , à quibus quidem Obligationibus , & Juramentis Omnibus , nos eos , & eorum singulos eisdem Auctoritate & Scientia , ac plenitudine per praesentes absolvimus , Ipsásque Confoederationes & Obligationes tam factas , quam in Posteram faciendas , quas tamen ( in quantum Henricus Rex , & Complices , Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores , & Sequaces praedicti circa praemissa , vel eorum aliquod se directè vel indirectè Juvare possent sub eadem poena fieri prohibemus , nullius Roboris vel Momenti , nullásque , irritas , Cassas , inanes , ac pro Infectis habendas fore decernimus & declaramus , consilium , auxilium , vel favorem , quomodolibet , praestent ; quinimo si qui illis , aut eorum alicui ad praesens quomodolibet assistant ab Ipsis omnino , & cum Effectu recedant . Quod si non fecerint postquam Praesentes publicatae & Executioni demandatae fuerint , et dicti Termini lapsi fuerint , Omnes & singulas Civitates , Terras , Oppida , Castra , Villas , & alia Loca eis Subjecta , simili Ecclesiastico Interdicto supponimus , volentes Ipsum Interdictum donec Ipsi Principes à Consilio , Auxilio & Favore Henrico Regi & Complicibus , Fautoribus , Adhaerentibus , Consultoribus , & Sequacibus praedictis praestando , destiterint , perdurare . Sect. 16. Insuper tam Principes praedictos , quam quoscunque alios , etiam ad Stipendia quorumcunque Christi fidelium Militantes , & alias quascunque personas , tam per Mare , quam per Terras , Armigeros habentes , similitèr hortamur , & requirimus , & nihilominùs eis in virtute Sanctae Obedientiae Mandantes , quatenus contra Henricum Regem , Complices , Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores , & Sequaces praedictos , dum in Erroribus praedictis , ac adversus Sedem praedictam , rebellione permanserint , Armis Insurgant , eosque & eorum singulos , persequantur , ac ad Vnitatem Ecclesiae , & Obedientiam dictae Sedis redire cogant , & compellant ; & ram eos , quam Ipsorum Subditos , & Vassallos , ac Civitatum , Terrarum , Castrorum , Oppidorum , Villarum , & Locorum suorum Incolas , & habitatores , aliásque Omnes singulas Personas supradictis Mandatis nostris , ut praefertur , non obtemperantes , & quae praefatum Henricum Regem Postquam Censuras & Poenas praedictas incurrerit , in Dominum quomodolibet etiam de facto recognoverint , vel ei quovis modo obtemperare praesumpserint , aut qui eum , ac Complices , Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores , Sequaces , ac alios non obtemperantes praedictos , ex Regno & Dominiis praedictis , ut praefertur , expellere noluerint , ubicúnque eos invenerint , eorúmque bona , mobilia & immobilia , mercantias , pecunias , navigia , credita , res , & Animalia , etiam extra territorium , dicti Henrici Regis ubilibet Consistentià , Capiant . Sect. 17. Nos enim bona , Mercantias , Pecunias Navigia , Res , & Animalia , praedicta sic capta , In proprios eorum usus convertendi , eisdem Auctoritate , Scientia , & Potestatis Plentudine , Plenariam Licentiam , Facultatem & Auctoritatem concedimus , illa omnia ad eosdem Capientes plenariè pertinere , & spectare , & Personas ex Regno , & Dominiis praedictis Originem trahentes , seu in illis Domicilium habentes , aut quomodolibet habitantes , Mandatis nostris praedictis non obtemperantes , ubicúnque eos Capi Contigerit , Capientium servos fieri decernentes , Praesentésque Literas , quoad hoc , ad omnes alios cujuscúnque Dignitatis , Gradus , Status , Ordinis , vel Conditionis fuerint , qui Ipsi Henrico Regi , vel ejus , Complicibus , Fautoribus , Adhaerentibus , Consultoribus , & Sequacibus , aut aliis Monitionibus , & Mandatis nostris hujusmodi , quoad Commercium non obtemperantibus , vel eorum alicui victualia , arma , vel pecunias subministrare , aut cum eis Commercium habere , seu Auxilium , Consilium , vel Favorem per se vel alium , seu alios publicè vel occultè , directè vel indirectè , quovis modo contra tenorem Praesentium praestare praesumpserint , extendentes . Sect. 18. Et ut praemissa facilius iis quos concernunt innotescant , universis & singulis Patriarchis , Archiepiscopis , Episcopis , & Patriarchalium Metropolitan . & aliarum Cathedralium , & Collegiatarum Ecclesiarum Praelatis , Capitulis , aliísque Personis Ecclesiasticis Saecularibus ac quorumvis Ordinum Regularibus , necnon Omnibus , & singulis etiam Mendicantium Ordinum Professoribus Exemptis , & non Exemptis , ubilibet , Constitutis , per easdem Praesentes , sub Excommunicationis , & Privationis Ecclesiarum , Monasteriorum , ac aliorum Beneficiorum Ecclesiasticorum , Graduum quoque & Officiorum , necnon Privilegiorum , & Indultorum quorumcúnque etiam à Sede praedicta quomodolibet Emanatorum poenis ipso facto Incurrendis , praecipimus , & mandamus , quatenus Ipsi , ac eorum singuli , si , & Postquam vigore Praesentium desuper requisiti fuerint , Infra tres dies Immediatè sequentes praefatum Henricum Regem , Omnesque alios & singulos , qui supradictas Censuras , & poenas Incurrerint , in eorum Ecclesiis Dominicis , & aliis Festivis diebus , dum Major Inibi populi Multitudo , ad divina Convenerit , cum Crucis vexillo , pulsatis Campanis , & accensis , ac demum Extinctis , & in Ter●am projectis , & Conculcatis Candelis , & aliis in similibus servari solitis Caeremoniis servatis , Excommunicatos publicè nuncient , & ab aliis nunciari , ac ab Omnibus Arctius evitari faciant , & mandent , necnon sub supradictis ▪ Censuris & Poenis , Praesentes Literas , vel earum transumptum , sub forma Infrascripta Confectum , Infra Terminum trium Dierum , Postquam , ut praefertur requisiti fuerint , in Ecclesiis , Monasteriis , Conventibus , et aliis eorum Locis , publicari , et assigi faciant . Sect. 19. Volentes , Omnes , et singulos cujuscúnque Status , Gradus , Conditionis , Praeeminentiae , Dignitatis , aut Excellentiae fuerint , qui quominus Praesentes Literae , vel earum transumpta , Copiae seu Exemplaria , in suis Civitatibus , Terris , Castris , Oppidis , Villis , et Locis Legi , et affigi , ac publicari possint , per se , vel alium , seu alios , publice vel occultè , directè vel indirectè impediverint , easdem Censuras , et Paenas Ipso facto Incurrere . Et cum fraus et dolus nemini debeant Patrocinari , ne quisquam ex his , qui alicui Regimini , et Administrationi deputati sunt Infra Tempus sui Regiminis , seu Administrationis , Praedictas Sententias , Censuras , et Poenas sustineat , quasi p●st dictum Tempus Sententiis , Censuris et Poenis praedictis amplius Ligatus non existat , quemcúnque qui dum in Regimine , et Administratione existens , monitioni , et mandato nostris , quoad praemissa , vel aliquid eorum obtemperare noluerit , etiam deposito Regimine , et Administratione hujusmodi , nisi paruerit , eisdem Censuris , et Poenis subjicere decernimus . Sect. 20. Et ne Henricus , Ejusque Complices , et Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores , et Sequaces , aliíque quos praemissa Concernunt , Ignorantiam eorundem Praesentium Literarum , et in eis Contentorum praetendere valeant , Literas ipsas ( in quibus Omnes et singulos , tam juris , quam facti , etiam solemnitatum , et Processuum , Citationúmque Omissarum defectus , etiamsi Tales sint , de quibus Specialis , et expressa mentio facienda esset , propter Notorietatem facti , Auctoritate , Scientia , et Potestatis plenitudine similibus , supplemus ) in Basilicae Principis Apostolorum , et Cancellariae Apostolicae de urbe , et in partibus in Collegiatae Beatae Mariae Brugen . Tornacen . et Parochialis de Dunkercae , Oppidorum Moriensis Dioecesis , Ecclesiarum valvis Affigi ; et Publicari Mandamus , decernentes quod earundem Literarum Publicatio sic facta , Henricum Regem , Ejúsque Complices , Fautores , Adhaerentes , Consultores et Sequaces Omnesque alios , et singulos , quos Literae Ipsae quomodolibet Concernunt , perinde eos arctent , ac si Literae Ipsae eis Personalitèr Lectae , et Intimatae fuissent , cum non sit verisimile , quod ea , quae tam patentèr fiunt , debeant apud eos incognita remanere . Sect. 21. Ceterum quia difficile foret Praesentes Literas ad singula quaeque Loca , ad quae necessarium esset deferri , volumus , et dictâ Auctoritate decernimus , quod earum transumptis manu publici Notarij Confectis , vel in Almâ Vrbe Impressis , ac Sigillo alicujus Personae in Dignitate Ecclesiastica Constitutae munitis , ubíque eadem fides adhibeatur quae Originalibus adhiberetur si essent exhibitae vel ostensae . Sect. 22. Nulli ergo Omnino hominum liceat hanc paginam Nostrae Monitionis , Aggravationes , Reaggravationis , Declarationis , Percussionis , Suppositionis , Inhabilitationis , Absolutionis , Liberationis , Requisitionis , Inhibitionis , Hortationis , Exceptionis , Prohibitionis , Concessionis Extensionis , Suppletionis , Mandatorum , Voluntatis , et Decretorum Infringere , vel ei ausu Temerario contraire . Si quis autem hoc attentare Praesumpserit , Indignationem Omnipotentis Dei , ac Beatorum Petri , et Pauli Apostolorum ejus se noverit Incursurum . Dat. Romae apud S. Marcum , Anno Incarnationis Dom. 1435. 3. Kal. Septemb. Pont. Nostri Anno Primo . FINIS . A SHORT ACCOUNT OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS BOOK . I. THE Bull of Pope Pius the Fifth ( containing the Damnation and Excommunication of Queen Elizabeth ) in Latin and English. P. 1. II. The first Observation , that Pius V. was neither the first nor last Pope , who Excommunicated and damn'd Kings and Emperors . For , 1. before him Pope Constantine , Gregory the Second , Greg. the Third , Greg. the Seventh , Gregory the Ninth , Innocent the Fourth , Paul the Third , &c. did the same thing : And , 2. Gregory the Thirteenth , and Sixtus the Fifth , after him . p. 7. III. The second Observation , concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Title prefix'd to Pius the Fifth his Bull ; that it is Damnatio & Excommunicatio Elizabethae . Where it is proved , 1. That not only Pius the Fifth , but other Popes ( not short of him in time or impiety ) use the same hard word ( Damnation ) in the Titles prefix'd to their damnatory Bulls , wherein they Excommunicate Kings and Emperors . 2. The uncharitable Error , and Invalidity of their reasons they do , or can pretend for doing so . p. 15. IV. The third Observation , wherein , 1. The notion and significations of the word Damnation are explain'd . 2. That by the word Damnation in their Anathema's and Damnatory Bulls , not only some temporal loss or punishment ( as to their Bodies or Estates ) but eternal Damnation of Body and Soul , is meant , by the Pope and his Party ; together with the invalidity of their reasons and pretences to justifie them in this particular . p. 20. V. The fourth Observation , wherein we have , 1. The grounds on which Pius the Fifth , and other Popes , build their Power to Excommunicate and Depose Kings ; and that in the Supremacy and Plenitude of Power , which ( they pretend ) our blessed Saviour gave to Peter , and in him to all his Successors . So that Peter ( and so every Successor of his ) was constituted a Prince over all Nations and Kingdoms , to pull up , and throw down , to dissipate and destroy , to plant and build , &c. 2. That such Power was ( by our blessed Saviour ) given to Peter and his Successors , they indeavour to prove out of Scripture , ( and in their Bulls , cite the places ) Gen. 1. 16. and Jer. 1. 10. 3. The ridiculous inconsequence and impertinence of such Papal reasoning , which shews them rather to be Fools , then Infallible . p. 26. VI. The fifth Observation , against the Pope's pretended Supremacy . 1. That Peter's Supremacy ( much less the Popes ) cannot be proved from Matth. 10. 2. where he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , primus ( or as in the Latin Fathers ) Princeps Apostolorum . 2. Nor from that place , Matth. 16. 18. 19. 3. That St. Paul in Scripture , hath a far better pretence to the Supremacy and the Bishoprick of Rome , then St. Peter ; and yet neither he , nor any for him , ever pretended to any Papal Supremacy . 4. How our blessed Saviour and the Apostles ( yet Peter no more then the rest ) are in Scripture , said to be Foundations of the Church . 5. That the Power of the Keys was given to every Apostle , as well and as much as to Peter . Nay , 6. To every Bishop and Priest , as is expresly affirm'd in the Authentick Offices of the Roman Church , and in their Trent Council and Catechism . 7. That every Apostle was Christ's Vicar as well as Peter ; that the Jesuites profess , ( and in their Institutions do publish it ) that their Superiors are Christ's Vicars . 8. That Pasce Oves , Joh. 21. 15. 16. 17. ( though usually ) is most impertinently urged to prove Peter's Supremacy . 9. That the 28. Canon of the Council of Chalcedon ( which utterly overthrows the Popes Supremacy ) is basely corrupted by Gratian and the Canonists , and ( that it might not appear ) left out of their old Editions of the Councils . p. 36. 37. &c. VII . The sixth Observation , In which a further examination and confutation of the Popish pretended grounds for the Popes Supremacy . That they neither do , nor can prove that Peter ever had any such Monarchical Supremacy over the Apostles and all Christians , with the reasons why they cannot . 2. If it were granted ( which is evidently untrue ) that he had such a Power , yet it neither does , nor can appear ( by Scripture , or any just Medium ) that it was hereditary , and to pass to his Successor , but might be personal , and ( as his Apostleship did ) dye with him . 3. And if it were granted ( which neither is , nor ever can be proved ) that that Power was hereditary , and to be transferr'd to his Successor , yet they neither have , nor can have any just grounds to prove , that the Bishop of Rome is that Successor , and not the Bishop of Antioch , where ( they say ) St. Peter first sate . 4. That 't is certain from Scripture , that Peter neither was nor could be ( as they pretend ) 25. years Bishop of Rome . 5. Nor can it ( by Scripture ) appear that ever he was at Rome , nor can Rome be meant by Babylon , 1. Pet. 5. 13. 6. Nor can it appear by any just Testimonies of Antiquity , that ever he was at Rome . Papias is the ground and Author on whom they rely for that Fable ; and he an ignorant Person , and Arch-Heretick . 7. That to get credit to Papias , they have impiously corrupted Eusebius . 8. If it were granted , that he was at Rome , yet they have no ground or probability for it , that he was Bishop there ; seeing there are far greater probabilities grounded on Scripture , that Paul was Bishop there , than Peter ( or any for him ) can pretend to ; and yet they do not say , nor ( without contradiction to their own Principles ) can say , that he was Bishop there . 9. That those other honorary Titles or Epithites , which their Authors every where use as proper to the Pope , and marks of his Supremacy , or ( at least ) superiority over all Bishops ( such as Apostolicus Pontifex Summus , Papa , Sedes Apostolica , Vicarius Christi , Cathedra Apostolica , Successor Petri , &c. ) are impertinently made use of , without any proof or probability . p. 91. 92. &c. VIII . The seventh Observation , concerning the Censures , Punishments and Curses contain'd in this Bull ; and the Antichristian impiety of them . 1. He miscalls the Queen , an Heretick , a favourer of Hereticks , a Slave of Impiety , and then Anathematizes her , and cuts her off from the Unity of Christ's Body . 2. He deposes and deprives her of her pretended Right to the Crown , and of all manner of Dignity , Dominion and Priviledge . 3. He absolves her Subjects , and all others , who are bound to her by any Oath , from all their Oaths , and all debt of Fidelity and Obedience , and that for ever . 4. He severely prohibits them all , to obey any of her Laws or Commands . 5. If any of them do otherwise , he Excommunicates and Curses them , whether they be Papists or Protestants . p. 145. 146. &c. IX . The eighth Observation , That the Pope is the great Antichrist , the Man of Sin , and Son of Perdition , spoken of 2. Thess. 3. 4. That the Opinions of H. Grotius , ( that Caius Caligula ) and of Dr. Hammond , ( that Simon Magus was Antichrist ) are inconsistent and contradictory to each other , and to themselves . That they are ( both of them ) repugnant to Scripture , the Judgment of the primitive Fathers , of Protestants and Papists , and the sense of Christendom for about 1600. years after our blessed Saviour , &c. p. 151. 152. &c. ad p. 199. X. The ninth Observation , What the Popes Power is , ( and whence they pretend to have it ) which inables them with Authority to sit Judges , and pass damnatory Sentences against Supream Princes , for Heresie . 2. What that Heresie is , and who the Hereticks , who by the Pope are so severely damn'd . 3. What those punishments are , which they pretend they may , and ( when and where they can ) actually do inflict on such Hereticks . 4. Of the Waldenses , that ( by the testimony of their Enemies ) 1. They had continued ever since the Apostles times . 2. That there was scarce any Christian Country in which they were not . 3. That they lived justly before men , and believ'd all things well of God , and all the Articles of the Creed : but their fault was , They said Rome was Babylon , and the Pope Antichrist , &c. p. 199. 200. &c. XI . Observation the Tenth , That Queen Elizabeth stood Excommunicate , before the Damnatory Bull of Pius the Fifth , and by whom , &c. p. 213. XII . Observation the Eleventh , Of the damnable and pernicious Doctrines and Conclusions , which evidently follow , upon their approv'd and practised Principles , of Deposing and Anathematizing Kings and Supream Princes . That 't is neither Treason , Murder , or any Sin , for Subjects to Assassinate their King , if he be Excommunicate by the Pope . Nay , that it is a meritorious Act , for which they promise them vast rewards here , and an higher degree of glory in Heaven hereafter , &c. p. 219. 220. &c. XIII . The Damnation and Excommunication of Henry the Eighth by Pope Paul the Third , Decemb. 17. Anno 1538. FINIS . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A69677-e270 a The reason why I cannot expect the favour or assent of my Adversaries , ( especially of the Jesuites ) is , because Maldonate tells us , That Luther and Calvin ( Arch-Hereticks ) are not to be followed , though they speak things consonant to Scripture — Cum sacris literis consent ancadocent , Non Sequendi . Nay Calvinists and Lutherans , Even When They Speak Truth , are no more to be hearken'd to , Then To the Devil . Lutherani & Calvinistae à Deo , & Ecclesia tanquam perniciosissimi Haeretici declarati , non magis , Etiam Cum Vera Dicunt , Audiendi sunt , Quam Diabolus , Maldonat . Comment . in Matth. 16. vers . 6. p. 336. C. Nor is this Maldona●'s peculiar Opinion ; for the Censor Librorum , who approves his Commentaries on Matthew , tells us , That Omnia in illis juxta Orthodoxam Apostolicae ac Romanae Ecclesiae Doctrinam Summa Cum Eruditione exponi . Ita Joh. Clavius De villo . Libr. Censor . b Nullus dubitand● Locus , quin Cultus Latriae qui Vero Deo debetur , sic huic Sacramento exhibendus . Concil . Trid. Sess. 13. De Encharistâ . cap. 5. c Matth. 26. 27. And they obey'd , and did all drink . & Marc. 14. 23. d Cardinal Bona , De Rebus Liturgicis , l. 2. c. 18. pag. 491 : 492 : Paris . 1672. Lindanus Panopliae , l. 4. c. 56. p. 342. Colon . 1575. e Vid. Hieronym . adversus Luciferianos , in sine . Tom. Operum . 1. p. 230. Col. 2. G. f Cyprian Epist. 71. ad Quintum fratrem , p. 140. in Editione Rigaltij , Paris . 1648. g Extant dictae Regulae Indici Tridentino praesixae , in Calce Concilij Tridentini . Antv. 1633. h Libri Vulgari Idiemate de Controverstis inter Catholicos & Haereticos nostri temporis disserentes , non passim permittantur , sed de iis idem servetir quod de Bibliis Vulgari Linguâ scriptis Statutum est . Ibidem Reg. 6. i Legentes , aut habentes , poenas in Sacris Canonibus , Constitutionibus Apostolicis , & Indicibus Librorum prohibitorum contentas , incurrere volumus , Ita Bulla Creg . 15. Data Rom. 30. Decemb. 1622. k 1. Thess. 5. 21. & 1. Joh. 4. ● . l Omnia probate , i. e. Per Discretionem dijudicate . Dr. Hen. Holden in Locum . m Sublato Omni Proprio Judicio , paratus semper sit Animus , ad Obediendum Ecclesiae . Vide Exercitia spiritualia Ign. Loyolae . Tolosae , 1593. p. 172. Reg. 1. n Si quod Oculis nostris apparet Album , Ecclesia Nigrum definierit , debemus quod nigrum sit pronunciare . Ibid. Reg. 13. p. 176. o Si Sacra B●●lia vulgari ●ingua , passim sine discrimine permittantur , Plus Inde , ob hominum temeritatem , Detrimenti , cu●m Vtilitatis Oriri . Ita Reg. 4. Indici Tridentino praesixa . p Vid. Praefat. ad Indicem Librorum Prohib . Confectum à Deputatione Synodi Tridentinae ; Author . Praef. erat Francisc . Forerius Deputationi Secretarius . q Index Libr. Prohib . ex Concil . Trid. praescripto ; Authoritate Pij . 4. primo Editus , postea à Sixto . 5. auctus ; demum Clement . 8. Juss● recognitus . r Greg. 15. Bulla data Rom. 30. Decemb. An. 1622. in Calce Indicis Trid. Antv. Ann. 1633. s Constit. 114. Urbani . 8. dat . Rom. 2. April . 1631. t Cum Librorum Prohibitorum Lectio , Magno sincere Fidei cultoribus Detrimento esse noscatur , &c. Those be their words in both their Bulls . u Omnes & singulas licentias legendi aut habendi Libros quoscunque prohibitos , quibuscunque Personis , cujuscunque gradus , etiamper literas Apostolicas , à Nobis aut Praedecessoribus nostris concessas , revocamus , cassamus , anullamus . So both of them declare in the same words . x Qui Libros prohibitos habuerint , eos ad Episcopum ant Inquisitorem , qui illos quantocius Comburere debeat , deferre teneantur . Ibidem . y Néque de caetero similes Licentiae , nisi à Congregatione Sancti Officij , quae singulis hebdomadis coram Nobis habetur , vel ab aliis per Nos , in eadem Congregatione deputandis concedantur . Urban . 8. dictae Bullae . §. 3. a Hanc Catholicam fidem , extra quam nemo salvus esse potest , quam in praesenti Profiteor , & veracitèr Yeneo , eandémque Integram , usque ad extremum vitae spiritum , constantissimè retinere , & confiteri , & a meis subditis , vel illis qu●rum cura ad m● spectat , Teneri , & Praedicari , quantum in me ●rit , curaturum , Ego idem N. Spondeo , Voveo , ac Juro . Ita in Bulla Pij Papae 4. super forma Juramenti Professionis fidei , in Concil . Trident. Sess. 24. De Refor ' . c. 12. p. 4 52. Editionis Anverp . 1633. b Recentiores Haeretici Catholicos homines Papistas vocant ; & certe nullo sublimiore Gloriae Titulo Exornare potuissent . Sint ideo nobis viventibus , haec semper Praeconia La●dum , & post mortem , Tituli Sepulchrales , ut sic Semper Dicamur Papistae . Baronius Notat . ad Martyrologium Rom. Oct. 16. B. p. 707. Col. Agrip. 1610. c Concerning the Errors , Superstition and Idolatry of the Church of Rome , ( with which I charge them ) I do not here name the Particulars , much less the proofs of them . It is not the business of this Epistle . But many of our learned Writers have long since effectually done it . Such I mean , as Bishop Jewel , Bp. Morton , Davenant , John White , Chillingworth and Dr. Crakanthorp , and ( to omit many more ) lately , my learned Friend Dr. Stillingfleet Dean of Pauls . The Reader ( if he please ) may consult these and find satisfaction . Some thing also is said to that purpose , in the following Papers . But if my Popish Adversaries ( who are not easily , if at all to be satisfy'd ) require me particularly to make good my Charge ; I shall undertake it ; and hope ( by the blessing of God , and the help of the Writings of those learned Persons I have named ) to say that which might ( though may be it will not ) satisfie my Adversaries . d Declaramus praedictam Elizabetham Haereticam , eique Adhaerentes Anathematis Sententiam inc●rrisse , esséque à Christi Corporis Vnitate Praecisos . In dictâ Pij . 5. Bullâ . §. 3. e Synodus innumerabilium fere Episcoporum ( as Valesius renders it ) apud Euseb. Hist. l. 7. c. 29. pag. 278. D. f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 homo professionis Catholicae . Even Paulus Samosatenus , till he was discovered to be an Heretick , was call'd a Catholick . Ibid. c. 30. p. 282. B. g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . speaking of the Church of Antioch , Euseb. Ibid. p. 282. 6. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : Testam . Nazian . cum Invert . contra Julian . Graecè Aetonae 1610. p. 126. & apud Leunclavium , Juris Graeco-Rom . Tom. 2. p. 203. vide Epiphan . Edit . D. Petav. Paris . 162. 2. Tom. 2. p. 2. i Vid. App. Cod. Theod . per Sirmondu● p. 218. k Leo Papa Ecclesiae Catholicae Urbis Romae . Conc. Chalcedon . part . 1. num . 10. 12. & Act. 8. l The Reader may have a very large Catalogue of such Subscriptions , by John Launoy . Epist . part . 1. In Epist. ad Franc s. Bonum . m Pope Gregory damns that proud Title , twelve several times ; the places are particularly cited by Joh. Launoy ( and he no Lu●heran ) in the Epist●e ad Bonum before-nam'd ▪ n Vide Augustinum Breviculi Collat. cum Donatistis , Collat. 3. Diei . Tom. 7. p. 568. Edit . Basil. 1569. & Epist. 67. ad Alipium . Tom. 2. p. 323. o 2 Thess. 2. 3. 4. See Bishop Jewel on this Chapter , and this fourth Verse . Sir Christoph. Sibthorp's Advertisement to the Catholicks in Ireland . Dublin 1622. part . 3. c. 2. p. 280. 281. 282. &c. Andr. Rivet . contra Silvestrum Petrasanctam c. 28. p. 537. 538. &c. vid. Georg. Dounamum , Dia●r de Antichristo , l. 3. & 4. Lond. 1620. p Vide Cap. Solitae . 6. Extra de Major . & Obedientia ; and the Lemma to that Chap. which is this — Imperium Sacerdotio subest , & ei Obedire Tenetur . q 1 Pet. 2. 13. ( which place evidently proves the contrary ) Jer. 1. 10. Gen. 1. 16. Joh. 21. 16. Matth. 16. 19. r Quanta est inter Solem & Lunam , tanta inter Pontifices & Reges differentia cognoscitur . Dicto Cap. Solitae . 6. s Bulla Romae data 1580. Juri Can. pr●efixa . t Cum igitur terra sic septies major Luna , Sol autem octies major terra : restat ergo , ut Pontificalis Dignitas Quadragesies septies su major Regali . Glossa verbo . Inter Solem & Lunam . Cap. Solitae . 6. Extra . de Major . & Obedientia . I quote the Edition of the Canon Law at Paris , 1612. u Alias quinquagies septics . Ita Nota in Margine , ad dictum Cap. Solitae verbo , Inter Solem & Lunam . Ibid. x Manifestum est , quod magnitudo Solis continet magnitudinem terrae Centies quadragies septies & duas medietates . Vid. Additionem ad Glossam . verbo . Inter Solem & Lunam . Cap. Solitae . 6. y Palam est , quod magnitudo Solis continet magnitudem Lunae septies millies septingenties & quadragies quater , & insuper ejus medietatem . Ibidem in dicta additione ad dictam Glossam . z Aurum non tam pretiosius est plumbo , quam Regia Dignitate sit Altior Dignitas Sacerdotalis . Gratian. Can. Duo sunt . 10. Distinct. 96. a Quia Colla Regum & Principum submittuntur Genibus Sacerdotum . ( By Sacerdotes here , the Popes are principally meant , as is evident both by the Text and the Gloss ) Glossa ad dictum Can. verbo . Dúo sunt . b Papa excipit Imperatorem ad osculum pedisut primum videt Papam , detecto Capite , illum , gen●● terram tangens , venera●u , — & Poutificis pedes Devotè osculatur . Lib. Sacrarum Ceremoniarum , Rom. 1560. l. 1. Tit. 5. p. 22. Col. 2. 3. c Volentes ut hac tantum Compilatione utantur Vniversi in Judiciis & in Scholis , &c. Greg. 9. in Literis Acad. Bononiensi , dat . 1230. Juri Canonico Praefixis . Edit . Lugduni . 1661. d Edit . Paris . 1520. cum Glossis . e Vide Bullam Greg. 13. datam Romae , Anno 1580. Corpori Juris Canonici praefixam . f Nulli liceat Libris Canonici Juris , de manda●o nostro Correctis , Recognitis , & Expurgatis quicquam addere , detrahere , vel immutare , &c. Ibid. dicta Greg. 13. Bulla . g They tell us , that it was our blessed Saviour himself , who Constituted Peter and his Successors , Supream Monarchs of the Catholick Church . Christus Catholicam Ecclesi●m , Vni Soli in Terris Petro , Petríque Successori Rom. Pontifici , in Potestatis Plenitudine , tradidit Gubernandam . So Pius the Fifth in this Bull of Excommunication of Eliz. In Principio . And Bellarmine says — Successio ex Christi Instituto , & Jure Divino est , quia Ipse Christus Instituit in Petro Pontificatum , ideo quicumque Petro succedit , à Christo accipit Pontificatum . De Rom. Pont. l 2. c. 12. § ut autem . Cum Papa in Petri Cathedra Sedeat , summum in eo Dignitatis gradum , nonnullis Humanis Constitutionibus , sed Divinitus datum agnoscit . Catechis . Trident. Part. 2. c 7. De Ordinis Sacramento . § 28. vide Can. Sacrosancta . 2. Dist. 22. & Glossam & Turrecrematam . Idem . h Baronius ▪ says , that Peter suffered Martyrdom Anno Christi . 69. & therefore 34. or 35. years after our blessed Saviours Passion . Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 69. §. 1. i Bellarmine says , tha 't is evident in Scripture that Peter's Supremacy was to descend to a Successor — Aliquem Petro Succedere , deducitur Evidentèr ex Scripturis . De Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 12. § Observandum Tertio . k Bellarmine tells us , that it is not expresly in Scripture , that the Pope is Peter's Successor , but that must be proved by Apostolical Tradition . Rom. Pontificem succedere Petro , non habetur expresse in Scripturis , sed habetur ex traditione Apostolicâ . Bellarm. Loco dicto . l They constantly tell us , the Pope has two Swords ; and of the Temporal Sword they say — Figurat Pontisicalis hic gladius potestatem summam Temporal●m , à Christo ejus Vicario collatam ; juxta illud , data est mihi omnis Potestas in C●elo & in Terrâ , & alibi , dominabitur à Mari usque ad Mare , & à Flumine , usque ad Terminos Orbie Terrarum . Liber Sacrarum Ceremoniorum Ecclesiae Rom. Romae . 1560. Lib. 1. Tit. 7. De Ense benedicendo , p. 36. Col. 1. m Vide Methodum Veronianam , seu modum , quo quilibet Catholicus potest Solis Bibliis , Religionis praetensae Ministrum evidentèr mutum reddere , &c. Authore Francisco Verono Parisiensi , Societatis Jesu Theolog. Colon. Agrip. 1610. Vide Jac. Masenij meditatam Concordiam Protestantium cum Catholics , ex verbo Dei. Edit . Colon. 1661. n Francis. Veroni Scientiam , è doctissimâ Societate Jesu prodeuntem , veneramur , sententiam libenter sequimur , & labores , optimo successu à Deo donatos , honoramus . Adrian . & Petrus Walenburch in Exam Princip . fidei , &c. Exam . 3. §. 1. num . 3. p. 111. o Vide Dispute . de fidei ex scripturis demonstratione , contra novam nonnullorum Methodū Per Joh. Dallaeum . 8● ▪ Genevae , 1610. p They do now pretend to potestatem Summain Temporalem ; as the Book of their Sacred Ceremonies ( a little before cited ) tells us . That our blessed Saviour gave Peter , ( & in him the Pope ) Coelestis & Terreni Imperij Jura . Can. Omnes . 1. dist . 22. Power to depose Kings and Emperors , absolve their Subjects from Oaths of Allegiance , and dispose of their Dominions . Plat. in vita Greg. 7. Conc. Lateran . sub . Innocent . 3. Can. de Haeret. 3. Hence it was , that Bonif. 8. ( that Prodigy of Antichristian Pride and Impiety ) in the Solemn Jubilee shew'd himself to the People the first day in his Pontificalibus , and the next day , Imperiali habitu , Intula Caesarea Insignis , gladium ante se nudatum jussit deferri & sedens alta voce ●●statur ; Ecce duo gladij . Vide Paralip . ad Chron. Urspergen : ad An. 1294. p. 344. a It is notoriously known how many Decretal Epistles have been forged , and fathered upon the ancient Bishops . I shall only instance in the fifth Epistle of that pious Pope and Martyr , Clemens the first ; in which he pleads for a community of all things in the world , even of Wives . Communis usus Omnium , quae sunt in hoc mundo , Omnibus esse Debuit . In Omnibus Sunt Sine Dubio , & Conjuges . Joh. Sichardus and James Merlin have that Epistle , and those very words ; & Gratian has refer'd them into the Canon Law. Can. dilectissimis . 2. Caus. 12. Quaest. 1. and there they are still , in all the Editions of that Law , even that corrected and approved by Pope Gregory the Thirteenth . b I shall instance only in one , the 28. Canon of the Council of Chalcedon , as it is shamefully corrupted in Gratian. Can. Renovant . 6. Dist. 22. where , 1. It is in the Original , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , definimus , statuimus ; for which Gratian has , Petimus . 2. In the Original Canon , it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Senior Roma ; but Gratian has Superior Roma . 3. In the Original , it is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , / Aequalia Privilegia ; But Gratian has Similia privilegia : as being unwilling that Constantinople should have equal priviledges with Rome . 4. In the Original Canon , it is — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. That Constantinople should be equal to Rome , in Ecclesiastical Matters , etiam in Ecclesiasticis . But Gratian ( in contradiction to the Canon ) says , Non tamen in Ecclesiasticis , &c. So it was in Gratian , in the old Editions ; only in the Later Editions of Gratian ( An. 1612. 1618. 1661. & . ) this last corruption is acknowledg'd , and ( which is not usual ) mended . But other corruptions remain still , in their last and best Editions of Gratian. Notes for div A69677-e5540 Extat haec Bulla in Bullario Romano . Romae 1638. Tom. 2. p. 229. Observ. 1. a Carolus Sigonius de Regno Italiae , lib. 3. pag. 58. b Omnium Consensu , omnes qui Imaginibus venerationem negarem , damnati ; & Philippicus ipse Nominatim , Diro in eum composito Carmine , Poenis Inferorum devotus . Ibid. c Car. Sigonius de Regno Italiae . l. 9. p. 219. Extabant praeclara Gregorii 2. & 3. exempla , qui Leoni Isauro Imperatori , Sacris Interdicere , & Juratâ Italiae obedientiâ spoliare non dubitârant , uno ●o Crimine , quod Imaginibus se Inimicum praebuisset . d Gregorius 3. Leonem Imperio & Communione fidelium privat . Plat. in vita Greg. 3. e Zacharias Papa Regem Francorum , non tam pro ejus Iniquitatibus , quamquod erat inutilis deposuit : & Francigenas à juramento fidelitatis absolvit . Gratian. Can. Alius . Caus. 15. Quaest. 6. f Non quod insufficiens sed quod dissolutus erat cum mulieribus , & effoeminatus . Gloss. ibid. verbo Inutilis . f Non quod Insufficiens sed quod dissolutus erat cum Mulicribus , & Effoeminatus , Gloss. ibid. verbo Inutilis . g Gloss. ibid. verbo Alius . h Vid. Joh. Launoium Epist. Tom. 7. p. 117 , 118 , &c. & p. 245 , 246 , &c. Hottomanni Franco-Galliam , cap. 13. p. 96 , 97 , 98. i Vid. Edit . Paris 1612. & 1618. k Vid. Bullam Gregorij 13. dat . Romae 1. Die Julij 1580. l Vide Indicem Librorum prohibitorum Lusitanicum Olysipone , 1624. p. 350. in Carolo Molinaeo . m Vide Bullarium Romanum Romae Anno 1638. Tom. 1. p. 49. n Potestate à Deo data Ligandi & Solvendi in Coelo , & in Terra . Ibid. o Omnes Christianos à vinculo Juramenti , quod sibi faciunt , aut facient , absolvo , & ut nullus ci serviat , sicut Regi , interdico . Ibid. §. 1. p Vt Mundus Intelligat , quia si potestis in Coelo ligare & solvere , potestis in Terra Imperia , Regna , Principatus , Marchias , Ducatus , Comitatus , & Omnium Hominum possessiones , pro meritis tollere , Vnicuique & Concedere . In dicto Bullario Roman , Bullae Excommunicationis . Hen. 4. §. 10. p. 51. Col. 1. q Sive Roman . Pontificem Supremum in Ecclesiâ Dei Judicem . Ita Gregorius 13. in Bulla data Romae , 8 Apr. 1575. In Ecloge Bullarum Lugduni . 1582. p. 359. Col. 2. r Vide Bullam . 13. Gregorij 9. datam Romae . Anno 1239. In Bullario Romano , Tom. 1. p. 89 , 90. s Vid. Constitutionem Ejus 3. dat . Lugduni 1245. In Bullario Romano , Tom. 1. p. 94 , 95. t Damnatio & Excommunicatio Friderici . 2. Ibidem . u Cum Fraribus & Sacro Concilio , deliberatione diligenti habitâ . Ib. dictae Constitutionis . §. 6. Bullarij dicti . p. 95. Col. 1. lin . ultimâ . x Non sine Omnium audientium & Circumstantium stupore & horrore . Matth. Paris in Hen. 3. ad Annum 1245. p. 668. lin . 33. y Fridericum Omnium Consensu Imperio & Regnis privavit . Platina in vita Innocentij 4. p. 209. Col. 1. Edit . Col. Agripp . 1626. z Quem ( Fridericum ) Concilium Generale Lugdunense Cassaverat & Condemnaverat . Matth. Paris in Hen. 3. ad An. 1250. p. 773. lin . ultimâ . a A nonnullis affirmative dicebatur , quod Dominus Papa sitienter & super Omnia desiderabat , Fridericum ( quem magnum Draconem vocabat ) pessundare , ut ipso suppeditato & Conculcaeo , Reges Francorum & Angliae , aliósque Christianitatis Reges , ( quos omnes Regulos & Serpentulos esse dicebat ) faciliùs , Exemplo dicti Friderici perterritos , Conculcaret , & Bonis suis , ac Praelatos eorum , ad Libitum spoliaret . Matth. Paris in Hen. 3. ad dictum Annum 1250. p. 774. lin . 2. &c. b Vide Bullam . 7. Pauli . 3. dat . Romae 3. Cal. Sept. Anno. 1535. In Bullario Romano . Tom. 1. p. 514. Editionis Romae 1638. c Mandantes , ut ab Henrici Regis , suorúmque Officialium , Judicum & Magistratuum quorumcunque Obedientâ penitùs & omninò recedant , nec illas in superiores recognoscant , néque eorum Mandatis Obtemperent . Dictae Bullae . §. 10. d Et Nulli ipsis , sed Ipsi aliis super quocunque debito , & negotio , tam Civili , quam Criminali , de jure respondere teneantur . Ibid. §. 11. e Praelatis quóque & Caeteris personis Ecclesiasticis mandat sub poenis in Bulla Contentis , quatenùs de Regno Angliae discedant , 〈◊〉 revertantur , donec dicti Excommunicati , privati , maledicti , & damnati meruerim absolutionis Beneficium . Ibid. §. 13. p. 516. f Cambdens Elizabeth . lib. 3. p. 360 , 361. ad Annum 1588. g See a Book with this Title — Important Considerations , &c. written by the Secular Priests here in England , printed Anno. 1601. and reprinted with other Tracts , with this Title — A Collection of several Treatises concerning the Reasons and Occasion of Penel Laws , &c. London 1675. In which Collection , pag. 76. the Secular Priests tell us , that Pope Gregory . 13. did excommunicate Queen Elizabeth . h Gregorius . 13. in Ducem ac Generalem hujus belli Capitaneum , Nos Elegit , ut ex ipsius Diplomate constat : Quod tanto magis fecit , quia ejus Praedecessor Pius . 5. Elizabetham haeresium Patronam Omni Regia Potestate privaverat . Vid. Edictum Illustriss . D. Jac. Geraldini , de Justitia ejus belli , quod in Hibernia pro side gerit . 'T is Extant in the History of the Irish Rebellion . Lond. 1680. in the Appendix , p. 8. i Cambdens Elizabeth . lib. 3. p. 360 , 361. k Cambden ibid. lib. 3. p. 364. Observ. 2. l Damnatio & Depositio Friderici . 2. Vid. Bullarium Romanum , Romae 1638. Tom. 1. p. 94. Col. 7. Edita erat Bulla ista Anno 1245. m Damnatio Hen. 8 , ejúsque Fautorum , &c. In Bullario Romano . ibid. p. 514. Col. 2. Edita dicta Bella , Anno 1535. & postea 1538. n Vid. Bullarium Romanum Lugduni . 1655. in . 4. Tomis in Folio , & Eclogen Bullarum & motu propriorum Pii . 4. &c. Lugduni . 1582. 8 0. & Novam Collectionem , &c. Eman. Roder. Turnoni . 1609. fol. where in that one Volume you have above . 500. Bulls , with the Names of . 46. Popes , who published them . o Vid. Constitut. 22 Julij Papae . 2. In Bullario Romano Tom. 1. p. 378. & Constitut. 81. Gregorij . 13. In dicto Bullario Tom. 2. p. 348. vide Extravag . Communes , 1. 5. Tit. 9. cap. Unigenitus 2. p Docuissemus cum ( Lutherum ) Luce clarius , Sanctos Rom. Pontifices Praedecessores nostros , in suis Canonibus seu Constitutionibus Nunquam Errasse . Vide Bullam Apostolicam Leonis 10. contra Errores Lutheri , & sequacium . Dat : Romae 17 Cal. Julij , An. 1520. & Pontificatus sui , 8 0. Apud Pet. Crab. Conc. Tom. 3. p. 715. &c. And his Predecessor , Julius . 2. says as much for the Church of Rome , — S. Sancta Ecclesia Romana , Magistra fidei , Omnium Errorum Expers , unica , immaculata , &c. Constitutio . 27. Julij . 2. data Anno. 1512. In Bullario Romano Tom. 1. p. 384. q Sic Omnes Apostolicae Sedis Sanctiones accipiendae sunt , tanquam Ipsuss Divini Petri voce Firmatae sint . Can. sic Omnes 2. dist . 19. & Ibid. Can. 3. 4. &c. r Vide Bullam Greg. 13. datam Romae . 1. Jul. 1580. Jur. Can. praefixam . s Quicquid Statuit , Quicquid Ordinat Romana Ecclesia , Ab Omnibus perpetno & Irrefragobilitèr est Observandum . Ibid. Can. Enimvero . 4. Dist. 19 t Christum ita Caput Ecclesiae Agnoscimus , ut illius regimen , dum in Coelos abiit , primum Petro , dein successoribus commiserit , & eandem quam habebat Ipse infallibilitatem , concesserit , quoties ex Cathedrâ loqueretur . Datur , ergo , in Eccles. Rom. Controversiarum fidei Judex Infallibilis , etiam Extra Concilium generale , tum in Quaestionibus Juris & Facti . Vid. Exposit. Theseos . in Coll. Claromontano propositae . 12. Dec. 1661. u Si Christi Authoritas non penderet à Concilio , si adhuc in terris viveret , sed Omni Concilio Major esset . Eâdem Ratione , & Pontificis Authoritas , quae ipsius Christi Vicaria est , Concilio superior est — Privilegium Infallibilis veritatis , non Concitio , sed Pontisici à Christo Collatum est . Luc. 22. 32. Gr. de Rives Epitome Concil . in Principio , praelud . 5. x Ecclesia Romana est Judex Controversiarum in Rebus Fidei , & Ipsius Determinationes Sunt De Fide. Ibid. Praelud . 9. Edit . Lugd. Anno. 1663. y Verbum Dei , vel est Scriptum in Scripturis : vel non scriptum , Traditiones : vel Explicatum , cum dubia in verbo Scripto aut Tradito Explicantur . Quod fit Praesertim per Papam , sive Extra Concilia , seu in Conciliis . Isque modus ultimus Magis probat us est , & Majori suavitate ei Plures acquiescunt , ut nihil ulterius Contendendum existiment . Lud. Bail in Print Apparatus ad summam Conc. De tripliciverbo Dei. z Quae cum it a sint , nec Nos debemus vereri ejus ductum sequi , In Doctrinâ Fidei & Morum , ejus Judicio Nos sistere , & scripta Omnia corrigenda submittere . Idem in Calce praefationis ad Lectorem , Tom. 1. praefixam . a Vide Aquinatem . 2. 2. Quaest. 11. Art. 3. Vtrum Haeretici sint tollerandi ? negat . & ibid. Quest. 12. Art. 2. Vtrum Princeps propter Apostasiam à fide , amittat Dominium in Subditos , ita quod ei obedire non Tenentur ? He affirms it , and says — Ejus Subditi à Dominio ejus & Juramento Fidelitatis ( si sit Excommunicatus ) Ipso facto liberantur . b Vid. Johan . Aventinum Annal : Bojorum . Lib. 5. 6. 7. Carol. Sigonium de Regno Italiae . Matth. Paris . &c. Ad An. 1078. p. 10. 11. & p. 13. lin . 1. & p. 668. lin . 30. & 773. lin . 49. & p. 774. lin . 1. 2. & p. 875. where R. Grosthead ( for his Tyrannical Usurpations ) calls the Pope Antichrist . c Remonstrant : Hibernorum , part . 1. Cap. 3. &c. d Volentes ( verba sunt Gregorij Papae . 9. ) ul hac Tantum Compilatione Vniversi ut antur , & in Judiciis & Scholis , &c. Bulla Greg. 9. Decretal . praefixa . e Innocent . 4. Excommunicates . Fridèrick . 2. in the General Council at Lions , Omnium Consensu , &c. Platina in vita Innocent . 4. And Pope Innocent himself said constantly that the Council of Lions Excommunicated and Deposed that Emperor . Matth. Paris in Hen. 3. Ad Ann. 1250. p. 773. lin . 58. 59. And Pope Pasch. 2. tells us , That he Excommunicated the Emperor Hen. 4. Judicio Totius Ecclesiae . Carol. Sigonius de Regno Italiae . l. 9. p. 237. lin . 18. Observ. 3. f Damnum à demendo , quia damnum est Rei diminutio unde Damna Lunae , apud Gellium . Noct. Atticarum lib. 20. Cap. 8. And Varro ; Damnum à demptione lib. 4. de Legibus . So Isiodore lib. 5. Orig. Cap. 22. g Damnum est amissio eorum quae habueras . Quinctilianus Declamat . 120. And a good Lawyer tells me , that — Damnare ; est rem sine remedio sublevandi tormentis seu Ignominiae sententialitor deputare . Panormitan . in Cap. Damnamus . in . 2. Notab . de summâ Trinit . & side Catholicâ . h Excommunicatus est Membrum Diaboli . Lindewood ad Cap. Seculi Principes . verbo . Reconciliationis . De Immunit . Ecclesiae . i Gratian. Can. Omnis Christianus . 32. Caus. 11. Quaest. 3. k Excommunicatio est Aeternae Mortis Damnatio . Idem Gratian. Can. Nemo . 41. Caus. 11. Quaest. 3. l Est Perpetua Damnatio cum ab Excommunicato contemnitur . Gloss. ad dictum Can. verbo mortis . m This Bulla Coenae often ( with some alterations ) occurs in Bullario Romano . vid. Constit . 25. Julii . 2. Tom. 1. pag. 382. Edit . Romae . 1638. & Constit. 63. Pauli . 5. Tom. 3. p. 83. ubi reliqua , hujus Bullae Exemplaria dicto Bullario comprehensa , indicantur . n Non modo deponi , sed etiam Excommunicari , & in Aeterno Examine Damnari Decrevit . Baronius Annal. Tom. 8. ad An. Christi . 593. num . 86. o Gregor . 7. lib. 4. Epist. 2. & 23. & lib. 8. Epist. 21. p Henricus . 4. primum à Gregorio Papâ , dein ab Vrbano , Postremo à Nobis , Judicio Totius Ecclesiae , Perpetuo Anathemate Obligatus est . Car. Sigonius de Regno Italiae . lib. 9. pag. 237. q Henricum , Ejúsque fautores , Adhaerentes , &c. Excommunicatos Decernimus , cosque Anathematis , Maledictionis , & Aeternae Damnationis mucrone percutimus . In Bulla Damnationis Hen. 8. Dat. Romae . Cal. Sept. Ann. 1535. r Si Imperiali , Regali , aut Pontificali Dignitate praefulgeant . §. 3. dictae Bullae . s Poenis quae Loesae Majestatis & Haereticae pravitatis reis Imponuntur . Ibidem . t Decernentes eos pro Schismaticis , & de Catholicâ fide male sentientibus , cum Dathan & Abiron partem & Damnationem habere : Constit. 22. Pii . 2. §. 6. vid. P. Crab. Concil . Tom. 3. p. 690. Col. 2. & ibi forman — sub paenâ Maledictionis Aeternae . u Porro subesse Rom. Pontifici Omni humanae Creaturae declaramus , dicimus , definimus , & pronunciamus Omnino esse de Necessitate Salutis . Constit . Bonifacii . 8. dat . Romae . Ann. 1301. Pont. Ann. 8. Cap. unam sanctam . 1. De Major . & Obed. Extrav . Communes . x Ecclesia Apostolica , extra quam nulla est Salus . In Prin. Bullae . Pii . 5. y Declaramus Elizabetham Haereticam eique Adhaerentes Anathematis sententiam , incurrisse , esseque a Christi Corporis Vnitate Praecisos . Ibid . §. 3. z Cum de necessitate Salutis sit , Omnes Christi fideles Romano Pontifici subesse , prout Divinae Scripturae & Sanctorum Patrum Testimonio edocemur , & Constitutione Bonifa●ii Papae . 8. quae incipit Vnam Sanctam , declaratur . — Constitutionem Ipsam Sacro praesenti Concilio Approbante Innovamus , & Approbamus . Conc. Lateran . sub Leone . 10. Sess. 10. apud P. Crab. Conc. Tom. 3. p. 697. Col. 1. a Contraria Omnia & Haereses , ab Ecclesia Damnatas & Anathematizatas Ego paritèr Anathematizo . Hanc veram Catholicam fidem , Extra quam Nemo Salvus esse Potest , quam veracitèr teneo , & ad Extremum vitae Spiritum , Constantissimè retinere , spondeo , voveo , juro . Conc. Trident. Sess. 24. De Reformat . in Calce Cap. 12. p. 452. Edit . Antverp . 1633. b Omnia à Concilijs Oecumenicis tradita , definita , & Declarata , Indubitant●r recipio , & profiteor . Ibid. p. 452. c Apostolicas Traditiones , reliqu●sque Ejusdem Ecclesiae Constitutiones firmissimè admitto & amplector . Ibid. p. 451. d Conc. Trident. Sess. 24. De Reformat . cap. 12. Proviside Beneficiis , &c. Teneantur fidei publicam sacere professionem in Rom. Ecclesiae Obedientiâ se Permansuros spondeant ac Jurent . p. 432. dictae Editionis . And that we may know that the Faith they are to profess and swear to , is the Creed of Pius . V. in the afore-named Edition of the Council of Trent , at Antverp . 1633. Pius . 5. his Creed , and the Forma Juramenti Professionis Fidei , is placed immediately after that 12. Cap. Sess. 24. De Reformat . pag. 450. Observ. 4. e Jer. 1. 10. f Petro & Successoribus , Ecclesiam , in plenitudine Potestatis gubernandam tradidit . Hunc unum super Omnes Gentes , & Omnia Regna Principem Constituit , qui Evellat , Destruat , Dissipet , Disperdat , plantet & aedificet ; ut fideles Salvos exhibeat Salvatori . g Cum Ascenderemus Palfredum nostrum , Fridericus Imp. Stepham tenuit . &c. Constit. 8. Alexand. 3. In Bullario Rom. Tom. 1. p. 65. Col. 2. h Deus Jeremiam , & in illo Evangelicum Sacerdotem instruxit dicens ; Ecce Constitui Te super Gentes & Regna , ut Evellas , destruas , disperdas , &c. quae Potestas imminet in Romano Antistite , qui à Christo , ut sit Caput Ecclesiae , accepit . Ibid. Constit. 9. p. 65. Col. 2. i Ejus Vices gerenics in terris , & in Sede Justitiae Constituti , Juxta Jeremiae Vaticinium , &c. super Omnes Reges Vniversae Terrae . In Bullâ Damnationis Hen. 8. data Rom. 1535. & 1538. k Spiritualis Potestas terrenam judicare debet , si bona non fuerit : sic Verificatur Vaticinium Jeremiae , Constitui Te super Gentes , &c. Cap. unam Sanctam . 1. de major . & Obed. Extrav . Communes . l Cap. Solicit . 6. Extra . De Major . & Obedientia . m Deus Papam Totius Orbis praecipuum ob●inere voluit Magistratum . Bonif. 8. in Bulla . 6. Decretalium praesixa . n Dictum Bonif. 8. Cap. Licet Romanus . De Constitut. in . 6. Romanus Pontifex jura Omnia in Scrinio pectoris sui censetur habere . o Regnans in Excelsis ( i.e. Christus ) Ecclesiam soli Petro & Successoribus tradidit Gubernandam . And then it immediately follows — Hunc Vnum ( Petrum scilicet ) super Omnes Gentes , & Omnia Regna Principem Constituit , qui evellat , destruat , dissipet , disperdat , plantet , &c. Bulla dicta in Principio . p Pope Nicol. 1. ( and he as Infallible as any of his Successors ) tells us ; That Ecclesia non habet Gladium nisi Spiritualem , qui non occidit , sed vivisicat . Luitprandus in vita , Nicol. 1. Cap. 107. But he lived above . 800. years since , and though Gratian records it for Law ( Can. inter haec . 6. Caus. 33. Quaest. 2. ) yet the Case is alter'd since , and the Gloss upon that Canon ( verbo Gladium ) tells us , that the meaning is ; that the Pope has not the Temporal Sword , Quoad Executionem only : the Power of the Temporal Sword belongs to the Emperor , but the Pope makes him Emperor , and gives him that Power : and this he proves out of a Decree of Pope Innocent 3. Cap. Venerabil . 34. Extra . De Elect. & Electi Potestate . q Hunc unum ( Petrum scilicet ) Principem Constituit , &c. Ibid. in dicta Bulla . r Super Omnes Gentes , & Omnia Regna , Ibid . s Jer. 1. 10. t Vide Corn. A Lapide in Prin. Argument . Comment . sui in Jeremiam . u For proof of this , see the Quotations before Observ. 2. x Pope Honorius , and Pope Vigilius anciently condemned for Hereticks in General Councils ; and of later times , the General Councils of Pisa , Constance , and Basil condemned others . y Vide Constitut. 9. Alexand. 3. In Bullario Rom. Tom. 1. p. 65. Col. 2. z ( 2 ) Jer. 1. 10. a He is beaten by Pashur . Jer. 20 , 1. Apprehended and Arraigned . Jer. 26. 8. Imprison'd by Zedekiah . Chap. 32. 3. and beaten and imprison'd by the Princes . Jer. 37. 15. by them put into a Dungeon . Jer. 38. 6. b A suis Concivibus in Taphnis Aegypti , Lapidibus Obrut us , Martyr occubuit . Ita Hieronymus , Tertull. Doroth. Epiphan . Isiodor . &c. Corn. A Lapide Comment . in Jerem. in Argumento . c The Commission was given him , when he was a Child . Jer. 1. 6. 7. when he was 14. or 15. years old . So Corn. A Lapide in Prin. Argumenti Commentariis suis in Jeremiam praefixi . d Gen. 41. 13. e It is a memorable Story we are told to this purpose ; not by any Lutheran , but a Learned Sorbon Doctor , an ear-witness of it , who says , That when Pope Innocent . X. was pressed to Determine the Controversie between the Jesuits and Jansenists , He ( who was bred a Lawyer ) told them that he was No Divine , that Divinity was not His Profession , nor had he studied Divinity . Monsieur de St. Amour in his Journal Part. 3. Cap. 12. & p. 120. f Vide Jer. 18. 7. 8. &c. Jer. 25. 15. 16. 17. &c. & Cap. 42. 10. & 45. 4. g Constitui Te ut Evellas , i. e. ut Intermineris Hostibus meis , ( quos Regionibus suis Plantavi ) Me inde per Bella , &c. evulsurum , nisi resipuerint . A Lapide . in Jer. 1. 70. h Ita Deus Plant at & Evellit Gentes : nam Jeremias reipsa nec plantavit nec Ev●lsit Gentes . Ergo , ut Ev●●las & Plantes ; Idem est quod , ut has Gentes evellendas , illas plantandas A Deo mineris ac Praedices . Idem Ibidem . i Cap. Solitae . 6. Extra de Major . & Obedientia . k Ostendit S●cerdotium praeeminere R●gibus , dicto Jeremiae Glossa ad dictum Cap. verbo . Solitae Benignitatis . l Vide Corpus Juris Can. Cum Glossis ; Paris . 1612. In Nota , Titulum . Tom. 2. Immediatè ( seu pagina proxima ) sequente . m Constitui Te , ut Evellas ] Vitia scilicet , & plantes ] Virtutes , Glossa ad dictum Cap. Solitae . verbo , Constitui Te , &c. n Glossas Eruditissumas Edidit . Vid. dictam Notam in Prin. Tom. 2. Juris Can. Paris 1612. o Vid. Bullam Greg. 13. Corp. Juris Can. praefixam . p 1. Peter 2. 13. 14. Jer. 1. 10. Gen. 1. 16. 17. &c. Joh. 21. 16. Matth. 16. 18. 19. Luc. 22. 38. Rom. 13. 1. 2. Gen. 1. 1. 1. Cor. 2. 15. q That of Innocent 3. Cap. Solitae . 6. Extra de Majorit . & Obed. And that of Boniface . 8. Cap. Unam Sanctam . 1. Eodem Tit. Extrav . Commun . Observ. 5. r Christus Ecclesiam Apostolorum Principi tradidit gubernandam ; & hunc unum Super Omnes Gentes & Omnia Regna Principem Constituit . Dictae Bullae principio . s Matth. 10. 2. t Petrus Apostolorum Primus & Primas , poterat Apostolis praecipere , & si in fide aut moribus errarent , Corrigere , &c. Corn. A Lapide in Matth. 10. 2. u Caeteri Evangelistae Matthaeum praeponunt Thomae , Matthaeus Thomam Praefert , Paulus ad Galat. 2. 9. Jacobum primo Loco recenset , ante Petrum & Johannem , Existimat Hieronymus ( so Erasmus says ) Ejus esse , Ordinem Apostolotum distribuere , Qui illos Elegit : innuens , Authoritatem Apostolis Omnibus Parem fuisse , quod ad Apostolici muneris functionem attinet . Erasmus in Locum . x Index Librorum Prohib . & Expurg . Madriti . 1667. p. 289. Col. 1. y Certe ex Ordine recensionis , non Efficacitèr Colligitur Quis Cui sit praeferendus ; siquidem ubi multi numerantur , aliquis primus sit opportet . Erasmus ibidem , in Matth. 10. 2. z So the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 usually signifies ; Eusebius calls Simon Magus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 primus Dux Haereseos , scilice● Primus Ordine Temporis , non Jurisdictionis . Euseb. Hist Lib. 2. Cap. 13. p. 51. Edit . Valesii . a So Homer and Virgil are call'd Poetarum Principes . So in Tully , Patroni Principes , ●eminent Advocates . So Plato and Aristotle , Philosophorum Principes , and yet no Dominion or Jurisdiction meant in these Expressions . b Dicti● Breviarij Part. aestivâ , ad Diem . 29. Junij , in Festo SS . Apostolorum Petri & Pauli . p. 476. & in Festo S. Andreae . Nov. 30. Ibidem pag. 780. c Vide Commune Sanctorum in Calce Partis Aestivae , dicti Breviarij , & in Communi Apostolorum & Evangelistarum . pag. 4. d Ad matutinum , Invitatorium . Regem Apostolorum Dominum , Venite adoremus . e Vide Card. Cusan Opera . p. 836. & Gratian . Caul . 2. Quaest. 7. Can. Beati . 37. & Theodoret in Gal. 2. p. 270. where Peter and Paul are call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . & in 2. Cor. 11. 6. p. 251. Principes Apostolorum alij praeter Petrum . Vid. Bellarmin . de Rom. Pontif l. 1. c. 12. p. 861. Potestas clavium transtvit ad alios Apostolos , & ad Omnes Ecclesiae Principes , &c. These are the words of Pope Leo ( and he Infallible ) cited there by Bellarmine . f Hoc erant utique & Caeteri Apostoli , Quod suit Petrus , Pari Consortio praediti & Honoris & Potestatis . Cyprian de Unitate Ecclesiae . p. 208. Edit . Rigaltij . g Ecclesiam suam Vni Soli , Petro Commisit gubernandam ; & hunc Vnum Super Omnes Gentes & Regna Principem Constituit . Bulla dicta in Principio . h Joh. 20. 21. i Ibidem . vers . 22. k Mark. 16. 20. l Ibid. vers . 23. m Matth. 16. 19. n Ministri Ecclesiae ad Remmissionem peccati , Per Virtutem Clavium Ministerialiter operantur . Lyran. in Joh. 20. 23. Vid. Tirinum , Menochium , &c. in Matth. 16. 19. o Matth. 28. 19. 20. p Mark. 16. 15. q Matth. 28. 20. r Simon , who Matth. 10. 4. is call'd Simon the Cananite , in the Syriack Version there , and Luk. 6. 15. is call'd Simon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is the Greek word for Cannita , or Cinnaeus . For the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Canna signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . vid. Ang. Caminium , in Explicat . locorum . N. Test. p. 51. Objection . s Vide Constitut. Bonif. 8. Cap. unam Sanctam . 1. De Majorit . & Obed. Extravag . Communes . & Innocent . 3. Cap. Solicitae . 6. Extra . de Major . & Obedientiâ . t Matth. 16. 18. 19. u Promittit hic Christus Petro , quod ipse & Successor Ejus Omnis , sit Ecclesiae Supremum Caput , Princeps & Monarcha . Jac. Tirinus in Math. 16. 18. 19. x Quamvis mortalis homo sit Petrus Ejusque Successor , tamen Coelesti praeditus Potestate , & quod ille è Cathedrâ decreverit , habendum est tanquam ab Ipso Deo Decretum . Idem Ibidem , ad vers . 19. Gratian . Can. 2. Sic Omnes . dist . 19. y De Petro ut Fundamentali Petra loquitur Christus . Joh. Stephan . Menochius in Matth. 16. 18. z Christus est Fundamentalis Petra Praecipuè , sed ei Successerunt Petrus & reliqui summi Pontifices , ut Ejus Vicarij cum Summâ Potestate . Menochius ibid. p. 41. Col. 2. vid. Gratian. Can. In nono . Dist. 21. Responsio . 1. a Marcellinus Pontifex ad Scrificia Gentium ductus , Deos alienos Adoravit . Plat. in vita Marcel . b Cum Arianis sentiebat , &c. Plat. in vit . Liber . c Honorius Synod . 6. damnatur . Act. 18. vid. Theoph. Chronagraph . p. 299. 301. Anastas . Biblioth . in vitis Pontif. p. 54. Francis. Combesis in Auctario Biblioth . Graec. Patrum . Tom. 2. p. 66. Synodus Nicena . 2. apud Joverium . Part. 1. p. 106. Col. 2. d Vid. Synod . 5. & Rich. Crakanthorp . in vigilio Dormitante . Ed. Richerium in Hist. Concil . Generalium . p. 302. e Vid. Plat. in vitâ Johan . 8. & Notas Car. Annibalis Fabroti , ad vitas Pont. Anast. p. 290. f Vid. Genebrardi Chronol . circa Initium seculi . 10. l. 4. p. 807. ad Annum 901. g Tunc foedissima Rom. Ecclesiae facies , cum Romae Dominarentur sordidissimae Meretrices , quarum arbitrio , Intruderentur in Sedem Petri earum Amasij Pseudopontifices ; qui non nisi ad fignanda tempora , in Catalogo Rom. Pontif. scripti : Quis enim à scortis intrusos sine lege , legitimos dicere possit Romanos fuisse Pontifices ? Baronius Annal. Tom. 10. ad An. 912. §. 14. p. 663. vid. eundem an Ad. 897. §. 8. p. 624. & ad An. 925. §. 10. p. 688. Edit . Annal. Antverp . 1618. vid. loca & hic adde . h Post Clem. 4. vacat Sedes . Ann. 3. m. 2. dies . 10. Post Nicolaum 3. vacat Sedes . Ann. 3. Post Clement . 5. vacat Sedes . Ann. 2. m. 3. d. 17. Platina in Ejus vita . i Sunt qui scribunt , post mortem Nicolai . 1. Sedem vacasse Ann. 8. Mens . 7. d. 9. Platina in Calce vitae Nicolai . 1. k In that great Schism , commonly reckon'd for the 27. Schism in their Church ; which begun about the Year 1378. Vrbanus . 6. being Pope at Rome , and Clem. 7. at Avignion . l Anno Dom. 1409. or as others . 1410. m Longus A Coriolano . Summa Con. p. 857. Col. 2. n In maximâ Praelatorum Frequentiâ , utérque Pontifex ab iis damnatus est , utróque tanquam Perjuro , Schismatico , Haeretico , è Pontificatu dejecto . Idem Ibidem Col. 1. o Concil . Constanti●nse Anno 1414. p Nobis Legitimè Constat . Johan . Papam . 23. à tempore quo fuit assumptus , usque nunc , Papatum in Scandalum Ecclesiae notorium rexisse ; vitâque sua Damnabili ejúsque Nephandis moribus , populis exemplum vitae Male praebuisse . Concil . Constant , Sess. 10. q Johan . 23. Schismatis nutritivum , à voto , promisso , & Juramento per Ipsum Deo , Ecclesiae & huic Concilio praestitis dirimativum , Simoniacum notorium , suis Inhonestis & Detestabilibus vita & moribus Ecclesiam Dei & Populum Christianum notorie scandalizantem . Idem Concil . Sess. 12. in sententia contra Johan . 23. desinitivâ . r Catechismus Romanus . Part. 1. Cap. 10. §§ . 11. 12. s Ibid. §. 13. p. 117. Edit . Paris . 1635. t Matth. 16. 19. u Vid. Chrysost. in . Matth. 26. Hom. 82. pag. 702. Edit . 1607. Isiod . Pelusiota . l. 1. Epist. 235. Aug. Retract . l. 1. c. 20. & De verbis Dom. Serm. 13. Tom. 18. Col. 58. ita Cyrillus & Anonymus in Catena Nicetae Serrarum Episcopi ad Matth. 16. 18. vide Catenam Graecam in Matth. per Possinum Jesuitam Cap. 16. 18. Hilarius Pictaniens . De Trinitate . l. 2. p. 25. Edit . Erasmi . Theophylact . in Matth. 16. 18. x Index Librorum Prohibit : & Expurg . Madriti . 1667. In Desid . Erasmo . p. 289. Col. 1. y Super hanc Petram ; i. e. super fidei Tuae soliditatem . Can. loquitur . 18. Caus. 24. Quaest. 1. verbo . Petram , in Glossâ . z Super hanc Petram , quam Confessus es ; i. e. Christum . Lyranus in Matth. 16. 18. a Super hanc Petram , i. e. Christum in quem credis . Glossa Interlinearia in dictum Locum . b So Gregorius Magnus in . 7. Psalmos Poenitential . Tom. 2. Operum Paris . 1619. pag. 908. D. Christus est Petra , à qua Petrus Nomen Accepit , & Super Quam se aedificaturum Ecclesiam dixit — Quod Ecclesia nullis Persecutionibus sit superanda , Ipse Super Quem aedificata est , Ostendit , cum ait , Portae Inferorum non praevalebunt contra eam . So Strabo Fuldensis in his Ordin . Gloss. on Matth. 16. 18. circa Ann. 840. And after them Lyranus ( in the Place cited ) who though he was a Franciscan Frier , and flourished almost Four hundred years ago , and in many things ( as those times were ) Popish enough ; yet he was not come so far , as to make Peter , or any but Christ , the Rock on which the Church was built : And again , on the 1. Cor. 3. 11. Solus Christus est Fundamentum Ecclesiae , quod ex se firmitatem & stabilitatem habet . And the Gloss on their own Canon Law , says , That Christ was the Rock ; for Boniface . 8. in that famous Extravagant . Cap. Unam Sanctam . 1. Indeavouring to prove the Papal Supremacy from several Places in Scripture ; he adds , That the Authority given to Peter and his Successors by our blessed Saviour , was not Human but Divine . Haec Authoritas , licet homini data , non humana , sed potius Divina , ore divino Petro data & Successoribu , &c. The Gloss on these words , Est autem haec Authoritas . p. 191. says thus — Haec Authoritas est Divina , quia firmata est in Petra firma , in Christo , qui erat verus Deus : & quod sit Divina , quia fundata in eo ; patet ex Evangelio ; quia Christus loquebatur cum dixit , super hanc Petram ; id est , super meipsum ( qui sum Petra , & qui significor per Petram ) aedificabo Ecclesiam meam . Ita Gloss. verbo , Est autem haec Authoritas . Ad Cap. Unam Sanctam . 1. Extrav . Commun . c Super hanc Petram , i. e. Super Ipsum Petrum , seu Petram seu Cepham , vel Super Fidem Petri quae est Catholica . Dr. Hen. Holden in Annotat. in Nov. Testam . Paris . 1660. ad Matth. 16. 18. & ad . 7. Matth. vers . 25. d Synodus Statuit , praemittendam esse Confessionem Fidei — Symbolum fidei ; quo Romana Ecclesia utitur , tanquam Principium — ac Fundamentum firmum ac Vnicum , contra quod portae Inferi nunquam praevalebunt . Conc. Trident. Sess. 3. Feb. 4. Ann. 1546. e Matth. 16. 18. f Per Petram , Confessionem Fidei intelligunt Chrysostomus , Cyrillus , Hilarius , & Rom. Pontifices , Leo magnus , Agatho , Nicolaus , & Adrianus primus in suis Decretalibus , Stapleton , Princep . Fidei Doct. Demonstr . Controvers . 2. l. 6. c. 2. p. 207. 208. g Loquitur Dominus ad Petrum ; Ego dico Tibi , quia Tues Petrus , & Super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam . Super Illum Vnum aedificat Ecclesiam . Catechis . Trid. ex Decreto Conc. Trid. à Pio. 5. Editus . Part. 1. Cap. 10. de . 9. Symboli Art. §. 12. p. 115. Edit . Paris . 1635. h Matth. 7. 24. 25. i 1 Joh. 5. 4. 5. k Orat Sacerdos , ut Sacra Symbola Omnibus cedant , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . In Lit. Jac. Graec. Paris . 1560. p. 20. vid. Fabr. Stapulensem in Matth. 16. 18. So Pope Nicol. 2. Ecclesia super Petram fidei fundata , Gratian. Can. Omnes . 1. Dist. 22. And the Apostle in his Canonical Epistle ( Jude 20. ) adviseth all , to build up themselves on their most holy Faith. l Isa. 28. 16. m Edit . Rom. 1590. n Edit . Rom. 1592. o Bellarmine , in Praefat. ad Libr. de Pontif . Rom. vid. R. Crakanth . Contra Spalatens . Cap. 81. §. 3. p. 612. p Vid. Hieronym . in Isaiae 28. vers . 16. Isiodor . Clarius in . 1. Cor. 3. 10. Fundatissimum Fundamentum Christus . q 1 Pet. 2. 6. 7. 8. and Act. 4. 11. r Rom. 9. 33. & 10. 11. 1. Cor. 3. 11. & 1. Cor. 10. 4. s Matth. 21. 42. But though Paul and Peter , and our blessed Saviour himself do expound the word Rock on which the Church is built , not to be meant of Peter , but Christ the Messiah , ( as appears by the foregoing Texts ) yet Maldonate the Jesuit ( whose words I shall cite anon ) says — That 't is very far from sense so to expound it . Maldonate in Matth. 16. 17. p. 339. Col. 1. E. And yet Card. Cusanus says , That Christ was that Rock . Operum p. 826. And so Cyrill in the Aurea Catenâ Graec. Patrum in Psalmos David . 50. per Dan. Barbaram Patriarcham Aquileiensem ; Venet. 1569. ad vers . 2. Psal. 39. ( aliâs . 40. p. 400. 401. So Gregorius Magnus in 7. Psal. Poenitent . Tom. 2. p. 980. D. So Chrysostom , &c. t 1. Pet. 2. 5. u Eph. 2. 20. x Rev. 21. 14. y Noveritis Symbolum hoc esse Fundamentum super quod aedificium Ecclesiae surrexit . Ang. lib. 3. de Symbolo ad Catechumen . Tom. 9. z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophylact . in Matth. 16. 17. 18. a Alcazar ' s words are these — Censco Apostolos ideo fundatores Ecclesiae dici ; quia fidei summam ediderunt , & eff us● Cruoris Testimonio , necnon praedicatione & Miraculi● in hominum animis inseverunt . Corn. A Lapide in Apocal. 21. 14. p. 112. Col. 2. C. b Concil . Trident. Sess. 3. Apostolicum Symbolum vocat firmum atque Vnicum Fundamentum , Contra quod portae Inferi non praevalebunt . Idem , ibid. Col. 2. E : c Tale Fundamentum à Paulo fuit Jactum . 1 Cor. 3. 10. in Saptens Architectus Fundamenum posui . Idem , ibidem . d Idem dic●nt alia Concilia & Pa●res . Ibid. e Sunt inter veteres Authores , qui Interpretantur super hanc Petram ; i. e. Super Hanc Fidem ; aut Super hanc Fidei Confessionem quâ me Filium esse Dei vivi dixisti : ut Hilarius , Greg : Nyssenus , Chrysostomus , Cyrillus Alexandrinus , Ambrosius in Epistolas Pauli , &c. Maldonat . in Matth. 16. 17. p. 339. Col. 1. E. f Longiùs etiam à Sensu Reccdens Augustinus interpretatur , super hanc Petram , i. e. Super meipsum , quia Petra erat Christus . Maldonat . ibid. g Certum est apud Omnes haec . 12. Fundamenta ( Rev. 21. 14. ) significare . 12. Apostolos ; ipsorum enim humeris quasi innixus Ecclesiae murus recumbit . Ideo enim eorum nomina fundamentis Inscripta sunt , ut significetur Ipos esse fundamente & fundatores ( haec enim duo eodem recidunt ) Ecclesiae . Corn. A Lapide in Apoc. 21. 14. p. 312. Col. 1. D. h 1. Tim. 3. 15. 1. Cor. 3. 9. 16. i 1 Pet. 2. 5. k Eph. 4. 11. 12. l Eph. 1. 22. 23. The Church which is his Body . m 1 Cor. 3. 9. 10. And I ( says Paul ) as a Master-Builder , &c. n Ye are Gods building , and as a skilful Master-Builder , I have laid The Foundation . 1. Cor. 3. 11 : 12. where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 peritum , significat . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Hesychius . o Fundamentum posui ; i. e. prima initia fidei Annunciavi . Lyranus . Annunciavi vitae aeternae fundamentum , id est , Christum . Fab. Stapulensis . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Theodor. vid. Cor. A Lapide in Apocal. 21. 14. p. 312. Col. 2. E. vid. Grotium in 1. Cor. 3. 10. Rom. 15. 20. Hebr. 6. 1. Ita etiam Lyranus & Glossa Interlinearia . p Act. 9. 31. 1. Cor 14. 3. 5. 12. so St. Paul's Authority was given him for Edification , or building the Church . 2. Cor. 10. 8. q Ideo enim Apostolorum nomina Fundamentis Ecclesiae Inscripta sunt . Rev. 21. 14. ut significetur Ipsos esse Fundamenta & Fundatores ( haec enim duo eodem recidum ) Ecclesiae . Corn. A. Lapide ubi supra , in Apoc. 21. 14. p. 312. Col. 1. D. r 1. Cor. 15. 10. I laboured More abundantly then They All. And 2. Cor. 11. 23. s Plus reliquis ; quia illi , ut plurimum , Judaeis praedicabant , quorum facilis Catechizatio ( cum legem & Prophetas admiserunt ) Paulus Gentibus , qui utrāsque negabant . Irenaeus Adversus Haereses lib. 4. cap. 41. p. 379. C. Edit . Feu-Ardentij . t 2. Cor. 11. 23. Vid. Originem contra Celsum , Graeco-Lat . p. 49. u 2. Cor. 11. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . X 1. Cor. 7. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Y Concil . Trident. Sess. 4. In Decreto de Edit . Sacrorum Liborum . z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Inde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Edictum , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Constitutio . Glossae veteres in Calce Cyrilli , &c. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Phavorinus , verbo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Theodor. in . 1. Cor. 7. 17. Oecumenius and Theophylact say to the same purpose , on the same place . Confer 1. Cor. 16. 1. c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Photius Epist. 117. pag. 158. & ibid. p. 109. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Paulus autem peculiaritèr Orbi Vniverso . Nicol. Methon . De Corp. & Sang. Christi in magna Bibl. Patrum . Tom. 12. p. 519. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Vniversi Orbis Terrarum sollicitudinem mecum gero . Theodor. in . 2. Cor. 11. 28. 1. Our blessed Saviour . f Vid. Matth. 21. 40. Rem . 9. 33. & Rom. 10 , 11 , & 1. Cor. 3. 11. & 1. Cor. 10. 4. & Act. 4. 11. & 1. Pet. 2. 6. 7. 8. & Isai. 28. 16. The Septuagint Translate it thus — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Vid. Hieronymum in locum ; & 1 Pet. 2. 6. 7. ubi Isaiam citat ▪ & eadem pene verba habet , quae apud . 70. Interpretes hodiè Extant . vide Procopium in Isai. 44. p. 504. & Fabr. Stapulensem in Matth. 16. 18. g Christus lapis summus Angularis Omnia sustinens , & in unam fidem Abrahae Colligens eos , qui in Vtroque Testamento apti sunt in aedificationem Dei. Irenaeus lib. 4. c. 42. p. 380. Edit . Feuardentij . h Gen. 3. 15. i Act. 13. 18. 24. Luc. 1. 70. & Luc. 24. 27. k Hebr. 9. 15. l Hebr. 11. 13. vid. Eusebium Hist. lib. 1. cap. 2. pag. 6. B. Edit . Valesij . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . &c. Omnes ab origine Generis humani qui Justitiae laude floruerunt , ut Abraham , Moses , & Quicunque postea Justi , Omnes Christum agnoverunt , eíque tanquam Dei Filio , debitum Cultum Exhibuerunt . Et Demonstrat . Evang. lib. 1. Capp . 5. 6. m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Christum distinctè cognitum habuerunt . Enseb . Hist. lib. 1. c. 4. p. 16. B. n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Si non nomine , reipsa tamen Christianos . Idem plane habet Augustinus , Retract . lib. 1. cap. 13. o Galat. 3. 8. p Luc. 24. 25. 26. 27. 44. q Act. 26. 22. 23. and Act. 28. 23. r Lombard . Sent. I. 3. Dist. 25. vid. Johan . Martinez de Ripalda ad dictam Distinctionem . s Augustinus in Evang . secundum Matth. Serm. 13. Tom. 10. p. 58. D. Basil. 1569. Super hanc Petram quam confessus es , dicens ; Tues Christus Filius Dei vivi , aedijicabo Ecclesiam meam . Id est , Super Meipsum aedificabo Ecclesiam meam . Super Me aedificabo Te ; non Me super Te — Non in Pauli , nec in Petri Nomine baptizati sumus , sed Christi ; ut Petrus aedificetur super Petram , non Petra super Petrum . Ibid. pag. 59. A. t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Omnium siquidem fundamentum est Christus , qui sibi ad mota , fixa firmáque sustineat . Procopius in Cap. 44. Isaiae . p. 504. And a little after — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Ecclesiae idem fundamentum jesit , qui Ipse Fundamentum est , super quod & nos , tanquam Lapides pretiosi , superstruimur . Procopius ibid. pag. 519. Omnis Ecclesiae Compages innititur & Incum●it , ut nunquam cadat , summo Angulari Lapide Christo Jesu . Augustin . Enarrat . in Psal. 86. Tom. 8. pag. 955. Operum Basil. 1569. u Fundamentum est solus Christus , vel fides Ipsius . Object . Apoc. 21. 14. Apostoli sunt Fundamenta . Sol 1. Fundamentum propriè , est illud quod habet firmitatem & stabilitatem in se ; sic Solus Christus est Fundamentum . 2. Impropriè , illud quod adhaeret primo Fundamento ; sicut sunt Lapides primarij Fundamento inhaerentes : sic Apostoli dicuntur fundamenta qui Primitùs Adhaeserunt Christo. Lyranus in . 1. Cor. 3. 11. vid. Per. Lombard . in locum . pag. 73. C. D. Christus primus Lapis & Angularis ; super Christum Apostoli & Prophetae , super illos , Nos aedificati sumus . Maldonatus in Matth. 16 pag. 342. And again — Multi in eodem Fundamento Lapides sunt ; summus & primus solus est Christus , & praeter illud , Fundamentum Aliud nemo potest ponere ; super illud autem , etiam alia sunt , quae eo nituntur , Fundamenta : nam & Apostoli & Prophetae Fundamentum Appellantur , sed ipso summo Angulari Lapide Christo Jesu . Eph. 2. 20. Maldonat . in Matth. 7. 24. p. 178. x 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Hebr. 13. 20. y 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Pet. 5. 4. z John 10. 27. a John 10. 15. b Act. 20. 28. c Rev. 15. 3. d Hebr. 3. 5. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ut famulus : Christus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , super domum , ut Filius & Dominus . e 2. Cor. 4. 5. f Christus Petrum Vniversi fidelium Generis Caput Constituit — ut qui Ei Successit , Eandem Plane Totius Ecclesiae Potestatem habere voluerit . Catechismus Tridentinus Part. 1. cap. 10. §§ . 11. 12. & praecipuè . §. 13. p. 117. Edit . Paris . 1635. 2. The Apostles . g Matth. 10. 1. 2. 3. &c. Mark. 3. 14. Luk. 9. 1. &c. h Paulus Apostolus non ab hominibus nec per hominem , Gal. 1. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Dominus eum vocavit voelitus , homine non usus Administro . Theodoret in loc . Non Petro. Estius in locum . i Matthias à Collegio Apostolorum factus est Apostolus ; Ita Estius in Gal. 1. 1. k Haec omnia factae sunt dirigente Petro , qui totius Operis fuit Choraegus . A Lapide in cap. 1. Act. Apost . p. 57. Col. 1. C. l Apostoli cateríque fideles Communi consensis Nominarunt duos , &c. A. Lapide , ibidem . m Matth. 10. 1. 2. 3. &c. Mark. 3. 13. 14. 15. Luk. 9. 1. n Matth. 10. 5. 6. o Matth. 28. 18. 19. Mark. 16. 15. 16. John. 20. 22. 23. p Francis. A Victoria . SS . Theol. Salamanticensis Academiae , in primariâ Cathedra Professore Eximio & Incomparabili . Ita habet Libri sui Epigraphe seu Titulus . q Omnem Potestatem , quam Apostoli habuerunt , reciperunt Immediatè à Christo. Victoria Prelect . 2. De Potest . Eccles. Conc. 3. p. 84. r Apostoli Omnes habuerunt aequalem Potestatem cum Petro. Ibid. Conc. 4. p. 85. f Quod sic Intelligo ; quod quilibet Apostolus habuit Potestatem Ecclesiasticam in toto Orbe , & ad Omnes Actus ad quos Petrus habuit . Ibid. t Non loquor de illis Actibus , qui spectant ad solum summum Pontisicem , ut Congregatio Generalis Concilij . Ibidem . u Vid. Hist. Conc. Generalium , per Ed. Richerium Doct. & Socium Sorbonicum . Colon. 1680. where he clearly proves , the first Eight General Councils were call'd by the Emperors . x Matth. 16. 19. y Cap. Solicit . 6. Extra De Major . & Obedientiâ . vid. Baron . Tom ▪ 11. ad Ann. 1076. §. 25. 26. z Cap. unam sanct . 1. De Major . & Obedientia . Extravag . Com. a Bellarm. de Pont. Rom. l. 5. c. 7. §. Item ; & §. sic enim . b Conc. Lateran . sub Leo. 10. Sess. 11. apud Binium . Tom. 9. p. 153. A. B. c Honoratus Faber Societi● Jesu , libro cui Titulus — Una Fides , Unius Ecclesiae Rom. Delingae . 1567. cap. 19. Cujus Lemma est ; Claves Regni Coelorum Duntaxac Petro Datae fuerunt . d Prodiit dictus Liber , cum facultate Superiorum , & Privilegio Caesareo . e Dabo ait , non do ; promittit , non dat . Luc. Brugensis in Matth. 16. 19. Ita etiam Faber Stapulensis in dictum locum , ut & alij . Vide Catenam Graecorum Patrum in Matthaeum à Nicetâ Serrarum Episcopo Collectam ; & à Balth : Corderio Jesuita Editá Tholos . 1647. & ibi Cyril . p. 548. ubi ait , Christum Claves Petro promississe . Matth. 16. 19. Sed non dedisse . Joh. 20. 22. 23. — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. f Matth. 18. 18. g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. Petro dedit Claves cum Liga●di Potestate ; eam vero Potestatem tradidit & Discipulis Omnibus . Procop. in Isaiae Cap. 61. & p. 715. 716. Potestatem tribuit Apostolis . Hieronym in Matth. 18. 18. so even the Popish Commentators upon that Place ; Menochius . Luc. Brugensis , &c. h Processionale juxta Ritum Ecclesiae Romanae restitutum Paris . 1663. p. 205. In Commendatione Animae . i Manuale dictum . Londini . 1554. p. 72. k Quilibet Sacerdos est Vicarius Petri & Pauli , &c. Ibid. p. 73. l Missale dictum Ms. In Formulâ Absolutionis . p. 111. 112. m Apud Eadmerum Hist. Novorum , per Seldenum lib. 1. pag. 27. n Apud G. Ferrarium De Cath. Eccl. Divi nis Officiis . Romae . 1591 p. 39. in Absolut . plurali & p. 40. In Absolut . singulari . Col. 1. A. B. o Catechis . Roman . Paris . 1635. Part. 2. c. 11. De. 10. Symboli Artic. §. 4. 6. Dominus Episcopis tantum & Sacerdotibus hanc Potestatem dedit . Et Idem habemus §. 9. Ibidem . p Pontificale Romanum . Romae . 1611. p. 52. De Ordinat . Presbyteri . q Joh. 20. 22. 23. Accipe Spiritum Sanctum , quorum remisseris peccata , remitt antur eis ; & quorum retinueris , retenta sunt . r Christus Ascensurus in Coelos , Sacerdotes sui Ipsius Vicarios reliquit , tanquam Praesides ac Judices , ad quos Omnia mortalia crimina deferantur ; quo , Pro Potestate Clavium , remissionis & retentionis Sententiam pronuncient . Concil . Trid. Sess. 14. De Poenitentia . c. 5. s Matth. 16. 19. Conc. Trident. Ibid. c. 6. t Summam Absolutamque Potestatem , Supremum Caput , summumique Pastorem . Luc. Brugensis . in locum Matth. 16. 19. u Nos Christi Vices tenentes , in terris , Nobisque in . Petri Personâ , dictum sit , Quodcunque Ligaveris , &c. Imperatonem Privamus , & Subditos à Juramento fidelitatis absolvimus . Apud Binium . Conc. Tom. 7. Part. 2. p. 854. x Vide Sacramentarium Gregorij Magni , per Hugonem Menardū Paris . 1642. p. 113. In Vigilia 88. Petri & Pauli . Where they pray thus — Deus , qui Ligandi Solvendique Licentiam This Aposlolis Commisisti , &c. Barlaam de Primatu Papae . lib. 2. Confesseth that the Keys were given to Peter — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Sed Non illi soli , sed Pari cum Ipso Dignitate , unicuíque è duodecem . And then he proves , it from Matth. 18. 18. and Joh. 20. 22. 23. The Learned Dan : Huetius cites this , In Notis ad Originem . Part. 2. p. 46. Col. 1. but neither gives , nor pretends to give any Just Answer to it . Only he says — Barlaamum corrupit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . This was easily said , and Barlaam might as easily have answered , Doct●ssimum Huetium corrupit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . y Joh. 20. 21. 22. 23. z Vide Catechism . Trident. Part. 1. cap. 11. §. 4. et . loca in Margine notata , in Edit . Paris . 1635. p. 129. & Ibid. §. 9. p. 132. & Part. 2. cap. 5. De Poenitent . §. 12. p. 309. 310. & Ibidem §. 55. p. 339. 340. & Conc. Trid. Sess. 14. De Poenitentiâ . cap. 5. & 6. a Remittuntur eis , verè & reipsâ Judicio meo Patrìsque Coelestis , Soluta sunt in Coelo ; quomodo loquitur Matth. 16. 19. Luc. Brugensis in Joh. 20. 23. Comment . Tom. 4. pag. 134. Vid. Catenam Graec. Patrum in Johan . per Corderium , ad Joh. 20. 23. p. 459. And Ammonius there . b Ego , filius Dei , perfunctus Vicibus meis , mitto Aequali Authoritate in Mundum Vniversum , vos , quos creavi Apostolos meos , — Ordino vos Successores meos — Quod ait Euthymius , Chrysostomum secutus — Apostoli tanquam Legati ac Vicarij Christi , sustinentes Personam ipsius absentis . Luc. Brugensis in Joh. 20. 21. Commentariorum in . 4. Evangelia . Tom. 4. pag. 172. c Joh. 20. 21. d Hebr. 3. 1. e Deus erat in Christo , quasi in Vicario & Legato . Ambros. in . 2. Cor. 5. 19. Explicat . Ambros. Cap. 16. f Deus pro Christo Vicarios dedit Apostolos , ut Pro Ipso praedicarent reconciliationem . Idem ibidem . g 2 Cor. 5. 19. 20. h Obsecramus pro Christo ; i. e. Loco Christi , cujus sumus Ministri . Lyranus in locum . 2. Cor. 5. 20. i Ministerium reconciliationis dedit nobis ; i. e. Vicariis Apostolis ; And again , Legatione fungimur pro Christo ; i. e. Vice Christi . k Dedit quosdam Apostolos ; i. e. Vicarios Praedicationis suae . Lombard . in Eph. 4. pag. 171. & rursus in . 2. Cor. 5. 19. 20. Dedit Ministerium reconciliationis nobis Apostolis , Vicariis Christi . pag. 125. Col. E. l Vide Johan . Lanoium Epist. Tom. 6. pag. 292. m Vid. Missale Roman . ex Decreto Concilij Trident. restitutum , Pij . 5. Jussu Editum . Clement . 8. Authoritate recognitum ; Antv. 1619. Inter Praefationes Missae sine notis . p. 219. ubi in Praefat. De Apostolis , Sic Orant — Aequum est Te Domine supplicitèr exorare , ut gregem tuum , Pastor aeterne , non deseras ; sed per Apostolos tuos , continuâ protectione Custodias ; ut iisdem Rectoribus gubernatur , quos operis Tui Vicarios eidem Contulisti praeesse Pastores . Hanc Orationem iisdem plane verbis conceptam , habes in Missali secudum usum Yorke , inter Praefationes Missales , in Calce Tom. 1. & in Missali secundum usum Ecclesiae Salisburiensis . Inter Praefationes Missales . And Guil : Estius the Learned Professor and Chancellor of the University of Doway , expresly approves , and confirms this ; in his Comment . on the. 2. Cor. 5. 20. Postquam Sublatus est Christus in Coelum , Nos ( Apostoli ) Illius Vices Gerimus in terrâ . Deus igitur primus Author , Christus Minister principalis , Nos ( Apostoli ) Ministri secundarij , at que Vicarij , A Deo & Christo Missi . n Matth. 18 , 18. Joh. 20. 22. 23. o So Pope . Bonif. 8. urges that Place , Matth. 16. 19. Quodcunque Ligaveris , &c. Cap. unam Sanctam . 1. De Major . & Obed. Extrav . Commun . And Innocent . 4. Justifies his Deposing the Emperor , ( as is aforesaid ) from those words — Quodcunque Ligaveris , and the Power given to Peter and the Pope by them . Binius Concil . Tom. 7. Part. 2. pag. 854. Edit . Paris . 1636. And Gregory . 7. cites the same Place , to the same purpose . Lib. 8. Epist. 21. And the same Gregory grounds his Excommunication of the Emperor Hen. 4. upon the Power of the Keys . Mihi est Potestas data Ligandi in Coelo & Terrâ . Hac Ideo Fiduciâ Fretus , Henrico totius Regni Teutonicorum & Italiae gubernacula Contradico , & Omnes Christianos à vinculo Juramenti , quod sibi fecere , an t facient , absolvo . Baronius Annal. Tom. 11. Ad Ann. 1076. §§ . 25. 26. p Petrus & Paulus ambo Principes . Card. Cusanus . Epist. 2. De usu Communionis ad Bohemos . Operum . p. 836. Edit . Basil. 1565. q Nec Mysterio caret , Romanum Pontificem . Authoritate Petri & Pauli Ligare & Solvere . Idem ibid. r De utriusque tam Petri inter Judaeos , quam Pauli inter Gentes Primatu , Immediate à Christo Vtrique Collato . And this he proves , out of Ambrose on the Galat. 2. 7. who says the same thing . Idem ibidem . s Potuit utérque ubique Ecclesias fundare , tam in Circumcisione , quam praeputio ; Licet Principalis Commissio cum Primatu , Petri fuerit in Circumcisione , & Pauli in Praeputio . Idem ibidem . t Nec in hoc Alter Alteri Suberat , sed Ambo sub Christo Immediate . Idem ibidem . u Cyprian says , That the Bishop is — Judex Vice Christi , and that the Bishops , Apostolis Vicariâ Ordinatione succedunt . This Rigaltius observes ; And adds , Ecce Episcopos , avo jam Cypriani , Vicarios Christi . Rigalt . Observat. in Epist. Cypr. p. 73. And a little after , — Episcopus est Dei Sacerdos , & Vicarius Christi . x Synodus declarat Episcopos , qui in Apostolorum locum successerunt . Conc. Trid. Sess. 23. De Sacramento Ordin . c. 4. y Christus Ascensurus , Sacerdotes sui Ipsius Vicarios reliquit , &c. Con. Trid. Sess. 14. De Poenit. c. 5. de Confessione . z Vid. Ibid. c. 6. De Minist . Sacramenti Poenitent . where it is evident , that by Sacerdotes , c. 5. all Bishops & Priests are meant ; And that it should be sure that they are meant , in the Index of that Council these words are expresly set down , — Saoerdotes sunt Vicarij Christi . And refer to the. 14. Sess. c. 5. before Cited . In Edit . Conc. Trid. Antv. 1633. Object . a Christus in Coelum abiturus , hic suum creatum Vicarium designat ac summum Pontificem creat Petrum ; Promiserat Christus Id Ipsum Petro. Matth. 16. 18. Sed hoc loco praestat ; eumque Principem & Pastorem Totius Ecclesiae Constituit . Corn : A Lapide in Joh. 21. 15. pag. 546. b Ex hoc loco patet S. Petrum ( & Ejus Successores Rom. Pontifices ) esse Caput & Principem Ecclesiae , Omnésque fideles , & jam Apostolos ipsi Subjici , & ab eo pasci & Regi debere . Idem ibid. pag. 547. Col. 2. c Ait Christus Petro & Successoribus : Pasce Oves meas ; non distinguens inter has oves & alias : ut alienum à suo ovili demonstraret , qui Petrum & Successores Ipsius , Magistros non recognosceret & Pastores . Cap. Solicit . 6. Extrav . de Majorit . & Obedientiâ . d Pasce Oves , inquit , & generalitèr non singularitèr has vel illas : per quod Commisisse sibi Intelligitur Vniversas . Cap. unam Sanctam . 1. De Major . & Obedientiâ . Extrav . Commun . Ita. Tirinus Reliquique passim . in Joh. 21. 15. Answer . e The Popes Supremacy consists in this , that he is , Petri Successor , & Christi verus & legitimus in terris Vicarius . Catechis . Trid. Part. 2. c. 7. §. 28. p. 391. Edit . Paris . 1635. And this an Article of their Creed , ( I mean their new Creed ) to which they swear ( all who have any Dignities , Cure of Souls , &c. Vide Bullam Pij Papae 4. Super forma professionis fidei in Concil . Trident. Sess. 24. De Reformat . post . cap. 12. Edit . Antverp . 1633. f Matth. 10. 2. g Joh. 1. 40. 41. 42. h Catechis . Trid. in the Place and Section last Cited , says — Romanus Pontifex est Episcoporum Maximus ; Idque Jure Divino . That 's the Lemma to that Section . And then 't is added , That the Supream Jurisdiction of the Pope , Nullis Synodicis , aut Humanis Constitutionibus , sed Divinitùs data est . i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . &c. Etenim Antiquae Romae Throno , quod Vrbs illa Imperaret , Jure Patres Privilegiadederunt . Conc. Chalcedon . Can. 28. Apud Bin. Tom. 3. p. 446. k Conc. Const. 1. Can. 5. apud bin . Conc. Tom. 1. pag. 661. Episcopus Constantinopolitanus habere debet . Primatûs Honorem Post Romanum Episcopum , quia Civitas illa est nova Roma . l Vid. Binium Conc. Tom. 3. Edit . Paris . 1636. pag. 461. & pag. 464. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Binius ibidem . p. 463. E. F. & 464. D. n Vide Edictum Valentiniani & Marciani . Ibid. pag. 476. 477. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. Universi ideo quae à Synodo Chalcedonensi Constituta sunt , Custodire debent . Et vide ibid. p. 477 478. Edictum Marciani , de Confirmatione Synodi Chalcedonensis . o Binius ibid. Conc. Tom. 3. p. 480. p Ibid. pag. 479. q Ibid. pag. 481. r So Pope Nicol. 1. tells us , That Primatûs Sedis Romanae non à Patribus , aut Imperiali Civitate , sed à Christo & Beato Petro. Vid. Binium Conc. Tom. 6. p. 508. Col. 2. F. Edit . Paris . 1636. & pag. 513. Col. 2. C. So the Trent . Catechis . part . 2. cap. 7. §. 28. Papa Rom. Suprematum habet — Non ullis Synodicis , aut humanis Constitutionibus , sed Divinitùs , &c. See the Authorities they there urge for it . p. 391. Edit . Paris . 1635. s Apud Binium ubi supra . pag. 479. E. t Clementiam vestram Precor , & Sedulâ Suggestione Obsecro , &c. Ita Leo Papa in Epist. Marciano Imperatori , Apud Binium . Conc. Tom. 3. p. 481. Col. 1. B. u Consensiones Episcoporum ( even those in the General Council at Chalcedon he means ) in irritum mittimus , & per Authoritatem Beati Petri , Generali Definitione Cassamus . Leo Papa in Epist. ad Pulcheriam , apud Binium . Tom. 3. p. 482. B. x It was in terminis Confirm'd in the sixth General Council at Constantinople . Can. 36. And the second General Council at Constantinople . Can. 5. give the same precedence to the Bishop of Byzantium , which the Council of Chalcedon does . y Dionysius Exiguus Abbas-Romanus sub Justiniano , Circa An. 540. as Trithemius , or . 520. as others . z So Isiodor . Jac. Merlinus . Paris . 3535. Codex Canonum vetus Eccl. Romanae . Edit . 2. Mogunt . 1525. dein Paris . 1619. Editio Latina prisca Canonum , Apud Justell . Biblioth . Tom. 1. p. 300. So Pet. Crabb . Joverius . Joh. Sichardus . Post Opera D. Clement . Paris . 1568. &c. a Can Renovantes . 6. Dist. 22. Petimus , ut Constantinopolitana Sedes Similia Privilegia , quae Superior Roma habet , accipiat ; Non tamen in Ecclesiasticis rebus magnificetur ut illa , &c. So Gratian in the Old Editions , as is Confess'd . Vid. Corpus Jur. Can. Cum Glossis . Paris . 1612. & sine Glossis . Paris . 1618. & ibi Notas ad hunc Canonem . b Definimus neminem Mundi Potentum , quenquam qui Patriarchalibus praesunt Sedibus , in honorare praecipuè sanctissimum Papam Senioris Romae , deinceps autem Constantinopoleos Patriarcham , deinde Alexandriae , &c. Ita Synodus . 8. habita sub Adriano Papa . Can. 21. And this an approved Council at Rome . c Gratian. Can. Definimus . 7. Dist. 22. Vid. Glossam Ibid. d Vid. Bullam Greg. 13. dat . Romae . 1. Julij 1580. Juri Canonico praefixam . Edit . Paris . 1612. & 1618. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . In Epist. Synod . 8. ad Adrianum . Apud Binium Conc. Tom. 7. Part. 1. p 984. f Vid. Greg. Maj. Regist. l. 4. Epist. 32. & 34. 36. 38. & l. 6. Epist. 30. & l. 7. Epist. 30. pag. 220. g Salvator Noster Petrum suae Potestatis Vicarium praefecit ; & Vniversi Fidelium generis Caput & Pastorem Constituit , cum illi Oves suas pascendas , Verbis Amplissimis Commendavit ; ut qui ei successit , Eandem planè Totius Ecclesiae Regendae Potestatem habere volùrit . Catechis . Trid. ex Decreto Conc. Trid. à Pio. 5. Editus . Part. 1. c. 10. § : 13. p. 117. Edit . Paris . 1634. Vid. N. Rigaltij Observat. Galeatam , Notis suis in Cyprianum praefixam . h John 21. 15. 16. i Vide Epitomen Canon . &c. per Greg. De Rives Capucinum . Lugd. 1603. Tract . de Primatu , p. 3. 4. where for Peter's Supremacy , he cites Matth. 16. 17. 18. 19. Super hanc Petram : & dabo Tibi Claves : Matth. 10. 2. Primus Petrus . Matth. 17. 27. Christ paid Tribute only for himself and Peter . Joh. 1. 43. Thou shalt be called Cephas . Joh. 21. 7. 8. Peter alone cast himself into the Sea. Matth. 14. 28. He calls Peter only to come to him ; Et ita Vnicum se Christi Vicarium designavit . Matth. 18. 21. Matth. 19. 27. Mark. 14. 37. He said only to Peter , Simon sleepest thou . Others Cite for Peter's Supremacy , Luk. 22. 38. Here are two Swords . So Pope Bonif. 8. Cap. Unam Sanctam . 1. Extrav . Commun . vide Glossam . verbo , Coelestis . Can. Omnes . 1. Dist. 22. Though their proofs from all those Places , ( and they have no better ) are not only Inconsequent , and Erroneous , but indeed Ridiculous . Vid. Tho. Campegium , Episc. Feltrensem , De Potestate Romani Pontificis . Venet. 1555. Cap. 4. 5. Opus Paulo . 4. Papae dedicat . ubi loca haec & plura , ad probandum Papae Suprematum , vanè adducit , & ridicule explicat . vid. etiam Bellarmin . De Romano Pontif. lib. 1. cap. 10. 11. 12. & inde ad cap. 24. Inclusivè . k 'T is certain , and confess'd , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 s●gnifies to rule . Kings are call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , populi pastores . So Menelaus and Agamemnon usually in Homer , and in Hesychius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And the Gloss. veteres in Galce Cyrilli , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pecor , a pasco and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Rego . l Act. 20. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Presbyters of that Church . m Act. 20. 4. 6. n Vers. 28. cap 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. o 1. Pet. 5. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p Episcopi ( says that Catechism ) singulis Episcopatibus praepos●i sunt , ●t Caeteros Ecclesiae Ministros , & fidelium populum Regant , & eorum saluti summâ Curâ Prospiciant ; unde in Sacris Literis Pastores Ovium ) saepe Appellantur . Catechis . Trid. part . 2. cap. 7. §. 26. pag. 389. 390. Editionis Paris . 1635. q Act. 20. 28. 1. Pet. 5. 2. 3. r Dominus Patres Tridentinos Divinitùs Inspirare dignatus est . Pius Papa . 4. in Bullà super formâ Juramenti professionis Fidei . s Praecepto Divino Mandatum est Omnibus , quibus Animarum Cura Commissa est , Oves Agnoscere , pro iis Sacrificium offerre , verbi praedicatione , Sacramentorum Administratione , ac bonorum operum Exemplo pascere , pauperum curam paternam gerere , & in Caetera Munia Pastoralia incumbere — ideo Synodus eos admonet , ut praeceptorum divinorum memores , in Judicio & veritate Pascant & Regant . Concil . Trid. Sess. 21. De Reformat . cap. 1. Edit . Antv●rp . 1633. pag. 284. t Act. 20. 28. u 1. Pet. 5. 2. x Joh. 21. 15. 16. y That of Bonif. 8. Cap. Unam Sanctam . 1. De Major . & Obed. Extravag . Commun . and that of Innocent . 3. cap. Solicitae . 6. extra eodem Titulo . z Maldonut . speaking of Matth. 28. 19. where our blessed Saviour gives Commission to all his Apostles — Go ye therefore into All the World , &c. He says thus — Non fieri poterat ut Singuli omnes terrae partes peragrarent , Gentésque Omnes docerent ; néque erat necessarium . Quid enim erat Opus , ut Omnes à singulis , modo Omnes ab hominibus , aliae ab aliis docerentur . Maldonat . in Joh. 21. 15. 16. &c. §. 65. p. 1889. E. This he says , and truly . But then he should have consider'd , that if it was impossible for every one of the Apostles to teach all the world ; then it will be impossible for any one . Impossible for Peter to feed all Christ's Sheep in the whole world : and yet this he endeavours to prove — Quicunque intra Ecclesiam erant , Petro pas●endos tradit . Dicit enim pasce Oves , non has , aut illas , fed pasce Oves meas . Omniu●i ergo suarum Ovium curam illi dedit . Ibid. §. 62. a Ex hoc loco ( Joh. 21. 15. ) patet Sanctum Petrum ( & Ejus Successores Romanos Pontifices ) esse Caput & Principem Ecclesiae , Omnésque fideles , etiam Apostolos Ipsi Subjici , & ab eo Pasci & Regi debere . Corn. A Lapide , in Joh. 21. 15. p. 547. Col. 2. b Heb. 4. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . c 1. Pet. 5. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . d Heb. 13. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 e Act. 1. 17. 25. f 2. Cor. 4. 5. g Hoc erant Caeteri Apostoli , quod fuit Petrus ; Pari Consortio praediti & Honoris , & Potestatis , Cyprian . de Unit. Eccles. p. 208. Edit . Rigaltij . Pastores sunt Omnes Apostoli , sed Grex Vnus , qui ab Omnibus unanimi Consensione Pascatur . Pasce Oves meas , belong'd equally to all the Apostles , as well as to Peter , in Cyprian ' s Opinion , as shall appear anon . h Nicol. Regaltius in Observatione Galeata , Notis suis ad Cypriani Opera praesixa . i Vid. Cypr. Epist. 67. p. 128. 129. Edit . Rigaltii : & Epist. 72. Ibid. p. 142. in Cal●e dictae Epistolae , &c. & Epist. 55. p. 95. k Singulis Pastoribus Episcopis portionem gregis esse adscriptam , quam regat unusquisque ; Actus sui , sive Administrationis suae rationem redditurus ; Non Romae , sed in Coelis ; Non Cornelio , sed Christo — Negat ( Cyprianus ) Ecclesiae Romanae Vllas ess● Partes in Causa Novatiani , peractâ jam in Africâ Cognitione damn●ti . ( There lay no Appeal to the Pope , as Superior to the Bishops of Africa ) . Rigalti●s in Notis ad 〈◊〉 ●●stolam 55. p. 95. & Notarum p. 77. 78. l Cyprian De Unitate Ecclesiae , pag. 208. apud Rigaltium . Hoc ●rant Caeteri Apostoli , quod fuit Potrus , Pari Consortio praediti honoris & Potestatis ; sed Primatus Petro datur . m Cyprian . Epist. 55. ad Cornelium , pag. 95. Ad Petri Cathedram , & ad Ecclesiam Principalem , unde unitas exorta est . n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. Quia Vrbs illa Imperaret , Patres dederunt Privilegia . Conc. Chalcedonense . Can. 28. o Ad Ecclesiam Principalem ] Id est , in Vrbe Principali Constitutam . Rigaltius ad Epist. Cyprian . 55. p. 78. Notarum p Justiniani Constit. Novel . 115. Cap. 3. §. 14. Graeco-Lat . Lugd. 1571. p. 745. & Novel . Const. 131. cap. 1. ibid. p. 1056. where the Emperor says — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. dictarum quatuor Synodorum dogmata , sicut Sanctas Scripturas accipimus , & Canones sicut Leges Observamus . Observ. 6. q Christus Catholicam Ecclesiam uni soli in terris , Apostolorum Principi Petro , Petríque Successori Rom. Ponti●ici , in Potestatis plenitudine tradidit gubernandam . Ita Bulla dicta in principio . r Christus Petrum universi fidelium generis Caput & Pastorem Constituit , cum illi Oves suas pascendas commendavit , ut qui ei Successisset ▪ Eandem Plane totius Ecclesiae regendae Potestatem habere voluerit . Catechis . Trid. Part. 1. De. 9. Symboli Art. §. 13. p. 117. Paris . 1635. s Cum in Petrì Cathedrâ sedeat , ut Petri Successor , Christique Vicarius in terris , Vniversali Ecclesiae Praesidet . Ibid . Part. 2. cap. 7. §. 28. p. 391. t Matth. 10. 1. Mark. 3. 14. Luk. 9. 1. u Ibid. Matth. 10. 1. x It does not appear in Scripture , that Peter ever was at Antioch , save once . Gal. 2. 11. But Paul was many times , and long there , and constituted that Church . See Act. 11. 26. Act. 14. 21. 28. Act. 15. 35. Act. 18. 22. 23. y Paul was there two whole years , Act. 28. 30. writ them a long and excellent Epistle ; But 't is certain , Peter never writ to them , nor can it appear from Scripture that he was ever two weeks , much less two years , at Rome . Where St. Paul is , by Origen , said to be ( next Christ ) Primus Ecclesiarum Fundator . Origen Contra Celsum , lib. 1. pag. 49. Graeco-Lat . z Matth 28. 19. 20. a Mark. 16. 15. b Matth. 10. 5. 6. c Euseb. 1. 3. Demonstrat . Evangelicae . p. 136. and he has our blessed Saviour's word for it . Matth. 24. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , d Franc. Victoria . Relect. Theol. Lugduni . 1587. Relect. 2. De Potestate Ecclesiae Concl. 4. p. 85. where he tells us , Apostoli Omnes habuerunt Aequalem Potestatem cum Petro. Quod sic Intelligo ; quod Quilibet Apostolorum habuit Potestatem Ecclesiasticam in Toto Orbe , & ad Omnes Actus ad quos Petrus habuit . Non tamen loquor de illis Actibus , qui spectant ad solum summum Pontificem , ut est Congregatio Generalis Concilij . And this he there proves ; as to their Power over the whole world ; and to Acts ; only ( and he dared do no otherwise ) he excepts some few , to which no Pope , for many Ages , pretended . In the present Roman Breviary the Universal Jurisdiction of Paul ( as well as Peter ) is acknowledg'd ; Paul an Apostle , Praedicator veritatis per Vniversum Mundum . In Festo Cathedrae Petri Antiochiae . Febr. 22. e A Learned Papist , Doctor of the Sorbon ( newly come to my hand ) has saved me the labour , and ex professo , and data opera proved , that all the Eight first General Councils were call'd solely by the Emperors : The Popes did indeed ( as he evidently proves ) sometimes Petition the Emperors , to call a Council at such a time or place ; but they were always both call'd and confirm'd by the Emperors . Vid. Edm. Richer . D. Sorb . in Hist. de Conc. General . Colon. 1680. f Act. 15. 2. g Act. 15. 7. h Act. 15. 19. 20. 21. i Act. 15. 22. k Ibidem . l Act. 15. 23. Vide dictum Edmundum Richerium D. Sorbonicum , in Hist. Conc. Generalium , lib. 1. cap. 13. §. 5. pag. 401. Edit . Colon. 1680. Ubi ex Card. Alliaceno , & Concilio hoc Apostolico Act. 15. demonstrat , Petrum Primatum ( qualem Jesuitae vellent ) non habuisse , sed Primatum illum Monarchicum ab Hildebrando , seu Gregorio . 7. retroductum . Ibid. §. 2. 5. m Act. 16. 4. n Act. 8. 14. a Act. 11. 2. 3. b Petrus Apostolorum Primus , rationem reddere Ecclesiae Cogitur , nec indigne fert , quia non Dominum sed Ministrum Ecclesiae se agere sciebat . Ferus in Act. 11. 2. c Impijautem Pontifices Nunc nec ab Ecclesiâ argui , aut in Ordinem cogi volunt , quasi sint Domini non Ministri . Ibidem . d Si Papa innumerabiles populos sccum ducit , primo mancipio Gehennae , &c. Hujus Culpas redarguere praesumat mortalium nullus : quia Cunctos ipse judicaturus , à nemine est Judicandus ; nisi sit à side deviss . Can. si Papa . 6. Dist. 40. e Gal. 2. 11. 12. 13. 14. f 2. Cor. 11. 5. & 12. vers . 11. g Gal. 2. 9. h Locus hic non derogat praerogativae Petri , qui totius Ecclesiae rector & Pastor Constitutus , etiam ipsis Apostolis Major & Superior fuit . Estius in 2. Cor. 12. 11. i Qui Apostolus est , Sammam habet in Omnem Ecclesiam Potestatem , Bellarmin . De Rom. Pontif. lib. 2. cap. 12. in Respons . 3. & Object . 2. k Successio ex Christi Instituto , & Jure Divino est , quia ipse Christus Instituit in Petro Pontificatum , infinem Mundi duraturum , ac ideo quicunque Petro succedit , à Christo accipit Pontificatum . Bellarmin . dicto lib. & cap. §. ut autem . l Romanum Pontificem succedere Petro , non habetur expresse in Scripturis , ( no , nor Implicitè neither ) tamen succedere aliquem Petro , deducitur evidentèr ex Scripturis , illum autem esse Romanum Pontificem , habetur ex traditione Apostolica . Bellarmin . dicto lib. & cap. §. Observandum Tertio . m Vid. Cap. Solitae . 6. Extra . de Major . & Obedientiâ . & Cap. Per venerabilem . 13. Extra . Qui filij sunt legit . & Cap. Ad Apostolicae . 2. De Sent. & re judicatâ , in . 6. & Cap. pro Human . 1. De Homicidio , in . 6. n Vid. Tho. Campegium Episc. Feltrensem , de Potestate Rom. Pont. Capp . 13. 14. & Bellarminum de Roman . Pontisice , lib. 2. c. 12. &c. o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c Non id Petro uni Successorbusque suis reservatum . Pet. Possinus Jesuita , Catena Graec. Patrum in Matth. Tom. 1. p. 232. p Joh. 20. 22. 23. q Vid. Pet. de Marca de Concordia Sacerdotij & Imperij . Tom. 2. 1. 5. c. 10. §. 2. p. 35. & Pet. Crab. Conc. Tom. 1. pag. 945. Col. 2. The words are these ; Vnde Sanctissimus & Beatissimus Papa , Caput Vniversalis Ecclesiae , &c. r Absent à Contextu Graeco , verba illa , Caput Vniversalis , &c. loco dicto , in margine . s Vide Indicem Librorum Prohibitorum Alexand. 7. Jussu Editum , Romae , Ann. 1664. verbo , De Concordia Sacerdotij , &c. p. 29. & p. 352. ubi extat Decretum Congrationis Jndicis , in quo damnatur hic Petri de Marca Liber . t Non fuisset Christus Diligens Pater-familias , si non dimisisset in Terrâ aliquem qui Vice suâ possit subvenire necessitatibus Ecclesiae , &c. De Potestat . Rom. Pontif. cap. 1. §. 3. pag. 2. u Christus Ecclesiae Defuissct , nec de Necessariis prospexisset , Nisi Monarcham aliquem & Judicem Constituisset , &c. Vide Albert. Pighium Controvers . 3. fol. 70. 71. 76. x Christus dum fuit in Mundo , de jure naturali , in Imperatorem & Quoscunque Alios Deposnionis Sementias ferre potuisset , & Damnationis — & Eadem Ratione & Vicarius ejus potest . Nam non videretur Dominus Discretus fuisse , nisi unicum post se Talem Vicarium reliquisset . Fuit autem iste Vicarius Petrus : & idem dicendum est de Successoribus Petri. Ita Petrus Bertrandus in Addit . ad Glossas ad Cap. Unam Sanctam . 1. De Major . & Obed. Extrav . Commun . y Vide Bullam Greg. 13. dat . Rom. 1. Julij , Ann. 1580. praefixam . Corp. Juris Can. Paris . 1612. & 1618. z Sic Omnes Apostolicae Sodis Sanctiones accipiendae sunt , tanquam Ipsius divini Petri voce firmatae sint . Can. sic Omnes . 2. Dist. 19. And this the Gloss there indeavours to prove , from a spurious and ridiculous , as well as impious Canon . Can. Non Nos . 1. Dist. 40. a The Jesuits in their Thesis proposed in the Claromont Coll. 12. Decemb. Ann. 1661. Impudently and Impiously say , Christus Ecclesiae regimen primum Petro , dein Successoribus Commisit , & Eandem quam habebat Ipse , Infallibilitatem , Concessit , quoties ex Cathedrâ loqueretur . And then . Thes. 20. tells us — Datur Infallibilis Controversiarum Judex , etiam Extra Concilium Generale , Tum in Quaestio ●ibus Juris , tum facti . b Hieronymus de Scriptoribus Ecclesiast in Fortunatiano . c Vid. Hist. Haeresis Monothlitarum , per Fran. de Combesis Dominicanum . Paris . 1648. p. 65. &c. 121. &c. ubi contra Pighium , Baronium , &c. probat evidentèr Honorium Synodo . 6. damnatum . d Vid. D. Rlch. Crakanthorp , in Vigilio dormitante . e Let any man read those two Constitutions before nam'd . 1. That of Innocent . 3. Cap. Solicitae . 6. Extra de Major . & Obedient . & , 2. That of Bonif. 8. Cap. Unam Sanctam . 1. eodem Titulo . Extravag . Commun . and if he have eyes , and will Impartially use them , he will find what I say , true . Or he may ( with the same success ) read the Bulls and Damnations of the Emperor Hen. 4. by Greg. 7. in Bull. Rom. 1638. Tom. 1. p. 49. 50. 51. And of Freder . 2. Ibid. p. 94. 95. by Innoc. 4. And the Excommunications of the same Emperor , by Greg. 9. Ann. 1239. Ibid. in dicto Bullario . Tom. 1. p. 89. 90. f Matth. 20. 26. 27. g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Primus seu Princeps , ( plus est quam esse Magnum ) aliis Omnibus Major ( yet this the Pope would have ) . Luc. Burgensis . in Matth. 20. 27. h Matth. 23. 8. 9. 10. 11. i Gal. 1. 1. * Joh. 1. 40 , 41 , &c. k Matth. 23. 8. Omnes autem vos fratres estis . On which words , Luc. Brugensis saith thus — Quia fratres sumus , Neminem in alios Magisterio fungi Concedit — Fratres non Magistri Alii in Alios — estis Condiscipuli , nemo in alium proprie agere potest Magistrum . Nullus aliorum Magisterium mereatur , se habere vos Omnes merito debeatis Condiscipulos . Christus Solus Omnium Magister agnoscendus . Ita L. Brugensis Commentar . in . 4. Evang. ad . 23. Math. 8. p. 361. vid. Hieronym . in Gal. 2. 1. ubi dicit Petrum , Paulum , & reliquos Apostolos fuisse aequales . l Sed quia Ecclesia regenda est juxta unitatem , necessarium fuit , Institui ab Apostolis modum quendam Communionis inter Episcopos , secundum Exemplum , A Christo datum in Institutione Collegij Apostolici ; quod Vniversum Ecclesiae Corpus repraesentabat : Ideoque praescribenda ab iis fuit forma regiminis , Aristocratici nimirum , it a ut unus Praesideret . Pet. de Marca de Concordia Sacerdotij & Imperij , lib. 6. cap. 1. §. 2. pag. 58. Col. 1. m Conc. Chalcedon . Can. 28. Conc. Constant. 1. Can. 5. apud P. Crabb . Conc. Tom. 1. pag. 411. n But it is not only Pet , de Marca , but even the Popish General Councils of Pisa , Constance , and Basil , and the Gallican Church and Sorbon , and the Ancient Church for a thousand years after our blessed Saviour , which maintain'd the same Doctrine Marca did ; as is evidently proved by a Learned Sorbon Doctor , Edm. Rechier . In Hist. Conc. General . l. 1. Edit . Colon. Ann. 1680. The design of the whole Book is against the Popes Monarchical Supremacy and Infallibility . Vide dicti lib. cap. 13. pag. 393. &c. o I know that some of them ( eminent for Learning and Dignity in their Church ) say ; That our blessed Saviour did give Peter power to transfer his great Authority to his Successor , and only to him , not to any of the other Apostles ; But this they say only , without any pretence of proof . And I commend their Prudence , not to attempt Impossibilities . Johan . Franciscus Bordinus Archbishop of Avignion , has published his Opinion , in these words — Christus Vniversale Totius Ecclesiae Caput Petrum Constituit , qui suas Vices in Terris ageret . Quo quidem in Munere , & si dum viveret , Aequales ( mark that ) habuit caeteros Coapostolos , Nulli tamen Eorum , quod à Domino accipissent , jus per Successionem in alios transferendi facult as fuit . Soli Petro Id Promissum , Soli Petro Id Traditum , ut Petra esset , & post Christum Ecclesiae fundamentum . Ita Johan . Fran. Bordinus Archiepiscopus Avenionensis , in Serie & Gestis Roman . Pontif. ad Clement . Papam . 8. ad Annum Christ. 34. Tiberij . 18. 2. p Petrus Romae Sedem suam , Jubente Domino , Collocavit . Bellarm. de Rom. Pontif. l. 2. c. 1. §. 1. q Probatur , Roman . Pontificem Petro Succedere , in Pontificatu Ecclesiae Vniversae Ex Divino Jure , & Ratione Successionis , Bellarmin . Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 12. §. Primum ergo . Papa in Petri Cathedrâ Sedet , summum in eo dignitatis gradum , & Jurisdictionis amplitudinem , non Humanis Constitutionibus , sed Divinitus datum agnoscit : est Pater Vnixersalis Ecclesiae Petri Successor , & Christi Vicarius , &c. Catechism . Trident. Part. 2. cap. 7. §. 28. pag. 391. Edit . Paris . 1635. r Bellarm. Locis proxime citatis , ( ut & alij passim ) . And Pope Pius . 5. in this his Impious Bull. §. 1. Christus Ecclesiam Catholicam uni soli Petro Petrique Successori Romano Pontifici in Potestatis Plenitudine Tradidit Gubernandam . s Nullum Christi , ea dere , Decretum Extat . So A Lapide Confesses ; in Apoc. 17. vers . 17. pag. 268. Col. 2. A. t Romano Pontifici , Beati Petri Apostolorum Principis , Successori , ac Christi Vicario , veram Obedientiam spondeo ae juro . Vid. Bullam Pii . 4. super forma Juramenti Professionis fidei , in Conc. Trident. Sess. 24. p. 452. Edit . Antv. 1633. u Hanc Catholicam fidem , extra quam nemo Salvus esse potest , quam in Praesenti profiteor , & teneo , eandem usque ad ultimum vitae spiritum Constantissime retinere , &c. Spondeo , Voveo , Juro . Ibidem . x 1 Pet. 5. 13. y Primam Petri Epistolam Romae Scriptam ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) aiunt , quam Petrus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appellat . Eusebius Hist. l. 2. c. 15. p. 53. B. Valesio . z Curiose sciscitabar ( said Papias ) à Senioribus , quid Petrus , quid Jacobus , dicere soli●ì essent . Néque ex Bibliorum Lectione , tantam me utilitatem capere posse Existimabam , quantam ex hominum vivâ voce . Euseb. l. 3. c. 39. p. 111. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ex Traditione non scriptâ habuit novas quasdam Servatoris parabolas & praedicationes , aliáque Fabulis propiora ; inter quae Mille Annorum spatium post resurrectionem , fore dicit . Euseb. ibid. p. 112. b Ita opinatus videtur Papias , ex male Intellectis Apostolorum narrationibus . Fuit enim Mediocri Admodum Ingenio Praeditus . Euseb. ibidem . Lit. c. c Plerisque tamen post Ipsum Ecclesiasticis Scriptoribus , Ejusdem Erroris occasionem praebuit , hominis vetustate , Sententiam suam tuentibus . Ibidem D. Ita etiam Nicephorus Hist. Lib. 3. cap. 20. pag. 252. D. Object . d Colon. Allobr . 1612. e Paris . 1659. f Papias eadem aetate Celebris fuit ; Vir Imprimis disertus , & eruditus , ac Scripturarum peritus . Euseb . Hist. lib. 3. cap. 36. Edit . Valesij : Sed in Edit . Christopherson . Cap. 35. Grae. 30. Latinae Versionis . g Omnium aliaruni Artium scientiâ vir planè disertissimus . Ibidem . h Papias was a friend and familiar of St. Polycarpe . Euseb. Hist. lib. 3. cap. 39. and Polycarpe suffered Martyrdom Anno Christ. 167. Baronius Annotat. ad Martyrolog . Romanum , ad diem Jan. 26. p. 81. Col. 1. Answer . i Quibus Temporibus floruit Polycarpus Smyrnaeorum Episcopus , & Papias Similiter Apud Hierapolim Sacerdotium gerens . Ruffin . l. 3. c. 35. in Excuso Rhenarci . Basil. 1528. k In Cod. MS. Ruffini , est . Lib. 3. cap. 32. l Totum hoc Elogium Papiae deest in nostris Codicibus . Valesius in Not. ad Lib. 3. Eusebij . c. 36. p. 55. m Non dubito , quin hae● verba ab Imperito Scholiastè adjecta sunt , praeter Eusebij mentem & Sementiam . Valesius Ibidem . n Quomodo fieri potest ut Eusebius Papiam hic appellet virum doctissimum , & scripturarum peritissimum , cum in fine Libri affirmat diserte , Papiam Mediocri Ingenio praeditum , Planéque Rudem ac Simplicem . Valesius Ibidem . o Euseb. lib. 3. c. 39. p Euseb. Hist. lib. 3. c. 39. p. 112. Valesij Edit . vide Nicephor . lib. 3. c. 20. q Act. 21. 8. Vide Nicephor . Hist. lib. 3. pag. 252. C. r Vide Euseb. Hist. lib. 3. cap. 39. Hieronym . de Illust. Doct. cap. 18. Nicephor . l. 3. c. 20. s Joh. 20. 30. 31. & 21. 25. t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Novas quasdam Servatoris parabolas ac praedicationes . u Scaliger in Annotat . in Joh. 18. 31. Petrus Romae nunquam fuit : sed praedicabat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Cujus Metropolis erat Babylon , ex quâ scribit Epistolam suam . Vid. Johan . Rainoldum contra Hartum , &c. x Tametsi Veteres Existimaverint Petrum vocabulo Babylonis signisicasse Vrbem Romam , probabilis est Scaligeri Conjectura ; qui ex Ipsa Babylone scriptam à Petro putat Epistolam hanc ad Judaeos dispersos , &c. Petrus de Marca ▪ Archiepiscopus Parisiensis . De Concordia Sacerd. & Imperij . l. 6. c. 1. §. 4. p. 59. Tom. 2. y Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Annum Christi 45. §. 16. 17. z Haec Sententia refelli videtur ex Actis Apostolorum , ex quibus constat Petrum , in Judaea ac Syriâ semper mansisse , usque ad ultimum Annum Agrippae , &c. Hen. Valesius in Notis ad Cap. 16. l. 2. Hist. Eccles. Eusebij pag. 33. 34. a Act. 15. &c. b Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 51. §. 6. c In Chronico Alexandrino Concilium Hierosolymitanum refertur Anno Claudij . 6. ( Christi . 48. ) melius dixisset . 7 ● . sic enim cuncta egregié conveniunt , &c. Hen. Valesius in Notis ad Cap. 18. l. 2. Hist. Eccles. Euseb. p. 37. Col. 2. A. d Gal. 1. 18. e Gal. 2. 1. 8. 9. f They say , he sate at Rome . 25. years , and that he was martyr'd Neronis . 13. or Anno Christi . 68. so that those 25. years must begin Anno Christi . 43. And then Anno Christi . 51. he had sate at Rome eight years . g 1 Pet. 1. 1. h The First Epistle of Peter was writ Anno Christi . 45. So Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 45. §. 16. And the same Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Annum Christ. 97. §. 1. tells us , that the Revelation of St. John was writ Anno Christi 97. that is , 52. years after . i Petrus & Paulus fundantes Ecclesiam Romanam , Lino Episcopatum tradiderunt . Succedit ei Anacletus , post eum Tertio Loco ab Apostolis Clemens . Irenaeus . lib. 3. cap. 3. k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. Post Pauli Petríque Martyrium , Primus Ecclesiae Romanae . Episcopatum suscepit Linus . Euseb. Hist. l. 3. c. 2. vide Niceph. l. 3. cap. etiam . 2. l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Primus fuit Linus , secundus Anencletus . Euseb. Ibid. l. 3. c. 21. m Euseb. Ibid. lib. 3. cap. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . n Clemens , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Tertius à Paulo & Petro Romae Episcopus . Euseb. loco dicto . cap. 21. vide Epiphanium adversus Haereses . lib. 1. Haeres . 27. Carpocratianorum §. 6. pag. 107. o Sciendum est Eusebium Apostolos Inordine Episcoporum minime N●merare . Hen. Valesius in Annotat. ad Hist. Ecclesiasticam Euseb. l. 3. c. 21. & Notarum . pag. 50. Col. 2. B. p Lib. 3. Cap. 2. & Cap. 21. q Gal. 2. 9. r Gal. 2. 1. 7. 8. 9. s Gal. 2. 7. t Vnus & idem mihi Evangelium praeputij , & Petro Circumcisionis credidit ; me misit ad Gentes , Illum posuit in Judea . Hieronymus in Cap. 2. ad Galatas . d. u Vers. 8. x Vers. 9. y As is evident in the Acts of the Apostles , and by his first Epistle writ ( as Baronius says ) Ann 45. Christi . Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 45. Num. 16. vid. Euseb. Hist. l. 3. c. 1. where he says , that Peter preach'd the Gospel long to the Asiatick Dispersion of the Jews , before he came to Rome ; and Nicephorus says so too . z And 't is certain , that after the year . 51. ( of which we now speak ) he took the Jews for his Charge and Cure : as is evident from his two Epistles writ to them , Ann. 68. And the Confession of Baronius , Annal . Tom. 1. ad Ann. 68. Num. 3. a Gal. 2. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Petro Concreditum est Evangelium praeputij . b Quod spectat ad Ecclesiam Antiochenam , hoc Anno ( Christi . 39. ) Institutam à Petro , & septem Annis ab eodem administratam , &c. Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Annum Christi . 39. §. 9. c Petrus Ecclesiam Antiochenam fundans , inde Romam adiit . Euseb. in Chron. ad Ann. Claud. 1. And they say he went to Rome , Our blessed Saviour Commanding him so to do . Cum. 7. Annos Antiochiae sedisset , Postea Jubente Christo Romam vemit . Longus A Coriolano in summâ Concil . in Principio , in serie Pontificum . d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Antiochenae Ecclesiae Episcopus Primus erat Enodius . Idem in Chronico , ad Annum Claudij 2. e Baronius Ibidem ; ad Ann. 39. §. 9. f All that Eusebius says , is only this — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Ad Ann. Claudij . 1. g The words Baronius Cites , as being Eusebius his words Ad Annum . 2. Claudij , are indeed ( part of them ) Ad Annum . 1. Claudij : but the rest ( Peter's being five and twenty years Bishop of Rome ) are neither at that , nor any other year of Claudius . h Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. Christi , 34. §. 1. & 2. i Idem . Tom. 1. ad Ann. Christi . 69. §. 9. k Gal. 2. 11. 12. 13. &c. l Act. 11. 26. m Act. 14. 22. n Act. 14. 23. o Act. 14. 26. 28. p Act. 15. 35. vid. Act. 18. 22. 23. p I confess Baronius , and Hierom ( whom he Cites , Commentariorum in Epist. ad Gal. lib. 1. cap. 2. ) tell us , That Peter was Bishop of Antioch ; and are not well pleas'd that Luke left it out of his History in the Acts of the Apostles . Nay they speak irreverently of him , and say , That he left that , and many other things out of his History , by a Liberty or Licence he took to himself . Hanc cum tacuit Lucas , & alia Multa Historiographi Licentia Praetermisit . Primum Episcopum Antiochae Petrum fuisse Accepimus ( says Hierome there ) quod Lucas penitùs Omisit . But Hierom ( though an excellent Person ) had his Passions and Errors , and in that very place , indeavours to justifie Peter , as not to be blam'd , against the express words of St. Paul , Gal. 1. 11. Luke writ by the direction of the Holy Ghost , and if he writ not all that Hierome or Baronius would have him , yet they should not Censure him . Vide Baronium ad Annum Christi . 39. §. 8. q Onuph . Panvin . in Annotat ad Plat. in vitis Pont. ad vitam Petri. r Ex his . 9. primis Annis , usque ad Initium An. 2. Imper. Claudiij , Petrum Judaea nunquam exessisse , ex quo & Paulo , apertissimè Constat . Idem . ibidem . s Petrus Cruci Affix●●est , novissimo Neronis Anno , Christi vero 69. Ibidem . t Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 39. §. 8. 9. &c. u Baronius Ibidem . §. 13. x Baronius Ibidem . §. 9. Ann. 39. y Anno Christ. 69. Capitone & Rufo Coss. Petrus & Paulus Martyrium subiere . Annal. Tom. 1. an Annum . 69. §. 1. Neronis . 13. z Vide Bellarm. de Script . Eccles. in Petro Aposto ; & Chronol . suae Part. 2. ad Annum 39. & 44. a Vide Baronium Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 69. §. 2. b Vide Jos. Scaligeri Animadvers . in Chronologica Eusebij ; Amstelod . 1658. pag. 189. c Rom. 1. 13. d Act. 22. 21. Gal. 27. 8. e Ibidem . f Act. 28. 30. 31. g 2. Cor. 11. 28. 1. Cor. 7. 17. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( hinc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Edictum , Constitutio . ) So I ordain in all Churches . Versio vulg . frigidè — In Ecclesiis Omnibus doceo . 1. Cor. 7. 17. vide Act. 18. 2. i I confess Bellarmine would ( out of Irenaeus as he vainly thinks ) perswade us , that both Peter and Paul were Bishops of Rome . Irenaeus ( says he ) lib. 3. cap. 3. fixit Catalogum Romanorum Episcoporum , & Primo Loco ponit Petrum & Paulum . De Rom. Pontif. lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 6. Irenaeus . k Series & Successio Rom. Pontif. sic est : Primus Jesus Christus . Longus à Coriol . summa Co●cil . in Prin. in Serie Rom. Pontif. we have the very same words in the Edition of Platina , De vi●● Pont. Col. Agripp . 1626. But Platina ( basely corrupted since his death ) has no such thing in the Old Edition , 1485. But to make our blessed Saviour the first Bishop of Rome , is not only erroneous , but impious . 1. He never was at Rome . 2. He was not sent , save to the lost Sheep of the Ho●● of Israel , ( not in Person sure , not to be a Bishop of any Gentile Church ) . 3. There was no Christian Church at Rome while he liv'd of which he could be Bishop . 4. Our blessed Saviour remains a Priest for ever , and cannot have any Successor . Heb. 5. 6. And therefore Bellarm. justly denies ou● B. Saviour to have any Successor , because he is Pontifex aeternus . Bellar. de Script . Eccles. in T. Aquia ▪ Object . l Apostolicus non nisi à Cardinalibus inthronizaendus , Gratian. Dist. 79. Part. 1. & ibidem . Can. 1. Alitèr inthronizatus non est Papa vel Apostolicus , sed Apostaticus & , Can. si Papa . 6. Dist. 4. In ●emmate . Damnatur Apostolicus , suae & fraternae salutis negligens . m Bellarmine gives us a Catalogue of fifteen such Papal Titles ; which are these — Papa , Pater Patrum , Christianorum Pontifex , summus Sacerdos , Princeps Sacerdotum , Vicarius Christi , Caput Ecclesiae , Fundamentum Ecclesiae , Pastor Ovilis Domini , Pater & Doctor Omnium Fidelium , Rector Domus Dei , Custos vineae Dei , Sponsus Ecclesiae Dei , Apostolicae Sedis Praesul , Episcopus Vniversalis , ex quibus Omnibus & Singulis Apertè Colligitur Ejus Primatus . De Romano Pont. lib. 2. cap. 31. Answer . n Cum Episcopus Civitatis fuerit demortuus , Eligitur alius , & veniunt ad Apostolicum cum Electo , ut cis Consecret Episcopum . Alcuinus de Divinis Officiis . Cap. 36. o Petrus de Marca de Concordiâ Sacerdotij & Imperij . Tom. 2. lib. 6. cap. 3. §. 3. pag. 67. p Sequens aetas abstinuit — & deinceps Apostolici Titulus Soli Summo Pontifici attributus est ab Authoribus . Idem Ibidem . q The Archbishop of Paris next before cited , amonst the Apostolical Churches ( besides those I have named ) reckons Alexandria , Ephesus , Ancyra , Corinth , Thessalonica ; and he might have added Philippi , &c. ( De Concordiâ Sacred . & Imperij , lib. 7. cap. 4. § 7. Tom. 2. p. 224. ) for Tertullian adds it , in the Place next cited . r Age jam qui voles Curiositatem melius exercere in negotio salutis tuae , percurre Ecclesias Apostolicas , apud quas Ipsae adhuc Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis Praesidentur ; apud quas Ipsae Authenticae Literae eorum recitantur , sonantes vocem , & repraesentantes faciem uniuscujusque . Proxima est Tibi Achaia , habes Corinthum : Si non longe ●s à Macedoniâ , habes Philippos , aut Thessalonicenses . Si potes in Afiam tendere , habes Ephesum : si autem Italiae adjaces , habes Romam . &c. Tertullian . de Praescript . cap. 36. pag. 338. Edit . Pamelij , 1662. s Ecclesiae Rom. specialius in Petro , Coeli Terraeque retine● habenas . Gratian. Can. Si Papa . 6. Dist. 40. t Jus Successionis , Pontificum Romanorum in eofundatur ; quod Petrus Sedem suam , Jubente Domino , Romae Collocaverit . Bellarm . de Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 1. §. 1. u Ecclesia Antiocheia hos Anno ( Christi . 39. ) à Petro Instituta , & 7. Annis ab eodem administrata . Baron . ad An. Christ. 39. §. 9. Tom. 1. p. 269. Edit . Antverp . 1612. x Baron . ibid. §. 18. p. 272. and in their present Roman Breviary , Antverp . 1660. They have a Holy-day for St. Peter's Installment at Antioch ; In Cathedrâ Sancti Petri Antiochiae , ( so they call it ) In parte Breviarij Hiemali ▪ ad diem . 22. Februarij . And we are there told , that that Festival was call'd Cathedra Petri ; Quia Primus Apostolorum Petrus hodiè Episcopatus Cathedram suscipisse referatur . Ibid. Lect. 3. p. 760. Col. 2. And for this they cite St. Augustin De Sanctis , Serm. 15. n known supposititius and spurius scrap , unworthily father'd on St. Augustin . y 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . &c. Hic Primus Episcopalem Cathedram caepit , cum ei Ante Coeteros Omnes , Suum ei in Terris Thronum Dominus Tradisset . Epiphanius Adversus Haeres . lib. 3. Tom. 2. Haeres . 78. §. 7. pag. 1039. B. z 1. Pet. 2. 25. a Rev. 17. 14. & 19. 16. b Matth. 10. 6. & 15. 24. Rom. 15. 8. c Luk. 10. 1. 2. d Gal. 2. 9. e Act. 15. 13. 19. 20. f God your King : ( so Samuel tells them ) and so 1. Sam. 8. 7. and cap. 10. 19. g So Josephus and Philo call the Jewish Government , from Moses to Saul . God was personally their King. 1. He himself Personally did give them all their Laws . 2. He Personally sent his Vice-Roys , Moses , Joshua , and all the Judges . 3. He received , and personally answered all their last Appeals , which are evident Characters that he was their Supream Power , their King. h Synodus à Spiritu Sancto , qui est Spiritus Sapientiae & Intellectûs Edocta declarat , &c. Concil . Trid. Sess. 21. de Communione , cap. 1. And yet what it declares there is most evidently untrue . i Christus à Terris Ascensurus ad Coelos , Sacerdotes sui Ipsius Vicarios reliquit tanquam Praesides ac Judices , ad quos Omnia Mortalia Crimina deferantur . Conc. Trid. Sess. 14. De Poenitentiâ , cap. 5. De Confessione . vid. Aquinat . part . 3. Quaest. 8. Art. 6. in Corpore . k Aquin. 2. 2. Quaest. 88. Art. 12. Praelatus gerit Vicem Christi . l 2. Cor. 2. 10. m Si periculum mortis immineat , approbatúsque desit Confessarius , Quilibet Sacerdos Potest à Quibuscunque Censuris & Pecatis absolvere . Rituale Romanum Pauli Papae . 5. Jussu Editum Antverp . 1652. De Sacramento Poenitentiae pag. 61. & 65. n Cum Jesu Christi Vices teneamus in Terris , Nobísque in Petri personâ dictum sit , Quodcunque Ligaveris , &c. Memoratum Principem Omni Dignitate privatum denunciamus , & Sententiando privamus ; Omnésque ei Juramento Fidelitatis astrictos , à juramento absolvimus ; inhibentes ne quisquam de Coetero ei , ut Imperatori pareat ; & qui Ipsi favorem aut auxillum praestiterint , sint Ipso facto Excommunicati . Cap. ad Apostolicae , 2. Extra de Sent. & re judicata . vid. Cap. Quanto . 3. Extra de Translatione Episcopi . o Cum in Petri Cathedrâ Sedeat , summum in eo Dignitatis gradum , non ullis humanis Constitutionibus , sed divinitùs datum agnoscit : Estque Moderator Vniversalis Ecclesiae , ut Petri Successor , & in terris verus Christi Vicarius . Ita Catechis . Trident. part . 2. cap. 7. de Ordinis Sacramento . §. 28. vid. etiam Bullarium Romanum , Tom. 1. pag. 347. Col. 1. §. 6. where Alexand. Papa . 6. gives all the West-Indies to the King of Spain , as Vicar of Christ. p Vid. Breviarium Romanum , in Cathedrâ S. Petri Antiochiae . Febr. 22. & in Festo Cathedrae S. Petri qua Romae primum Sedet . Jan. 18. Breviarij parte Hiemali . q Petro dedit Claves ; transivit quidem etiam in Alios Apostolos vis potestatis illius , & in Omnes Ecclesiae Principes . Breviar . Rom. in Festo Cathedr . S. Petri Antioch . Febr. 22. Lect. 9. Part. Hiemali . p. 762. Edit . Antverp . 1660. r Part. 1. cap. 11. §. 4. s Eam Potestatem Episcopis & Presbyteris concessit . Ibid. §. 9. t Joh. 20. 22. 23. u Pontificale Romanum jussu Clement . 8. restitutum Rom. 1611. p. 52. Accipe Spiritum Sanctum quorum remiseritis peccata , remittuntur eis ; & quorum retinueritis , retenta sunt . x Declarat Synodus , falsas esse Doctrinas Omnes , quae ad alios quosvis praeter Episcopos , & Presbyteros , Clavium Ministerium extendunt , Putantes verba illa , Quodcunque Ligaveris , &c. & quorum remiseritis peccata , remittentur , &c. ad Omnes fideles indifferenter dict● , &c. Conc. Trid. Sess. 14. De Poenitentiâ , cap. 6. y Matth. 16. 19. & Joh. 20. 23. z Conc. Trid. Antv. 1633. p. 152. a Vid. Cap. Solicit . 6. Extra de Major . & Obedientiâ . Where the Lemma or Title prefix'd to that Decretal is thus — Imperium non praeest Sacerdotio , sed subest , & ei Obedire Tenetur . This he indeavours to prove by several ridiculous Instances ; and then comes with Dabo Tibi Claves , & quodcunque Ligaveris , as a most known ground of his Supremacy . Illud tanquam Notissimum omittamus , quod Dominus dixit Petro & in Petro ad Successores Ipsius ; Quodcunque Ligaveris , erit ligatum in Coelis , &c. Nihil excipit , qui dixit Quodcunque , &c. And a little before he tells the Emperor of Constantinople , ( to whom he writes ) Quanta est Inter Solem & Lunam , Tanta inter Pontifices & Reges , Differentia Cognoscatur . b Cap. ad . Apostol . 2. De Sent. & re Judicata . In. 6. c Innocentius Sacro praesente Concilio in Memoriam Sempiternam . d Papa Imperatorem depo●ere potest ex Causis Ligitimis . e Cum à Christo Nobis in Petri Persona dictum sit ; Quodcunque Ligaveris super Terram , Ligatum erit in Coelis , &c. Memoratum Principem , suis Ligatum peccatis , Omni Dignitate privatum denunciamus , sententiamus & privamus ; Omnésque ei Juramento astrictos , à Juramento perpetuo absolvimus ; Inhibentes ne quisquam sibi de Coetero , tanquam Imperatori pareat . f Vid. 1. Breviarium Romanum , by Card. Quignonius , approved and highly commended by Clement the Seventh , and Paul the Third , and often printed at Paris , An. 1536. Again , An. 1537. and at Lions , An. 1543. and at Lions , 1546. and , 1548. and again at Lions , 1556. and at Antv. 1566. and though it be the best Breviary Rome has had this Six hundred years ; yet 't is damn'd by Pius . 5. Bullâ Romae dat . 7. Idus Julij , 1568. 2. Breviarium Romanum , ex Decreto Concilii Trident. Jussu Pij . 5. Antverp . Editum , 1568. & iterum , 1585. g Portiforium Salis. Lond. 1555. Part. Hiemali . in Festo Cathedr . S. Petri , Febr. 22. h Missale Secundum usum , Sarum , Paris . 1555. eodem festo & die . i Missale secundum usum Hereford Rothomagi , 1520. eodem Festo & die . k Breviarium Rom. Antv. Ann. 1660. parte Hiemali , in Festo Cathedrae Petri Antioch . Febr. 22. p. 759. & parte aestivâ in Festo Cathedrae Petri Romae , Jan. 18. Ibid. p. 698. l Missal . Rom. Antv. 1619. In Festo Cathedrae Petri Romae , Jan. 18. p. 331. And they have the same again in Festo Cathedrae Petri Antiochiae , Febr. 22. m Dict. Brev. Rom. Antv. 1660. in Festo Cathedrae Petri Antiochiae , Febr. 22. In Resp. post Lect. 4. p. 760. Partis Hiemalis . And that it might not be forgotten , ( being a Doctrine that makes so much for the Papal Interest ) it is repeated again , in Festo Petri & Pauli , Jan. 29. Partis aestivae , p. 482. & in Festo Petri ad vincula . Ibidem p. 541. n Though I find the word Animas , left out in some of their Older Offices ; yet these words Tibi Tradidit , &c. I find in none till of late . o The Popes Tribunal ( they say ) is Supremus Justitiae Thronus . So Pius the Fifth in this his Bull , ● . 3. p Vide Originem Dialogo contra Marcionitas Graeco-Lat . per Rad. Westenium , p. 247. & Westenij Notas , pag. 230. 231. Pet. Delalande Concil . Antiquorum Galliae Supplemento , p. 35. 36. 39. Baronium in Notis ad Martyrologium Rom. ad Diem , Jan. 10. c. p. 35. Nomen Papae transit in Dignitatis Nomen , ut Clerici venerandi eo nomine Appellarentur . Postea nomen illud capit esse peculiare Episcoporum , usque enim ad Annum , 850. Nomen Commune fuit Omnibus Episcopis , inde peculiarius tribui eonsuevisset Rom. Pontifici , & sequitur , p. 36. Gregorius . Papa . 7. in Concilio Romae habito , 1073. Statuit , ut Nomen Papae Vnicum esset in toto Mundo , &c. q Vid. Pet. de Marcade Concord . Sacerdotij & Imperij , Lib. 6. c. 13. §. 3. Tom. 2. p. 126. Col. 1. So Ruffinus calls Chromatius , Pontisicem maximum . Vid. Russin . Opuscula , Paris . 1580. Epist . ad Chromatium , Pontificem maximum , post p. 194. So Clemens Romanus ( one of the best and Ancientest Popes Rome ever had ) calls every Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Summus Sacerdos . Clemens Rom. Epist. ad Corinthios , per Patr. Junium , p. 53. Edit . Oxon. 1633. r Plerique tum privatìm tum publicè , Hildebrandum Antichristum praedicant , Titulo Christi , negotium Antichristi agitat : in Babyloniâ in Templo Dei Sedet . Super Omne quod Colitur , extollitur , quasi Deus sit , se errare non posse gloriatur , &c. Aventinus Annal. Bojorum , Lib. 5. p. 352. & Lib. 7. p. 473. Observ. 7. s Flagitiorum Serva . Ita §. 1. who they are who speak ill of Dignities , ( which the Arch-Angel would not do of the Devil ) St. Jude tells us , in his Epistle , vers . 9. t Apostolicae Potestatis plenitudine declaramus praedi●●m Elizabeth Haereticam , & Haereticorum fautric●m , Anaethematis Sementiam incurrisse , Esséque à Christi Corporis unitate praecisam . §. 3. u Quin etiam ipsam Praetenso praedicti regni jure , necnon Omni & quocunque Dominio , Dignitate , Privilegioque privatam . §. 4. And again ; Dictam Elizabeth . Praetenso jure Regni privamus . §. 5. x Itemproceres , Subditos , & populos dicti Regni , ac coeteros Omnes qui illi Quomodocunque juraverunt , à Juramento hujusmodi , ac Omni prorsus Dominij , fidelitatis & Obsoquij dehito . Perpetuo absolutos , prout nos Authoritate Praesentium absolvimus , Ibid. §. 5. y Nay , such is 〈◊〉 Antichristian 〈◊〉 and barbarous 〈◊〉 to those they call 〈◊〉 ; ticks ; that when 〈◊〉 are once actually 〈◊〉 judicially condemn'd ▪ 〈◊〉 though they turn good Catholicks , and repent never so sincerely ; and though our blessed Saviour Jesus would pardon Penitents , yet Antichrist will not . For by the Popish Law , such Penitents are to be put into Prison , and be immured there , and live and dye in a miserable condition . Si dicat Haercticus se velle paenitere , ac Haereses abjurare , de misericordia possit recipi , ut Haereticus poenitens , & Perpetuo Immurari . Nic. Eymericus , Direct . Inquisitorum , part . 3. pag. 516. Col. 1. And Fran. Regne in his Commentary upon Eymericus there . Comment . 46. p. 517. Col. 2. Num. 202. z Praecipimus & Interdicimus Vniversis & Singulis Proceribus , Subditis , Populis & Aliis Praedictis , ne illi Ejusvè Monitis , Mandatis , & Legibus Audeam Obedire . Ibid. §. 5. a Praecipimus Vniversis & Singulis Praedictis , ne Ejus Mandatis aut Legibus audeant Obedire , Qui secus Egerint , eos Simili Anathematis Sententiâ Innodamus . Ibidem , §. 5. b Rom. 13. 4. c Their Petition was , That Their most holy Lord Gregory the Thirteenth , would give a Declaratory Explication of Pius the Fifth's Bull , against Queen Elizabeth , and her Adherents ; that it might be understood so , as always to bind her and the Hereticks , but not the Catholicks , as matters then stood ; but hereafter , when Publick Execution of the Bull may be had . The Answer was , These Graces the highest Bishop hath granted to Rob. Parsons and Ed. Campian ( who are now coming into England ) the Seventeenth day of April , 1580. in the Presence of Rather Oliver Manark Assistant . Camden in his History of Elizabeth , ad Ann. 1580. Elizabeth . 23. pag. 217. Edit . Angl. Lond. 1635. d The necessity of these things ariseth from the Infirmity and Fallibility of all Human Judges ; which is attested by Pope Innocent the Third , in the Canon Law ; Judicium Dei veritati , semper inititur , Judicium aut em Ecclesiae , nonnunquam opinionem sequitur , quam & fallere Saepe contingit , & falli ; propter quod contingit interdum , ut Qui Ligatus est apud Deum , apud Ecclesiam sit solutus ; & qui liber est apud Deum , Ecclesiastica sit Sententiâ innodatus . Innocent . 3. Cap. A Nobis . 28. Extra . De Sententia Excommunicationis . It is Pope Innocent the Third who says this ; and if he was Infallible , ( as the Jesuits , Canonists , &c. pretend ) then the Church of Rome does ( Saepe ) often err in her Excommunications ; and if he was not Infallible , then both he and his Successors may err . e Act. 25. 16. f Gen. 18. 20. 21. The Cry of the Sins of Sodom was great ; but before God did destroy them , I will go down And See , whether they have done Altogether according to the Cry of it , which is come to me ; and if not , I will know . Si Judicas Cognosce . God gives us an example , that we ought to be sure of the sin , which deserves it , before we pass Sentence to punish it . But the Pope here , Curses two Kingdoms , without any Hearing or Cognizance of the Cause , or possibility to know ( notwithstanding the Cry which might come to Rome ) that every one whom he Cursed , deserved it . 2. God would have spared Sodom and Gomorrah for ten righteous men , Gen. 18. 32. But the Pope Curses two Kingdoms , though he neither did , nor possibly could know , but that there might be in them Ten thousand pious Persons who deserved it not : Nay , he Excommunicates them for their Piety to God and their Prince , in Obeying the Commands of both , to which by the Law of God and the Land , they were indispensably obliged . Observ. 8. g Vide Bullarium Romanum Romae , 1638. & ibi Excommunicat . Frideric . 2. à Gregor . 9. Const. 13. Tom. 1. p. 89. & Excommunicat . Hen. 8. à Paul. 3. Tom. 1. p. 514. &c. h Gregory the Thirteenth , and Sixtus the Fifth , renewed the Bull of Pius the Fifth . Camden's History of Queen Elizabeth , Ad Ann. 1588. p. 360. 361. Edit . Anglicanae . i See the Annotat. on 1. Pet. 5. 13. and Tirinus the Jesuit says , ( in his Commentary on the same Text ) Vnanimitèr ●sserunt Patres & Doctores Orthodoxi , Citati apud Bellarminum , Riberam , Viegam , Pererium , Aleazar . &c. per Babylonem , Romam Intelligi . And so Corn. A Lapide on the same place : The same A Lapide upon Rev. 17. 16. on these words — . Hi odient fornicaeriam , scilicet , Babylozem ; i. e. Romam . Vide Hen. Valesium in Notis ad Lib. 2. Eusebij Hist. Cap. 15. Notarum p. 33. Col. 2. Riberam in Apocal. 14. 8. §. 25. k Rev. 17. 18. l Pamelius Annot. ad Lib. 3. Tertul. adversus Marcionem , num . 98. pag. 687. m 2. Thess. 2. 3. vid. 1. Tim. 4. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , An Apostacy from the Faith. n Rev. 17. 1. 5. And so Hierome calls her ( alluding to this Place , Cum in Babylone versarer ( says he ) & Purpuratae Meretricis esse●s Colonus , & Jure Quiritum viverem , &c. in praefat . ad Didymum . Alexandrinum , de Sp. Sancto , Tom. 6. p. 217. And again , lib. 2. Adversus Jovinianum ; Sed ( Hierom. Tom. 2. p. 379. 380. in calce Libri ) ad Te loquor , qui scriptam in frome blasphemiam , Christi Confessione delisti . Vrbs Orbis Dominâ , Maledictionem , quam Tibi Salvator in Apocalypsi Comminatus est , potes effugere per poenitentiam , &c. Marian. Victorius in Notis ad dictum Librum & Locum , num . 68. says he means Pagan Rome . But 't is certain ( which I only cite him for ) that Babylon in the Revelation ( in Hierom's Opinion ) is Rome : Sure I am , that Tertullian is of the same judgment ; ( Libro adversus Judaeos , cap. 8. pag. 142. num . 106. ) Sic & Babylon apud Johannem , Romanae Vrbis figuram portat , proinde & Regno superbae , & sanctorum debellatricis . And he has the same words again , ( Lib. 3. Adversus Marcion . cap. 13. num . 98. p. 674. ) where Pamelius in his Notes on those places , 1. Would have Pagan Rome meant . However , by Babylon in the Revelation ( in Tertullian's Opinion , as well as Hieroms ) Rome is meant . 2. He would have those words , ( Babylon Roma ) which were in the Margent of a former Edition of Tertullian , blotted out ; that men might not be put in mind that Rome was the Mystical Babylon , more Romano , corrupting Records , and blotting out whatever makes against them . o See Hos. 1. 2. &c. and Hos. 2. 2. p 2. Thes. 2. 7. Rev. 17. 5. 7. q Rev. 11. 8. r The Similitude between the Pagan Babylon , in the Old , and the Antichristian in the New Testament , may appear in this ; 1. They were both very great Cities . ( Isai. 13. 19. Rev. 16. 19. ) 2. They were both Impious and Idolatrous . ( Isai. 46. 1. Rev. 9. 20. ) 3. They were both Oppressors of the Church of God ; the Literal and Pagan Babylon , of the Jews , ( Jer. 50. 11. ) the Mystical Babylon of Christian Church . ( Rev. 17. 6. ) 4. They both propagated their Impiety , and made other Nations to sin with them . ( Jer. 51. 7. Rev. 13. 16. &c. Rev. 17. 2. ) 5. In the Pagan Babylon God had some Saints and Servants , and they were Commanded to come out of her . ( Jer. 50. 8. & 51. 6. ) And so in the Mystical Babylon , ( Rev. 18. 4. ) 6. The destruction of both is denounced in the same words , of Pagan Babylon , ( Isai. 21. 9. Jer. 51. 8. ) and of Mystical Babylon , ( Rev. 14. 8. & 18. 2. ) s 2 Thess. 2. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Hesychius . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Adversarius . Glossae veteres in Calce Cyrilli . Etymolog . Magnum , in verbo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; which he renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and then adds ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . u Filius perditionis , qui Adversatur . x Corn. A Lapide in 2. Thess. 2. 4. y Matth. 26. 27. z Mark. 14. 23. a Concilium Constantiense , Sess. 13. b Licet Christus post coenam , Instituerit , & Discipulis sub Vtrâque Specie panis & vini administraverit : Hoc non Obstante , &c. Ibid. c Licet in Primitivâ Ecclesiâ hoc Sacramentum reciperetur à fidelibus sub Vtrâque Specie , tamen Consuetudo ab Ecclesiâ introducta , pro lege habenda est . Ibidem . By the way , let the Intelligent and Impartial Reader consider , with what contradiction to truth and right reason the Fathers at Constance , establish their half Communion . They reject the uninterrupted perpetual Custom of the Universal Church , ( both Greek and Latin , Eastern and Western ) for above One thousand two hundred years , for receiving the Communion in both kinds : and yet tell us , That a late Custom of the Roman Church only , and that in some places only ( for it was not a general Custom in the Roman Church to receive only in one kind , till Ann. 1414. the Council of Constance met and defined it ) must be a Law to oblige all to receive only in one kind . d Pertinacitèr asseremes oppositum , tanquam Haeretici arc●ndi sunt & Gravitèr puniendi . Ibidem . e Nullu● Presbyter sub poenâ Excommunicationis , Communicet populum sub utraque Specie . Ibidem . f Lindanus in Panoplia , Lib. 4. Cap. 56. pag. 342. Edit . Colon. 1575. g Card. Bona de rebus Liturgicis . Lib. 2. Cap. 18. pag. 491. 492. Paris . 1672. h In Quibusdam Ecclesiis observatur , ut populo Sanguis Sumendus non detur . Aquinas part . 3. Quaest. 8. Art. 12. in Corpore . i Which was about the year of Christ , 1265. Bellarmine de Script . Ecclesiasticis , in Tho. Aquinate . l 1. Cor. 14. m Ibid. vers . 37. The things I write unto you are the Commandments of the Lord. n Ibid. vers . 26. & vers . 12. o Ibid. vers . 17. p Ibid. vers . 6. q Ibid. vers . 2. 9. 14. 15. 16. r Ibid. vers . 28. s Ibid. vers . 23. t Cum quidam Missale Romanum , ad Gallicam vi●●g arem linguam convertere tent averint : Nos Novitatem istam Ecclestae decoris deformatricem , detestamur ; & Missale praedictum Gallico Idiomate conscriptum , damnamus , ac Interdicimus , sub poenâ Excommunicationis latae Sententiae , Ipso Jure incurrendae . Mandantes , ut qui illud habuerint tradant Ordinarijs , aut Inquisitoribus , qui sine Morâ , Exemplaria igne comburant . Bulla Alexand . 7. dat . Romae , 12. Jan. 1661. Pontificatûs Ann. 6. u Vid. Bullam Cloment . 9. Rom. 9. April , 1668. It was to be burnt by the Bishop or Inquisitors , even their own Missal in French. x Quidam Perditionis Filij in perniciem Animarum novitatibus studentes , & Ecclesiasticas Sanctiones , & praxin Contemnentes , ad cam nuper Vesaniam pervenerint , ut Missale Romanum in Gallicam vulgarem linguam convertere tentaverint . So it is in the said Bull. y 2. Thess. 2. vers . 3. 4. z Vide Corn. A Lapide in 1. Cor. 14. Costeri Enchiridion . Cap. 17. De precibus . Latine Recitandis , pag. 502. &c. Johan . Eckij Enchiridion adversus Lutherum , pag. 392. Colon. 1565. vide Azorium Instit. Moral . Part. 1. lib. 8. cap. 26. a Hen. Holden . Theologus Parisiensis , in Annotat . ad i. Cor. 14. Paris . 1660. b Nulla conceditur facultas Legendi vel retinendi Biblia vulgaria , aut alias Sacrae Scripturae partes , quavis Vulgari Linguâ Editas , & Insuper Summaria & Compendia etiam Historia Sacrae Scripturae , quocunque vulgari Idiomate conscripta ; quod Inviolatè Observandum . Vid. Observat. ad Regul . 4. Indicis , in Calce Concilij Trident. Antverp . 1633. & Indicem Expurg . Alexand . 7. Rom. 1667. p. 14. verbo . Biblia , & Bibliorum . c Plus inde ob hominum temeritatem , Detrimenti quam Vtilitatis Oriri . Ibid. Reg. 4. In Indice Alexand. 7. p. 4. d Librorum prohibitorum Lectio , magno sincerae fidei Cultoribus Detrimento esse noscitur . Urban . 8. Constit. 114. Bullarij Rom. Tom. 4. §. 1. p. 119. Edit . Rom. An. 1638. e Liber Versionis Gallicae Novi Testamenti , cui Titulus est — Le Nouvean Testament de nostre Seigneur Jesus Christ , &c. Nos Librum hujusmodi tanquam temerariu , Damnosum , à vulgatâ Editione deformem Damnamus , & prohibemus : ita ut nemo cujuscunque Conditionis sub poena Excommunicationis , illum legere aut retinere audeat , sed Ordinariis aut Inqlisitoribus deferat . &c. Ita Clem. 9. Bulla data Rom. 20. Apr. An. 1668. f li qui Libros prohibitos habuerint , cos ad Episcopum aut Inquisitores deserant , qui eos quantocyus Comburere debeant . Ibid. §. 3. g In his Bull , 9. Apr. 1668. Pontificatus sui Ann. 1. Damnamus — mandantes , ut quicunque librum illum Ritualem habuerint vel habebunt , locerum Ordinariis , vel Inquisitoribus statim tradant , qui nullâ interpositâ mora , igni comburant , aut comburi faciant , &c h Item Alboranus Mahometis in Linguâ Vulgari , ex Concessione Inquisitorum haberi possit . Index Librorum prohibitorum . Alexandr . 7. Edit . Rom. 1664. pag. 3. i Biblin quocunque I diomate Vulgari conscripta . Ita Index Librorum prohibitorum , Alexand. 7. Jussu Editus Romae , 1667. verbo Biblia , p. 14. k Extollitur super Omne quod dicitur Deus , aut quod Colitur . Clem. 8. in Bibliis , 1592. l Corn. A Lapide in 2. Thess. 4. §. 27. m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Colo , veneror . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( Suidae & Hesychio ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Colendum , venerandum , Id quod veneratur . Athanasius Orat. Contra Gentes , ( ex sapientiâ Sirach , c. 14. 17. ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ubi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Numen , Deum significat . Sic Act. 17. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacra Gentilia , quae venerabantur , seu Numina , Altaria , Templa , &c. Hinc Caesares 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Augusti ; Hesychio , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . n Sanctiss . Vrban . 8. Vniversi Imperator . Angelus Maria Cherubinus , in Calce . Tom. 4. Bullarij Romani , Rom. 1638. pag. 120. o Vid. Cap. Solicit 6. Extra . De Major . & Obed. Quanta est inter Solem & Lunam , tanta inter Pontifices & Reges differentia cognoscatur . p Vid. Corpus Juris Canon . cum Glossis . Paris . 1612. q Palam est , quod magnitudo Solis continet magnitudinem ▪ Lunae 7744 ½ . Vice Addit . ad Gloss. verb. Inter Solem. Ad dictum cap. 6. r Clavius Comment . in Johan . de Sacro Bosco . p. 189. s 2 Thess. 2. 4. t Rom. 13. 1. u 1. Pet. 2. 13. x Act. 25. 11. y Athanasius in Apologia , ad Constantium Tom. 1. p. 680. D. z Tertull. ad Scap. cap. 2. & Apolog. c. 30. a Tu es Pastor Ovium , Princeps Apostolorum ; Tibi Tradidit Deus Omnia Regna Mundi : Breviar . Roman . Antv. 1660. part . Hiemali , in Festo Cathedrae S. Petri Antiochiae , in Resp. post Lect. 4. p. 760. b Ibid. parte Hiemali in Festo Cathedrae Sti. Petri Romae , ad diem Jan. 18. p. 700. Col. ● . & in dicti Breviarij Part. Aestiva , p. 482. In Festo Petri & Pauli , Jun. 29. & ibidem rursus p. 541. In Festo S. Petriad vincula . c The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Title of that Breviary , is thus — Breviarium Romanum , ex Decreto Sacro-Sancti Concilij Tridentini restitutum , ●ij . 5. Pont. Max. Jussu Editum , & Clement . 8. primum , nunc demum Vrbani P. 8. Authoritate recognitum . Antv. 1660. d Pius . 5. Clem. 8. Urban . 8. as above . e Stapleton , in Academiâ Duacenâ Theol. Professor , in Epist. Greg. 13. Princip . Fidei Doctrin . Demonstrationi praefixa ; Papam appellat , Catholicae Ecclesiae Virticem Coruphaeotatum , Totius Orbis Magistrum & Supremum in terris Numen . f Nec Deus es , nec Homo , quasi neuteres , inter utrúmque . Glossa ad Prooemium Clement . verbo , Papa . g Vide Censuram in Glossas Jur. Can. per Tho. Manrique , Colon. 1572. p. 13. 14. h Vide Indicem Expurgat . Olysipone , 1624. p. 350. i Paris . 1612. k Credere Dominum Deum nostrum Papam non posse sic statuere , Haereticum Censetur . Glossa ad Cap. cum inter . 4. verbo . Declaramus . De verborum signific . Extravag . Johan . 22. l Edit . Paris . 1519. m Edit . Paris . 1612. n Diviniae Majestatistuae Conspectus , rutilanti cujus fulgore oculi mei Caligant , &c. Crab. Concil . Tom. 3. Conc. Lateran . Sess. 9. p. 648. Col. 2. o Verbum Dei est triplex : 1. Scriptum , scilicet Scriptura sacra . 2. Non scriptum , Traditio . 3. Explicatum ; Cum dubia in verbo scripto vel non scripto Explicantur , & determinantur : & hoc sit praesertìm per summum Pontificem , sive Extra Concilium , s●u in Concilio . Lud. Bail : in Apparatu de triplici verbo Dei , Tom. 1. Summae Concil . Praefixo . p Iste Modus ultimus ( the Popes determinations of doubts ) Magis Probatus est , & cum majore suavitate ei Plures acquiescunt . Ibidem in principio dicti Apparatus . q De nostra mera Liberalitate , Omnes Insulas & Terras firmas inventas & Inveniendas , versus Occidentem & Meridiem , fabricando unam . Lineam à Polo Arctico ad Antarcticum , quae Linea distet à qualibet Insularum quae Vulgaritèr dictae sunt , De 〈◊〉 Azores y Cabo Vi●rde , Centum Leucis versus occidentem , Cum Omnibus illarum dominijs , Ciritati●us , Castris , Villis , Juribus , & Pertinentiis Vniversis , vobis , haeredibus & successoribus in 〈…〉 . Constit. 2. Alexand. 6. §. 8. in Bullario Rom. Tom. 1. p. 347. r Ac Personis cujuscúnque Dignitatis , etiam Imperialis , Regalis , &c. sub Excommunicationis latae Sententiae poenâ , districtius Inhibemus , ne ad Insulas aut terras dictas , pro mercibus habendis , vel causa aliâ quavis , accedere praesumant , absque veniâ vestrâ , aut Haeredum Speciali Licentiâ . Ibid. §. 8. s Matth. 22. 21. t Rom. 13. 7. The Apostle commands the Romans to pay tribute to whom it was due , that is , to Caesar ; for to him only they were Subjects , and to him only Tribute was due from them . Our blessed Saviour ( as man , born in the Roman Empire ) was subject to Caesar , and paid him Tribute . Matth. 17. 25. And that ( as Cajetan and Lucas Burgensis on that place , truly say ; That he paid that Tribute , not de facto only , but de debito . u Vide Testimonia ex variis Authoribus Collecta Romam Babylona esse , Ejúsque Episcopum jure Antichristum dici ; per Simon . Schardium , in calce Epistolarum Petri de Vincis . Basil. ●566 . x See the third part of the Homily of Good Works ; in the first part of the Homilies , p. 38. and the sixth part of the Homily against Rebellion , in the second part of the Homilies , p. 316. where the Pope is call'd the Babylonical Beast of Rome . y Novissime ad Supplantationem nostram aspirans , ut adversus David , turrem Construeret Babylonis , &c. Apud Pet. de . de Vincis , Epist. Lib. 1. cap. 13. pag. 129. z Videte Orbis generale Scandalum , dissidia gentium , generale justitiae doleatis Excidium , exeunte Nequitia A Senioribus Babylonis , qui populum hactenus Regere videbantur , &c. Apud eundem , lib. 1. cap. 21. pag. 152. a Plerique tum privatim , tum Publicè indignum facinus clamitant , Pro Concione Gregorio Maledicunt , Hildebrando male precantur ; ipsum Antichristum esse praedicaent , Titulo Christi , negotium Antichristi agitat ; in Babylonia , in Temple Dei Sedet ; super Omne id quod colitur , extollitur ; quasi Deus sit , &c. Joh. Aventinus Annal. Bojor . lib. 5. p. 352. Basil. 1615. vide plura Ibid. p. 363. b Hildebrandus ante Annos . 170. primus specie Religionis Antichristi Imperij fundamenta jecit . Hoc bellun nefandum primus auspicatus est , quod per Successores huc usque continuatur — Flamines illi ( Papas Rom. Intelligit ) Babyloniae Soli regnare cupiunt : ferre parem non possunt , in Templo Dei Sedeant , Extollantur supra omne id quod Colitur : Ingentia loquitur perditus homo ille , quasi Deus esset , &c. Aventine Ibid. lib. 7. pag. 420. 421. Vide plura ibidem pag. 444. c Plerique Omnes Boni , justi , ingenui , simplices , tum Imperium Antichristi coepisse , quod ea quae Christus tot Annos Ante nobis Cantavit , evenisse cernebant , memoriae Literarum prodidere . Joh. Aventinus , Ibidem , lib. 5. pag. 363. Edit . 1615. & Edit . 1580. pag. 470. And the Learned Marcus Ephesius in the Council of Florence , call'd Rome Babylon . Binius Concil . Tom. 8. pag. 980. Edit . Paris . 1636. d Episcopus deleus de jacturâ Animarum per Papalis Curiae Avaritiam , suspirans ait : Christus devenit , ut animas Lucraretur . Ergo , qui animas perdere non formidas , nonne Antichristus merito dicendus est ? Matth. Paris in Hen. 3. ad Ann. 1253. p. 875. e Nonne ergo Animarum destructor inimicus Dei & Antichristus censetur ? Ibidem . f Rev. 11. 8. g Ibid. p. 876. Edit . Watsij . Nec Liberabitur Ecclesia ab Aegyptia servitute , nisi in ore Gladij Cruentati . h Quise Mystas Christi ferunt , sunt Nuncij Antichristi — Nec per hunc Antichristum , licet Christianis pac●m à Deo datam servare . Joh. Aventinus Annal. Bojorum , lib. 7. pag. 469. Editionis Basil. 1615. i Sicuti Pastor est Personatus , ita Mysticus est Antichristus . Ibidem , p. 473. vid. Epist. Ecclesiae Leodiensis ad Paschal . 2. apud Binium , Tom. 7. part . 2. p. 518. k In Temlo Dei , hoc est , Ecclesiâ , quasi Deus , Sedebunt , & super Omne illud quod usquam Gentium , aut Colitur , aut cultum est , extollentur . Dominationem , Vrbi orbique Terrarum , rejecta Cruce Christi , arripient , &c. l Quae ideo vates veridici , Nobis ante Contarunt , verissima esse experimentis animadvertimus ; & nisi planè Asini simus , Sentimus , &c. m Qui contra obstrepere ausit , tanquam Reipubl . hostis , inimicus Pietaetis & Satelles Antichristi , ultimo Supplicio Parricidium luet . Conditum est hoc Decretum . Ann. 1338. Extat apud Aventinum , Annal. Lib. 7. p. 479. n The Portugal Index Expurgatorius . Olysipone , 1624. pag. 29. damns Aventine , in General only . But the Spanish Index Expurgat . Madriti , 1612. & p. 449. and at Madrid , 1667. p. 562. Col. 2. sets down particularly , all the passages to be Expunged . Dubium . o Bellarm. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 3. cap. 3. §. 1. p Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 43. §. 1. q Item Tom. 1. ad Ann. 68. §. 16. 17. Sol. 1. r Bellarm. de Rom. Pontif. Lib. 3. cap. 3. §. Refert . B. Augustinus . s Concilium Florentinum , Episcopornm 340. Praeside Paschal . 2. contra Fluentinum illius Loci Episcopum , qui Motus Quotidianis Portentis , quae tunc Accidebant , dicebat jam tum natum esse Antichristum . Genebrard . Chron. Lib. 4. ad Annum 1105. p. 355. t Since that Council wherein he was censured , ( Ann. 1105. ) are 574 years pass'd . u In Bodley's Library in Oxon. Cod. 76 , super D. Arts. The MS. was given to St. Peter's Church in Excester , in Edward the Confessor's time , by Leofricke ; first Bishop of Exon , as appears by his own hand , in the beginning of that Manuscript . x Malis Artibus Pontificatum adeptus est — Ambitione & Diabolicâ dominandi cupiditate Impulsus , Archiepiscopatum Rhemensem , dein Ravennatem , postremò Pontificatum , Adjuvante Diabolo , consecutus . And a little before , Relicto Monasterio . Diabolum secutus , cui se Totum tradiderit , &c. Plat. in vitâ Sylvest . 2. See the Hist. of Magick by Gabr. Nandaeus , c. 19. pag. 255. & Johan . Stella de vitis Pontificum , ( opus revisum & correctum sub Julio . 2. as we are told in the last page save one ) Basil. 1507. in vita Silvestri . 2. y In Annotat. ad vit . Silvest . 2. apud Plat. Edit . 1626. z In vitâ Silvest . 2. a Grot. in 2. Thess. 2. 4. 5. b Dr. Hammond on the same place , and more largely , contra D. B●ondellum Dissert . 1. Prooemialis . De Antechristo . c 2. Thess. 2. 6. 7. d Secundum Computum Dionysij vulgat . 38. sed Ann. Christ. 40. secundum verum Computum . Collegi ( inquit Grotius ) scriptam hanc Epistolam Anno Altero Caiani Principatus . Grotius in Prologo ad 2. ad Thess. e Usserius Annal. Part. posteriori . Aetat . Mundi . 7. ad Ann. 54. p. 667. in which year he says , and proves this Epistle to be writ . f Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. Christ. 53. §. 1. p. 408. In which year he says this Epistle was writ . g Ed. Simpson Chronici Cathol . part . 7. ad Ann. 51. p. 36. hoc Ann. 2. ad Thess. Epist. scriptam putat . h Corn. A Lapide in Argumento ad . 2. ad Thess. & in Chronolaxi Actuum Apostolorum ad Ann. Christ. 53. pag. 4. quo Ann. 2. ad Thess. Epist. esse Scriptam asserit . i Calvisius ad Ann. Christ. 50. hoc Ann. 2. ad Thess. scriptain vult . k Annal. part . posteriori , Aetate Mund. 7. ad Ann. Christ. 54. p. 668. Toto Coelo erravit Grotius , cum hanc Epistolam sub Caio exaratam existimabat . l 1 Thess. 1. 5. m Gal. 1. 17. n Gal. 1. 18. o Gal. 2. 1. p Act. 15. 2. q Chron. Catholici , part . 7. ad Ann. 47. p. 34. r Centur. 1. Lib. 2. cap. 9. p. 420. s Theatro Hist. ad dictum Annum . t Tom. 1. ad Ann. 51. §. 6. u Chronol ad dictū Annum . p. 93. x In Chronotaxi , ad Ann 51. y In Chronot sua ad dictum Annum . z Usserius Annal. Part. 2. ad Ann. 52. pag. 660. a 1. Thess. 1. 5. b Act. 15. 30. c Ibid. vers . 41. d Act. 16. 1. 2. e Ibid. vers . 6. f Ibid. vers . 11. 12. g Act. 17. 1. h Ibid. vers . 10. i Ibid. vers . 15. k Act. 18. 1. l Orosium secuti sunt Omnes deinceps Chronographi ; & Baronius , &c. Hen. Valesius in Notis ad Cap. 18. Lib. 2. Eusebij . p 37. m Paulus Anno demum Claudij . 9. venit in Graeciam . Ibid. Col. 2. B. n 1. Thessal . 3. 2. 6. vide Hen. Holden Theolog . Parisiensem in Tabula Gestorum Pauli , in Calce N. Test. à se , cum Arnotat . Edit . Paris . 1660. p. 883. 884. ubi haec Omnia firmat . o 2. Thess. 2. 6. 7. p Dr. Hammond in the Prologue to his Annotat . on the Second to the Thessalonians . q Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. Christ. 43. §. 1. In which year 't is certain Caius died . r Dr. Hammond Annot . p. 718. Col. 2. ex Professo proves that Caius could not be Antichrist . s Act. 8. t Ibid. vers . 13. u Vers. 18. x They Money perish with thee , vers . 20. y Ibid. vers . 23. z Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 35. §. 9. Ita etiam Hen. Holden , Dr. Theol. in Tabulâ Gestorum Petri , in Calce N. Test. cum Annot. suis Edit . Paris . 1660. p. 881. a Magus cum inde recessissent Apostoli , contra eos obniti , corúmque Doctrinae adversari non dubitarct : & qui olim Samaritas dementarat , Judaeos iisdem Artibus aggressus , quos Apostolis Insensos videat , se esse Dei Filium , illis Suadere Conatus est . Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 35. §. 20. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. Itáque hinc Simon Magus aemulatione percitus , contra Apostolos , corúmque Doctrinam se Armavit . Nicephor . Histor. Eccles. Lib. 2. cap. 6. p. 141. c Dr. Hammond in his Annotat. on 2. Thess. 2. 3. Lit. E. p. 719. Col. 1. d Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. Christ. 35. §. 9. e Dr. Hammond Annotat . on 2. Thess. 2. 3. literad . p. 718. Col. 2. f Eusebius Hist. Ecclesiast . lib. 2. cap. 12. In the Latin ; but , 13. in the Greek . g Hierome De Scriptor . Eccles. in Petro. h Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 43. §. 1. i Vide Hen Holden . Dr. Parisiens . in cap. 13. vers . 1. Apoc. vidi Bestiam ; i. e. Antichristum , habentem Cap. 7. i. e. Authoritatem Supremam , & Cornua . 10. id est , potestatem Maximam . Vid. Grotium in dictum locum . k Apoc. 13. 7. l Apoc. 17. 6. m Euseb. Hist. Eccles. l. 2. c. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Nero Rom. Imperat. primus Hostis , &c. Ita Tertullianus — Neronem primum in sectam nostram gladio ferocisse . Euseb. in Chronico ad Ann. Christ. 70. n Caius died Anno Christ. 43. and the first Persecution under Nero was Anno Christ. 66. Baronius Tom. 1. ad Ann. 43. §. 1. & ad Ann. 66. §. 9. o 1. Tim. 4. 1. 2. 3. p 2. Thess. 2. 3. q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 1. Tim. 4. 1. r Gravius peccat Sacerdos , si matrimonium contrahat , quam si fornicetur , & domi concubinam foveat . Vid. Costeri Enchiridion , cap. 15. Propos . 9. p. 459. Edit . 1587. s Haereticorum Ministri Sacerdotium Incestis Nuptiis foedant ; quae non sunt Nuptiae , sed Pejora Omnibus Adulteriis Sacrilegia . Idem ibid. p. 460. t See the Approbations of Coster's Enchiridion in the Beginning . Edit . Colon. 1587. & Edit . Turnoni , 1591. Where we have , 1. The Approbation of the University of Mentz ; and they say , they had read it diligently ; Dignissimúmque judicasse quod in publicum prodiret , manibúsque Studiosorum Assiduè tereretur . 2. The University of Colon : Approbat , Omnibúsque veritatis amantibus Plurimum Profuturum testatur . 3. The University of Lovan : — Dignum judicat , quod adversus pestilentes nostri Temporis Sectariorum errores , Catholicorum manibus teratur . 4. The Divines of Triers : — Enchiridion Costeri , quia & eruditè & Orthodoxè Per Omnia Scriptum , Summa Cum Vtilitate legi possit . u 1. Tim. 4. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . x So Ed. Simpson Chronol . Cathol . Part. 7. ad Ann. 54. p. 37. y So Baronius Annal . Tom. 1. ad Ann. 57. Num. 189. so Ger. Mercator Atlant. Minoris Arnhemij , 1621. p. 676. In Itinerario Pauli . And so Corn. A Lapide in Chronotaxi , ad Ann. 57. z Jac. Usserius Armachanus Annal. Part. 2. ad Ann. Christ. 65. pag. 688. a In his Second to Tim. 3. 1. 2. 3. &c. which Epistle was writ , says Baronius , Ann. Christ. 59. Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 59. num . 19. And Archbishop Vsher says it was writ Anno Christ. 66. Annal . Part. 2. ad dictum Annum , p. 691. b 2. Tim. 3. 1. c 2. Thess. 2. 3. d 2. Pet. 1. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , velox est deposito tabernaculi mei . Versio Vulgata . e Jac. Usserius Armach . Annal. Part. 2. ad Ann. 67. p. 691. vide Lyranum in Glossa ad Prologum Hieron●m . in . 7. Epist. Canonicas , & Hie●onymum , De Illust. Eccles. Doctoribus , c. 1. f Idem Usserius ibid. p. 691. g Simpson Chron. Cathol . Part. 7. ad Ann. 67. p. 44. h Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 69. §. 1. i 2. Pet. 2. 1. k Rev. 13. 1. l Rev. 17. 6. m Rev. 17. 18. n Rev. 11. 8. o Rev. 17. 12. 13. p Ibidem vers . 16. 17. q Rev. 18. 2. 21. r Rev. 1. 9. s Johannes Apocalypsin viderat , pene sub nostro seculo , ad Finem Domitiani Imperij . Irenaeus advers . Haeres . l. 5. p. 259. Col. 2. Edit . Erasmi . So Eusebius Hist. Eccles. l. 3. c. 23. where he cites Clemens Alexandr . for the same purpose . So the Acta Martyrij Timothei , apud Photium Biblioth . Cod. 254. p. 1402. 1403. So Orosius Hist. l. 7. c. 10. 11. p. 598. And so Hierom , de Doct. Ecclesiae Illust. c. 9. ad Ann. 97. t Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 97. §. 1. u The Revelation was writ Anno Christ. 97. Caius died Ann. 43. ( Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad An. 43. §. 1. ) and so was dead 54. years before Antichrist came . x Simon Magus died Anno Christ. 68. ( Ita Baronius , ex Eusebio , Epiphanio , &c. Tom. Annal. 1. ad Annum Christ. 68. §. 17. 18. ) which was . 29. years before the Revelation was writ , or Antichrist come , if St. John says true . y Dr. Hammond in his Premonition to his Annotat. on the Revelation , p. 906. & 907. z Epiphanius Haeresi . 51. § 12. & 33. a Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Annum . 99. §. 2. Dionysius Petavius in Notis ad Epiphan . Haeresin . 51. Num. 33. & Baronius Ibid. ad An. 93. §. 9. D. Blondellus de Sybillis , lib. 2. cap. 2. Possevin . in Apparat. verbo Johannes Apostolus , p. 814. &c c Grot. in Apocalyp . 1. 9. d Joh. Malela in Domitiano MS. in Bibliotheca Bodleiana Oxon. pag. 161. alias 171. e Haimo Hist. lib. 3. cap. 15. pag. 55. f Arethas in Apocalyps . cap. 1. 9. g Ado Viennensis in Chronico , ad Annum Christ. 84. apod Laurent . de la Barre , p. 493. h Rev. 2. 13. i Martyrologium Romanum ad diem Apr. 11. k Baroni●s Annot. ad Martyrologium Roman . ad dictum diem April . 11. & Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. Christ. 93. §. 9. l Dr. Hammond in Annotat. ad Apocal. 2. 13. lit . 1. pag. 927. Col. 1. m Moritur Claudius Ann. Christ. 55. seu 56. Baronius ad An. Christ. 56. §. 42. & Domitianus Imperium adiit Anno Christ. 84. Baronius ad dictum Annum . §. 1. And hence it appears , that Claudius died either 84 55 29 Twenty nine , or , 84 56 28 Twenty eight years before Domitian came to the Empire . n 1 Joh. 2. 18. & cap. 4. 3. o Nunc multisunt Antichristi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui unum illum praecedunt , it érque illi parant : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Oecumenius in 1. Johan . Epistol . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 573. C. D. So Bede , Estius , &c. in . 1. Joh. 2. 18. 80 Gagnaeius . Ibid. &c. p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Idem Ibidem . Nunc multi sunt Antichristi ; qui Omnes Maximo illi Antichristo In Finem Secul ; Vanturo , qu●si suo Capiti , Testimonium creddunt . Beda in . 1. Joh. 2. 18. q 1. Joh. 4. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . r Jam in Mund , est ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Oecumenius Ibidem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , p. 587. D. s Vide Grotium in 1. Joh. 2. 18. t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , est sono praesens , sensu futurum . Grotius in 1. Joh. 4. 3. u Inter Antichristos , unus futurus erat Caeteris Eminentior , ad quem Locus . 1. Joh. 4. 3. pertinet , is vero non alius fuit quam Barchochebas . Grotius in 1. Joh. 2. 18. x Apparuit Barchochebas Ann. Christ. 130. Adrian . 11. apud Baronium , Annal. Tom. 2. ad Ann. 130. Num. 4. 5. y Grotius in . 1. Joh. 4. 3. Talis Prophetia ( he speaks of the Propheties of false Christs , and Prophets ) viam struit Magno Ipsi & Eximio Antichristo . z So Baronius Annal . Tom. 1. ad Annum Christ. 99. Num. 7. Bart. Gavantus Comment . in Rubricas , Breviarij Rom. Sect. 5. p. 84. a Johannes vero nullum post Evangelium & Epistolas Scripsit ; Scilicet post mortem Domitiani ; quia reversus de Exilio invenit Ecclesiam per Haereticos perturbatam , & tunc , Scripsit Evangelium & Epistolas contra Ipsos . Lyranus in Glossa ad Prologum Hieronymi in septem Epist . Canonicas . b Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 68. Num. 16. 17. &c. c ●uto Scriptam hanc Epistolam non multo ante Excidium Hierosolymorum . Grotius Annot. in . 1. Johannis , In Principio . d This Epistle seems to have been writ A Little Before the great destruction which befell the Jews , &c. Dr. Hammond in his Prologue to his Annot. on the first of John. e Josephus de Bello Judaico , lib. 7. cap. 47. p. 969. f Eusebius in Chronico ad Ann. 72. g Usserius Annal. part . 2. p. 698. h Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 72. Num. 20. i Hierom. de Illust. Eccles. Doctoribus , c. ● . says St. John liv'd . 68. years after the Passion of our blessed Saviour , to which if we add . 34. ( the year of the Passion ) it will appear that St. Joh. died Anno Christ. 102. Trajan . 2. vel . 3. k Vid. Baronium Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. Christ. 70. Num. 3. 4. ex Augustino , De Civitate Dei , lib. 20. c. 19. where he says , That by those words ( 2. Thess. 2. 7. ) Mysterium Iniquitatis jam operatur ; Neronem voluerit Intelligi : cujus jam facta velut Antichristi videbantur . So Athanasius tells us , that Constantius ( the Arian Emperor ) acted all those things , which are spoken of Antichrist , but was not that Antichrist spoken of in Scripture , ( for he was future , and to come , says Athanasius ) Quid Igitur Hic ( Constantius ) Quod Antichristi Est , Omisit ? aut Quid Ille ubi Venerit , plus committere poterit ? Athanasius Epistola ad Solit. vitam Agentes . p. 236. l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Porphyrius in Isagog . c. 2. §. 38 ▪ Observ. 9. m Elizabetha praetensa Angliae Regina , Flagitiorum Serva . Bulla . §. 1. n Declaramus praedictam Elizabeth Haereticam & Hereticorum fautricem . §. 3. o Christus Soli Petro , Petríque Successori , Romano Pontifici , in Potestatis , plenitudine Ecclesiam tradidit Gubernandam . Hunc Vnum super Omnes Gentes & Omnia Regna Principem Constituit , qui Evellat , Destruat , Dissipet , Disperdat , &c. In dictae Bullae Principio . p Hereticorum , Schismaticorum corúmque f●●torum poenae . That 's the Title of the Bull. q Romanus Portifex , qui Dei & Domini nostri Jesu Christi Vices-gerit in terris , & super Gentes & Regna , plenitudinem Potestatis , obtinet , Omnésque Judicat , à Nemine in Seculo Judicandus , &c. In Bulla . 19. Paul. 4. Bullarij Rom. Tom. 1. p. 602. Edit . Rom. 1638. r 2. Thess. 2. 4. s Corpus Juris Canonici per Pet. Matthaeum , Francofurti , Ann. 1599. Cap. Cum ex Apostolatûs , 9. De Haeret. & Schismat . in 7. t In Corpore Juris Canonici , Lugduni , 1661. u Haeresis est Error in Fide , Cum Pertinaciâ . Card. Tolet. Instruct. Sacerd . lib. 1. cap. 29. §. 2. x Gratian. Can. dixit Apostolos , 29. & Can. Qui in Ecclesiâ . 3. Caus. 24. Quaest. 3. & Glossa 〈◊〉 . y Est autem pertinacia , quando homo scit , aut scire debuit & potuit , aliquid esse contrarium Scripturae , aut ab Ecclesiâ damnatum . Cajetan . ibidem . z Vide Regulas , Indici librorum Prohibit . ex Decreto Conc. Trid. Confecto , praefixas ; Reg. 4. & Observat. Regulae dictae annexam . a Libri Vulgari Idiomate , de Controversi● i●ter Catholicos & Haereticos nostri Temporis di●●erences , non passim permittantur ; Sed Idem de ipsis servetur , quod de Bibliìs vulgari linguâ scriptis , Statutum est . Ibid. Reg. 6. b Vnde multi Rustici , habentes errores contra Articulos fidei , excusantur ab Haeresi ; Quia Ignorant Articulos , & sunt Parati Obedire Ecclesiae , &c. Card. Toletus Instruct . Sacerd. lib. 4. cap. 3. §. 7. c Siquis ●rret in his , quae tenebatur scire , tamen sine pertinaciâ , Quia nescit esse contra Ecclesiam , paratúsque est credere , quod tenet Ecclesia , non est Haereticus . Idem ibidem . d Non enim ut quisque primum in fide peccaverit , Haereticus dicendus est . Sed qui Ecclesiae Authoritate neglectâ , impias opiniones pertinaci animo tuetur . Catechis . Trid. ex Decreto Concilij Tridentini , Jussu Pij . 5. Edit . Paris . 1635. Part. 1. cap. 10. De 9. Symboli Articulo , §. 1. p. 107. e Fieri igitur non possit ; ut aliquis se Haeresis Peste Commaculet , si iis fidem adhibeat , quae in hoc nono fidei Articulo credenda proponuntur . Catechis . Trident. loco dicto . f Rursus , si Rusticus circa Articulos Credat suo Episcopo , proponenti aliquod Dogma Haereticum , in Credendo Meretur , licet sit Error ; quia Tenetur Credere , donec ei Constet esse contra Ecclesiam . Tolet . Instruct. Sacerd. l. 4. c. 3. §. 7. Idem habet Rob. Holcott , in . 1. Sentent . Quaest. 1. in Replica . ad 6. Principale : where he tells us , that simple people may err in many things , Dummodo velint Credere sicut Ecclesia Catholica credit . And when he puts the case in an old simple woman , and says — Si audiat praelatum praedicantem Propositionem erroneam , quam ipsa nescit esse erroneam , & ei credit : Non peccat , sed Tenetur Errare , quia tenetur ei Credere ; & Meretur volendo Credere Errorem ; & concedo ( Inquit ) quod ipsa potest adipisci Meritum Debitum Martyri , si ipsa Imerficitur pro tali Err●re , quem credit Articulum fidei , &c. g Especially the Jesuits ; In the end of the Exercitia Spiritualia Ignatij Loyalae , Tolosae , 1593. there are Regulae Servandae , ut cum Ecclesiâ verè Sentiamus . The first of which is , Sublato Proprio Omni Judicio , tenendus est Paratus Animus ad Obediendum verae Ecclesiae . You may be sure they mean the Church of Rome . The thirteenth Rule is this — Si quid quod Oculis nostris Album apparet Ecclesia Nigrum esse definierit , debemus itidem , quod nigrum sit pronunciare . And to the same purpose Bellarmine tells us — Fides Catholica docet , Omnem virtutem esse bonam , & Omne vitium malum . Si autem Papa erraret , praecipiendo vitia & prohibendo virtutes , Tenetur Ecclesia Credere vitia esse Bona , & virtutes Malas — Tenetur credere bonum esse quod ille praecipit , & malum quod ille prohibet . Bellarm. de Rom. Pontif. l. 4. c. 5. §. ultima . Ita etiam V. Erbermannus contra Amesium , Tom. 1. lib. 3. cap. 6. §. 5. pag. 401. 402. h Crimen Haeresis est Mere Ecclesiasticum . Innocent . 8. Constit. 10. §. 2. In Bullario Romano , Romae , 1638. Tom. 1. p. 337. Col. ● . vide Cap. Ad abolendum , 9. Extra de Haereticis . Qui alitèr docent quam Ecclesia Romana , Excommunicantur . i Domine Judex , rogamus Vos cum Omni affectu , quo possumus , ut Amore Dei , Pietatis , & Misericordiae Intuitu , & nostrorum interventu precaminum , miscrimo huic nullum mortis , vel mutilationis periculum Inferatis . Pontif. Roman . Romae , 1611. p. 456. & Hostiensis in summâ . l. 5. De Haereticis , pag. 424. Edit . Ludg. 1517. k Pontifex Essicacitèr , & ex Corde , Omni Instantiâ intercedit , &c. Ibidem in Rubrica . l Infra . 6. dies , sine aliqua Processuum Visione , Sententias latas promptè exequantur , sub Excommunicationis poenâ , aliisque Censuris . Innocent . 8. Constit. 10. In Bullar . Rom. Tom. 1. p. 337. m Facultas Cogendi Quoscunque Magistratus , sub poena Excommunicationis & Interdicti , &c. Alexand. 4. Const. 17. in dicto Bullar . p. 117. Tom. 1. & Constit. 18. in Lemmate . Ibid. n Sine Aliqua Processuum Visione . Innocent . 8. dicta Constit. 10. o Cogantur Omnes Principes Catholici Conservare Omnia Sancita quibus Immunitas Ecclesiastica declaratur . Conc. Trid. Sess. 25. De Reformat . c. 20. In Lemmate , Edit . Antverp . 1633. p Degradatus propter flagitium damnabile & damnosum , traditur Curiae seculari ; pro quo tamen debet Ecclesia efficaciter Intercedere , ut contra mortis periculum , circa eum sententia moderetur . Cap. Novimus . 27. Extra . De verb. significatione . q Roffensis cotra Lutherum , ad Art. 33. Operum p. 642. Dixit enim Lutherus , Eos dicta Orationis formulâ non Orare , sed ludere . r Ecclesia Haereticum Excommunicat , & ulterius relinquit cum Judicio Seculari , à Mundo Exterminandum Per Mortem . Aq●in . 2. 2. Quaest. 11. Art. 3. Respondeo . Si Judex Ecclesiasticus tradat Curiae Seculari haereticum , non potest in aliquo cognoscere secularis ; scilicet , An Bene vel Male fuerit judicatum , sed tenetur exequi omninò . Card. Tuschus Conclus . Practicarum Juris . Tom. 4. Lit. H. Concl. 95. §. 4. p. 166. vide Turrecrematam summa de Ecclesia . Venet. 1561. part . 2. l. 4. p. 411. where he cites Wicliff ' s Opinion , That the Popish Bishops are like the Pharisees , who having said , Non licet nobis quenquam occidere , Christum Seculari potestati tradiderunt , erant tamen homicidae Pilato Graviores . And when the Gloss ( verbo deprehensi . Cap. Excommunicamus , 15. Extra de Haereticis ) made some distinction of Persons deliver'd to the Secular Magistrate , and that docentes erant ultimo supplicio , officiendi ; discentes vero decem Libris auri , &c. There is this Note in the ( b ) Margent — Hodie nulla est talis distinctio , nam Magistratus Secularis , Quemcunque Haereticum , sibi à Judicibus fidei traditum , debet Vltimo Supplicio afficere . Cap. ut . Inquisitioni de Haereticis . Lib. 6. ( b ) In Corpore Juris Canon . cum Glossis . Paris . 1612. s Bannes ibidem . Conclus . 3. t Sed quicquid dicatur , Ad Hoc fit ista Traditio ut Puniatur morte . Vid. Panormitan . ad Cap. Novimus . 27. Extra . De verb. significat . §. 8. u Solet Communitèr dici , quod ista Intercessio est Potius Vocalis & Colorata quam Effectualis . Idem Hostieusis , ibidem . x Omnes qui ab Ecclesiâ Rom. hactenus desciverant , pro Haereticis habiti fuerint . Honorat . Fabri Contra Indifferentes ; Dilingae , 1657. lib. 2. cap. 18. & Mart. Bresserum . De Conscientia , lib. 1. cap. 25. pag. 113. 117. 118. Qui in Vno rejiciunt Authoritatem Ecclesiae . pag. 117. Col. 1. Lin. ultima & penultima . y In Ecclesiâ duntaxat Romana homines salvari possunt . Honorat . Fabri , Loco citato . pag. 133. So Bresserus and the rest of them not only of late , but above five hundred years ago ; ( yet after the Devil was let loose , and Antichrist revealed ) For an old Collector of their Canons tell us ( Ivo Cornotens . Decret . part . 1. De fide . c. 38. ) Firmissimè tene , & nullatenus dubites , Omnes Paganos , Judaeos , Haereticos & Schismaticos , qui Extra Ecclesiam Catholicam ( Romanum Intelligit ) finiunt vitam , in Ignem Aeternum ituros , qui diabolo & Angulis ejus paratus est . This is the Charity of Rome , to damn all but themselves . z Conc. Trid. Antv. 1633. Sess. 24. De Reform . p. 452. a Ibid. Haec est Fides Catholica Extra quam , Nemo Salvus esse potest . b Hanc fidem teneo & profiteor , in Praesenti , & Constantissimè tenere ad ultimum vitae spiritum spondeo , voveo , juro . Ibid. c Reinerus contra Waldenses , Cap. 4. in Magna Bibliothecâ Patrum . Paris . 1654. Tom. 4. Part. 2. Col. 749. Sectae Haereticorum fuerant plures quam . 70. quae Omnes deletae sunt . Cap. 4. Reineri . d Inter Omnes sectas quae adhuc sunt , vel fuerunt , non est Perniciosior Ecclesiae , quam Leonistarum , & hoc tribus de Causis . Ibidem . 1 Prima est , quia est Diut urnior ; aliqui enim dicunt quod duraverit , à tempore Sylvestri ; aliqui , A Tempore Apostolorum . 2 Quia est Generalior ; Ferè enim nulla est Terra , in qua haec Secta non sit . Ibid. cap. 4. 3 Tertia , quia Cum Omnes aliae Sectae immanitate Blasphemiarum in Deum , audientibus horrorem inducunt ; Haec Leonistarum , Magnam Habet Speciem Pietatis ; eo quod coram hominibus Justè Vivant ; & Bene Omnia De Deo Credant , & Omnes Articulos Qui in Symbolo Continentur . Ibidem . e Solummodo Romaenam Ecclesiam Blasphemant , & Clerum ; cui Multitudo Laicorum Facilis est ad Credendum . Ibid. f Ecclesia Romana est Meretrix in Apocalypsi . cap. 17. vers . 1. 2. &c. Reinerus loco citato . c. 5. De Sectis Modernorum Haereticorum . Errore . 6. pag. 750. g Papa est Caput Omnium errorum , &c. Ibid. Errore . 8. they deny'd also Transubstantiation , Purgatory , Invocation of Saints , the Popes Supremacy . Vide Card. Turrecrematam , in summa De Ecclesiâ . Part. 2. Lib. 4. cap. 35. pag. 407. Edit . Venet. 1561. h Haeresis est , cum quis non sequutus Doctrinam Christi , vel Apostolorum , vel Ecclesiae , Eligit sibi novam credulitatem . Card. Tuschas Conclus . Juris . Tom. 4. Lit. H. Concl. 91. verbo Haeresis . p. 164. Haereticus est , qui aliquid credit , non obstante quod Ecclesia contrarium decreverit . Debet enim Intellectum Captivare Sacrae Scripturae Sanctaeque Ecclesiae . ( Cajet . in sum . verbo Haeresis . ) And by Holy Church you may be sure they do mean their own Roman Church , for they acknowledge none else , but damn all other Christians , as Hereticks . i Quadruplex Haereticorum poena secundum Canones : scilicet , Excommunicatio , Depositio , Bonorum ablatio , Militaris Persecutio . Gloss. ad Cap. ad Apostol . 2. De Sentent . & re Judicata . In 6. verbo . Haeresis , In additione . Ita Hostiensis in summa . Lib. 5. pag. 424. Edit . Lugd. 1517. k Reynerius de Pisis , in summa De Haeresi . cap. 4. & F. Reynerus contra Waldenses . cap. 10. l Decretal . Greg. 9. Lib. 5. & Tit. 7. m De Haereticis . Lib. 5. Tit. 2. In Sexto . n Clement . Lib. 5. Tit. 3. De Haereticis . o Extrav . Commun . Lib. 5. Tit. 3. De Haereticis . p Septimi Decret . Lib. 7. Tit. 3. De Haereticis & Schismaticis . This seaventh Book of the Decretals was first Printed with the Body of the Canon Law , ( dedicated to Card. Cajetan ) at Francfurt . 1590. and since at Lions , Anno 1661. q Leges Frider. 2. extant in Corpore Jur. Civilis cum Gloss. Lugd. 1618. in Calce lib. 2. Feudorum . Tom. 5. pag. 137. 138. &c. r Conc. Laterani fub Innocent . 3. Ann. 1215. & praecipuè Canonis . 3. De Haereticis . s Nos Honorius , Servus Servorum Dei , has leges à Friderico , pro utilitate Omnium Christianorum ( pro Pernicie Waldensium ) Editas , Laudamus , Approbamus , & Confirmamus , tanquam In Aeternum valituras . Ita Honorius Papa . 3. in Calce dictarum Legum . t Moral . Quaest. Tract . 32. cap. 7. De Poenis Haereticorum . u Speculi . Lib. 4. part . 4. De Haereticis . x Summae . part . 2. Tit. 12. Cap. 4. De Haeresi . & Haereticorum Poenis . y Instit. Moral . Tom. 1. Lib. 8. Capp . 10. 11. 12. z Theol. Moral . Lib. 2. Tract . 1. c. 16. p. 202. a Summae . Tom. 1. De Haeresi . p. 1017. Venet . 1585. b Summae de Ecclesiae . part . 2. Lib. 4. cap. 1. &c. c Hostiensis in summae . Lib. 5. De Haereticis . p. 422. Edit . Lugd. 1517. d Epitome Juris Pontisicij Veteris . Lib. 34. Tit. 3. & lib. 38. & lib. 11. Tit. 53. part . 1. & 2. &c. Observ. 10. e Vide Constit. 63. Paul. 5. In Bull. Romano . Rom. 1638. Tom. 3. pag. 183. Vbi Omnes Istiusmo di Bullae , quae dicto Bullario occurrunt Notantur . f Anathematizamus Quoscunque Hussitas , Wickliffistas , Lutheranos , Suinglianos , Calvinistas , Hugonottos , §. 1. dictae Bullae . g Vid. Paul. 4. Constit . 19. In dicto Bullar . Tom. 1. p. 602. h Bulla Paul. 4. data Romae , 15. Cal. Mart. Ann. 1559. Bulla autem Pij . 5. data Rom. 5. Cal. Maij. 1570. Eliz. 13. In dicto Bullario . Tom. 2. p. 229 i Habita deliberatione Maturâ , de Cardinalium Consiliis & unanimi assensu . Bullae dictae . §. 2. k Bullam Paul. 4. &c. Renovamus Confirmamus , illámque Inviolabilitèr , & Ad Vnguem Observari volumus & Mandamus . Constit . Pij . 5. 22. §. 3. dicti Bullar . Tom. 2. p. 151. l Vid. Cap. 9. 10. Decret . 7. De Haereticis & Schismaticis . In Corpore Juris Canon . Ludg. 1661. m Omnes & singulas Excommunicationis , Privationis , &c. & Quasvis alias Censuras & Poenas à Quibusvis Rom. Pont. aut Pro Talibus Habitis , in Constitut. contra Haereticos Quomodolibet Latis , Approbamus , Innovamus , ac Perpetuo observari , ac in Viridi Observantia esse debere decernimus . §. 2. n Necnon Quoscunque qui hactenus à fide Catholicâ deviasse , aut in Schisma aut Haeresin incidisse deprehensi sint , seu in Posterum incident , cujuscunque Conditionis , Gradus , seu Praeeminentiae existunt , etiamsi Baronali , Ducali , Regali , & Imperiali excellentia profulgeant , & eorum Quemlibet , Censuras Poenas praedictas incurrere Volumus ac Decernimus . Ibidem . §. 2. o Hac nostra Constitutione in Perpetuum Valiturâ , sancimus , statuimus , definimus , &c. §. 3. p Comitatibus , Baroniis , Marchionatibus , Ducalibus , Regnis & Imperiis penitus , & , in Totum Perpetuo Privati sint , &c. Ibidem . q Secularis relinquantur arbitrio Potestatis , animadversione Debita puniendi , habentúrque Pro Relapsis . Ibid. §. 3. r Ad illa de Caetero sint Inhabiles & Incapaces ; nec Restitui aut Rehabilitari Possint . Ibidem . s Apparentibus verè Poenitentiae Judiciis & Condignis fructibus , in loco aliquo Regulari , ad Peragendum Perpetuam in Pane Doloris & Aqua Moestitiae poenitentiam , Detrudendi sunt — & evitari Omnique Humanitatis Solatio destitui debent . Ibid. t Ex Ipsius Sanctae Sedis Benignitate & Clementia . Ibid. §. 3. N. Eymericus Directorio Inquisitorum , part . 3. pag. 516. Col. 1. u Esséque à Christi Corporis unitate praecisam . In Bulla Pij . 5. §. 3. & Paul the Third in his Damnation of Hen. 8. and all his Adherents , says , Eósque Anathematis , Maledictionis , & Damnationis Aeternae Mucrone Percutimus . Bulla Paul. 3. 7. §. 7. In Bullario Rom. Tom. 1. p. 515. Col. 2. Edit . Romae , 1638. x Henrici Regis ex dicta Annanatos & nascituros , aliósque descendentes , usque ad gradum in Jure Constitutum , nulla aetatis aut sexus ratione habitâ , dignitatibus , Dominiis , &c. Privamus . & ad Similia obtinenda Inhabilitamus . Ibid. dictae Bullae . §. 9. y Filiòsque eorum de dignitatibus , Dominiis , &c. & bonis Omnibus Privatos , & Ad Alia de Caetero Obtinenda Inhabiles esse declarat . Ibid. in Margine . z Elizabetha Praetensa Angliae Regina . Bullae . 〈◊〉 . 5. §. 1. a Ipsum Praetenso Regni Jure privatam . Ibidem . §. 4 b It is a Resolved Case in the Canon Law , ( and Pope Gelasius is the Casuist who Resolves it ) Quicúnque in Haeresin s●mel damnatam labitur , ejus damnatione seipsum invaluit : Or ( as it is in the Lemma prefix'd to that Canon ) Ejus Damnationis participem se facit . Vid. Can. Achatius . 1. Caus. 24. Quaest. 1. And Can. Majores . 2. Idem Gelasius codem modo Statuit . And Pope Felix says , Non ultra in eum procedere oportet , qui in haeresin damnatam incidit . Ibid. Can. Achatius . 3. Observ. II. c Vid. Justinianum F. ad . Leg. Juliam Majestatis ; & Statut. 25. Edvardi . 3. c. 2. in the Statute of Purveyors , Anno Domini . 1350. d Clerici Rebellio in Regem non est Crimen Laesae Majestatis , quia nen est Subditus Regi . Eman. Sa Aphoris . Confess . verbo Clericus . p. 41. e Colon. 1599. f Ad Beatiss . Dei Matrem . Accipe ( Sapientiae Divinae Sacr●rium ) Libellum hu●c ; tuoque Praesidio sic tuere & promove , ut ad Multorum proficiat aeternam Salutem . Ibid. pag. 2. g Hi Aphorismi Docti sunt & Pij , Multámque utilitatem alaturi Confessariis Omnibus . Ibid. pag. 384. Sylvester Pardo . Eccles . Antverp . Canonicas Librorumque Censor . h Index Librorum Prohibit . Novissimus , Madriti . 1667. Eman. Sa non Omnino meminit . i Index Librorum Prohibit . Olysipone . An. 1624. p. 543. k Index Librorum Prohibit . Alexandr . 7. Romae , 1667. pag. 41. l Loco dicto . m Ii Aphorismorum Codices deinceps permit tuntur , à quibus Expunctae sunt duae Sententiae , quas Ann. 1611. pridie Calend. Mart. Cavendas Rescripsit , Sanctae & universalis Inquisitionis Congregatio , per Illustriss . Card. Arragonium . Index Olysipone . 1624. loco dicto . n Emanuelis Sa Aphorismi Confessariorum Hactenus Impressi , etiam Romae , ante Ann. 1602. post autem tale Tempus Romae Editi de mandato Magistri Sacri Palatij Permittuntur . Index Alexandri . 7. loco dicto . o Ex Indice Joh. Chrysostom . Basil. 1558. Dele sequentia . And then ( amongst many other evident truths ) this Proposition follows ; Sacerdotes Etiam Principibus Jure Divino Subditi . This must be Expunged . Index Libr. Prohib . Madriti . 1667. pag. 703. Col. 1. p And the Index of Portugal , Edit . Olysipone , Ann. 1624. p. 753. Col. 1. damns the very same Position . q In Indice Operum Chrysostom . Basil. 1558. ex Officina Frobeniana . r Persona Cujuslibet Clerici est Sancta quoad hoc , quod Non Potest Subjici Potestati Seculari . Cajetan . in . 2. 2. Quaest. 99. §. Ad Quintum Dubium mihi . p. 247. Col. 3. 4. s R. Patris Emanuelis Sa Aphorismi Confessariorum . Coloniae 1599. t Opusculum Theologis Omnibúsque animarum Curam habentibus Vtile ac Necessarium . Ibid. in Libri dicti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . u Vide Librum cum hac 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Les Oevures de Maistre Jacques Leschasier , &c. Paris . 1652. p. 421. Libellus Aphorismorum Romae Probatus . x Quae Doctrina ( that the Clergy are not Subjects to Princes ) est pestis & eversio Rerum publicarum — Regia potestas vel suprema nihil aliud est , quam Constitutio Dei , quae Omnes Mortales Jurisdictioni Regum subjiciuntur . Ibidem . y Vide Historiam Interdict Veneti , per P. Sarpium , 1626. Edit . Latina . z Omnes , in eo Concordes asserebant , Clericos Non esse Principi Subditos , ne in Crimine quidem Laesae Majestatis . pag. 107. dictae Historiae & pag. 13. a Ecclesiasticos non Comprehendi inter Subditos Principis , nec ab eo posse poenis affici , etsi Rebelles essent . They are the words of Pope Paul the fifth to the Venetian Ambassador , in Decemb. 1605. in the aforesaid History , pag. 13. Gre●ser tells us — Cl●rici non pertinent ad Regis Jurisdictionem . Considerat . ad Theolog. Venetos . l. 2. pag. 137. Edit . Ingolstadij , Ann. 1607. And there ( besides Bellarmine and Baronius ) he gives us a List of Thirteen or Fourteen Authors , who writ for the Pope in his Quarrel with the Venetians , of the same Opinion . Gretser Ibid. p. 380. b Nont sunt Homicidae , qui adversus Excommunicatos Zelo Matris Ecclesiae , armantur . Ita Lemma praesixum Can. Excommunicatorum . 47. Caus. 23. Quaest. 5. vide Lemma hujus Can. apud Juonem . Decreti part . 10. cap. 54. c Non eos Homicidas Arbitramur , quos adversus Excommunicatos , Zelo Catholicae Matris ardentes , aliquos corum Trucidasse contigerit . Ibid. in Canone . d Ivo Carnotensis Episcopus ; Decret . part . 30. cap. 54. e Moritur Urban . 2. Anno Christ. 1099. f Vide Bullam Gregor . 13. dat . Romae , 1. Jul. 1580. Corpori Juris Canonici praesixam . g Vide Edit . Juris Canon . cum Glossis Paris . 1612. & Edit . sine Glossis , Paris . 1618. & Editionem Lugduni , 1661. &c. h Rev. 20. 2. 3. i Remonstrant . Hibernorum part . 5. c. 13. §. 10. pag. 34. k Si Contingentèr trucidaverit , non esse Homicidam Formalem , &c. Ibidem . l Vrbani ideo Sententia Non suit , Excommunicatos vel Haereticos De Proposito interimi posse . Ibidem . m Alioquin certe veritatem Omnem & Fidem expugnasset . Ibidem . n Horrendum igitur Principium , Maledictum & Execrabile est , Haereticos , vel Excommunicatos , eo ipso interimi posse , &c. And again , Inter Damnabilia & Anathemata reponimus . Ibid. §. 11. p. 35. o Turrecremata ad Can. Excommunicator . 47. Caus. 23. Quaest. 5. p Intentio requiritur , quia licet bonam habuerint voluntatem , potuerunt tamen peccare Intentione . Si Interfecerunt Haereticos , quia Infestabant Ecclesiam , in hoc Bonam haberunt Voluntatem ; peccaverunt tamen si Intendebant habere Bona Haereticorum . Si ergo bono Z●lo & Mandato Ecclesiae aliquos Interfecerunt , non sunt Homicidae Reatu , nec Vlla Poenitentia est Impenenda . Turrecremata loco dicto . q Agnoscit Peronius , ( Orat , ad Status , pag. 107. ) Tyrannum Vsurpatione Licitè interimi posse : at qui Rex Omnis semel à Papa depositus , si postea administraverit , Rex Vsurpatione & Tyrannus est ; quia abs●ue Jure Jus Vsurpat . F. Caron . Remonstrant . Hibernorum . part . 4. c. 1. §. 20. p. 265. r An Pontifex Romanus Principes seu Magistratus Protestantium possit deponere , vel Occidere , tanquam Excommunicatos ? Vide F. Caron Remonstrant . Hibernorum part . 1. cap. 4. §. 3. p. 12. s Convenientibus ergo in hac Causa Theologis Anglicanis , pro Negativâ resolverunt . Ibid. §. 3. num . 3. t His nunciis Romae receptis , sacra Congregatio resolutionem illam negativam , tanquam Haereticam mox Condemnat , citatisque Romam Authoribus , Carceres & Censurae parantur . Ibidem . u Floruit sub Greg. 11. circa Ann. 1311. Nicol . Eymericus Direct . Inquisit . p. 255. Col. 2. D. x Possevin . Apparat. in Pet. Remundo . y Interficientes Haereticos sunt Injuriosi & vitiosi in suo Memorari , Intelligere , & Velle , &c. Eymericus Ibid. p. 260. Col. 2. A. z Greg. 11. in Consistorio , etiam de Consilio Fratrum , interdixit & condemnavit Doctrinam Raym. Lulli , &c. Eymericus loco dicto . p. 255. a Christus Petrum Ejúsque Successores Vicarios suos Instituit , quibus ( ex Libri Regum Testimonio ) Ita Obedire Necesse est , ut qui non Obediret , Morte Moriatur . Binius Concil . Tom. 9. pag. 151. Col. 2. E. Edit . Paris . 1636. b Pet. Crab. Concil . Colon. Agrip. 1551. Tom. 3. p. 694. Col. 2. So Turrecremata summa de Eccles. l. 2. cap. 114. Prop. 7. c Laur. Surius Concil . Colon. Agripp . 1567. Tom. 4. p. 681. Col. 2. d Binius Concil . Latet . Paris . 1636. Tom. 9. pag. 151. Col. 2. B. e Vide Grotium and Ainsworth in Deut. 17. vers . 9. 12. &c. Vide 2 Chron. 19. 8. 9. &c. f Non nunc Agit in Ecclesia Excommunicatio , quod tunc ( ante Christum in Synagoga ) agebat Intersectio . Aug. Quaest. super Deuteronomium , lib. 5. cap. 38. And elsewhere ; Phineas Sacerdos Adulteros simul Inventos ferro ultore confixit , Quod utique Degradationibus & Excommunicationibus , significatum esse faciendum hoc tempore . Idem . Aug. de Fide & Bonis Operibus . cap. 6. g In the English Seminary at Rhemes , some there were , who believ'd , Pius the fifth's Bull to be dictated by the Holy Ghost , and they perswaded themselves and others , that it was meritorious to take away the lives of Princes Excommunicate , and Martyrdom to spend a man's life in the Cause . These things Giffard , Dr. of Divinity , Gilbert Giffard and Hodgson inculcated so deeply into John Savage , that he willingly and gladly vowed to kill Queen Elizabeth . Camb. Annals of Q. Eliz. l. 3. p. 301. 302. of the English Edition , ( I have not the Latin now by me ) Lond. 1635. h Ann. Christ. 1598. Eliz. 41. apud Cambdenum Annal. l. 4. p. 498. 499. dictae Editionis . i Ibid. p. 499. k All the Popes Sanctions ( they say ) are Divine ( Can. sic Omnes . 2. dist . 19. ) as if Peter himself had made them . And no wonder , seeing they tell us , That God by his Holy Spirit , speaks in the mouth of the Pope , Deus ipse , Spiritu suo , per Ora Pontificum loquitur . Pet. Matthaeus J. C. Lugdun . Praefat. praefixa Corp. Juris Can. à se Edito , Francof . 1590. k Jul. 2. Conc. Lateran . 5. Generali , approbante Concilio . Sess. 5. apud Binium . Tom. 9. p. 48. Col. 1. F. 2. A. l Concil . Trid. Sess. 25. De Reformat . c. 20. p. 624. Edit . Antverp . 1633. m Can. Omnium . 46. Causa . 23. Quaest. 5. n Turrecremata ad dictum Canoncm . o Regna illi Coel●stia minime negabuntur . p In Certamine quod Contra Infideles ( Haereticos ) geritur quisquis moritur Coeleste Regum meretur . q Can. Omni Timore . 9. Caus. 23. Quaest. 8. r Omni timore Deposito contra inimicos Sanctae Ecclesiae virilitèr ag●re Studete , novit enim Omnipoteus , si quilibet vestrum morietur , quod pro veritate fidei mortuus est , & Ideo Proemium Coeleste consequitur . f Hortatur Papa , ut virilitèr pugnet contra Inimicos Ecclesiae ; & si qui propter hoc moriatur , Non Poenam , sed Coeleste Praemium Consequetur . Glossa Ibidem . t Conc. Later . mag . num sub Innocentio . 3. Ann. 1215. u Ita Abbas Ursperg . in Chronico ad dictum Ann. 1215. Binius in Hist. Conc. Later . 4. praesixa . x Can. 3. De Haereticis . y Ad Haereticorum Exterminium . z Illa Indulgentia & Privilegio muniti sunt , quod Accedentibus ad terrae Sanctae subsidium conceditur . Ibid. dicto Can. 3. a Const. Innocent . 3. 12. data Lateran . 19. Cal. Jan. 1215. b A Collectis , Talliis , aliisque gravaminibus sunt Immunes . Bullae dictae . §. 10. c Quorum Personas & Bonasua sub Beati Petri & Nostrâ Protectione suscipimus . Ibidem . d 2. Thess. 2. 4. e Si ad Praestandas usuras Juramento teneantur astricti , Creditores ut remittant Juramentum & Vsuras Compelli praecipimus . Ibid. §. 11. f Plenam peccatorum Veniam Indulgemus , & Salutis Aeternae pollicemur Augmentum . Ibidem §. 17. In Bullario Romano , Romae , 1638. Tom. 1. p. 78. Col. 7. vide Matth. Paris . ad Ann. 1213. In Johanne . pag. 241. g Catalogus Scriptorum Religionis Societatis Jesu ; Auctore Pet. Ribadeneira , Ejusdem Societ . Theol. Antverp . 1613. h Ferdinandus Lucero in Censura Libro praefixa , Madritif , 17. Sept. 1607. i Lavin . Torrentius in Oda ad Societatem Libr. praefixa . k Gravium doctorumque hominum Judicio Probatus . Ferd. Lucero indicta Censura . l Dicti Libri . p. 357. 358. &c. m Ibid. p. 366. n Ibid. p. 371. o Ibid. p. 372. p In supplemento addictam Cent●riam . pag. 375. q Ibidem . r Omnes , quas Cathedralibus & Superioribus Ecclesiis praefici , vel quibus de illarum dignit atibus , Canonicatibus & alis , quibuscunque Beneficiis Ecclesiasticis , Curam Animarum habentibus , providere Contingat , publicam Orthodoxae fidei professionem facere , seque in Rom. Ecclesiae Obedientiâ permansuros , Spondere & Jurare teneantur . Vide Bullam Pij . 4. super forma Juramenti Professionis fidei , in Concilio Trident. Sess. 24. De Reformat . Cap. 12. pag. 450. Edit . Antverp . 1633. s Etiam per quoscunque quibus de Monasteriis , Conventibus , Domibus , & aliis quibuscunque locis , Regularium quorumcunque Ordinum , etiam Militiarum , quocunque nomine providebitur , idem Servari . Idem . pag. 451. Extat etiam in Bullario Romano . Edit . Romae , 1638. Tom. 2. pag. 97. Dat. Ibid. Novem. 1564. Pontificatus sui Ann. 5. t Nullus Doctor , Magister , Regens , vel alius cujuscunque Artis & Facultatis Professor , sive Clericus , sive Laicus , ac Secularis , vel cujusvis Ordinis Regularis , sit , in quibusvis Vniversitatibus aut Gymnasiis publicis , aut Alibi Lectoris Cathedram obtinere , aut obtentam retinere , seu alias Theologiam , Canonicam vel Civilem Censuram , Medicinam , Philosophiam , Grammalicam vel alias Artes Liberales , publice vel privatim profiteri , nisi Juramento prius praestito . &c. Bulla Pij . 4. in Bullarij Rom. Tom. 2. p. 96. & cap. In Sacro Sancta . 2. De Magist. & Doctoribus in 7. u Juxta dispositicnem Conc. Trid. in Constit . 89. Pij . 4. Bullar . Rom. Tom. 2. pag. 97. x Romano Pontifici , Petri Apostolorum Principis Successori , & Christi Vicario veram Obedientiam Spondeo , ac Juro . Caetera item Omnia à Sacris Canonibus & Occumenicis Conciliis , Praecipuè à Trident . Synodo tradita , definita ac declarata , Indubitanter recipio & profiteor , & ad Vltimum vitae spiritum Constantisstmè retinere ac profiteri , & à meis subditis , illísque quorum Cura ad me spectat , teneri , quantum in me est , Curaturum . Ego . N. Spondeo , Voveo , Juro , &c. p. 98. §. 2. dictae Bullae . y Deus Omnipotens Patribus ( Tridentinis ) Divinitus Inspirare Dignatus est . Ibidem , in dictae Bullae Initio . z They are more affraid of Protestants , then of all others they call Hereticks , and there is good reason for it . For truth ( which the Protestants constantly maintain ) is more destructive of their Popish Errors , then any one Error can be of another . Extrema ( Errores & vitia ) facile Coexistunt ; Media ( virtutes & veritates ) Extrema destruunt . This appears , 1. Because they will not permit their Italian Papists to live in any Protestant County . Prohibentur Nunc Itali Catholici habitare , ciu Commorari extra Italiam Occasione Mercimonij adsque Licentiâ Inquisitorum , si in illis partibus non viget Libertas Religiones Catholicae . Vide Const. 42. Clement . 8. in Bullario Rom. Tom. 3. pag. 42. 2. They permit no Hereticks ( Protestants you may be sure especially ) to inhabit in Italy , or the adjacent Isles , on pretense of Merchandize , &c. Gregorius . 15. sub gravissimis poenis vetuit , Haereticos quoscunque etiam sub praetextu Coinmercij habere domum apertam propriam , vel Conductam in Italiâ , vel adjacientibus insulis . Gregorius . 15. in Constitut. 38. In dicto Bullario . Tom. 3. pag. 314. Edit . Romae . 1638. Vide Corp. Jur. Canon . Lugduni . 1661. & ibi Annotationes in Calce Tom. 2. pag. 55. 3. Because 't is notoriously known , that they permit Jews , ( who deny Jesus Christ , and the whole Gospel ) to live and have Houses , even in Rome it self , and yet they will not permit Protestants . It is a less Crime ( it seems ) at Rome , to deny Jesus Christ , then to deny ( what all Protestants do ) that the Pope is his Vicar , and Monarchical Head of the whole Christian Church . a Cambdens Eliz. l. 4. ad Ann. 1594. p. 430. 431. Edit . Lond. 1635. b Fifty thousand Duckets promised by the Popish Party , for Poysoning Q. Elizabeth . c Cambdens Eliz. l. 4. ad Ann. 1594. 1596. p. 440. vide Plura in Statuto de Ann. 3. Jac. c. 2. d Forty thousand Duckets promised for killing Q. Elizabeth . e Cambdens Eliz. l. 2. p. 144. 145. f Ibid. l. 3. p. 257. g Ibid. l. 3. p. 272. h Ibid. l. 3. p. 302. i Ibid. p. 303. k Ibid. p. 336. l Ibid. l. 4. p. 431. m Ibid. l. 4. p. 498. n Ibid. l. 4. p. 578. o Pius . 5. In Depositione Eliz. Jus Britanniae , Hiberniaeque ad Philip. 2. Hispaniae Regem transtulit ; vi cujus donationis , demandat us postea Sidonius fuit . Ann. 1588. Classe Hispanicâ Instructus , ut Regna Britanniae Possideret . F. R. Caron , Remonstrant . Hibernorum . Part. c. 3. §. 4. p. 7. p Sixtus the Fifth was Pope , and it was in the fourth year of his Popedom . Vide Cambd. Eliz. l. 3. ad Ann. 1588. p. 360. 361. q Matth. Paris . ad dictum Ann. 1213. pag. 236. r Rex Francorum respondet , Regnum Angliae Patrimonium Petri nunquam fuit ; Nec est , Nec erit . Nullus Rex potest dare Regnum suum , sine assensu Baronum suorum , Qui Regnum tenantur defendere . Tunc Magnates Omnes Vno Oreclamabant , quod isto Articulo starent usque ad mortem , non Rex vel Princeps per Sol●m voluntatem suam possit Regnum dare , vel tributarium facere , unde nobiles regni essent servi . Matth. Paris in Johanne ad Ann. 1213. s Matth. Westmin . ad Ann. 1213. p. 271. Johannes Rex est Papae Tributarius , seu Fe●datarius . t Hen. Knighton de Event . Angl. l. 2. c. 15. p. 2420. u Card. Tuschus Pract. Conclus . Juris . Tom. 6. Conclus . 41. x Papa potest deponere Imperatorem , Reges , Duces , & Omnes qui de facto Superiorem non recognoscunt . Ibid. §. 49. y Rex Angliae & Siciliae sunt Tributarij Ecclesiae Romanae . Ibid. §. 34. z Qui negat potestatem Papae , Negat se Christianum . Ibid. §. 37. a Vid. Const. 4. Johan . Papae , 22. In Bullar . Rom. Tom. 1. p. 172. Edit . Rom. 1638. b My Lord Cook ▪ Inst. Part. 4. c. 1. p. 13. c Significetur Pontifici , ut Ipse Vasallos à fidelitate absolvat , & Terram Exponat Catholicis occupandam . Conc. Lateran . 4. Can. 3. De Haereticis . And it now goes for Law. Cap. 13. Extra . de Haereticis . d Qui terram illam Exterminatis Haereticis absque ullâ Contradictione possideant , & in fidei puritate conservent . Ibidem . e Papa Philippo Francorum Regi Literas mittit , in quibus rogat ut Regem Angliae non Inquiet aret ; sed ut Romanae Ecclesiae Vassallum protegeret . Mat. Paris Hist. an Ann. 1216. p. 280. In Johanne . f Papa non se capiens prae ira & indignatione ( it was Grostheads Letter had angred him ) torvo aspectu , & superbo animo , ait : Nonne Rex Anglorum noster est Vasallus , & ut plus dicam Mancipium ? Mat. Paris Hist. in Hen. 3. ad Ann. Dom. 1253. p. 872. in Edit . G. Watsij . London . 1640. g Matth. 20. 28. Luc. 22. 27. h Matth. 20. 45. 46. 47. & Matth. 23. 11. 12. Luc. 22. 24. 25. 26. i 2. Thess. 2 , 4. k Greg. 7. deposeth Hen. 4. Emperor , by the Power of the Keys . Potestas Ligandi & Solvendi in Coelo & Terrâ , mihi à Dco data . Hac ideo fiducia fretus , Henrico totius Regni Teutonini & Italiae gubernacula Interdico , & Omnes Christianos , à vincule Juramenti , quod sibi fecere , absolvo . Baronius Annal Tom. 11. ad Ann. 1076. §. 25. 26. l Ecclesia Rom. Nunquam Erravit , nec in perpetuum ( Scripturâ testante ) Errabit . Inter Dictatus Papae . Ibid. apud Bar. §. 33. p. 479. Edit . Antv. 1608. m Dictatus seu Sententiae Breviores Gregorij Papae , Qu● Hactenus in ●cclesiâ Catholicâ usu receptae , ut ex his reprimeretur audacia Schismaticorum Episcoporum & Principum . Baron . Ibid. §. 31. p. 479. And Pope Leo. 10. in their General Latera● Council , 1513. and in his Bull in Bullario Rom. Romae , 1638. Tom. 1. p. 451. says the same thing , that the Church and Pope of Rome have never err'd . Ibid. in Constit. Leo. 10. 40. §. 3. & 6. n Vide Stat. 3. Jac. Capp . 1. & 2. A Conspiracy undertaken by Malignant and Devilish Jesuits and Priests . Ibid. Cap. ● ▪ A Design so barbarous and cruel , as the like was never before heard of . Ibidem . The most wicked barbarous , execrable , and abominable Treason that ever enter'd into the heart of the most wicked man. Ibid. cap. 2. o Vid. Thuani Hist. Tom. 4. lib. 95. ad Ann. 1598. p Vide Anticoton , by Peter Du Moulin . In that Pyramid erected in Paris upon the Murder of Henry the Fourth , the Jesuits are noted as men , Malificae Superstitionis , Quorum Instinctu , piacularis Adolescens ( Raviliac ) Dirum facinus ( the murder of the King ) Instituerat . q Ann. 1678. & 1679. r Cum poenae pro culpis debitae delentur & remittuntur , tum crimina velentur & remittuntur . Quo sensu Ecclesia per Indulgentias concedit peccatorum Omnium plenissimam veniam , id est , Poenarum Omnium , quas peccando contraximus . — Quia non est Plene remissa Culpa , quamdiu peccator Reus est Solvendae Poenae . Melch. Canus Locorum Theol. lib. 12. cap. 13. §. Ex quo Ambrosij pag. 694. Edit . Colon . Agrip. 1605. Observ. 12. s It was the saying of this Gregory ; Intelligant Omnes , Imperia , Regna , Principatus , & quicquid habere mortales possunt , avferre & dare Nos Posse . Plat. in vitâ Greg. 7. Edit . 1485. And Baronius tells us , that this , and such dictates of that Pope — In Ecclesia Catholica Hactenùs usurecepti sunt . Annal . Tom. 11. ad Ann. 1076. §. 31. t Constitutio illa extat , in Corpore Juris Can. de Homicidio . cap. pro humani . 1. In. 6. u Sacri approbatione Concilij Statuimus . Ibid. x Qui Horrenda Impietate Detestandaque Saevitiâ Mortem suiunt aliorum , ut Ipsos faciunt per Assassinos occidi , non solum Corporum , sed mortem procurent Animarum — Statuimus , ut quicunque Princeps vel Praelatus quempiam Christianorum per praedictos Assassinos interfici fecerit , vel mandaverit ( quanquam mors non sequatur ) Excommunicatus & Depositus à Dignitate , Honore , & Officio , Ipso facto , sit bonis etiam Mundanis Omnibus à toto Christiano populo perpetuo diffidatus . Ibid. & Conc. Tom. 11. Part. 1. p. 672. Edit . per Labbe Paris . 1671. y Cap. pro humani . ● . De Homicidio , In. 6. Decretalium . z Vid. Edit . Juris Canonici , Paris . 1612. & 1618. Lugduni . 1661. &c. a Vt hujus utilissimi & gravissimi Codicis non vacillaret Authoritas , placuit Pio. 4. dein Pio. 5. & Greg. 13. ut illi Corrigendo Summa opera daretur , &c. Ita admonitio ad Lect. praefixa Corpori Juris Can. Paris . 1612. & Ludg. 1661. b Summa de Ecclesia , l. 25. 35. & 36. as he is cited ( for I have not the Book by me ) in the Margent of the Canon Law ; ad Cap. 1. de Homicidio . in . 6. c In Summula . verbo Assassinus . d Conclus . Pract. Juris , Lit. A. verbo Assassinus . Conclus . 531. e Continuat . Annal. Baronij , ad Ann. 1231. §. 3. 4. 5. &c. f Operum , Tom. 1. p. 528. De Delict . & Conat . §. 9. g Papa volens obviare hujusmodi malis , profert plures poenas in istos Assassinos , & illos qui eis mandabant . Glossa ad dictum Cap. 1. De Homicidio . In. 6. h Non contraipsos Assassinos , utpote Infideles ; sed contra Mandantes per Ipsos aliquem occidi ; Innocentius . 4. Excommunicationem promulgavit . Cajetan . in Summula . verbo Assassinus . i Papa cum prius esset Purus Homo , nunc Vices Veri Dei●gerit . Johan . Andreas , in Glossa ad Prooemium . 6. Decret . verbo Bonifacius . k Et hi non comprehenduntur sub Censura dicta , quamvis digni sunt & Morte Temporaeli & Aeternâ . Cajetan . Ibidem . l Qui cum quolibet Christiano aut Infideli , pecuniae data vel promissa pactionem inierit , de homine Christiano occidendo , in ipso Mandatario , si ad actum proximum processerit , ut per eum minime steterit ; quin scelus peregerit , notant puniendum fore poena Ordinariâ ; id est , Morte . D. Covarruvias , Part. 2. Relect. Clem. Si furiosus , de Homicidio , de delictis & Conat . num . 9. Operum . Tom. 1. p. 258. Col. 1. m Hen. Carter . Davila in his Hist. of the Civil Wars of France ▪ ad Ann. 1594. in Calce istius Anni . n Accedent ad hoc Sacri ordinis favore & quorundam Religiosorum non segni Opera , & Jesuitarum Patrum Imprimis , qui fascinatum per scrupulosas in Arcanis Confessionibus quaestiones , lebem sensim à Principis obsequio alienatam , Ad Defectionem Sollicitabant . Thuanus Hist. Tom. 3. lib. 75. p. 561. A. B. Edit . 1620. & Tom. 4. l. 86. p. 170. ad Ann. 1587. And the same excellent person ( Thuanus ) gives us this account of the Society of the Jesuites . Nata Magistratum convellere , nata Ministris Subtrahere obsequium , praesulibusque suum . Et viles Regnantum animas , ipsosque Necandos Horrenda Regis proditione docet ; Servandamque fidem Negat , argutisque cavillis Detorquet magni jussa severa Dei. Hi sunt Ampliss . Praesidis Thuani versus de Jesuitarum Sectâ , in Elegia sua eleganti in Parricidas , sub finem Sacrae Poeseos . o Vide Thuanum Restitutum Amstoladami . Ann. 1663. p. 49. p Thuanus Hist. Tom. 4. l. 95. p. 454. A. Facundis Concionatorum Declamationibus , & Novitiorum , Theologorum , ac praecipuè Jesuitarum disputationibus , qui Tyrannum Impune occidere Licere affirmabant , Incitatus Clemens , &c. q Vide Thuanum Restitutum . p. 84. r Non solum inoffensa Conscientiâ facere posse , sed multum apud Deum Meriturum . Thuanus dicto Tom. 4. & p. 454. s Hen. Cart. Davila , in his Hist. of the Civil Wars in France , Lib. 10. ad Ann. 1589. t Si in actu Ipso moriatur , proculdubio inter Beatorum choros animam ejus Evolaturam . Thuan. dicto Tom. 4. & p. 454. & Davila , l. 10. ad Ann. 1589. u Historical Collections of the most Memorable Accidents , and Tragical Massacres in France , under Hen. 2. Francis. 2. Charles . 9. Hen. 3. and Hen. 4. ad Ann. 1589. in the begining of Hen. 4. & Thuan. Tom. 4. ad dictum Ann. p. 458. a Hen. Carter . Davilâ , in his History of the Civil wars of France , lib. 14. ad Ann. 1594. sub sinem istius Anni . See to the same purpose the Author of the Civil Wars of France under Hen. 2. Fran. 2. Charl. 9. Hen. 3. and Hen. 4. In Henry the Fourth , ad Ann. 1594. a little before the end of that year . b See Father Cotton , the Jesuites Declaration , with the Bishop of Paris his Preface prefixed to it , to this purpose . c See Anti-Cotton by Peter Du Moulia . d Christus Petro & Successoribus Ecclesiae regimen Commisit , & Eandem quam habebat Ipse , Infallibilit atem Concessit , quoties è Cathedra Loquerentur . Datur , Ergo , in Rom. Ecclesiâ , Controversiarum Fidei Judex Infallibilis , etiam extra Concilium Generale , tum in Quaestionibus Juris , tum Facti . Haec erat Thesis in Coll. Claromontano à Jesuitis proposita & expositâ Decem. 12. Ann. 1661. e Quae Omnia Conscio Pontifice gerebantur , crebro Commeantibus ad eum Emissariis , qui Brevia & occulta Diplomata ad partiū Duces adferebant , & indies magis plebem ad seditionem incendebant . Vid. Thuanum Restitutum . p. 49. f Sixtus Papa . 5. Oratione praemeditata . 3. Idus Sept. in Consistorio habita , factum Clementis Operi Assumptae à Domino Carnis , & Resurrectionis , propter magnitudinem , & rei administrationem comparat . Tum virtutem hominis , animi Robur , & ferventem Erga Deum Amorem , supra Eleazarum & Juditham , Multis verbis , Extollit , &c. Thuan's Hist. Tom. 4. li● . 95. ad Ann. 1589. p. 458. Edit . 1620. g Peccato in Spiritum Sanctum admisso , quale erat Regis peccatum . Ibid. p. 458. E. h Thuanus ibidem . Summè Insolens , & Pastoris moderatione indignum . i Supprimi potius quam publieari , famae Sixti & Sanctae Sedis Interfuit . Ibidem . k Responsio acerbior , sed fali Oratione prorsus Digna , in qua Multa Absurda & Impia not antur . Ibidem . l Fran. Suarez in Defens . Fidei Cathol . adversus Angl. Sectae Errores cum Respons●d Apolog. Jacobi Regis , & 〈◊〉 , Agrip. 1614. l. 6. c. 4. pag. 814. &c. m Tyrannus tit●lo , qui vi , & injustè Regnu●● occupat , qui Revera Rex non est , sed locum illi●● occupat . Ibid. §. 1. n Qui licet justo Titulo Regnum possideat , quoad usum tamen & gubernationem , Tyrannicè regnat . Ibid. o Inter Christianos , Maxime est numerandus in hoc Ordine Princeps , qui Subditos suos in Haeresi● , aut aliud Apostasiae genus , aut Schisma inducit . Ibid. §. 2. p. 811. Col. 1. p Si defensio sit propriae vitae , quam Rex violentèr auferre aggreditur , tunc quidem Ordinarie licebit Subdito , seipsum defendere , etiamsi Mors Principis sequatur , quia jus tuendae vitae est Maximum , &c. Ibid. p. 815. B. q St Rex Actu aggrediatur Civitatem , ut Cives perdat , &c. tunc certe licebit Principi resistere , Etiam Occidere Illum , si aliter fieri defensio , &c. Ibid. §. 6. C. Tunc enim Civitas habet justum bellum defensivum , Contra Injustum Invasorem , Etiamsi Proprius Rex sit . Ibidem . D. r Communitèr asseritur Tyrannum quoad Titulum , Interfici posse , à Quacunque privata Persona , quae sit Membrum Reipubl . quae Tyrannidem patitur , &c. Ibid. §. 7. F. s Tyrannus in Titulo Licite Occiditur . Ibidem . §. 7. Ma●gine . t Inter Christianos Maximè in hoc Ordine ( Tyrannorum ex Administratione Tyrannieâ ) numerandus est Princeps , qui Subditos in Haeresia aut aliud Apostaesiae Genus , aut publicum Schisma Inducit . Ibid. c. 4. §. 1. u Rex Haereticus Statim per Haeresin ipso Facto privatur , Aliquo Modo , proprietate & Dominio Regni sui . Ibid c. 4. §. 14. p. 819. x In summo Pontisice est haec potestas tanquam In Superiori habente Jurisdictionem ad Corripiendum Reges , etiam Supremos , tanquam Sibi Subditos , &c. Ibidem . y Si Rex post depositionem Legitimam , in sua pertinacia perseverans , Regnum per vim retineat , incipit esse Tyrannus in Titulo , quia non est Legitimus Rex , nec justo Titulo Regnum possidet . Ibidem . z Ergo Extunc poterit Rex tanquam Omnino Tyrannus Tractari ; & Consequentèr A Quocunque Privato Poterit Interfici . Ibidem . p. 819. B. a Respubli●●● prout inter Gentiles , & hunc inter Ethnicos ) habet potestatem , se defendendi à Rege Tyranno , & illum deponendi si necessarium fuerit , &c. Ibid. §. 17. p. 820. A. b Regna Christiana quoad hoc ( scilicet depositionem Regum suorum ) habent dependentiam & subordinationem ad Pontificem Romanum ; qui potest Regno praecipere , ut se Inconsulto , Regem non deponat , nisi prius Causa & Ratione Ab Ipso Cognita propter pericula , & Animarum dispendia , quae in his Tumultibus popularibus Interveniunt . Ibid. A. c Ibidem . p. 820. C. d Pendet Règnum Christianum à Pontifice in hoc , ut posset Pont. non solum Consulere , aut Consentire , ut Regem sibi perniciosum deponat , sed etiam Praecipere , & Cogere ut id faciat , praesertim cum ad vitandas Haereses & Schismata necessarium esse Judicaverit . Suarez . Ibid. p. 820. B. C. e Quia tale praeceptum in illo Casu Justissimum est . Idem Ibidem . f Instruct. Sacerd. l. 5. c. 6. §. 17. p. 738. g G. Rossaeus de Justa Reipub Christiana in Impios , &c. Authoritate . Cap. 3. h Conc. Trident. Sess. 4. in Decreto de Editione & usu Sacrorum librorum . i Firmis & Inconcussis Argumentis Potestatem Summi Pontificis Supernaturalem tuetur . Ita in Censura Illust. D. D. Alphon . A Mello , Epis. Lamecensis , Suaresij Libro praefixa . k Facultas Supremi Senatus S. Inquisitionis . l Ex Commissione Illustrissimi Episcopi , D. Petri de Castillo , Lusit aniae Proregis , & Supremi in rebus Fidei Inquisitoris . In Censura Alphonsi à Castello , Episc. Conimbricensis , à Consiliis Catholicae Majestati . m Humanarum rerum Religiosus Contemptor , & Vnius Pietatis & Religionis fortissimus Defensor , & propter Eximiam Sapientiam , Communis hujus aetatis Magister , & Alter Augustinus . n Religiosissimus juxta ac Gravissimus Auctor , cujus Ingenii monumenta , Orbis Suspicit , Miratur , Amat . o In qua non Solum S. Scripturae Authoritati Omnia Religiosè Consonant , Apostolicis traditionibus Pic Correspondent , Oecumenicis Conciliis , summerum Pontificum Decretis erudite consentium . p Quâ in defensione Nihil Planè offendi , quod Fidem Offendat , quae vero defendant , Inveni Multa . So it is in the Censure of Ferdinand Martinez Counsellor to his Catholick Majesty . q Librum Suaresij quanta potuimus diligentiâ , evolvimus , in quo opere Nihil veritate Catholicae fidei Alienum , Nihil devium , Nihil dissonum deprehenditur : Nihil quod probari loudaríque non debeat . Denique Nihil à Nostro Omnium Sensu discordans , cum hac in re , sit Omnium nostrum Eadem vox , Idem Animus , Eadémque Sententia . r Plusquam Humano Studio . In Censura Alphon. A Castello , Epis. Conimbricensis . s Dignissimum ut in Lucem eat , ad Fidei Nostrae Victoriam De Haeresibus Insignem , & totius Orbis Christiani Publicam & Communem utilitatem . In Censura Illustris . D. D. Alphons . A Mello . Episc . Lamec . A Consiliis Cathol . Majestati . t By Pope Paul. 5. who in his damnatory Breve , says — Juramentum illud , salva fide Catholica , & Salute Animarum , praestari non potest ; cum Multa Contineat , quae fidei saluti Aperte Adversantur . Vide Remonstrant . Hibernorum , pe R. Caron . 1 p. 9. u In Apolog. pro Juramento fidelitatis . x In Commentario Exegetico contra Jac. Regem . Ingolstadij , An. 1610. y Non diffitemur , sed Libere Profitemur , quod Papa , suppetente legitima Causa possit , Principes Excommunicare , Deponere , Subditos à Juramento Fidelitatis Exsolvere , &c. Gretser Ibid. p. 255. z Subditi in Conscientia tenentur stare Sententiae Pontificis . Ibidem . a Et si qui sint Alij Casus Hujus Generis . Ibid. b Ibidem . p. 11. Apolog . Jac. Gretseri , Romae , à Deputatis ad id Theologis lectam & approbatam , ego quoque Theod. Bu●aeus Approbo , &c. c Hunc Librum Jac. Gretseri , Doctissimorum Theologorum Suffragiis Romae Approbatum , ego itidem Approbo , ut quamprimum , Antipharmaci loco , sparsis ex Britannia Venenis , opponatur , opto ego Petrus Steuartius , Academiae Ingolstadiensis Pro-Cancellarius , & hoc tempore Rector . Ibid. p. 12. d Rev. 13. 3. d Potest Pontifex non solum Consulere , aut Consentire , ut Regnum Regem suum sibi perniciosum Deponat ; sed etiam Praecipere , & Cogere , ut id Faciat ; quando Saluti Spirituali Regni , & praesertim ad vitandas Haereses necessarium esse Papa Judicaverit . Suarez dicto . l. 6. cap. 4. p. 820. B. C. This place is before cited , but that the Reader may not be troubled to look back for it , I have again put it here . Where in the Margent , ( which I before omitted ) Suarez cites others , ( to shew he was not singular in this Opinion ) Azorius , Tom. 3. l. 2. c. 7. Quaest. 30. A Castro , lib. 2. De justa Haereticorum Punitione ; cap. 14. vid. Hist. Conciliorum General . per Ed. Richerium Doctorem Sorbonicum , lib. 1. cap. 13. §. 3. p. 398. Colon. 1680. where he acknowledges that Bellarmine , Suarez , Becanus , and the Jesuites maintain this Doctrine of Deposing and killing Kings — Jesuitae non modo docent , Papam habere potestatem Regum Abdicandorum verum etiam & Capite Puniendorum in Officio Sacrae Inquisitionis , ut vocant , &c. And the same Sorbon Doctor , Ibidem . cap. 8. §. 13. pag. 191. tells us , that 't is the Jesuites Doctrine ; Licere Pontifici Reges sibi immorigeros , hand alitèr Abdicare , quam Paster Canes , quos minus habet ad manus , Occidere . And that it is their Practise , to accuse those Princes who do not please them , to the People , of Tyranny , Schism or Heresie , Hacque viâ Illos tanquam arietes , aut Canes Furiosos , Parricidis mactandos Exponere . e This is evident ( to omit others ) by the Bull of Pope Paul the Third , wherein King Hen. 8. is Excommunicated and Deposed . For in that Bull having declared that King an Heretick and deposed him ; he commands all Christian Princes ( Kings or Emperor ) to take Arms against K. Henry and his Adherents — Insuper , tam Principes , praedictos ( quacunque etiam Imperiali aut Regali dignitate fulgentes . §. 15. ) quam quoscunque alios , etiam ad stipendia quorumcunque Christi fidelium militantes & alias quascunque personas , tam Per Mare quam Per Terras , Armigeros habentes , eis Mandantes , ut contra Henricum Regem , eique adhaerentes , dum in erroribus adversus Sedem praedictum permanserint , Armis Insurgant , eosque & eorum singulos Persequantur , &c. And then ( such is his liberality ) he gives those Souldiers all the Goods of those Anathematiz'd Hereticks , wherever they can find them — Eorumque Bona , Mobilia , & Immobilia , Mercantias , Navigia , Credita , Res , & Animalia , etiam extra territorium Henrici Regis , Vbi Libet Consistentia , Capiant , &c. Vide Pauli Papae . 3. Constit. 7. datum Romae , Decemb. 17. Ann. Dom. 1538. Pontificatus sui , Ann. 5. In Bullario Romano , Romae 1638. Tom. 1. p. 516. Col. 2. §. 16. Notes for div A69677-e79200 Aeditae . A. D. 1535. & 1538. Exordium . Henticus postquam à Leone decimo Titulo Defensoris Fidei donatus fuit , ex Causa hic expressa , à Catholica side deviavit , & multa enorm●a commisit . ●●emen . 7. ( ejus Constit. hic non habes ) tandem illum Excommunicavit , quin in Censuris insordescendo deterior evasit . Ideo Pont. Iste contra Regem , Complices , & Fautores decrevit , procedere , ut hic . Regem itáque hortatur , ut ab hujusmodi erroribus desistat . Complices vero & Fautores monet ut abstineant Regi desuper favere , vel adhaerere . Inobedientésque Majoris Excommunicationis sententia innodat . Rebellionis quoque , & Amissionis Regni poenam Imponit . Regémque & Complices monet , uc infra , certum Terminum Compareat alioquin in poenas hic expressas incidisse declarat . Et quascunque Civitates Ecclesias & alica Loca , ad quàe Ipsi declinaverint , Interdicto Ecclesiastico supponit . Filiósque eorum de dignitatibus , gratiis & privilegiis ac dominiis & bonis omnibus privatos , & ad alia de cetero obtinenda inhabiles esse declarat . Subditósque à juramento fidelitatis & subjectione liberat . Et eisdem mandat ut ab obedientia omnino recedant . Henrico & Complicibus alias poenas hic Expressas Imponit . Christi fidelibus sub poenis hie expressis praecipit , ut Infidelium Commercium evitent . Praelatis quóque & ceteris Personis Ecclesiasticis mandat sub poenis hic contentis quatenus de Regno Angliae discedant , ut hic . Ducésque & alios monet sub poenis supradictis , ut Henricum & ejus Complices de Regno expellere & expelli procurent . Principum Christianorum Confoederationes , & Obligationes Contractas cum Henrico nullas & invalidas declarat . Principibus & aliis Ma●dat , ut contra Henricum & Complices Arma Capiant . Infideles & inobedientes capientium servos , & corundem bona occupantium sieri decernit . Praelatis & aliis Mandat sub poenis de quibus hic , ut in eorum Ecclesiis Henricum & Complices qui supradictas poenas , & Censuras Incurrerint , Excommunicatos publicè enuncient , & evitari faciant . Publicationem Isti●s Const. Impedientib . easdem poenas Imponit . Publicari Mandat hanc Const. in Locis hic Expressis . Sed haec forma immutata est , ut hic in fine . Transumptis credi jubet . Sanctionem poenalem Imponit . D. P. An. 1. Die 30. Aug. 
A61558	----	Irenicum A weapon-salve for the churches wounds, or The divine right of particular forms of church-government : discuss'd and examin'd according to the principles of the law of nature .../ by Edward Stillingfleete ... Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699. 1662 Approx. 1186 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 239 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2005-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A61558 Wing S5597A_VARIANT ESTC R33863 13585310 ocm 13585310 100525 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A61558) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 100525) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 1049:30) Irenicum A weapon-salve for the churches wounds, or The divine right of particular forms of church-government : discuss'd and examin'd according to the principles of the law of nature .../ by Edward Stillingfleete ... Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699. The second edition : [28], 447 p. Printed for Henry Mortlock.., London : 1662. Imperfect: pages stained. Reproduction of original in the Huntington Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Church of England -- Government. Church polity. Excommunication. 2004-02 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2005-01 Mona Logarbo Sampled and proofread 2005-01 Mona Logarbo Text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-04 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion ●REN●CUM . A VVEAPON-SALVE FOR THE Churches Wounds , OR THE DIVINE RIGHT OF Particular forms of CHURCH-GOVERNMENT : Discuss'd and examin'd according to the Principles of the law of Nature , the positive Laws of God , the practice of the Apostles , and the Primitive Church , & the judgment of reform'd Divines . Whereby a Foundation is laid for the Churches peace , and the accommodation of our present differences . Humbly tendered to Consideration . By Edward Stillingfleete , Rector of Sutton in Bedfordshire . The Second Edition . With an APPENDIX concerning the power of Excommunication in a Christian Church . Let your Moderation be known unto all men , the Lord is at hand , Phil. 4. 5. Si ad decidendas hodierna● controversias — jus divinum à positivo seu Ecclesiastico candid● separaretur ; non videretur de iis quae sunt absolutè necessaria , inter pios aut moderatos viros longa aut aeris contentio futura . Isaac . Casaub. ep . ad Card. Perron . Multum refer● ad re●inendam Ecclesiarum pacem inter ea quae jure divino praecepta sunt , & quae non sunt , accuratè distinguere . Grot. de Imper. sum Potestat . circa sacra . cap. 11. London , Printed for Henry Mortlock , at the Phoenix , in St. Pauls Church-yard , neer the little North door . 1662. THE PREFACE TO THE READER . I Write not to increase the Controversies of the times , nor to foment the differences that are among us ; the one are by far too many , the other too great already . My onely design is to allay the heat and abate the fury of that Ignis sacer , or Erysipelas of contention , which hath risen in the face of our Church , by the overflowing of that bilious humour which yet appears to have too great predominancy in the spirits of men . And although with the poor Persian I can onely bring a hand full of water , yet that may be my just Apology , that it is for the quenching those flames in the Church , which have caused the bells of Aaron to jangle so much , that it seems to be a work of the greatest difficulty to make them tunable . And were this an Age wherein any thing might be wondered at , it would be matter of deserved admiration , to hear the noise of these Axes and Hammers so much about the Temple , and that after these nigh twenty years carving and hewing , we are so rude and unpolished still , and so far from being cemented together in the unity of the Spirit and the bond of Peace . May we not justly fear that voyce , Migremus hinc , when we see the Vail of the Temple so rent asunder , and the Church its self made a Partition wall to divide the members of it ? And since the wise and gracious God hath been pleased ( in such an almost miraculous manner ) so lately to abat● the Land-flood of our civil intestine Divisions , how strange must it needs seem , if our sacred Contentions ( if Contentions may be call'd sacred ) like the waters of the Sanctuary , should rise from the Ankle to the Knee , till at last they may grow unpassable ? Must onely the fire of our unchristian animosities be like that of the Temple , which was never to be extinguished ? However I am sure it is such a one as was never kindled from Heaven , nor blown up with any breathings of the Holy and Divine Spirit . And yet that hath been the aggravation of our Divisions , that those whose duty it is to lift up their voyces like Trumpets , have rather sounded an Allarm to our contentious spirits , then a Parley or Retreat , which had been far more suitable to our Messengers of Peace . In which respect it might be too truly said of our Church , what is spoken of the Eagle in the Greek Apologue : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Eagle saw her breast was wounded sore , She stood and weeped much , but grieved more : But when she saw the dart was feather'd , said , Woo's me , for my own kind hath me destroy'd . It is not so long since that version of the vulgar Latine , Psal. 68. 15. inter Domini cleros ▪ might have been sadly rendred to lye among the pots : and Pierius Valerianus might have met with too many Examples to have increased his Book De Literatorum Infoelicitate ; and in the next age it might have been true again what Matthew Paris observes of the Clergy in the Conquerours time ; adeò literaturâ carebant ut caeteris stupori esset qui Grammaticam didic●sset . But blessed be God who hath freed us from that Daemonium meridianum of Ignorance and Barbarism ; may we be but as happily delivered from the plague of our divisions and animosities ! Than which , there hath been no greater scandal to the Iews , nor opprobrium of our Religion among Heathens and Mahumetans , nor more common objection among the Papists , nor any thing which hath been more made a pretence even for Atheism and Infidelity . For our Controversies about Religion have brought at last even Religion it self into o Controversie , among such whose weaker judgements have not been able to discern where the plain and unquestionable way to Heaven hath lain in so great a Mist as our Disputes have raised among us . Weaker heads when they once see the battlements shake , are apt to suspect that the foundation its self is not firm enough ; and to conclude , if any thing be call'd in question , that there is nothing certain . And truly it cannot but be looked on as a sad presage of an approaching Famine , not of bread , but of the Word of the Lord , that our lean Kine have devoured the fat , and our thin ears the plump and full ; I mean ; our Controversies and Disputes , have eaten so much out the Life and practice of Christianity . Religion hath been so much rarified into aiery Notions and Speculations , by the distempered heat of mens spirits , that its inward strength , and the Vitals of it have been much abated and consumed by it . Curiosity , that Green-sickness of the Soul , whereby it longs for novelties , and loaths sound and wholsome Truths , hath been the Epidemical distemper of the Age we live in . Of which it may be as truly said as ever yet of any , that it was saecolum f●rtile religionis , sterile pietatis ; I fear this will be the Character whereby our Age will be known to Posterity , that it was the Age wherein men talked of Religion most , and lived it least . Few there are who are content with the Dimensum which God hath set them ; every one almost is of the Spanish Iesu●tes mind ; Beatus qui praedicat verbum inauditum , seeking to find out somewhat whereby he may be reckoned , if not among the Wise , yet among the Disputers of this World. How small is the number of those sober Christians , of whom it may be said as Lucian of his Parasites , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they were not at leisure to be sick of this pica ( 1 Tim. ● 4. ) such as longed more to taste of the Tree of Life , then of the Tree of Knowledge : and as Zenophon speaks of the Persians , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they consume the fomes morbi , the root of the distemper by their serious endeavours after peace and holiness . But instead of this , the generality of men let all their Religion run up into Bryers and Thorns , into Contentions and Parties , as though Religion were indeed sacramentum militiae , but more against fellow-Christians then the unquestionable hinderances of mens Eternal Happiness . Men being very loath to put themselves to the trouble of a Holy Life , are very ready to embrace any thing which may but dispense with that ; and if but listing mens selves under such a party , may but shelter them under a disguise of Religion , none more ready then such to be known by distinguishing names ; none more zealous in the defence of every tittle and punctilio that lies most remote from those essential duties wherein the Kingdome of God consists , viz. Righteousness and Peace , and Ioy in the Holy Ghost . And hence all the several parties among us have given such glorious names onely to the outward Government of the Church ; the undoubted practise of the Apostles , the Discipline of Christ , the order of the Gospel , and account onely that the Church where their own method of Government is observed ; just as the Historian observes of Brutus and Cassius , Ubicunque ipsi essent praetexentes esse Rempublicam , they think the Church can never be preserved but in that V●ssel they are imbarked in : As though Christ could not have caused his flock to rest ▪ sub Meridie , unless the Pars Donati had been in the South . And from this Monopolizing of Churches to parties , hath proceeded that strange uncharitableness towards all who come not up to every circumstance of their way and method , which is a piece of Prudence like that of Brutus , who when he had raised those flames in the Common-wealth , was continually calling Caesar Tyrant ; Ita enim appellari Caesarem , facto ejus expediebat . So when men have caused such lamentable Divisions in the Church , by their several parties and factions , it concerns them to condemn all others beside themselves , le●t they most of all condemn themselves for making unnecessary Divisions in the Church of God. This uncharitableness and ill opinion of all different parties , onely gathers the fuel together , and prepares combustible matter , which wants nothing but the clashing of an adverse party , acted upon Principles of a like Nature , to make it break out into an open flame . And such we have seen , and with sadness and grief of heart felt it to be in the Bowels of our own Church and Nation , by reason of those violent Calentures and Paroxysms of the spirits of men , those heart-burnings and contentions which have been among us , which will require both time and skill to purge out those noxious humours which have been the causes of them . I know no prescriptions so likely to effect this happy end , as an Infusion of the true spirits of Religion , and the Revulsion of that extravasated blood , into its proper channels : Thereby to take men off from their e●ger pursuit after wayes and parties , Nations and Opinions , ( wherein many have run so far , that they have left the best part of their Religion behind them ) and to bring them back to a right understanding of the nature , design and principles of Christianity . Christianity , a Religion , which it is next to a miracle men should ever quarrel or fall out about ; much less that it should be the occasion , or at least the pretence , of all that strife and bitterness of spirit , of all those comentions and animosities which are at this day in the Christian World. But our onely comfort is , that whatever our spirits are , our God is the God of peace , our Saviour is the Prince of peace ; and that ▪ Wisdome which this Religion teacheth , is both pure and peaceable . It was that which once made our Religion so amiable in the judgement of imrartial heathens , that nil nisi justum suadet & lene , the Court of a Christians Conscience was the best Court of Equity in the world . Christians were once known by their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the b●nignity and sweetness of their disposition , by the Candour and Ingenuity of their spirits , by their mutual love ▪ forbearance , and condescension towards one another . But , Aut hoc non est Evangelium , aut nos non sumus Evangelici , Either this is not the practice of Christianity , or it was never calculated for our Meridian ▪ wherein mens spirits are of too high an elevation for it . If pride and uncharitableness , if divisions and strifes ▪ if wrath and envy , if animosities and cont●ntions were but the marks o● true Christians , Diogenes●●●●er ●●●●er need light his Lamp at noon to find out such among us . But if a Spirit of meekness , gentleness , and condescension , if a stooping to the weakness and infirmities of others , if a pursuit after peace even when it flies from us , be the indispensable duties and the characteristical notes of those that have more then the name of Christians , it may possibly prove a difficult inquest to find out such for the crouds of those who shelter themselves under that glorious name . Whence came it else to be so lately looked on as the way to advance Religion , to banish Peace , and to reform mens manners by taking away their lives ? whereas in those pure and primitive times when Religion did truly flourish , it was accounted the greatest instance of the piety of Christians not to fight but to dye for Christ. It was never thought then that Bellona was a nursing Mother to the Church of God , nor Mars a God of Reformation . Religion was then propagated , not by Christians shedding the blood of others , but by laying down their own . They thought there were other wayes to a Canaan of Reformation besides the passing through a Wilderness of Confusion , and a red Sea of blood . Origen could say of the Christians in his time , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . They had not yet learnt to make way for Religion into mens mind , by the dint of the sword , because they were the Disciples of that Saviour who never pressed Followers as men do Soldiers , but said , If any man will come after me , let him take up his Cross ( not his sword ) and follow me . His was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , his very commands shewed his meekness ; his Laws were sweet and gentle Laws ; not like Draco's that were writ in blood , unless it were his own that gave them . His design was to ease men of their former burdens , and not to lay on more ; the duties be required were no other but such as were necessary , and withall very just and reasonable . He that came to take away the insupportable yoke of Iewish Ceremonies , certainly did never intend to gall the necks of his Disciples with another instead of it . And it would be strange , the Church should require more then Christ himself did ; and make other conditions of her Communion , then our Saviour did of Discipleship . What possible reason can be assigned or given , why such things should not be sufficient for Communion with a Church , which are sufficient for eternal salvation ? And certainly those things are sufficient for that , which are laid down as the necessary duties of Christianity by our Lord and Saviour in his Word . What ground can there be why Christians should not stand upon the same terms now which they did in the time of Christ and his Apostles ? Was not Religion sufficiently guarded and fenced in them ? Was there ever more true and cordial Reverence in the Worship of God ? What Charter hath Christ given the Church to bind men up to , more then himself hath done ? or to exclude those from her Society , who may be admitted into Heaven ? Will Christ ever thank men at the great day for keeping such out from Communion with his Church , whom he will vouchsafe not onely Crowns of Glory to , but it may be aureolae too , if there be any such things there ? The grand Commission the Apostles were sent out with , was onely to teach what Christ had commanded them . Not the least intimation of any Power given them to impose or require any thing beyond what himself had spoken to them , or they were directed to by the immediate guidance of the Spirit of God. It is not , Whether the things commanded and required be lawfull or no ? It is not , Whether indifferencies may be determined or no ? It is not , How far Christians are bound to submit to a restraint of their Christian liberty ? which I now inquire after , ( of those things in the Treatise its self ) ; but , Whether they do consult for the Churches peace and unity who suspend it upon such things ? How far either the example of our Saviour or his Apostles doth warrant such rigorous impositions ? We never read the Apostles making Lawes but of things supposed necessary . When the Councel of Apostles met at Ierusalem , for deciding a Case that disturbed the Churches peace , we see they would lay no other burden 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , besides these necessary things , Acts 15. 29. It was not enough with them that the things would be necessary when they had required them , but they looked on an antecedent necessity either absolute or for the present state , which was the onely ground of their imposing those commands upon the Gentile-Christians . There were after this great diversities of practice and varieties of Observations among Christians , but the Holy Ghost never thought those things fit to be made matters of Lawes to which all parties should conform ; All that the Apostles required as to these , was mutuall forbearance and condescension towards each other in them . The Apostles valued not indifferencies at all , and those things it is evident they accounted such , which whether men did them or not , was not of concernment to Salvation . And what reason is there why men should be so strictly tied up to such things , which they may do or let alone , and yet be very good Christians still ? Without all Controversie , the main in-let of all the Distractions , Confusions , and Divisions of the Christian World , hath been by adding other conditions of Church-Communion then Christ hath done . Had the Church of Rome never taken upon her to add to the Rule of Faith , nor imposed Idolatrous and superstitious practises , all the injury she had done her self had been to have avoyded that fearful Schisme which she hath caused throughout the Christian World. Would there ever be the less peace and unity in a Church , if a diversity were allowed as to practices supposed indifferent ? yea there would be so much more as there was a mutual forbearance and condiscension as to such things . The Unity of the Church is an Unity of love and affection , and not a bare uniformity of practice or opinion . This latter is extreamly desireable in a Church : but as long as there are several ranks and sizes of men in it , very hardly attainable , because of the different perswasions of mens minds as to the lawfulness of the things required ; and it is no commendation for a Christian to have only the civility of Procrustes , to commensurate all other men to the bed of his own humour and opinion . There is nothing the Primitive Church deserves greater imitation by us in , then in that admirable temper , moderation , and condescension which was used in it , towards all the members of it . It was never thought worth the while to make any standing Laws for Rites and Customs that had no other Original but Tradition , much less to suspend men her his communion for not observing them . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Sozomen tells us . They judged it , and that very justly , a foolish and frivolous thing , for those that agree in the weighty matters of Religion , to separate from one anothers communion for the sake of some petty Customs and Observations . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . For Churches agreeing in the same Faith , often differ in their Rites and Customes . And that not only in different Churches , but in different places belonging to the same Church ; for , as he tells us , many Cities and Villages in Egypt , not onely differed from the Customes of the Mother-Church of Alexandria , but from all other Churches besides in their publick Assemblies on the Evenings of the Sabbath , and receiving the Eucharist after dinner . This admirable temper in the Primitive Church might be largely cleared from that liberty they allowed freely to dissenters from them in matters of practice and opinion : as might be cleared from Cyprian , Austine , Ierome and others ; but that would exceed the bounds of a Preface . The first who brake this Order in the Church , were the Arrians , Donatists and Circumcellians , while the true Church was still known by his pristine Moderation and sweetness of deportment towards all its members . The same we hope may remain as the most infallible evidence of the conformity of our Church of England to the Primitive , not so much in using the same rites that were in use then , as in not imposing them , but leaving men to be won by the observing the true decency and order of Churches , whereby those who act upon a true Principle of Christian ingenuity may be sooner drawn to a complyance in all lawfull things , then by force and rigorous impositions , which make men suspect the weight of the thing it self when such force is used to make it enter . In the mean time what cause have we to rejoyce , that Almighty God hath been pleased to restore us a Prince of that excellent Prudence and Moderation , who hath so lately given assurance to the World , of his great indulgence towards all that have any pretence from Conscience to differ with their Brethren ! The onely thing then seeming to retard our peace , is , the Controversie about Church-Government , an unhappy Controversie to us in England , if ever there were any in the World. And the more unhappy , in that our contentions about it have been so great , and yet so few of the multitudes engaged in it , that have truly understood the matter they have so eagerly contended about . For the state of the controversie , as it concerns us , lyes not here , as it is generally mistaken , What Form of Government comes the nearest to Apostolical practice ; but , Whether any one individual form be founded so upon Divine Right , that all Ages and Churches are bound unalterably to observe it ? The clearing up of which by an impartial inquiry into all the grounds produced for it , being of so great tendency to an accommodation of our present differences , was the only motive which induced me to observe Aristotles wild Politicks , of exposing this deformed conception to the entertainment of the wide World. And certainly they who have espoused the most the interest of a jus divinum , cannot yet but say , that if the opinion I maintain be true , it doth exceedingly conduce to a present settlement of the differences that are among us . For then all parties may retain their different opinions concerning the Primitive form , and yet agree and pitch upon a form compounded of all together as the most suitable to the state and condition of the Church of God among us : That so the peoples interest be secured by consent and suffrage , which is the pretence of the congregational way , the due power of Presbyteries asserted by their joynt-concurrence with the Bishop , as is laid down in that excellent model of the late incomparable Primate of Armagh : and the just honour and dignity of the Bishop asserted , as a very laudable and ancient constitution for preserving the Peace and Unity of the Church of God. So the Learned Is. Casaubon describes the Polity of the Primitive Church ; Episcopi in singulis Ecclesiis constituti cum suis Prebyteriis , & propriam sibi quisque peculiari cura , & universam omnes in commune curantes , admirabilis cujusdam Aristocra●iae speciem referebant . My main design throughout this whole ●reatise , is to shew that there can be no argument drawn from any pretence of a Divine Right , that may hinder men from consenting and yielding to such a form of Government in the Church , as may bear the greatest correspondency to the Primitive Church , and be most advantagiously conduceable to the peace , unity and settlement of our divided Church . I plead not at all for any abuses or corruptions incident to the best form of Government through the corruption of men and times . Nay I dare not harbour so low apprehensions of persons enjoying so great dignity and honour in the Church , that they will in any wise be unwilling of themselves to reduce the Form of Church Government among us to its Primitive state and order , by retrenching all Exorbitances of Power , and restoring those Presbyteries which no law hath forbidden , but onely through disuse have been laid aside . Whereby they will give to the world that rare example of self-denial and the highest Christian prudence , as may raise an honourable opinion of them even among those , who have hitherto the most slighted so ancient and venerable an Order in the Church of God , and thereby become the repairers of those , otherwise irreparable , breaches in the Church of God. I conclude with the words of a late learned , pious and moderate Prelate in his Via media ; I have done , and now I make no other account , but that it will fall out with me , as it doth commonly with him that offers to part a fray ; both parts will perhaps drive at me for wishing them no worse than peace . My ambition of the publike tranquillity shall willingly carry me through this hazzard : let both beat me , so their quarrel may cease : I shall rejoyce in those blows and scars which I shall take for the Churches safety . The Contents of the Chapters . PART . I. CHAP. I. THings necessary for the Churches peace , must be clearly revealed . The Form of Government not so , as appears by the remaining controversie about it . An evidence thence , that Christ never intended any one Form as the only means to peace in the Church . The Nature of a divine Right discussed . Right in general either makes things lawful , or else due . For the former , a non-prohibition sufficient ; the latter , an express command . Duty supposeth Legislation and promulgation . The Question stated . Nothing binds unalterably but by vertue of a standing Law , and that two fold . The Law of Nature , and positive Lawes of God. Three wayes to know when Positive Lawes are unalterable . The Divine right arising from Scripture-examples , divine acts , and divine approbation , considered . p. 1. CHAP. II. SIX Hypotheses laid down as the basis of the following Discourse . 1. The irreversible Obligation of the Law of Nature , either by humane or divine positive Lawes in things immediately flowing from it . 2. Things agreeable to the Law of nature may be lawfully practised in the Church of God inlarged into five subservient Propositions . 3. Divine positive Lawes con●erning the manner of the thing whose substance is determined by the Law of nature , must be obeyed by vertue of the obligation of the natural Law. 4. Things , undetermined both by the natural and positive laws of God , may be lawfully determin'd by the supream authority in the Church of God. The Magistrates power in matters of Religion , largely asserted and cleared . The nature of Indifferency in actions stated . Matters of Christian liberty are subject to restraints , largely proved . Proposals for accommodation as to matters of Indifferency . 5. What is thus determined by lawful authority , doth bind the Consciences of men subject to that authority ; to obedience to those determinations . 6. Things thus determined by lawful authority , are not thereby made unalterable , but may be revoked , limited , and changed by the same authority . p. 27 CHAP. III. HOW far Church Government is founded upon the Law of nature . Two things in it founded thereon . 1. That there must be a Society of men for the Worship of God. 2. That this Society be governed in the most convenient manner . A Society for Worship manifested . Gen , 4. 26. considered . The Sons of God and the sons of men who ? Societies for worship among Heathens evidenced by three things , 1. Solemnity of Sacrifices ; sacrificing how far natural . The antiquity of the Feast of first-fruits largely discovered . 2. The Original of Festivals for the honour of their Deities . 3. The s●crecy and solemnity of their mysteries . This further proved from mans sociable nature , the improvement of it by Religion , the honour redounding to God by such a Society for his Worship . p. 72 CHAP. IV. THE second thing the Law of Nature dictates , that this Society be maintained and governed in the most convenient manner . A further inquiry , what particular Orders for Government in the Church come from the Law of Nature . Six laid down , and evidenced to be from thence . First , a distinction of some persons , and their superiority over others , both in power and order , cleared to be from the Law of Nature . The power and application of the power distinguished ; this latter not from any Law of Nature binding , but permissive : therefore may be restrained . Peoples right of chosing Pastors considered . Order distinguished from the form and manner of Government : the former Natural , the other not . The second is , that the persons imployed in the Service of God , should have respect answerable to their imployment , which appears from their Relation to God as his Servants ; from the persons imployed in this work before positive Laws . Masters of Families the first Priests . The Priesthood of the first-born before the Law discussed : The Arguments for it answered . The Conjunction of Civil and Sacred Authothority largely shewed , among Egyptians , Grecians , Romans , and others . The ground of Separation of them afterwards , from Plutarch and others . p. 85 CHAP. V. THE third thing dictated by the Law of Nature is the solemnity of all things to be performed in this Society , which lyes in the gravity of all Rites and Ceremonies , in the composed temper of mind . Gods Worship rational . His Spirit destroyes not the use of Reason . The Enthusiastick spirit discovered . The circumstantiating of fit times and place for Worship . The seventh day on what account so much spoken of by Heathens . The Romans Holy ▪ dayes . Cessation of labour upon them . The solemnity of Ceremonies used . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , silence in devotions . Exclusion of unfit persons . Solemnity of Discipline , Excommunication among the Iewes by the sound of a Trumpet , among Christians by a Bell. p. 93 CHAP. VI. THE fourth thing dictated by the Law of Nature , that there must be a way to end controversies arising , which tend to break the peace of the Society . The nature of Schisme considered . The Churches Power as to Opinions explained . When separation from a Church may be lawful . Not till communion becomes sin ; Which is , when corruptions are required as conditions of Communion . Not lawful to erect new Churches , upon supposition of corruption in a Church . The ratio of a fundamental article explained ; it implyes both necessity and sufficiency in order to salvation . Liberty of judgement and authority distinguished . The latter must be parted with in religious Societies as to private persons . What way the Light of nature directs to , for ending Controversies . First in an equality of power , that the less number yield to the greater ; on what Law of Nature that is founded . Secondly , In a subordination of power , that there must be a liberty of Appeals . Appeals defined . Independency of particular Congregations considered . Elective Synods . The Case paralleld between Civill and Church-Government . Where Appeals finally lodge . The power of calling Synods , and confirming their Acts , in the Magistrate . p. 104. CHAP. VII . THE fifth thing dictated by the Law of Nature ; That all that are admitted into this Society , must consent to be governed by the Lawes and Rules of it . Civil Societies founded upon mutual Consent ; express in their first entrance , implicite in others born under Societies actually formed . Consent as to a Church necessary ; the manner of Consent determined by Christ , by Baptism and Profession . Implicite consent supposed in all Baptized ; explicite declared by challenging the Priviledges , and observing the Duties of the Covenant . Explicite by express owning the Gospel when adult , very useful for recovering the credit of Christia nity . The Discipline of the primitive Church cleared from Origen ▪ Iustin Martyr , Pliny , Tertullian . The necessary re●●●●●●es of Church membership , whether Positive signs of Grace ▪ nothing required by the Gospel beyand reality of profession ▪ Ex●●●●●t● Co●●●●●● , how far necessary ▪ not the formal Constitution of a Church ▪ proved by sever●● arguments . p. 132. CHAP. VIII . THE last thing dictated by the Law of Nature , is , that every offender against the Lawes of this Society , is bound to give an account of his actions to the Governours of it , and submit to the censures inflicted upon him by them . The original of penalties in Societies . The nature of them , according to the nature and ends of Societies . The penalty of the Church no civil mulct ; because its Lawes and ends are different from civil Societies . The practice of the D●u●ds and C●rce●ae in e 〈…〉 n. Among the Iewes , whether a meer civil or sacr 〈…〉 y. The latter proved by six Arguments . Cherem Col Bo what ? Objections answered . The original of the mistake shewed The first part concluded . p. 141 PART . II. CHAP. I. THE other ground of divine Right considered ▪ viz. Gods positive Lawes , which imply a certain knowledge of Gods intention to bind men perpetua●ly . As to which the arguments drawn from Tradition , and the practice of the Church in after ages , proved invalid by several ▪ arguments . In order to a right stating the Question , some Concessions laid down . First , That there must be some form of Government in the Church , is of divine right . The notion of a Church explained , whether it belongs only to particular Congregations ? which are manifested not to be of Gods primary intention , but for our necessity . Evidence for National Churches under the Gospel A National Church-Government necessary . p. 150 CHAP. II. THE second Concession is , That Church Government must be administred by officers of Divine appointment . To that end , the continuance of a Gospel Ministry fully cleared from all those arguments ▪ by which positive Laws are proved immutable . The reason of its appointment continues ; the dream of a ●aeculum Spiritus sancti discussed ; first broached by the Mendicant Friers upon the rising of the Waldenses , now embraced by Enthusiasts . It s occasion and unreasonableness shewed ▪ Gods declaring the perpetuity of a Gospel Ministry , Matth. 28. 20. explained . A Novel interpretation largely refuted . The world to come What ? A Ministry necessary for the Churches continuance , Ephes. 4 12. explained and vindicated . p. 158 CHAP. III. THE Question fully stated . Not what Form of Government comes the nearest to the Primitive practice , but whether any be absolutely determined . Several things propounded for resolving the Question . What the Form of Church-Government was under the Law. How far Christians are bound to observe that . Neither the necessity of a superiour Order of Church-Officers nor the unlawfulness can be proved from thence . p. 170 CHAP. IV. WHether Christ hath determined the Form of Government by any positive Laws . Arguments of the necessity why Christ must determine it , largely answered , as First , Christs faithfulness compared with Moses , answered and retorted ▪ and thence proved that Christ did not institute any Form of Government in the Church , because he gave no such Law for it , as Moses did . And we have nothing but general Rules which are appliable to several Forms of Government . The Office of Timothy and Titus , What it proves in order to this question ; the lawfulness of Episcopacy shewed thence , but not the necessity . A particular form how far necessary , as Christ was Governour of his Church ; the Similitudes the Church is set out by , prove not the thing in question . Nor the difference between civil and Church-Government ; nor Christ setting Officers in his Church , nor the inconvenience of the Churches power in appointing new Officers . Every Minister hath a power respecting the Church in common , which the Church may determine , and fix the bounds of Episcopacy , thence proved lawful . The argument from the Scriptures perfection answered . p. 175 CHAP. V. WHether any of Christs actions have determined the Form of Government ? All Power in Christs hands for Governing the Church : What order Christ took in order thereto when he was in the World. Calling the Apostles , the first action respecting outward Government : Three steps of the Apostles calling , to be Disciples ; in their first mission ; in their plenary Commission . Several things observed upon them pertinent to our purpose . The Name and Office of Apostles cleared ; An equality among them proved during our Saviours life . Peter not made Monarch of the Church by Christ. The pleas for it answered . The Apostles Power over the seventy Disciples considered , with the nature and quality of their Office , Matth. 20. 25 , 26. largely discussed and explained . It excludes all civil power ; but makes not all inequality in Church-Officers unlawful ▪ by the difference of Apostles and Pastors of Churches , Matth. 18. 15 , 16 , 17. fully inquired into . No evidence for any one Form from thence ▪ because equally applyed to several . What the offences are , there spoken of ? What the Church spoken to ? Not an Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin among the Iews , nor yet the civil Sanhedrin , as Erastus and his followers explain it : nor a Consistorial or Congregational Church under the Gospel ; but onely a select company for ending private differences among Christians . p. 200 CHAP. VI. THe next and chief thing pleaded for determining the Form of Church-Government , is Apostolical practice ; two things inquired into concerning that ; what it was ? how far it binds ? The Apostles invested with the power and authority of governing the whole Church of Christ by their Commission ▪ Iohn 20. 21. Matth. 28. 19. What the Apostles did in order to Church-Government before Pentecost . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained . No division of Provinces made among the Apostles then ; made appear by several Arguments . Whether Paul and Peter were con●ined , one to the circumcision , the other to the uncircumcision , and different Churches erected by them in the same Cities ? What course the Apostles took in setling the Government of particular Churches . Largely proved that they observed the customs of the Iewish Synagogue . The model of the Synagogue Government described . Whether peculiar Ordination for the Synagogue Officers ? The service of the Synagogue set forth , with the Officers belonging to it . Grounds proving that the Apostles copied forth the the Synagogue modell . Community of names and customs between Iews and Christians then . Forming Churches out of Synagogues : Whether any distinct Coetus of Jewish and Gentile Christians in the same Cities ? Correspondency of the Church with the Synagogue , in the orders of publick Service . In the custome of Ordination . Ierom explained . The power of Ordination ▪ in whom it lodgeth in the Christian Church . The opinions of Ierom and Aerins considered . The name of Presbyters and Bishops explained . Three general considerations touching Apostolical practice . 1. That we cannot attain to such a certainty of Apostolical practice , as thereon to ground a divine right . The uncertainty of Apostolical practice as to us fully discovered , 1. From the equivalency of the names which should determine the controversie . 2. In that the places in controversie may without incongruity be understood of the different forms . 3. From the defectiveness , ambiguity , partiality and repugnancy of the Records of Antiquity , which should inform us what the Apostolical practice was . These fully discoursed upon . The testimonies of Eusebius , Irenaeus , Tertullian , Hilary , Ierom , and Ignatius discussed ; and these two last proved not to contradict each other . Episcopacy owned as a humane Instituiion by the sense of the Church . 2. Consideration . That in all probability the Apostles did not observe any one fixed course of settling Church Government ; but settled it according to the several circumstances of time , places , and persons . Several things premised for clearing it . This Opinion , though seemingly New , is proved at large to be most consonant to antiquity , by the several Testimonies of Clemens Rom. Alexandrinus , Epiphanius ( whose Testimony is corrected , explained , and vindicated ) Hilary and divers others . This Opinion of great consequence towards our ▪ present peace . No foundation for Lay-Elders , either in Scripture or Antiquity . 3. Consideration ▪ Meer Apostoli●al practice , if supposed , founds not any divine right , proved by a fourfold Argument . The right of Tithes resolved upon the same Principles with that of Church Government . Rites and Institutions Apostolical grown quite out of use among the several contending parties . p. 230. CHAP. VII . THE Churches Polity in the ages after the Apostles considered . Evidences thence that no certain unalterable Form of Church-Government was delivered to them . 1. Because Church Power did inlarge as the Churches did . Whether any Metropolitan Churches established by the Apostles . Seven Churches of Asia , whether Metropolitical ; Philippi no Metropolis either in Civil or Ecclesiastical sense . Several degrees of inlargement of Churches . Churches first the Christians in whole Cities , proved by several arguments ; the Eulogiae an evidence of it . Churches extended into the neighbour territories by the preaching there of City Presbyters ; thence comes the subordination between them . Churches by degrees inlarged to Diocesses ; from thence to Provinces . The Original of Metropolitans and Patriarches . 2. No certain Form used in all Churches . Some Churches without Bishops , Scots , Goths . Some with but one Bishop in their whole Countrey Scythian , Aethiopian Churches how governed . Many Cities without Bishops . Diocesses much altered . Bishops discontinued in several Churches for many years . 3. Conforming Ecclesiastical Government to the civil in the extent of Diocesses . The suburbicarian Churches what . Bishops answerable to the civil Governours . Churches power rises from the greatness of Cities . 4. Validity of Ordination by Presbyters in places where Bishops were . The case of Ischyras discussed ▪ instances given of Ordination by Presbyters not pronounced null . 5. The Churches prudence in managing its affairs , by the several Canons , Provincial Synods , Codex Canonum . p. 346 CHAP. VIII . AN Inquiry into the Iudgement of Reformed Divines concerning the unalterable Divine Right of particular Forms of Church-Government : wherein it is made appear , that the most emine nt Divines of the Reformation did never conceive any one Form necessary ; manifested by three arguments . 1. From the judgment of those who make the Form of Church-Government mutable , and to depend upon the wisdom of the Magistrate and Church . This cleared to have been the judgement of most Divines of the Church of England since the Reformation . Archbishop Cranmers judgements with others of the Reformation in Edward the Sixth , time , now first published from his authentick MS. The same ground of setling Episcopacy ▪ in Queen Elizabeth's time . The judgement of Archbishop Whitgift , Bishop Bridges , Dr. Loe , Mr. Hooker , largely to that purpose , in King Iames his time . The Kings own Opinion . Dr. Sut●●ffe . Since of Grakanthorp , Mr. Hales , Mr. Chillingworth . The Testimony of Forraign Divines to the same purpose . Chemnitius , Zanchy . French Divines , Peter Moulin , Fregevil , Blondel , Bochartus , Amyraldus . Other learned men , Grotius , Lord Bacon , &c. 2. Those who look upon equality as the Primitive Form , yet judge Episcopacy lawful . Aug●stane Confession , Melanchthon , Articuli Smalcaldici . Prince of Anhalt , Hyperius , Hemingi●s : The practice of most Forraign Churches . Calvin and Beza both approving Episcopacy and Diocesan Churches . Salmatius , &c. 3 : Those who judge Episcopacy to be the Primitive Form , yet look not on it as necessary . Bishop Iewel , Fulk , Field , Bishop Downam , Bishop Bancroft , Bishop Morton , Bishop Andrews , Saravia , Francis Mason , and others . The Conclusion hence laid in Order to Peace . Principles conducing thereto . 1. Prudence must be used in Church-Government , at last confessed by all parties . Independents in elective Synods , and Church Covenants , admission of Members , number in Congregations . Presbyterians in Classes and Synods , Lay-Elders , &c. Episcopal in Diocesses , Causes , Rites , &c. 2. That Prudence best , which comes nearest Primitive practice . A Presidency for life over an Ecclesiastical Senate shewed to be that Form ; in order to it . Presbyteries to be restored . Diocesses lessened . Provincial Synods kept twice a year . The reasonableness and easiness of accommodation shewed . The whole concluded . p. 383. 384. A Weapon-Salve for the Churches Wounds : OR , The Divine Right of particular Forms of Government in the Church of God , discussed and examined , according to the Principles of the Law of Nature , the Positive Laws of God , the Practice of the Apostles , and the Primitive Church : and the Judgement of Reformed Divines . PART I. CHAP. I. Things necessary for the Churches Peace , must be clearly revealed . The Form of Church-Government not so , as appears by the remaining Controversie about it . An Evidence thence , that Christ never intended any one Form , as the only means to Peace in the Church . The Nature of a Divine Right discussed . Right in general either makes things Lawful , or else Due . For the former , a Non-prohibition sufficient ; the later , an Express Command . Duty supposeth Legislation and Promulgation . The Question stated . Nothing binds unalterably but by virtue of a standing Law , and that two-fold ; The Law of Nature and Positive Laws of God. Three ways to know when Positive Laws are unalterable . The Divine Right arising from Scripture-Examples , Divine Acts , and Divine Approbation , considered . HE that imposeth any matter of Opinion upon the belief of others , without giving Evidence of Reason for it , proportionable to the confidence of his Assertion , must either suppose the thing propounded , to carry such unquestionable Credentials of Truth and Reason with it , that none who know what they mean can deny it entertainment ; or else that his own understanding hath attained to so great perfection , as to have authority sufficient to oblige all others to follow it . This latter cannot be presumed among any who have asserted the freedom of their own understandings , from the dictates of an Infallible Chair : but if any should forget themselves so far as to think so , there needs no other argument to prove them not to be Infallible in their Assertions , then this one Assertion , that they are infallible ; it being an undoubted Evidence that they are actually deceived ▪ who know so little the measure of their own understandings . The former can never be pretended in any thing which is a matter of Controversie among men , who have not wholly forgot they are Reasonable Creatures , by their bringing probable arguments for the maintaining one part of an opinion as well as another . In which case , though the Arguments brought be not convincing for the necessary entertaining either part to an unbiassed understanding , yet the difference of their Opinions is Argument sufficient , that the thing contended for is not so clear as both parties would make it to be on their own side ; and if it be not a thing of necessity to salvation , it gives men ground to think , that a final decision of the matter in controversie , was never intended as a necessary means for the Peace and Unity of the Church of God. For we cannot with any shew of reason imagine , that our Supreme Law giver and Saviour , who hath made it a necessary duty in all true members of his Church , to endeavour after the Peace and Unity of it , should suspend the performance of that duty upon a matter of Opinion , which when men have used their utmost endeavors to satisfie themselves about , they yet find , that those very grounds which they are most inclinable to build their Judgements upon , are either wholly rejected by others , as wise and able as themselves ; or else , it may be , they erect a far different Fabrick upon the very same foundations . It is no ways consistent with the Wisdom of Christ in founding his Church , and providing for the Peace and Settlement of it , to leave it at the mercy of mens private judgments , and apprehensions of things , than which nothing more uncertain , and thereby make it to depend upon a condition never like to be attained in this world , which is the agreement and Uniformity of mens Opinions . For as long as mens faces differ , their judgements will. And until there be an Intellectus Averroisticus , the same understanding in all persons , we have little ground to hope for such an Universal Harmony in the Intellectual World ; and yet even then the Soul might pass a different judgement upon the colours of things , according to the different tincture of the several Optick-Glasses in particular bodies , which it takes a prospect of things through . Reason and Experience then give us little hopes of any peace in the Church , if the unity of mens judgements be supposed the condition of it : the next inquiry then is , how the Peace of the Church shall be attained or preserved , when men are under such different perswasions ; especially if they respect the means , in order to a Peace and Settlement . For the ways to Peace , like the fertile soils of Greece , have been oft-times the occasion of the greatest quarrels . And no sickness is so dangerous as that when men are sick of their remedy , and nauseate that most which tends to their recovery . But while Physitians quarrel about the Method of Cure , the Patient languisheth under their hands ; and when men increase Contentions in the behalf of Peace , while they seem to Court it , they destroy it . The only way left for the Churches Settlement and Peace under such variety of apprehensions concerning the Means and Method , in order to it , is to pitch upon such a foundation , if possible to be found out , whereon the different Parties retaining their private apprehensions , may yet be agreed to carry on the same work in common , in order to the Peace and Tranquillity of the Church of God. Which cannot be by leaving all absolutely to follow their own ways ; for that were to build a Babel instead of Salem , Confusion instead of Peace ; it must be then by convincing men , that neither of those ways to peace and order , which they contend about , is necessary by way of Divine Command , ( though some be as a means to an end ) but which particular way or form it must be , is wholly left to the prudence of those in whose Power and Trust it is to see the Peace of the Church be secured on lasting Foundations . How neerly this concerns the present Debate about the Government of the Church , any one may quickly discern . The main Plea for Forms of Government in the Church , is their necessity , in order to its Peace and Order , and yet nothing hath produced more disorder and confusion then our Disputes about it have done . And our sad experience still tells us , that , after all our Debates , and the Evidences brought on either side , men yet continue under very different apprehensions concerning it . But if we more strictly enquire into the causes of the great Distances and Animosities which have risen upon this Controversie , we shall find it hath not been so much the difference of Judgements concerning the Primitive Form of Government , which hath divided men so much from one another , as the prevalency of Faction and Interest in those whose Revenues have come from the Rents of the Church , and among others of greater Integrity it hath been the Principle or Hypothesis which men are apt to take for granted , without proving it ; viz. that it is in no case lawful to vary from that Form , which by obscure and uncertain conjectures , they conceive to have been the Primitive Practice . For hereby men look upon themselves as obliged by an unalterable Law , to endeavour the Establishment of that Idea of Government , which oft-times Affection and Interest , more then Reason and Judgement , hath formed within them ; and so likewise bound to over throw any other Form not suitable to those Correspondencies which they are already engaged to maintain . If this then were the Cause of the Wounds and Breaches this day among us , the most successful Weapon-salve to heal them , will be , to anoint the Sword which hath given the Wound , by a seasonable inquiry into the Nature and Obligation of particular Forms of Government in the Church . The main Subject then of our present Debate will be , Whether any one particular Form of Church Government be setled upon an unalterable Divine Right ; by virtue whereof all Churches are bound perpetually to observe that Individual Form ? or , whether it be left to the Prudence of every particular Church to agree upon that Form of Government which it judgeth most conducible within its self to attain the end of Government , the Peace , Order , Tranquillity , and Settlement of the Church . If this latter be made fully appear , it is then evident that , however mens judgements may differ concerning the Primitive Form of Government , there is yet a sure ground for men to proceed on in order to the Churches Peace . Which one Consideration will be motive sufficient to justifie an attempt of this Nature , it being a Design of so great Importance , as the recovery of an advantagious piece of ground , whereon Different Parties may with safety not only treat , but agree in order to a speedy Accommodation . We come therefore closely to the business in hand , and , for the better clearing of our passage , we shall first discuss the Nature of a Divine Right , and shew whereon an unalterable Divine Right must be founded , and then proceed to shew how far any Form of Government in the Church is setled upon such a Right . Right in the general is a relative thing , and the signification and import of it must be taken from the respect it bears to the Law which gives it . For although in common acception it be often understood to be the same with the Law its self , as it is the rule of actions ( in which sense Ius naturae , gentium , civile , is taken for the several Laws of Nature , Nations , and particular States ) yet I say Ius , and so Right , is properly something accruing to a person by virtue of that Law which is made , and so jus naturae is that right which every man is invested in by the Law of Nature , which is properly jus personae , and is by some call'd jus activum , which is defined by Grotius to be Qualitas moralis personae competens ad aliquid juste habendum aut agendum ▪ by Lessius to be Potestas Legitima ad rem aliquam obtinendam , &c. So that by these descriptions , Right is that Power which a man hath by Law to do , have , or obtain any thing . But the most full description of it is given by Martinius , that it is adhaerens personae necessitas vel potestas recta ad aliquid agendum , omittendum , aut permittendum , that whereby any person lies under a necessity of doing , omitting or suffering a thing to be , or else hath a lawful authority of doing , &c. For we are to consider that there is a two-fold Right , either such whereby a man hath Liberty and Freedom by the Law to do any thing ; or such whereby it becomes a mans necessary duty to do any thing . The opening of the difference of these two , and the different influences they have upon persons and things , is very useful to our present purpose : Ius then is first that which is justum ; so Isidore , Ius dictum quia justum est . So what ever is just , men have right to do it : Now a thing may be said to be just either more generally , as it signifies any thing which is lawful , or in a more restrained sense , when it implies something that is equal and due to another . So Aristotle distributes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The former sense of it is here only pertinent , as it implies any thing which may be done according to Law , that is , done jure , because a man hath right to do it . In order to this we are to observe , that an express Positive Command is not necessary to make a thing lawful , but a non-prohibition by a Law is sufficient for that . For it being the Nature of Laws to bound up mens Rights , what is not forbidden by the Law is thereby supposed to be left in mens power still to do it . So that it is to little purpose for men to seek for Positive Commands for every particular action to make it lawful ; it sufficeth to make any action lawful , if there be no Bar made by any direct or consequential prohibition ; unless it be in such things whose lawfulness and goodness depend upon a meer Positive Command . For in those things which are therefore only good , because commanded , a Command is necessary to make them lawful , as in immediate positive acts of Worship towards God ; in which nothing is lawful any further then it is founded upon a Divine Command . I speak not of Circumstances belonging to the Acts of Worship , but whatever is looked upon as a part of Divine Worship , if it be not commanded by God himself , it is no ways acceptable to him , and therefore not lawful . So our Saviour cites that out of the Prophet ▪ In vain do they worship me , teaching for Doctrines the commandments of men , which the Chaldee Paraphrast and Syriack version render thus , Reverentia quam mihi exhibent est ex praecepto & documento humano , plainly imputing the reason of Gods rejecting their worship , to the want of a Divine Command for what they did . And therefore Tertullian condemns all those things to be vacuae observationis & superstitioni deputanda , as superstitious , which are done sine ulli●s Dominici a●t Apostolici praecepti autoritate , without the Warrant of Divine Command . Although even here we may say too , that it is not meerly the want of a Divine Precept which makes any part of Divine Worship uncommanded by God unlawful , but the General Prohibition , that nothing should be done in the immediate Worship of God , but what we have a Divine Command for . However , in matters of meer Dece●cy and Order in the Church of God , or in any other civil action of the lives of men , it is enough to make things lawful , if they are not forbidden . But against this , that a Non-prohibition is warrant enough to make any thing lawful , this Objection will be soon leavied , that it is an Argument ab authoritate negativè , and therefore is of no force : To which I answer ▪ that the Rule , if taken without limitation , upon which this Objection is founded , is not true ; for although an Argument ab authoritate negativè , as to matter of Fact avails not , yet the Negative , from Authority , as to matter of Law and Command , is of great force and strength . I grant the Argument holds not here ; we do not read that ever Christ or his Apostles did such a thing , therefore it is not to be done ; but this , we read of no Law or Precept commanding us to do it , therefore it is not unlawful not to do it ; and we read of no Prohibition forbidding us to do it , therefore it may be lawfully done ; this holds true and good , and that upon this two-fold Reason . First , From Gods Intention in making known his Will ; which was not to record every particular fact done by himself , or Christ , or his Apostles , but it was to lay down those general and standing Laws , whereby his Church in all Ages should be guided and ruled : And in order to a perpetual obligation upon the Consciences , there must be a sufficient promulgation of those Laws which must bind men . Thus in the case of Infant-Baptism , it is a very weak unconcluding Argument to say that Infants must not be baptized , because we never read that Christ or his Apostles did it ; for this is a Negative in matter of Fact ; but on the other side , it is an Evidence that Infants are not to be excluded from Baptism , because there is no Divine Law which doth prohibit their admission into the Church by it ; for this is the Negative of a Law ; and if it had been Christs intention to have excluded any from admission into the Church , who were admitted before as Insants were , there must have been some positive Law whereby such an Intention of Christ should have been expressed ; For nothing can make that unlawful which was a duty before , but a direct and express Prohibition from the Legislator himself ▪ who alone hath power to re●cind as well as to make Laws . And therefore Antipaedobaptists must , instead of requiring a Positive Command for baptizing Infants , themselves produce an express Prohibition excluding them , or there can be no appearance of Reason given , why the Gospel should exclude any from those priviledges , which the Law admitted them to . Secondly , I argue from the intention and end of Laws , which is to circumscribe and restrain the Natural Liberty of man , by binding him to the observation of some particular Precepts . And therefore where there is not a particular Command and Prohibition , it is in Nature and Reason supposed that men are left to their Natural freedom ; as is plain in Positive Humane Laws ; wherein men by compact and agreement for their mutual good in Societies , were willing to restrain themselves from those things which should prejudice the good of the Community ; this being the ground of mens first inclosing their Rights and common Priviledges , it must be supposed , that what is not so inclosed , is left common to all as their just Right and Priviledge still . So it is in Divine Positive Laws , God intending to bring some of Mankind to happiness , by conditions of his own appointing , hath laid down many Positive Precepts , binding men to the practise of those things as duties which are commanded by him . But where we find no Command for performance , we cannot look upon that as an immediate duty , because of the necessary relation between Duty and Law ; and so where we find no Prohibition , there we can have no ground to think that men are debarred from the liberty of doing things not forbidden . For as we say of Exceptions , as to General Laws and Rules , that an Exception expressed firmat regulam in non exceptis , makes the Rule stronger in things not expressed as excepted ; so it is as to Divine Prohibitions ; as to the Positives , that those Prohibitions we read in Scripture make other things not-prohibited to be therefore lawful , because not expresly forbidden . As Gods forbidding Adam to taste of the fruit of one Tree , did give him a liberty to taste of all the rest . Indeed , had not God at all revealed his Will and Laws to us by his Word , there might have been some Plea why men should have waited for particular Revelations to dictate the goodness or evil of particular actions , not determined by the law of nature ; but since God hath revealed his will , there can be no reason given why those things should not be lawful to do , which God hath not thought fit to forbid men the doing of . Further we are to observe , that in these things which are thus undetermined in reference to an obligation to duty , but left to our natural liberty as things lawful , the contrary to that which is thus lawful , is not thereby made unlawful . But both parts are left in mens power to do , or not to do them ; as is evident in all those things which carry a general equity with them , and are therefore consonant to the Law of Nature , but have no particular obligation , as not flowing immediately from any dictate of the natural Law. Thus community of goods is lawful by the law and principles of nature ; yet every man hath a lawful right to his goods by dominion and propriety . And in a state of Community it was the right of every man to impropriate upon a just equality , supposing a preceding compact and mutual agreement . Whence it is that some of the School-men say , that although the Law of Nature be immutable , as to its precepts and prohibitions , yet not as to its demonstrations ( as they call them ; ) as , Do as you would be done to , binds always indispensably ; but , that in a state of nature all things are common to all , This is true , but it binds not men to the necessary observance of it . These which they call Demonstrations are only such things as are agreeable to nature , but not particularly commanded by any indispensable precept of it . Thus likewise it is agreeable to nature , that the next of the kindred should be heir to him who dies intestate ; but he may lawfully wave his interest if he please . Now to apply this to our present case ; According to this sense of jus for that which is lawful , those things may be said to be jure divino , which are not determined one way or other by any positive Law of God , but are left wholly , as things lawful , to the prudence of men to determine them , in a way agreeable to natural light , and the general Rules of the Word of God. In which sense I assert any particular form of Government agreed on by the Governours of the Church , consonant to the general Rules of Scripture , to be by Divine Right , i. e. God by his own Laws hath given men a power and liberty to determine the particular form of Church-Government among them . And hence it may appear , that though one form of Government be agreeable to the Word , it doth not follow that another is not ; or , because one is lawful , another is unlawful : but one form may be more agreeable to some parts , places , people and times , then others are . In which case that form of Government is to be setled which is most agreeable to the present state of a place , and is most advantagiously conducible to the promoting the ends of Church-Government in that place or Nation . I conclude then according to this sense of jus , that the Ratio regiminis Ecclesiastici is juris divini naturalis , that is , that the reason of Church-Government is immutable , and holds in all times and places , which is the preservation of the peace and unity of the Church ; but the modus regiminis Ecclesiastici , the particular form of that Government is juris divini permissivi , that both the Laws of God and Nature have left it to the Prudence of particular Churches to determine it . This may be cleared by a parallel Instance . The reason and the Science of Physick is immutable , but the particular prescriptions of that Science are much varied , according to the different tempers of Patients . And the very same reason in Physick which prescribes one sort of Physick to one , doth prescribe a different sort to another , because the temper or disease of the one calls for a different method of cure ; yet the ground and end of both prescriptions was the very same , to recover the Patient from his distemper . So I say in our present case ; the ground and reason of Government in the Church is unalterable by divine right ; yea , and that very reason which determines the particular forms : but yet , these particular forms flowing from that immutable reason , may be very different in themselves , and may alter according to the several circumstances of times , and places , and persons , for the more commodious advancing the main end of Government . As in morality there can be but one thing to a man in genere summi boni , as the chief good , quò tendit & in quod dirigit aroum — to which he refers all other things ; yet there may be many things in genere boni conducentis , as means in order to attaining that end . So though Church-Government vary not as to the ground , end , and reason of it ; yet it may , as to the particular forms of it : As is further evident , as to forms of Civil Government : though the end of all be the same ; yet Monarchy , Aristocracy , and Democracy , are in themselves lawful means for the attaining the same common end . And as Alensis determines it , in the case of Community of goods by the Law of Nature , that the same reason of the Law of Nature which did dictate Community of goods to be most suitable to man in the state of Innocency , did in his faln estate prescribe a propriety of goods , as most agreeable to it ; so that herein the modus observanti●● dissered , but the ratio praecepti was the same still ; which was mans comfortable enjoyment of the Accommodations of life : which in Innocency might have been best done by Community ; but in mans degenerate condition , must be by a Propriety . So the same reason of Church-Government may call for an Equality in the persons , acting as Governours of the Church in one place , which may call for Superiority and subordination in another . Having now dispatched the first sense of a Divine Right , I come to the other , which is the main seat of the Controversie , and therefore will require a longer debate . And so jus is that which makes a thing to become a duty : so jus quasi jussum , and jussa jura , as Festus explains it , i. e. that whereby a thing is not only licitum , in mens lawful power to do it or no , but is made d●bitum , and is constituted a duty by the force and virtue of a Divine Command . Now mans obligation to any thing as a duty , doth suppose on the part of him from whose authority he derives his obligation , both legislation and promulgation . First there must be a Legislative Power commanding it ; which if it respects only the outward actions of a man in a Nation imbodied by Laws , is the supreme Magistrate ; but if the obligation respect the consciences of all men directly and immediately , then none have the power to settle any thing by way of an universal standing Law , but God himself : Who by being sole Creator and Governour of the World , hath alone absolute and independent Dominion and Authority over the souls of men . But besides Legislation , another thing necessary to mans obligation to duty , is , a sufficient promulgation of the Law made ; Because though before this there be the ground of obedience on mans part to all Gods Commands , yet there must be a particular Declaration of the Laws , whereby man is bound in order to the determination of Mans duty . Which in Positives is so absolutely necessary , that unless there be a sufficient promulgation and declaration of the will of the Law-giver , mans ignorance is excusable in reference to them ; and so frees from guilt and the obligation to punishment . But it is otherwise in reference to the dictates of the natural Law , wherein though man be at a loss for them , yet his own contracted pravity being the cause of his blindness , leaves him without excuse . Hence it is said with good reason , that though man under the Moral Law , was bound to obey Gospel-precepts , as to the reason and substance of the duties by them commanded , as Faith , Repentance from dead works , and New Obedience ; yet a more full and particular revelation by the Gospel was necessary , for the particular determination of the general acts of obedience , to particular objects under their several Modifications expressed in the Gospel . And therefore Faith and Repentance under the Moral Law , taken as a transcript of the Law of Nature , were required under their general notion as acts of obedience , but not in that particular relation which those acts have under the Covenant of Grace . Which particular determination of the general acts to special objects under different respects , some call New Precepts of the Gospel , others New Light ; but taking that light as it hath an influence upon the consciences of men , the difference is so small , that it deserves not to be named a Controversie . But that which I am now clearing is this , that whatsoever binds Christians as an universal standing Law , must be clearly revealed as such , and laid down in Scripture in such evident terms , as all who have their senses exercised therein , may discern it to have been the will of Christ , that it should perpetually oblige all believers to the Worlds end , as is clear in the case of Baptism , and the Lords Supper . But here I shall add one thing by way of caution ; That there is not the same necessity for a particular and clear revelation in the alteration of a Law unrepealed in some circumstances of it , as there is for the establishing of a New Law. As to the former , viz. the change of a standing Law as to some particular circumstance , a different practice by persons guided by an infallible spirit is sufficient ; which is the case as to the observation of the Lords day under the Gospel : For the fourth Command standing in force as to the Morality of it , a different practice by the Apostles may be sufficient for the particular determination of the more ritual and occasional part of it , which was the limitation of the observation of it to that certain day . So likewise that other Law standing in force , that persons taken into Covenant with God should be admitted by some visible sign , Apostolical practice , clearly manifested , may be sufficient ground to conclude what the mind of Christ was , as to the application of it to particular persons ; and what qualifications are requisite in such as are capable of admission , as in the case of Infants . Whereby it is clear why there is no particular Law or command in reference to them under the Gospel , because it was only the application of a Law in force already to particular persons , which might be gathered sufficiently from the Apostles practice , the Analogy of the dispensation , the equal reason of exclusion under the Law , and yet notwithstanding the continual admission of them then into the same Gospel-Govenant ; Circumcision being the Seal of the Righteousness of Faith. But this by the way , to prevent mistakes . We must now by parity of reason say , that either the former Law , in those things wherein it was not typical , must hold in reference to the form of . Government in the Church of Christ ; or else that Christ by an universal Law hath setled all order in Church Government among the Pastors themselves ; or else that he hath left it to the prudence of every particular Church , to determine its own form of Government , which I conceive is the direct state of the Question about Divine Right , viz. Whether the particular form of Government in the Church be setled by an universal binding Law or no ? But for a further clearing the state of the Question , we must consider what it is that makes an unalterable Divine Right , or a standing Law in the Church of God : for those who found forms of Government upon a Divine Right , do not plead a Law in express terms , but such things from whence a Divine Right by Law may be inferred . Which I now come to examine ; and that which I lay down as a Postulatum , or a certain conclusion according to which I shall examine others ●ssertions concerning Divine Right , is , That nothing is founded upon a Divine Right , nor can bind Christians directly or consequentially as a positive Law , but what may be certainly known to have come from God , with an intention to oblige Believers to the worlds end . For either we must say , it binds Christians as a Law when God did not intend it should ; or else Gods intentions to bind all Believers by it , must be clearly manifested . Now then , so many ways and no more as a thing may be known to come from God with an intention to oblige all perpetually , a thing may be said to be of an unalterable Divine Right ; and those can be no more then these two ; Either by the Law of Nature , or by some positive Law of God : Nothing else can bind universally and perpetually but one of these two , or by virtue of them , as shall be made appear . I begin with the Law of Nature . The Law of Nature binds indispensably , as it depends not upon any arbitrary constitutions , but is founded upon the intrinsecal nature of good and evil in the things themselves , antecedently to any positive Declaration of Gods Will. So that till the nature of good and evil be changed , that Law is unalterable as to its obligation . When , I say , the Law of Nature is indispensable , my meaning is , that in those things which immediately flow from that Law by way of precept , as the three first Commands of the Moral Law , no man can by any positive Law be exempted from his obligation to do them ; neither by any abrogation of the Laws themselves , nor by derogation from them , nor interpretation of them , nor change in the object , matter , or circumstance , whatsoever it be . Now although the formal reason of mans obedience to the precepts of this Law , be the conformity ▪ which the things commanded have to the Divine Nature and goodness , yet I conceive the efficient cause of mans obligation to these things , is to be fetched from the Will , Command , and Pleasure of God : Not as it is taken for an arbitrary positive will , but as it is executive of Divine purposes , and as it ingraves such a Law upon the hearts of men . For notwithstanding mans Reason , considered in it self , be the chiefest instrument of discovery what are these necessary duties of humane nature ( in which sense Aristotle defines a Natural Law to be that which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , hath every where the same force and strength , i. e. as Andronicus Rhodius very well interprets it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , among all that have the free use of their reason and faculties ) yet I say , it is not bare Reason which binds men to the doing of those things commanded in that Law , but as it is expressive of an Eternal Law , and deduceth its obligation from thence . And so this Law , if we respect the rise , extent , and immutability of it , may be call'd deservedly the Law of Nature ; but if we look at the emanation , efflux , and original of it , it is a Divine Law , and so it is call'd by Molina , Alphonsus à Castr●● , and others . For the sanction of this Law of Nature , as well as others , depends upon the Will of God , and therefore the obligation must come from him , it being in the power of no other to punish for the breach of a Law , but those who had the Legislative Power to cause the obligation to it . It appears then from hence , that whatever by just consequence can be deduced from the preceptive Law of Nature , is of Divine Right , because from the very nature of that Law ( it being indispensable ) it appears that God had an intent to oblige all persons in the world by it . The second way whereby we may know what is of Divine Right , is by Gods positive Laws ; for God being the Supreme Governour of the World , hath the Legislative Power in his hands , to bind to the performance of what duties be please , which carry no repugnancy in them to his Divine Nature and Goodness . Hence arise all those positive Laws of God which we have in Scripture ; for God's end in his written Law was , that man should have a Copy of all Divine constitutions by him , that he might therein read what his duty was toward his Maker . The Precepts of the Law of Nature , are by the Jews call'd ▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absolutely , without any addition ; because they are of such things as do perpetually bind , which because they are known to all by natural light , they sometimes call them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praecepta scientia ; and being that their righteousness is so evident and apparent , they call them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verba rectitudinis : but the clearest difference between the precepts of the Law of Nature , and other positive commands , is that which the famous Is. Casaubon takes notice of out of the Jewish Doctors . Observant doctissimi è Rabbinis , inter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 han● esse differentiam , quod Mitsvoth , sive pr●ceptorum ratio aperta est , ut , Deum cole , Honora patrem & matrem ; at Chukim , statuta sive decreta earum rerum esse dicunt quarum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ratio soli Deo sit nota , ut Circumcisionis & similium . The reason of the Laws of Nature is evident , but of positive Laws there is no reason to be given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non est alia praeter decretum regis , no other account to be given of them but the will of God. The Laws of Nature are by the LXX . often call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and so used , Rom. 2. 16. by Iustin Martyr , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . by Iosephus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Gods positive Laws are call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : thence we read of Zachary and Elizabeth , Luke 1. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. walking in all the Ordinances and Commandments of God blameless , and those are call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by S. Paul , Ephes. 2. 15. the Law of Commandments in Ordinances . Now although this difference be not always observed in the words in Scripture , yet there is a vast difference between the things themselves , though both equally commanded by God. That which is most to our present purpose to observe , is , that Positives being mutable and alterable in themselves , a bare Divine Command is not sufficient to make them immutable , unless there be likewise expressed , that it is the Will of God that they should always continue . This was that which the Jews stumbled at so much , and do to this day ; because they are assured their Law came once from God , therefore it must of necessity have a perpetual obligation : as may be seen in their two great Doctors Maimonides and Abarbinel , who both of them make the Eternity of the Law one of the Fundamental Articles of their Creed . But Abarbinel splits this Article into two ; whereof the first is , that the Law of Moses shall never be changed ; the other , that no other Law shall come instead of it . The original of which grand errour is from want of observing the difference between things commanded by God , some of which are good , and therefore commanded ; others commanded , and therefore good . In which latter , if the reason of the Command ceaseth , the Command its self obligeth no longer . As the Ceremonial Law was to be their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is not meant in regard of the sharp severe nature of the Law to drive them unto Christ , as it is by many interpreted ; but the Law is a Paedagogue in regard of its tutorage and conduct , as it signified him whose office it was to conduct Noblemens Children to the School ( as a learned man observes . ) This being then the office of the Law , when the Church was now entred into Christs School , the office of this Paedagogue then ceased . And so the Ceremonial Law needed no abrogation at all ▪ exspiring of its self at Christs coming , as Laws made for the times of war do when peace comes . Only because the Jews were so hardly perswaded that it should exspire ( the believing Jews conceiving at first the Gospel came rather to help them to obey the Law of Moses then to cancel the obligation of it ) therefore it was necessary that a more honourable burial should be given to it , and the Apostles should pro rostris declare more fully that believers were freed from that yoke of Ceremonies , under which the neck of their fore-fathers had groaned so long . It appears then that a positive Law coming from God doth not meerly by virtue of its being enacted by God , bind perpetually all persons , unless there be a Declaration of Gods Will adjoyned , that it should do so . It will be here then well worth our inquiry to find out some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or notes of difference whereby to know when positive laws bind immutably , when not ; I shall ●ay down these following . First , when the same reason of the Command continues still , then we cannot conceive how that which was instituted upon such an account as remains still , should not have the same force now which it had at first . That positive Law under which Adam was in his state of Innocency touching the forbidden fruit , did not bind any longer then his fall ; because the reason of the Command ceased , which was the tryal of mans obedience : For which , God made choice of a very facile and easie Command , according to that rule of Politicians In minimis obedientiae periculum faciunt Legislatores , of which they give this rational account , Quia legislatoris ad obedientiam obligantis potius habenda est ratio , quàm rei de quâ lex est lata : thence arose that Law of the Ephori at Sparta , barbam tondere , to which no other reason was annexed but this , obtemperare legibus , to learn them to obey the Laws . This was Gods aim in that easie Command given to Adam , to make thereon an experiment of mans willingness to obey his Maker , and wherein man soon lost that Obsequii gloria , as he in Tacttus calls it , which , as Pliny saith , is in to major quod quis minus velit . But had this Law been a standing Law for all mankind , it would have continued its obligation still ; but since , we see that it was only a personal , temporary , probative precept ; for no sooner was man fallen but its obligation ceased . So likewise those precepts of the Judicial Law which immediately respected the Commonwealth of the Jews as such , their obligation reacheth not to Christians at all , nor ( as it is generally conceived ) to the Jews themselves , when out of the Consines of their own Countrey , because the reason of those Laws doth neither descend to Christians , nor did travel abroad with the Jews . But those judicial Laws which are founded upon common equity to bind still , not by virtue of that Sanction , but by virtue of common principles of equity , which certainly in the present shortness of humane reason cannot be fetched from a clearer Fountain then those Laws which once came from the Fountain of Goodness : none of whose constitutions can any ways be supposed to deviate from the exactest rules of Justice and Equity . And upon this very ground too , some part of the fourth Commandment is abrogated , and the other continues to bind still ; For the reason of the Ceremonial and occasional part is ceased , and the reason of what was Moral , continues . Therefore the School-men say right of the Sabbath day , Cultus est à naturâ , modus à lege , virtu● à Gratiâ . Nature dictates that God should be worshipped , the Law informs what day and time to spend in his worship , Grace must enable us to perform that worship on that day in a right manner . And because the same reason for Gods Worship continue● still , therefore it is a Precept of the Natural Law , that God should be worshipped . What time precisely must be spent in Gods Worship ( as one day in seven ) though the reason be evident to nature of it when it is made known ; yet it is hard to conceive that Nature could have found out the precise determination of the time . Although I must confess the general consent of Nations , as to the seventh part , ( if it were fully cleared ) would speak fair to be the voice of Nature , or at least a tradition received from the Sons of Noah , which , if so , will be an evidence of the observation of the Sabbath before the Children of Israels being in the Wilderness . But granting that the seventh part of time was a positive Law of God , yet I say it binds immutably , because there is as strong a reason for it now as ever , and Ratio immutabilis praecepti , facit praeceptum immutabile . This I take to be the sense of those who distinguish between morale positivum , and morale naturale , i. e. that some things are so moral , that even Nature its self can discover them , as that God should be worshipped . Other things are so moral , that though the reason of them be founded in Nature , yet there wants Divine Revelation to discover them to us ; but when once discovered , are discerned to be very agreeable to common principles of reason : And these when thus discovered , are as immutably obligatory as the other , because the reason of them is immutable . And of this nature , is the determination of the particular time for Gods worship , and limitation of it to one day in seven . But what was in that Precept meerly occasional , as the first and original ground of its limitation to the seventh in order , Gods resting on that day from the work of Creation , and the further ground of its inforcement to the Jews , viz. their deliverance out of Egypt ; these being not immut●ble , but temporary and occasional , may upon as great ground given , and approved of God for that end ( as is evident by the Apostles practice ) be sufficient reason of the alteration of the seventh day to the first day of the week . By this may briefly be seen how irrationally those speak , who say we have no further ground for our observation of the Lords day now , then for other arbitrary Festivals in the Church , viz. The Tradition of the Church of God. I grant , the Tradition of the Church doth acquaint us with Apostolical practice , but the ground of our observation of the Lords day , is not the Churches Tradition , but that Apostolical practice conveyed by Universal Tradition ( which setting aside the Festivals observed upon the Lords days , can very hardly be ●ound for any other . ) But supposing Universal Tradition for other Festivals ; I say , here Tradition is not only used as a testimony and instrument of conveyance , as in the other case of the Lords day ; but is it self the only argument , and the very ground of the original observation : Between which two , what a wide difference there is , let any rational man judge . But for a further clearing this observation , we must consider , that the reason of the Command , which we say is the measure of its obligation , must not be fetched from mens uncertain conjectures ( among whom dreams often pass for reasons ) but it must be either expressed in the Law its self , or deducible by apparent and easie collection from it ; as is plain in the Decrees of the Apostles about things strangled , and offered to Idols , where the reason of the Command is plainly implied , to wit , for present compliance with the Jews ; and therefore no sooner did the reason of the Command cease , but the obligation of it ceased too : but of this more afterwards . This is one way then to discern the difference between positive Laws , as to the obligation of them , by the ground and reason of the Command . And therefore it is well observed by Divines ( which further confirms what I now prove ) that no Command doth bind against the reason of the Command ; because it is not the words , but the sense and reason of a Command which hath the greatest obligatory force . Therefore Tully tells us , that the ratio juris & legislatoris consilium , is the best Interpreter of any Law ; who excellently and largely proves , that the reason of the Law is the Law , and not the words . So much for the first Rule . Secondly , Another way to know when Positive Laws are immutable , is , when Gods Will is expresly declared that such Laws shall bind immutably . For it being granted on all hands , that God may bind us to those things which are left indifferent by the Law of Nature , and likewise for what term he please ; the only inquiry left , is to see in his Word whether he hath so bound us or no ; and , if he hath , whether he hath left it in mans power to revoke his Laws . For as to Positive Laws expresly laid down in Scripture , the ground of which is only as the Jews speak 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the will of the King , i. e. Gods own pleasure , without any reason or occasion of it else expressed , or necessarily implied ; these do bind immutably , unless the same Power which commanded them , doth again revoke them . For we cannot in any wise conceive that the wise God should after the declaring his own will , leave it in the power of any corrupt fallible ▪ Being to determine , or dispence with the obligation of his own Laws . Which to do , and instead of them to enforce others immediately upon the Consciences of men , as standing Laws , is an attempt beyond that of the Gyants against heaven ( or the men at Babel ▪ ) that being only an affectation of reaching heaven , but this an actual usurpation of Gods supreme and legislative power and authority . But though man hath nor , God alwayes reserves to himself a power to relax , interpret , and dispence with his own positive Laws , which imply no repugnancy to his own nature . And this power is alwayes to be understood in all Laws to be reserved to God , where he hath not himself declared that he will not use it ▪ which is done either by the annexing an Oath on a Promise , which the Apostle calls the two immutable things in which it is impossible for God to lie . For though God be free to promise , yet when he hath promised , his own nature and faithfulness binds him to performance ; in which sense I understand those who say , God in making promises is bound only to himself , and not to men ; that is , that the ground of performance ariseth from Gods faithfulness . For else if we respect the right coming by the promise , that must immediately respect the person to whom it is made , and in respect of which we commonly say that the promiser is bound to performance . But the case is otherwise in penal Laws , which though● never so strict ; do imply a power of relaxation in the Legislator : because penall Laws do only constitute the debstum poenae ▪ and bind the sinner over to punishment , but do not bind the Legislator to an actual execution upon the debt . Which is the ground that the person of a Mediator was admittable in the place of faln man , because it was a penal Law , and therefore relaxable . But because the debt of punishment is immediately contracted upon the breach of the Law , therefore satisfaction was necessary to God as Law-giver , either by the person himself , or another for him ; because it was not consistent with the holiness of Gods nature and his wisdom as Governor , to relax an established Law , without valuable consideration ▪ Now for the third kind of Gods Laws , besides promissory and penall , viz such as are meerly positive respecting duties , which become such by vertue of an express command : these , though they be revocable in themselves , yet being revocable only by God himself , and his own power , since he hath already in his Word fully revealed his Will , unlesse therein he hath declared when their obligation shall cease , they continue irreversible . This is the case as to the Sacraments of the New Testament , which being commands meerly positive , yet Christ commanding Christians as Christians to observe them , and not as Christians of the first and second Ages of the Church , his mind can be no otherwise interpreted concerning them , then that he did intend immutably to bind all Christians to the observance of them . For al though the Socinians say , that Baptism was only a Rite instituted by Christ for the passing men from Judaism and Gentilism to Christianity , yet we are not bound to look upon all as reason that comes from those who professe themselves the admirers of it . For Christs Command nowhere implying such a limitation ; and an outward visible profession of Christianity being a duty now , and the Covenant entred into by that Rite of initiation , as obligatory as ever , we have no reason to think that Christs command doth not reach us now , especially the promise being made to as many as God shall call , and consequently the same duty required which was then in order to the obtaining of the same ends . A third way to discern the immutability of positive Laws , is , when the things commanded in particular are necessary to the being , succession , and continuance of such a Society of men professing the Gospel , as is instituted and approved by Christ himself . For Christ must be supposed to have the power himself to order what Society he please , and appoint what Orders he please to be observed by them ; what Rites and Ceremonies to be used in admission of Members into his Church , in their continuing in it ; in the way , means , manner of ejection out of it ; in the preserving the succession of his Church , and the administration of Ordinances of his appointment . These being thus necessary for the maintaining and upholding this Society , they are thereby of a nature as unalterable , as the duty of observing what Christ hath commanded is . How much these things concern the resolution of the Question proposed , will appear afterwards . Thus we have gained a resolution of the second thing , whereon an unalterable Divine Right is founded ; viz , either upon the dictates of the Law of Nature , concurring with the rules of the written word ; or upon express positive Laws of God , whose reason is immutable , or which God hath declared shall continue , as necessary to the being of the Church . The next thing is to examine the other pretences which are brought for a Divine Right ; which are either Scripture ▪ examples , or Divine acts , or Divine approbation . For Scripture-examples : First ; I take it for granted on all hands , that all Scripture examples do not bind us to follow them ; such are the Mediatory acts of Christ , the Heroical acts of extraordinary persons , all accidentall and occasionall actions . Example doth not bind us as an example ; for then all examples are to be followed , and so we shall of necessity go , quà itur , non quà eundum , walk by the most examples , and not by rule . There is then no obligatory force in example it self . Secondly , there must be then some rule fixed to know when examples bind , and when not ; for otherwise there can be no discrimination put between examples which we are to follow , and which to avoid . This rule must be either immediately obligatory , making it a duty to follow such examples , or else directive , declaring what examples are to be ●ollowed : And yet even this latter doth imply , as well as the former , that the following these examples thus declared , is become a duty . There can be no duty without a Law making it to be a duty , and consequently , it is the Law making it to be a duty to follow such example , which gives a Divine Right to those examples , and not barely the examples themselves . We are bound to follow Christs example , not barely because he did such and such things , ( for many things he did we are not bound to follow him in ) but because he himself hath by a command made it our duty to follow him in his humility , patience , self-denyal , &c. and in whatever things are set out in Scripture for our imitation . When men speak then with so much confidence , that Scripture-examples do bind us unalterably , they either mean that the example it self makes it a duty , which I have shewn already to be absurd ; or else that the morall nature of the action done in that example , or else the Law making it our duty to follow the example , though in its self it be of no morall nature . If the former of these two , then it is the morality of the action binds us , without its being incarnate in the example : For the example in actions not morall , binds not at all , and therefore the example binds only by vertue of the morality of it ; and consequently , it is the morality of the action which binds , and not the example . If the latter , the rule making it our duty , then it it is more apparent that it is not the example which binds necessarily , but that rule which makes it a duty to follow it ; for examples in indifferent things do not bind without a Law making it to be a duty : And so it evidently appears , that all obligatory force is taken off from the examples themselves , and resolved into one of the two former , the morall nature of the action , or a positive Law. And therefore those who plead the obligatory nature of Scripture-examples , must either produce the morall nature of these examples , or else a rule binding us to follow those examples . Especially , when these examples are brought to found a New positive Law , obliging all Christians necessarily to the end of the world . Concerning the binding nature of Apostolicall practice , I shall discourse largely afterwards . The next thing pleaded for a Divine Right , is by Divine Acts. As to this ▪ ●t is again evident that all Divine Acts do not constitute such a Right ; therefore there must be something expressed in those Acts when such a Divine Right follows them ; whence we may infallibly gather , it was Gods intention they should perpetually oblige : as is plain in the cases instanced in the most for this purpose ; as Gods resting on the seventh day making the Sabbath perpetual : For it was not Gods resting that made it the Sabbath , for that is only expressed as the occasion of its institution ; but it was Gods sanctifying the day , that is , by a Law setting it apart for his own service , which made it a duty . And so Christs resurrection was not it which made the Lords day a Sabbath of Divine Right ; but Christs resurrection was the occasion of the Apostles altering only a circumstantiall part of a morall duty already ; which being done upon so great reasons , and by persons indued with an insallible spirit , thereby it becomes our duty to observe that morall command in this limitation of time . But here it is further necessary to distinguish between acts meerly positive , and acts donative or legall . The former con●er no right at all , but the latter do ; not barely as acts , but as legall acts , that is , by some declaration that those acts do conserr right . And so it is in all donations , and therefore in Law the bare delivery of a thing to another doth not give a legall title to it , without express transferring of dominion and propriety with it . Thus in Christs delivering the Keys to Peter and therest of the Apostles , by that act I grant the Apostles had the power of the Keyes by Divine Right ; but then it was not any bare act of Christ which did it , but it was only the declaration of Christs will conferring that authority upon them . Again , we must distinguish between a right confer●'d by a donative act , and the unalterable nature of that Right ; for it is plain there may be a Right personall as well as successive , derivative , and perpetuall . And therefore it is not enough to prove that a Right was given by any act of Christ , unless it be made appear it was Christs intention that Right should be perpetuall if it oblige still . For otherwise the extent of the Apostolical Commission the power of working miracles , as well as the power of the Keyes ( whether by it we mean a power declarative of duty , or a power authoritative and penall ) must continue still , if a difference be not made between these two ; and some rule sound out to know when the Right conferr'd by Divine Acts is personall , when successive . Which rule thus found out , must make the Right unalterable , and so concerning us , and not the bare donative act of Christ ▪ For it is evident , they were all equally conferr'd upon the Apostles by an act of Christ : and if some continue still , and others do not , then the bare act of Christ doth not make an unalterable Divine Right . And so though it be proved that the Apostles had superiority of order and jurisdiction over the Pastors of the Church by an act of Christ ; yet it must further be proved , that it was Christs intention that superiority should continue in their successors , or it makes nothing to the purpose . But this argument I confess , I see not how those who make a necessary Divine Right to follow upon the acts of Christ , can possibly avoid the force of . The last thing pleaded for Divine Right , is Divine approbation ; but this least of all constitutes a Divine Right : For if the actions be extraordinary , Gods approbation of them as such , cannot make them an ordinary duty . In all other actions which are good , and therefore only commendable , they must be so , either because done in conformity to Gods revealed Will , or to the nature of things good in themselves . In the one , it is the positive Law of God , in the other the Law of Nature , which made the action good , and so approved by God , and on that account we are bound to do it . For God will certainly approve of nothing but what is done according to his Will revealed , or natural ; which Will and Law of his , is that which makes any thing to be of Divine Right , i. e. perpetually binding , as to the observation of it . But for acts of meerly positive nature , which we read Gods approbation of in Scripture , by vertue of which approbation those actions do oblige us ; in this case , I say , it is not Gods meer approbation that makes the obligation , but as that approbation , so recorded in Scripture , is a sufficient testimony and declaration of Gods intention to oblige men : And so it comes to be a positive Law , which is nothing else but a sufficient declaration of the Legislators will and intention , to bind in particular actions and cases . Thus now we have cleared whereon a necessary and unalterable Divine Right must be founded ; either upon the Law of Nature , or some positive Law of God , sufficiently declared to be perpetually binding . CHAP. II. Six Hypotheses laid down , as the basis of the following Discourse . 1. The irreversible obligation of the Law of Nature , either by humane , or Divine positive Laws , in things immediately flowing from it . 2. Things agreeable to the Law of Nature may be lawfully practised in the Church of God , where there is no prohibition by positive Laws ; inlarged into 5 subservient Propositions . 3. Divine positive Laws , concerning the manner of the thing whose substance is determined by the Law of Nature , must be obeyed by vertue of the obligation of the natural Law. 4. Things undetermined , both by the naturall and positive Laws of God , may be lawfully determined by the supream authority in the Church of God. 5. What is th●● determined by lawfull authority , doth bind the consciences of men ▪ subject to that authority . to obedience to those determinations . 6. Things thus determined by lawfull authority , are not thereby made unalterable , but may be revoked , limited , and changed by the same authority . HAving shewed what a Divine Right is , and whereon it is founded ; our next great inquiry will be , How far Church-Government is founded upon Divine Right , taken either of these two wayes . But for our more distinct , clear , and rationa●● proceeding , I shall lay down some things , as so many Postulata or generall Principles and Hypotheses , which will be as the basis and foundation of the following Discourse ; which all of them concern the obligation of Laws , wherein I shall proceed gradually , beginning with the Law of Nature , and so to Divine positive Laws ; and lastly , to speak to humane positive Laws . The first Principle or Hypothesis which I lay down , is , That where the Law of Nature doth determine any thing by way of duty , as flowing from the principles of it , there no positive Law can be supposed to take off the obligation of it . Which I prove , both as to humane positive Laws and Divine : First as to humane . For first , the things commanded in the Law of Nature , being just and righteous in themselves , there can be no obligatory Law made against such things . Nemo tenetur ad impossibile , is true in the sense of the Civil Law , as well as in Philosophy ; as impossibile is taken for turpe , and turpe for that which is contrary to the dictates of Nature . A man may be as well bound not to be a man , as not to act according to principles of reason ▪ For the Law of Nature is nothing else but the dictate of right reason , discovering the good or evil of particular actions , from their conformity or repugnancy to natural light . Whatever positive Law is then made directly infringing and violating natural principles , is thereby of no force at all . And that which hath no obligation in it self , cannot dissolve a former obligation . Secondly , the indispensablenesse of the obligation of the Law of Nature , appears from the end of all other Laws , which are agreed upon by mutual compact , which is , the better to preserve men in their rights and priviledges . Now the greatest rights of men , are such as flow from Nature its self , and therefore , as no Law binds against the reason of it , so neither can it against the common end of Laws . Therefore , if a humane positive Law should be made , that God should not be worshipped , it cannot bind , being against the main end of Laws , which is to make men live together as reasonable creature● , which they cannot do , without doing what Nature requires , which is , to serve God who made it . Again , it overturns the very foundation of all Government , and dissolves the tye to all humane Laws , if the Law of Nature doth not bind indispensably : for otherwise , upon what ground must men yield obedience to any Laws that are made ? Is it not by vertue of this Law of Nature , that men must stand to all compacts and agreements made ? If Laws take their force among men from hence , they can bind no further then those comp●cts did extend ; which cannot be supposed to be , to violate and destroy their own natures . Positive Laws may restrain much of what is only of the permissive Law of Nature ( for the intent of positive Laws , was to make men abate so much of their naturall freedom , as should be judged necessary for the preservation of humane Societies ) but against the obligatory Law of Nature , as to its precepts , no after-Law can derogate from the obligation of it . And therefore it is otherwise between the Law of Nature and positive Laws , then between Laws meerly civil : for as to these the rule is , that posterior derogat priori , the latter Law cassats and nulls the obligation of the former ; but as to natural Laws and positive , prior derogat posteriori , the Law o● Nature , which is first● , takes away the obligation of a positive Law , if it be contrary to it . As Iustellus observe it was in the primitive Church , — in reference to the obligation of the Canons of the Councils , that such as were inserted in the Codex Canonum , being of the more ancient Councils , did render the obligation of later Canons invalid , which were contrary to them , unlesse it were in m●tte●s of small moment . We see then , that supposing the Law of Nature doth not continue obligatory , the obligation of all humane positive Laws will fall with it , ( as the superstructure needs must when the foundation is removed ) for if any other Law of Nature may be dissolved , why not that whereby men are bound to stand to Covenants and contracts made ? and if that be dissolved , How can the obligation to humane Laws remain , which is founded upon that basis ? And so all civil Societies are thereby overturned . Thirdly , it appears from the nature of that obligation which follows the Law of Nature , so that thereby no humane Law can bind against this ; for humane Laws bind only outward humane act●ons directly , and internall acts only by vertue of their necessary connexion with , and influence upon outward actions , and not otherwise ; but the Law of N●ture immediately binds the soul and conscience of man : And therefore obligatio naturalis , and nexus conscientiae , are made to be the same by Lessius , Suar●z , and others . For Lessius d●sputing , Whether a Will made without solemnity of Law , doth bind in conscience or no ? He proves it do●h by ●his argument , from the opinion of the Lawyers , that without those solemnities there doth arise from it a natural obligation , and the hresae ab Intestato , who is the next of Kin , is bound to make it good ; therefore it doth bind in conscience . So then there ariseth a necessary obllgation upon conscience , from the dict●tes of the Law of Nature , which cannot be removed by any positive Law. For although there lye no action in the civil Law against the breach of a meerly natural Law , as in the former case of succession to a Will not legally made ; in covenants made without conditions expressed , in recovery of debt● from a person to whom money was lent in his Pupillage without consent of his Tutor ; in these cases though no action lie against the persons , yet this proves not that these have no obligation upon a man , but only that he is not responsible for the breach of morall honesty in them before civil Courts . In which sense those Lawyers are to be understood , which deny the obligation of the Law of Nature . But however conscience binds the offender over to answer at a higher tribunal , before which all such offences shall be punished . Thus then we see no positive humane Law can dispence with , or dissolve the obligation of th● Law of nature . Much lesse ; Secondly , can we suppose any positive Divine Law should . For although Gods power be immense and infinite to do what pleaseth him , yet we must always suppose this power to be conjoyned with goodnesse , else it is no divine power : and therefore posse malum , non est posse , it is no power , but weakness to do evil ; and without this posse malum , there can be no alteration made in the nature of good and evil ; which must be supposed , if the obligation of the natural Law be dispensed with . Therefore it was well said by Origen , when C●lsus objected it as the common speech of the Christians , That with God all things are possible , that he neither understood how it was spoken , nor what these all-things are , nor how God could do them : and concludes with this excellent speech , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , We say , saith he , that God can do all things , which are reconcilable with his Deity , Goodnesse , and Wisdom . And after adds , That as it is impossible for honey to make things bitter , and light to make things obscure , so it is for God to do any thing that is unjust . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . For the power of doing evil is directly contrary to the Divine Nature , and that Omnipotency which is consistent with it . To the same purpose he speaks elswhere , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , God wills nothing unbecoming himself : And again , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . We affirm that God cannot do evil actions : for if he could , he might as well be no God. For if God should do evil , he would be no God. So then though God be omnipotent , yet it follows not that he can therefore dissolve the obligation of the preceptive Law of nature , or change the natures of good and evil . God may indeed alter the properties of those things from whence the respects of good and evil do result , as in Abrahams offering Isaac , the Israelites taking away the Aegyptians Jewels ; which God may justly do by vertue of his absolute dominion ; but the change here , is not in the obligation of the Law , but in the things themselves . Murther would be an intrinsecal evil still ; but that which was done by immediate and explicit command from God , would have been no murther . Theft had been a sin still , but taking things aliena●ed from their properties by God himself , was not Theft . We conclude then , what comes immediately from the Law of nature by way of command binds immutably and indispensably . Which is the first Hypothesis or Principle laid down . The second Hypothesis is , That things which are either deducible from the Law of Nature , or by the light of Nature discovered to be very agreeable to it , may be lawfully practised in the Church of God , if they be not otherwise determined by the positive Laws of God , or of lawfull humane authority . We shall first inquire into the nature of these things , and then shew the lawfulnesse of doing them . For the nature of these things : we must consider what things may be said to be of the Law of nature . They may be reduced to two heads , which must be accurately distinguished . They are either such thing● which Nature dictates to be done , or not to be done necessarily and immutably ; or else such things as are judged to be very agreeable to natural light , but are subject to positive determinations . The former are called by some jus naturae obligativum ; by others jus naturae proprium , whereby things are made necessarily duties or sins ; the latter jus naturae permissivum , and reductivum , for which it is sufficient if there be no repugnancy to natural light . From these two arise a different obligation upon men ; either strict , and is called by Covarr●vias , obligatio ex ▪ justitiâ , an obligation of duty and justice ; the other larger , obligatio ex communi aequitate , or ex honestate morali ; an obligation from common equity , that is , according to the agreeablenesse of things to natural light , The former I have shewn already to bind indispensably , but these latter are subject to positive Laws . For our better understanding the obligation of these ( which is more intricate then the former ) we shall consider men under a double notion , either in a state of absolute liberty , which some call a state of Nature ; or else in a state wherein they have restrained their own liberty by mutual compacts , or are determined by a higher Law. These things premised , I lay down these Propositions . 1. In a state of absolute liberty , before any positive Laws were superadded to the naturall , Whatsoever was not necessarily determined by the obligatory Law of Nature , was wholly left to mens power to do it or not , and belongs to the permissive Law of Nature . And thus all those things which are since determined by positive Laws , were in such a supposed state , left to the free choyce of a mans own will. Thus it was in mens power to joyn in civil Society with whom they pleased , to recover things , or vindicate injuries in what way they judged best , to submit to what constitutions alone they would themselves , to choose what form of Government among them they pleased , to determine how far they would be bound to any Authority chosen by themselves , to lodge the legislative and coercive Power in what persons they thought fit , to agree upon punishments answerable to the nature of offences . And so in all other things not repugnant to the common light of reason , and the dictates of the preceptive part of the Law of Nature . 2. A state of absolute liberty , not agreeing to the nature of man considered in relation to others ; it was in mens power to restrain their own liberty upon compacts so far as should be judged necessary for the ends of their mutuall Society . A state of Nature I look upon only as an imaginary state , for better understanding the nature and obligation of Laws . For it is confessed by the greatest Assertors of it , that the relation of Parents and Children cannot be conceived in a state of natural liberty , because Children assoon as born are actually under the power and authority of their Parents . But for our clearer apprehending the matter in hand , we shall proceed with it . Supposing then all those former rights were in their own power , it is most agreeable to natural reason , that every man may part with his right so far as he please for his own advantage . Here now , men finding a necessity to part with some of their Rights , to defend and secure their most considerable Ones , they begin to think of Compacts one with another ( taking this as a Principle of the Natural Law , and the Foundation of Society , That all Covenants are to be performed : ) When they are thus far agreed , they then consider the terms upon which they should enter into Society one with another . And here men devest themselves of their original liberty , and agree upon an Inclosure of Properties , and the Fences of those Properties ; I mean , upon living together in a civil state , and of the Laws they must be ruled by . This is apparently agreeable to Natural Reason , the things being in their own power , which they agree to part with . Men entring upon Societies by Mutual Compacts , things thereby become good and evil , which were not so before . Thus he who was free before to do what and how he pleased , is now bound to obey what Laws he hath consented to ; or else he breaks not only a Positive Law , but that Law of Nature , which commands Man to stand to Covenants once made , though he be free to make them . And therefore it is observable , that the doing of things that were lawful before Covenants made , and things thereby determined , may be so far from being lawful after , that the doing of them may contradict a Principle of the Obligatory Law of Nature . Thus in a state of liberty , every one had right to what he thought fit for his use ; but Propriety and Dominion being introduced , which was a free voluntary act , by mens determining Rights , it now becomes an offence against the Law of Nature , to take away that which is another mans . In which sense alone it is , that Theft is said to be forbidden by the Law of Nature . And by the same reason , he that resists and opposeth the lawful Authority , under which he is born , doth not only offend against the Municipal Laws of the place wherein he lives , but against that Original and Fundamental Law of Societies , viz standing to Covenants once made . For it is a gross mistake , as well as dangerous , for men to imagine , That every man is born in a state of Absolute Liberty , to chuse what Laws and Governours he please ▪ but every one being now born a Subject to that Authority he lives under , he is bound to preserve it as much as in him lies : Thence Augustus had some reason to say , He was the best Citizen , qui praesentem reipublicae statum mutari ●●● vult , That doth not disturb the present state of the Commonwealth ; and who , as Alcibiades saith in Thucydides , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 endeavours to preserve that form of Government he was born under . And the reason of it is , that in Contracts and Covenants made for Government , men look not only at themselves , but at the benefit of Posterity ; if then one Party be bound to maintain the Rights of the others Posterity , as well as of his person , the other party must be supposed to oblige his Posterity in his Covenant to perform Obedience ; which every man hath power to do , because Children are at their Parents disposal ; And Equity requires , that the Covenant entred should be of equal extent to both parties : And if a man doth expect Protection for his Posterity , he must engage for the Obedience of his Posterity too , to the Governor● who do legally protect them . But the further prosecution of these things belongs to another place to consider of ; my purpose being to treat of Government in the Church , and not in the State. The sum of this is , that the Obligation to the performance of what things are determined ( which are of the permissive Law of Nature ) by Positive Laws , doth arise from the Obligatory Law of Nature . As the Demonstration of the particular Problemes in the Mathematicks , doth depend upon the Principles of the Theoremes themselves ; and so whoever denies the truth of the Probleme , deduced by just Consequence from the Theoreme , must consequentially deny the truth of the Theoreme its self : So those who violate the particular Determinations of the Permissive Law of Nature , do violate the Obligation of the Preceptive part of that Law : Obedience to the other being grounded on the Principles of this . 4. God hath Power by his Positive Laws to take in and determine as much of the Permissive Law of Nature as he please , which being once so determined by an Universal Law , is so far from being lawful to be done , that the doing of them by those under an Obligation to his Positive Laws , is an offence against the Immutable Law of Nature . That God may restrain mans Natural Liberty , I suppose none who own Gods Legislative Power over the world can deny : especially considering that men have power to restrain themselves ; much more then hath God , who is the Rector and Governor of the World. That a breach of his positive Laws is an offence against the common Law of Nature , appears hence ; because man being Gods creature , is not only bound to do what is in general suitable to the principles of reason in flying evil , and choosing good ; but to submit to the determinations of Gods will , as to the distinction of good from evil . For being bound universally to obey God , it is implyed that man should obey him in all things which he discovers to be his will : whose determination must make a thing not only good , but necessary to be done , by vertue of his supreme authority over men . This then needs no further proof , being so clear in its self . 5. Lastly , What things are left undetermined by divine positive Laws , are in the Churches power to use , and practise according as it judgeth them most agreeable to the rule of the Word . That things undetermin'd by the Word are still lawfull , evidently appears : because what was once lawfull , must have some positive Law to make it unlawfull , which if there be none , it remains lawfull still . And that the Church of God should be debarr'd of any priviledge of any other Societies , I understand not ; especially if it belong to it as a Society considered in its self , and not as a particular Society constituted upon such accounts as the Church is . For I doubt not but to make it evident afterwards , that many parts of Government in the Church belong not to it as such in a restrained sense , but in the general notion of it , as a Society of men imbodyed together by some Laws proper to its self ; Although it subsist upon a higher foundation , viz. of divine institution , and upon higher grounds , reasons , principles , ends ; and be directed by other Laws immediately then any other Societies in the World are . The third Hypothesis is this ; Where the Law of Nature determines the thing , and the Divine Law determines the manner and circumstances of the thing , there we are bound to obey the divine Law in its particular determinations , by vertue of the Law of Nature in its general obligation . As for instance , the Law of Nature bindeth man to worship God ; but for the way , manner , and circumstances of Worship , we are to follow the positive Laws of God : because as we are bound by Nature to worship him , so we are bound by vertue of the same Law to worship him in the manner best pleasing to himself . For the light of Nature , though it determine the duty of worship , yet it doth not the way and manner , and though acts of pure obedience be in themselves acceptable unto God , yet as to the manner of those acts , and the positives of worship , they are no further acceptable unto God then commanded by him . Because in things not necessarily determined by the Law of Nature , the goodnesse or evill of them lying in reference to Gods acceptance , it must depend upon his Command , supposing positive Laws to be at all given by God to direct men in their worship of him . For supposing God had not at all revealed himself in order to his worship ; doubtlesse it had been lawfull for men not only to pray to God , & express their sense of their dependance upon him ; but to appoint waies , times and places for the doing it , as they should judge most convenient & agreeable to natural light . Which is evident from the Scripture its self as to places : for as far as we can find , sacrificing in high places , ( that is , such as were of mens own appointment ) was lawful , till the Temple was built by Solomon ; as appears by the several examples of Gedeon , Samuel , David , and others . Indeed after the place was setled by Gods own Law , it became wholly sinfull : but if so before , we should not have read of Gods accepting sacrifices in such places as he did Gedeons , nor of the Prophets doing it , as Samuel and David did . It is a disputable case about Sacrifices , Whether the offering of them came only from natural light , or from some express command : the latter seems far more probable to me , because I cannot see how naturall light should any wise dictate that God would accept of the blood of other creatures as a token of mans obedience to himself . And Rivet gives this very good reason why the destruction of any thing in sacrifice cannot belong to the Law of Nature , because it is only acceptable as a sign , and token of obedience , and not simply as an act of obedience ; and this sign signifying ex instituto ( for mans destroying the life of a beast can never naturally signifie mans obedience to God ) and therefore it must have some positive Law ; for those which signifie only by institution , and not naturally , cannot be referred to a dictate of the Law of Nature . To which purpose it is further observable , that God doth so often in Scrip●ure slight the offering of Sacrifices , in respect of any inherent vertue or goodnesse in the action its self , or acceptablenesse to God upon the account of the thing done . In which sense God saith , He that killeth a bullock , is as if he slew a man ; and he that Sacrificeth a sheep , as if he cut off a dogs neck , &c. For what is there more in the one then in the other , but only Gods appointment , which makes one acceptable and not the other ? So that it is no wayes probable that God would have accepted Abels sacrifice rather then Cains , had there been no command for their sacrificing . For as to meer natural light , Cains Sacrifice seems more agreeable to that then Abels ; Cains being an Eucharistical offering without hurt to other creatures , but Abels was cruentum Sacrificium a Sacrifice of blood . But the chief ground of Abels acceptance , was his offering in faith , as the Apostle to the Hebrews tells us : Now saith is a higher principle then natural light , and must suppose divine Revelation , and so a divine Command as the Principle and ground of his action . Moses his silence in reference to a Command , is no argument there was none , it not being his design to write at large all the particular precepts of the Orall Law , but to deduce the Genealogy of the Patriarchs down from Adam and the Creation . But , supposing a Command given from God determining modes and circumstances of such ●hings of which the substance depends on a natural Law , men are as well bound to the observation of them after their revelation , as the other before . The one being a Testimony of their obedience to God as clear and full as the other ; yes , and so much the clearer evidence of obedience , in that there could be no argument for the performing of those things but a divine Command . And even in doing things intrinsecally good , the ground of purely religious obedience is , because God commands men to do those things more then that they are good in themselves : Doing a thing because most suitable to nature , speaking morality ; but doing because God commands it , speaks true Religion and the obedience of Faith. For as the formal reason of the act of Faith is a divine Testimony discovered to our understandings , so the formal principle of an act of spiritual obedience is a divine Command inclining the will , and awing it to performance . So far then as divine Law determines things , we are bound to observe them from the dictates of the natural Law. The fourth Hypothesis : In things which are determined both by the Law of Nature , and divine positive Laws , as to the substance and morality of them , but not determined as to all circumstances belonging to them ; it is in the power of Lawful authority in the Church of God to determine them , so far as they judge them tend to the promoting the performance of them in due manner . So that not only matters wholly left at liberty as to the substance of them are subject to humane Laws and Constitutions , but even things commanded in the divine Law , in reference to the manner of performance , if undetermined by the same Law , which enforce the duty . Thus the setting apart some time for Gods Worship , is a dictate of the natural Law : that the first day of the week be that time , is determin'd under the Gospel ; but in what places , at what hours , in what order , decency and solemnity this Worship shall be then performed , are circumstances not determined in Scripture , but only by general Rules ; as to these then so they be done in conformity to those Rules , they are subject to humane positive determinations . But this is not an hypothesis in the Age we live in to be taken for granted without proving it : some denying the Magistrate any power at all in matters of Religion ; others granting a defensive , protective power of that Religion which is professed according to the Laws of Christ , but denying any determining power in the Magistrate concerning things left undetermin'd by the Scripture . This Hypothesis then hath landed me into a Field of Controversie , wherein I shall not so much strive to make my way through any opposite party , as endeavour to beget a right understanding between the adverse parties , in order to a mutual compliance ; which I shall the rather do , because if any Controversie hath been an increaser and fomenter of heart-burnings and divisions among us , it hath been about the determination of indifferent things . And , which seems strange , the things men can least bear with one another in , are matters of liberty : and those things men have divided most upon , have been matters of uniformity , and wherein they have differed most , have been pretended things of Indifferency . In order then to laying a foundation for peace and union . I shall calmly debate what power the Magistrate hath in matters of Religion , and how far that power doth extend in determining things left undetermin'd by the Word . For the clear understanding the first of these , we shall make our passage open to it by the laying down several necess●ry distinctions about it , the want of considering which hath been the ground of the great confusion in the handling this Controversie . First then , we must distinguish between a power respecting Religion in its self , and a power concerning Religion as it is the publick owned and professed Religion of a Nation . For although the Magistrate hath no proper power over Religion in its self , either taking it abstractly for the Rule of Worship , or concretely for the internal acts of Worship ; for he can neither add to that Rule nor dissolve the obligation of it ; nor yet can he force the consciences of men , ( the chief seat of Religion ) it being both contrary to the nature of Religion its self , which is a matter of the greatest freedom and internal liberty , and it being quite out of the reach of the Magistrates Laws , which respect only external actions as their proper object ; for the obligation of any Law can extend no further then the jurisdiction and authority of the Legislator , which among men is only to the outward actions . But then , if we consider Religion as it is publikely owned and professed by a Nation , the supreme Magistrate is bound by vertue of his office and authority , not only to defend and protect it , but to restrain men from acting any thing publikely tending to the subversion of it , So that the plea for liberty of conscience , as it tends to restrain the Magistrates power , i● both irrationall and impertinent ; because liberty of conscience is the liberty of mens judgements , which the Magistrate cannot deprive them of . For men may hold what opinions they will in their minds , the Law takes no cognizance of them : but it is the liberty of practice and venting and broaching those opinions which the Magistrates power extends to the restraint of . And he that hath the care of the publike good , may give liberty to , and restrain liberty from men , as they act in order to the promoting of that good ; And as a liberty of all opinions tends manifestly to the subverting a Nations peace , and to the embroyling it into continual confusions , a Magistrate cannot discharge his office unlesse he hath power to restrain such a liberty . Therefore we find plainly in Scripture that God imputes the increase and impunity of Idolatry as well as other vices to the want of a lawful Magistracy , Iudges 17. 5 , 6. where the account given of Micahs Idolatry was , because there was no King in Israel ; which implies it to be the care and duty of Magistrates to punish and restrain whatever tends to the opposing and subverting the true Religion . Besides , I cannot find any reason pleaded against the Magistrates power now , which would not have held under David , Solomon , Asa , Iehosophat , Hezekias , Iosias , or other Kings of the Jews , who asserted the publike profession , to the extirpation to what opposed it . For the plea of Conscience ( taken for mens judgements going contrary to what is publikely owned as Religion ) it is indifferently calculated for all Meridians , and will serve for a Religion of any elevation . Nay , stiff and contumacious Infidels or Idolaters may plead as highly ( though not so truly ) as any , that it goes against their judgements or their conscience to own that Religion which is established by authority . If it be lawfull then to restrain such notwithstanding this pretence , why not others , whose doctrine and principles the Magistrate judgeth to tend in their degree ( though not so highly ) to the dishonouring God , and subverting the profession entertained in a Nation ? For , a mans own certainty and confidence that he is in the right , can have no influence upon the Magistrate judging otherwise ; only if it be true , it wil afford him the greater comfort and patience under his restraint ; which was the case of the primitive Christians under persecutions : The Magistrate then is bound to defend , protect , and maintain the Religion he owns as true , and that by vertue of his office , as he is Custos utriusque tabulae ; The maintainer of the honour of Gods Laws , which cannot be if he suffer those of the first Table to be broken without any notice taken of them . Were it not for this power of Magistrates under the Gospel , how could that promise be ever made good , that Kings shall be nursing Fathers to the Church of God ? unlesse they mean such Nursing Fathers as Astyages was to Cyrus , or Amulius to Romulus and Remus , who exposed their nurslings to the Fury of wild Beasts to be devoured by them . For so must a Magistrate do the Church , unlesse he secure it from the incursion of Hereticks , and the inundation of Seducers . But so much for that which is more largely asserted and proved by others . The Magistrate then hath power concerning Religion , as owned in a Nation . Secondly , We must distinguish between an external and objective power , about matters of Religion ; and an internal formal power , which some call an Imperative and Elicitive power , others a power of Order , and a power of Jurisdiction , others potestas Ecclesiastica , and potestas circa Ecclesiastica , or , in the old distinction of Constantine , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a power of things within and without the Church ; the sense of all is the same , though the terms differ . The internal , formal , Elicitive power of Order , concerning things in the Church , lies in authoritative exercise of the Ministerial Function , in preaching the Word , and administration of Sacraments ; but the external , objective , Imperative power of Jurisdiction , concerning the matters of the Church , lies in a due care and provision , for the defence , protection , and propagation of Religion . The former is only proper to the Ministry , the latter to the Supreme Magistracy : For , though the Magistrate hath so much power about Religion , yet he is not to usurp the Ministerial Function , nor to do any proper acts belonging to it . To which the instance of Uzzias is pertinently applied . But then this takes nothing off from the Magistrates power ; for it belongs not to the Magistrate imperata facere , but imperare facienda , as Grotius truly observes , not to do the things commanded , but to command the things to be done . From this distinction we may easily understand , and resolve that so much vexed and intricate Question , concerning the mutual subordination of the Civil and Ecclesiastical power : For , as Peter Martyr well observes , these two powers are some wayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , are conversant several wayes about the same thing ; but the Functions of both of them must be distinguished : For the Pastors of the Church are not to administer Justice , but it is their duty to declare how Justice should be rightly administred , without partiality , or oppression . So , on the other side , the Magistrate must not preach the Gospel , nor administer Sacraments ; but however , must take care that these be duly done by ●hose to whose Function it belongs : But for a clearer making it appear , these things are to be considered ; both in a Magistrate , and Minister of the Gospel . In a Magistrate , the Power it self , and the Person bearing that Power : The power it self of the Magistrate is no ways subordinate to the Power of the Ministry : Indeed , if we consider both Powers , in reference to their objects , and ends , there may be an inferiority of Dignity , as Chamier calls it , in the civil power to the other , considered abstractly ; but considering it concretely , as lodged in the persons , there is an inferiority of Subjection in the Ecclesiastical to the Civil . But still the person of the Magistrate , though he is not subject to the power of the Ministers , yet both as a Christian , and as a Magistrate , he is subject to the Word of God , and is to be guided by that in the Administration of his Function . So on the other side , in a Minister of the Gospel , there are these things considerable ; the Object of his Function , the Function its self , the Liberty of exercising it , and the Person who doth exercise it . As for the Object of this Function , the Word and Sacraments , these are not subject to the Civil Power , being setled by a Law of Christ ; but then for the Function its self , that may be considered , either in the Derivation of it , or in the Administration of it . As for the derivation of the power and authority of the Function , that is from Christ , who hath setled and provided by Law , that there shall be such a standing Function to the end of the world , with such authority belonging to it : But for the Administration of the Function , two things belong to the Magistrate : First , to provide and take care for due administration of it ; an● to see that the Ministers preach the true Doctrine , though he cannot lawfully forbid the true Doctrine to be taught ; and that they duly administer the Sacraments , though he cannot command them to administer them otherwise then Christ hath delivered them down to us : This for due Administration . Secondly , in case of male-administration of his Function , or scandal rendring him unfit for it , it is in the Magistrates power , if not formally to depose , yet to deprive them of the liberty of ever exercising their Function within his Dominions ; as Solom●n did Abiathar , and Iustinian Sylverius , as Constantius did Vigilius : For the liberty of exercise of the Function is in the Magistrates power , though a right to exercise it be derived from the same power from which the Authority belonging to the Function was conveyed . And then lastly , as to the persons exercising this Function , it is evident , As they are members of a Civil Society as well as others , so they are subject to the same Civil Laws as others are . Which as it is expresly affirmed by Chrysostom , on Rom. 13. 1. Let every Soul be subject to the Higher Powers ; that is , saith he , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Be he an Apostle , Evangelist , Prophet , Priest , Monk , be he who he will : So it is fully , largely , irrefragably proved by our Writers against the Papists ; especially by the learned Is. Casaubon in his piece de libertate Ecclesiasticâ . So then we see what a fair , amicable , and mutual aspect these two powers have one upon another , when rightly understood , being far from clashing one with the other ; either by a subjection of the Civil Power to the Ecclesiastical , or the Civil powers swallowing up and devouring the peculiarity of the Ministerial Function . And upon these grounds , I suppose , Beza and Erastus may , as to this , shake hands ; So that the Magistrate do not usurp the Ministerial Function , which Videlius calls Papatus politicus ; nor the Ministers subject the Civil power to them , which is Papatus Ecclesiasticus . Thirdly , we distinguish between an absolute Architectonical and Nomothetical Power , independent upon any other Law , and a Legislative Power , absolute as to persons , but regulated by a Higher Law. The former we attribute to none but God ; the latter belongs to a Supreme Magistrate , in reference to things belonging to his power , either in Church or Commonwealth . By an Architectonical , Nomothetical Power , we mean that power which is distinguished from that which is properly call'd Political . The former lies in the making Laws for the good of the Commonwealth ; the latter in a due execution and administration of those Laws for the Common Good. This we have asserted to the Magistrate already : We now come to assert the other ; where we shall first set down the bounds of this power , and then see to whom it belongs . First , then we say not , that the Magistrate hath a power to revoke , rep●al , or alter any Divine positive Law ; which we have already shewn . Secondly , we say not , that the Magistrate by his own will may constitute what new Laws he please for the Worship of God. This was the fault of Ieroboam who made Israel to sin , and therefore by the Rule of Reason must be supposed to sin more himself : So likewise Ahab , Ahaz , and others . Religion is a thing setled by a Divine Law ; and as it is taken for the Doctrine and Worship of God , so it is contained in the Word of God , and must be fetched wholly from thence . But then thirdly , The Magistrate by his power , may make that which is a Divine Law already , become the Law of the Land. Thus Religion may be incorporated among our Laws , and the Bible become our Magna Charta . So the first Law in the Codex Theod. is about the believing the Trinity , and many others about Religion are inserted into it . Now as to these things clearly revealed in the Word of God , and withall commanded by the Civil Magistrate , although the primary obligation to the doing them , is from the former determination by a Divine Law ; yet the Sanction of them by the Civil Magistrate , may cause a further obligation upon Conscience then was before , and may add punishments and rewards not expressed before . For although when two Laws are contrary the one to the other , the obligation to the Higher Law takes away the obligation to the other ; yet when they are of the same Nature , or subordinate one to the other , there may a New Obligation arise from the same Law , enacted by a New Authority . As the Commands of the Decalogue brought a New Obligation upon the Consciences of the Jews , though the things contained in them , were commanded before in the Law of Nature : And as a Vow made by a man , adds a new ●ye to his Conscience , when the matter of his Vow is the same with what the Word of God commands ; and renewing our Covenant with God after Baptism , renews our Obligation : So when the Faith of the Gospel becomes the Law of a Nation , men are bound by a double Cord of duty to entertain and profess that Faith. Fourthly , in matters undetermined by the Word , concerning the External Polity of the Church of God , the Magistrate hath the power of determining things , so they be agreeable to the Word of God. This last Clause is that which binds the Magistrates power , that it is not absolutely Architectonicall , because all his Laws must be regulated by the generall rules of the Divine Law - But though it be not as to Laws , yet I say it is as to persons ; that is , that no other persons have any power to make Laws , binding men to obedience , but only the civil Magistrate . This is another part of the Controversie between the Civil and Ecclesiastical Power , about the power of determining matters belonging to the Churches Government : But there is here no such breach between those two , but what may be made up with a distinction or two ▪ We distinguish then between a power declarative , of the obligation of former Laws ; and a power authoritative , determining a New Obligation ; between the office of counselling and advising what is fit to be done , and a power determining what shall be done ; between the Magistrates duty of consulting , in order to the doing it , and his deriving his authority for the doing it . These things premised , I say : First , that the power of declaring the obligation of former Laws , and of consulting and advising the Magistrate for setling of New Laws , for the Policy of the Church , belongs to the Pastors and Governours of the Church of God. This belongs to them , as they are commanded to teach what Christ hath commanded them ; but no authority thereby given to make new Laws to bind the Church ; but rather a tying them up to the commands of Christ already laid down in his Word . For a power to bind mens consciences to their determinations ; lodged in the Officers of the Church , must be derived either from a Law of God giving them this right , or else only from the consent of parties . For any Law of God , there is none produced with any probability of reason , but that , Obey those that are over you in the Lord. But that implies no more then submitting to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Gospel , and to those whom Christ hath constituted as Pastors of his Church , wherein the Law of Christ doth require obedience to them , that is , in looking upon them , and owning them in their relation to them as Pastors . But that gives them no authority to make any new Laws or Constitutions , binding mens consciences any more then a Command from the Supreme authority that inferiour Magistrates should be obeyed , doth imply any power in them to make new Laws to bind them . But thus far I acknowledge a binding power in Ecclesiastical Constitutions , though they neither bind by virtue of the matter , nor of the authority commanding ( there being no legislative power lodged in the Church ) yet in respect of the circumstances and the end , they should be obey'd , unlesse I judge the thing unlawfull that is commanded , rather then manifest open contempt of the Pastors of the Church , or being a scandall to others by it . But as to the other power , arising from mutual compact and consent of Parties , I acknowledge a power to bind all included under that compact , not by vertue of any Supream binding power in them , but from the free consent of the parties submitting ; which is most agreeable to the Nature of Church-power , being not coactive but directive ; and such was the confederate discipline of the primitive Church , before they had any Christian Magistrate : And thence the decrees of Councils were call'd Canons , and not Laws . Secondly , Though it be the Magistrates duty to consult with the Pastors of the Church , to know what is most agreeable to the Word of God , for the settlement of the Church ; yet the Magistrate doth not derive his authority in commanding things from their sentence , decree , and judgement ; but doth by vertue of his own power cause the obligation of men to what is so determin'd , by his own enacting what shall be done in the Church . The great use of Synods , and Assemblies of Pastors of Churches , is to be as the Council of the Church unto the King , in matters belonging to the Church , as the Parliament is for matters of civil concernment . And as the King , for the settling civil Laws , doth take advice of such persons who are most versed in matters of Law ; so by proportion of reason , in matters concerning the Church , they are the fittest Council , who have been the most versed in matters immediately belonging to the Church : In the management of which affairs , as much , if not more prudence , experience , judgement , moderation , is requisite , as in the greatest affairs of State. For we have found by dolefull experience , that if a fire once catch the Church , and Aarons Bells ring backward , what a Combustion the whole State is suddenly put into , and how hardly the Churches Instruments for quenching such fires , lachrymae & preces Ecclesiae , do attain their end . The least peg serued up too high in the Church soon causeth a great deal of discord in the State , and quickly puts mens spirits out of Tune . Whereas many irregularities may happen in the State , and men live in quietnesse and peace . But if Pha●tons d●ive the Chariot of the Sun , the World wil be soon on fire . I mean such in the Church whose brains like the Unicorns run out into the length of the Horn ▪ Such who have more fury then zeal , and yet more zeal then knowledge or Moderation . Persons therefore whose calling , ●temper , office , and experience , hath best acquainted them with the State-actions ▪ Policy of the primitive Church , and the incomparable Prudence and Moderation then Used , are fittest to debate , consult , deliberate , and determine about the safest expedients for repairing breaches in a divided , broken , distracted Church . But yet , I say , when such men thus assembled have gravely and maturely advised and deliberated what is best and fitted to te done ▪ the force , strength , and obligation of the things so determin'd doth depend upon the power and authority of the Civil Magistrate : for taking the Church as incorporated into the civill state , as Ecclesia est in republicâ , non respublica in Ecclesia , according to that known speech of Optatus Milivetanus , so , though the object of these constitutions , and the persons determining them , and the matter of them be Ecclesiasticall , yet the force and ground of the obligation of them is wholly civill . So Peter Martyr expresly ; Nam , quod ad potestatem Ecclesiasticam attinet , satis est civilis Magistratus : is enim ●urare debet ut omnes officium faciant . ( But for the judgement of the reformed Divines about this , see Vedelius de Episcopatis Constant. M — & Officium Magistratus Christiani , annexed to Grotius de Imper. &c. ) I therefore proceed to lay down the reason of it . First , That whereby we are bound either to obedience , or penalty upon disobedience , is the ground of the obligation ; but it is upon the account of the Magistrates power that we are either bound to obedience , or to submit to penalties upon disobedience . For it is upon the account of our general obligation to the Magistrate , that we are bound to obey any particular Laws or Constitutions : Because it is not the particular determinations made by the civil Magistrate , which do immediately bind Conscience , but the general Law of Scripture requires it as a duty from us , to obey the Magistrate in all things lawfull . Obedience to the Magistrate is due immediately from Conscience ; but obedience to the Laws of the Magistrate comes not directly from Conscience but by vertue of the general obligation . And therefore disobedience to the Magistrates Laws is an immediate sin against Conscience , because it is against the general obligation ; but obedience to particular Laws ariseth not immediately from the obligation of Conscience to them in particular , but to the Magistrate in general . So that in things left lawfull and undetermin'd by the Word , where there ariseth no obligation from the matter , it must arise from our subjection and relation to the Magistrate ; and what is the ground of obedience , is the cause of the obligation . Secondly , He hath only the power of obligations who hath the power of making Sanctions to those Laws . By Sanctions , I mean here , in the sense of the civil Law , eas legum partes , quibus poenas constituimus adversus eos qui contra leges fecerint ; those parts of the Law which determine the punishments of the violaters of it . Now it is evident that he only hath power to oblige who hath power to punish upon disobedience . And it is as evident , that none hath power to punish but the civill Magistrate ; I speak of legall penalties which are annexed to such Laws as concern the Church . Now there being no coercive or coactive power belonging to the Church as such , all the force of such Laws as respect the outward Polity of the Church , must be derived from the civill Magistrate . Thirdly , He who can null and declare all other obligations void , done without his power , hath the only power to oblige . For whatsoever destroys a former obligation , must of necessity imply a power to oblige , because I am bound to obey him in the abstaining from that I was formerly obliged to : But this power belongs to the Magistrate . For suppose , in some indifferent Rites and Ceremonies , the Church representative , that is , the Governors of it pro tempore , do prescribe them to be observed by all , the Supreme power f●rbids the doing of those things , if this doth not null the former supposed obligation , I must inevitably run upon these absurdities . First , that there are two supreme powers in a Nation at the same time . Secondly , that a man may lie under two different Obligations as to the same thing ; he is bound to do it by one power , and not to do it by the other . Thirdly , the same action may be a duty and a sin ; a duty in obeying the one power , a sin in disobeying the other . Therefore there can be but one power to oblige , which is that of the Supreme Magistrate . Having thus far asserted the Magistrates due power and Authority , as to matters of Religion ; we proceed to examine the extent of this power , in determining things left at liberty by the Word of God , in order to the Peace and Government of the Church . For our clear and distinct proceeding , I shall ascend by these three steps : First , to shew that there are some things left undetermined by the Word . Secondly , that these things are capable of positive Determinations and Restraint . Thirdly , that there are some bounds and limits to be observed in the stating and determining these things . First , That there are some things left undetermined by the Word : By Determining here , I do not mean determining whether things be lawful or no ; for so there is no Rit● or Ceremony whatsoever , but is determined by the Scripture in that sense , or may be gathered from the application of particular actions , to the general Rules of Scripture : but by Determining , I mean , whether all things concerning the Churches Polity and Order be determined as Duties or no : viz. that this we are bound to observe , and the other not . As for instance , what time , manner , method , gesture , habit , be used in preaching the Word ; whether Baptism must be by dipping or sprinkling ; at what day , time , place , the Child shall be baptized , and other things of a like Nature with these . Those who assert any of these as duties , must produce necessarily the Command making them to be so : For Duty and Command have a necessary respect and relation to one another . If no Command be brought , it necessarily follows , that they are left at liberty . So as to the Lords Supper Calvin saith , whether the Communicants take the Bread themselves , or receive it being given them ; whether they should give the Cup into the hands of the Deacon , or to their next Neighbour ; whether the Bread be leavened or not , the Wine red or white , nihil refert , it matters not ; Haec indifferentia sunt & in Ecclesiae libertate posita ; they are matters of indifferency , and are left to the Churches liberty . But this matter of Indifferency is not yet so clear as it is generally thought to be ; we shall therefore bare the ground a little by some necessary distinctions to see where the root of indifferency lies : Which we shall the rather do , because it is strongly asserted by an Honourable person , that there is no Indifferency in the things themselves , which are still either unlawful or necessary , ( if lawful at this time , in these circumstances ) but all indifferency lies in the darkness and shortness of our understandings , which may make some things seem so to us . But that Honourable person clearly runs upon a double mistake . First , that Indifferency is a medium participationis of both extremes , and not only negationis , viz. that , as intermediate colours partake both of black and white , and yet are neither ; so in morality , between good and bad , there is an intermediate entity , which is neither , but indifferent to either : Whereas the Nature of Indifferency lies not in any thing intermediate between good and bad , but in some thing undetermined by Divine Laws , as to the necessity of it ; so that if we speak as to the extremes of it , it is something lying between a necessary duty , and an intrinsecal evil . The other mistake , is , that throughout that Discourse he takes Indifferency as Circumstantiated in Individual actions , and as the morality of the action is determined by its Circumstances ; whereas the proper notion of Indifferency lies in the Nature of the action , considered in its self abstractly ; and so these things are implyed in an indifferent action . First , absolute undetermination ; as to the general nature of the act by a Divine Law , that God hath left it free for men to do it or no. Secondly , that one part hath not more propension to the Rule then the other ; for if the doing of it comes nearer to the rule then the omission ; or on the contrary , this action is not wholly indifferent . Thirdly , that neither part hath any repugnancy to the Rule ; for that which hath so , is so far from being indifferent , that it becomes unlawful : So that an indifferent action is therein like the Iron accosted by two Loadstones on either side of equal virtue , and so hovers in medio , inclining to neither ; but , supposing any degree of virtue added to the one above the other , it then inclines towards it : or as the Magnetical Needle about the Azores , keeps its self directly parallel to the Axis of the world without variation , because it is supposed then to be at an equal distance from the two Great Magnets , the Continents of Europe and America : But no sooner is it removed from thence , but it hath its variations . So indifferency , taken in specie , as to the Nature of the act , inclines neither way ; but supposing it lye under Positive Determinations , either by Laws or Circumstances , it then necessarily inclines either to the Nature of Good or E●il . Neither yet are we come to a full understanding of the Nature of indifferent actions ; we must therefore distinguish between indifferency , as to goodness , necessitating an action to be done ; and as to goodness , necessary to an action to make it good : For there is one kind of goodness propter quam fit actio , in order to which the action must necessarily be done ; and there is another kind of goodness sine quâ non benè fit actio , necessary to make an action good when it is done . As following after peace hath such a goodness in it , as necessitates the action , and makes it a necessary duty : but handling a particular Controversie is such an action , as a man may let alone without sin in his course of studies ; yet when he doth it , there is a goodness necessary to make his doing it a good action , viz. his referring his study of it to a right end , for the obtaining of truth and peace . This latter goodness is twofold , either bonitas directionis , as some call it , which is , referring the action to its true end ; in reference to which , the great Controversie among the Schoolmen , is about the indifferency of particular actions , viz. Whether a particular direction of a mans intention to the ultimate end , be not so necessary to particular actions , as that , without that , the action is of necessity evil , and with it good ; or whether without that an action may be indifferent to good or evil , which is the state of the Question between Thomas and Scotus , Bonaventure and Durandus ; but we assert the necessity of at least an habitual direction , to make the action in individuo good , and yet the act in its self may notwithstanding be indifferent , even in individuo , as there is no antecedent necessity lying upon mens Consciences for the doing of it ; because men may omit it , and break no Law of God. Besides this , to make an action good , there is necessary a bonitas Originis , or rather Principii , ●● good Principle , out of which the action must flow ; which must be that Faith , which whatsoever is not of , is sin ; as the Apostle tells us . Which we must not so understand , as though in every action a man goes about , he must have a full perswasion that it is a necessary duty he goes about ; but in many actions that Faith is sufficient , whereby he is perswaded upon good ground , that the thing he goes about is lawful ; although he may as lawfully omit that action ; and do either another , or the contrary to it . There may be then the necessity of some things in an action when it is done to make it good , and yet the action its self be no ways necessary , but indifferent , and a matter of Liberty . This may be easily understood by what is usually said of Gods particular Actions , that God is free in himself either to do or not to do that action ( as suppose the Creation of the World ) but when he doth it , he must necessarily do it with that goodness , holiness , and wisdom , which is suitable to his Nature : So may many actions of men be in themselves indifferent , and yet there must be a concomitant necessity of good intention and Principle to make the action good . But this concomitant necessity doth not destroy the Radical Indifferency of the action it self ; it is only an antecedent necessity from the obligation of the Law , is that which destroys indifferency . So likewise it is as to evil ; there is such an evil in an action , which not only spoils the action , but hinders the person from the liberty of doing it , that is , in all such actions as are intrinsecally evil ; and there is such a kind of evil in actions , which though it spoils the goodness of the action , yet keeps not from performance ; which is such as ariseth from the manner of performance , as praying in hypocrisie , &c. doing a thing lawful with a scrupulous or erring Conscience . We see then what good and evil is consistent with indifferency in actions , and what is not . And that the Nature of Actions , even in individuo , may be indifferent , when as to their Circumstances they may be necessarily determin'd to be either good or evil . As Marrying , or not Marrying , as to the Law of God , is left at liberty , not making it in its self a necessary duty , one way or other ; but , supposing particular Circumstances make it necessary , pro hîc & nunc , yet the Nature of it remains indifferent st●ll ; and supposing Marriage , it is necessary it should be in the Lord , and yet it is not necessary to make choice of this person rather then of that , so that not only the absolute indifferency of the action is consistent with this concomitant necessity , but the full liberty , both of contradiction , and contrariety . Again , we must distinguish between an Indifferency , as to its Nature , and Indifferency , as to its use and end ; or between an indifferency as to a Law , and indifferency as to order and peace : Here I say , that in things wholly indifferent in both respects , that is , in a thing neither commanded nor forbidden by God , nor that hath any apparent respect to the Peace and Order of the Church of God , there can be no rational account given , why the Nature of such indifferencies should be alter'd by any Humane Laws and Constitutions . But matters that are only indifferent as to a Command , but are much conducing to the Peace and Order of a Church , such things as these , are the proper matter of Humane Constitutions concerning the Churches Polity : Or rather , to keep to the words of the Hypothesis it self , where any things are determin'd in general by the Word of God , but left at Liberty , as to manner and Circumstances , it is in the power of Lawful Authority in the Church of God to determine such things , as far as they tend to the promoting the good of the Church . And so I rise to the second step , which is , That matters of this Nature may be determin'd and restrained . Or , that there is no necessity , that all matters of Liberty should remain in their primary indifferency . This I know is asserted by some of great Note and Learning ; that in things which God hath left to our Christian Liberty , man may not restrain us of it , by subjecting those things to Positive Laws ; but I come to examine , with what strength of reason this is said , that so we may see , whether men may not yield in some lawful things to a restraint of their Christian Liberty , in order to the Peace of the Church of God : Which I now prove by these Arguments . First , What may be lawfully done when it is commanded , may be so far lawfully commanded , as it is a thing in it self lawful ; but matters of Christian Liberty may be lawfully done when they are commanded to be done , though it were lawful not to do them before that Command . The truth of the Proposition appears , because Lawful Authority may command any thing that may be lawfully done . Because nothing can exempt from obedience to a lawful Magistrate , but the unlawfulness of the thing commanded ; and therefore nothing can debar the Magistrate from commanding these things ; for nothing can hinder him from Commanding , but what may hinder the Subject from Obedience . I grant in many cases it may be lawful to obey , when it is very inconvenient for the Magistrate to command : but inconveniency and unlawfulness are two things ; nay , and in some cases a man may lawfully obey when he is unlawfully commanded ; but then the matter of the Command it self is unlawful . As in executing an unjust Sentence , granting that a Princes Servants may lawfully do it , especially when they know it not ; yet in that case , the ground of their lawful obedience , is the ground of the Magistrates lawful Command , which is the supposed Justice of the Execution . But that which makes the Magistrates Command unlawful , is the intrinsecal evil of the thing its self . So for unlawful Wars , though the Subjects may lawfully obey , yet the Prince sins in commanding , not but that he hath right to command so far as they are bound to obey , which is only in things lawful : but that which in this case alters the matter , is , the Princes knowing his cause to be unjust . So that however the Proposition holds in things not manifestly unjust . But however this be , it is hereby granted , that the things may be lawfully done , when they are restrained by the Magistrates Command : and by that it appears , that liberty may be restrained , else it could not be lawful to act under that restraint , not as it respects the things themselves , but under that formality , as they are the restraint of that which ought to be left free . The Restraint however then is lawful , as to the persons acting under Authority , who are the Subjects of this liberty , though it were granted unlawfull as to the authority doing it . Which former is sufficient for my purpose , viz. that Christian liberty , as to the subjects of it , may be lawfully restrained . Secondly , A lesser duty ceaseth to be a duty , when it hinders from the performance of greater ; but the preserving Christian liberty is a lesser duty , which may hinder the peace of the Church , which is a greater ; therefore in that case it may be restrained . The Major is granted by Divines and Casuists ; when duties stand in competition , the lesser ceaseth to bind , as is evident , in that God will have mercy rather then sacrifice . Positives yield to morals and naturals . Thence the obligation of an Oath ceaseth , when it hinders from a natural duty ; as the Corban among the Jews from relief of Parents . And therefore Grotius saith , that an Oath taken concerning a thing lawfull , if it doth hinder majus bonum morale , the obligation of that Oath ceaseth . Now that preserving-liberty is a lesser duty then the looking after the peace of the Church , is evident , because the one is only a matter of liberty , and left undetermin'd by the Word ; and the other a matter of necessity , and absolutely , and expresly required of all , as a duty as much as possibly lyes in them to endeavour after . Thirdly , If an occasional offence of weaker Brethren may be a ground for restraining Christian liberty ; then much more may commands from lawfull authority do it ; but the offence of weaker Brethren may restrain Christian liberty , as to the exercise of it , as appears by the Apostles discourse , Rom. 14. 21. The reason of the consequence lies here , that a case of meer offence , which is here pleaded towards weak Brethren , cannot have that obligation upon Conscience , which a known duty of obeying lawfull Authority , in things in themselves lawfull , hath ▪ Nay further , insisting only on the Law of scandall , I would fain know , whether it be a greater offence and scandall to Christians consciences , to infringe the lawfull authority of the Magistrate , and to deny obedience to his commands , in things undetermin'd by the Law of God ; or else to offend the Consciences , that is , go against the judgements of some well-meaning , but less-knowing Christians . Or thus , whether in the matter of scandall , it be a greater offence to go against the judgements of the weaker and more ignorant , or the more knowing and able ; when the one have only their own weak apprehension to byasse them , the other are backed by and grounded upon an established Law. And whether it be not a greater scandall to Religion to disobey a Christian Magistrate , then it is to offend some private Christians . Let these things be examined , and then let us see whether the argument will not hold à majori ; if the Law of scandall as to private Christians may restrain liberty , then may a command from the Magistrate do it . Fourthly , I argue thus , If the nature of Christian-liberty may be preserved under the restraint of the exercise of it , then it is not against the nature of Christian-liberty to have the exercise restrained ; but the former is true ; and therefore the latter . Now that the nature of Christian-liberty may be preserved under the restraint of its exercise , I prove by these arguments . First , Because the nature of Christian-liberty is founded upon the freedom of judgement , and not the freedom of practice . The case is the same in moral and natural liberty as in Christian. Now we say truly , that the radical liberty of the soul is preserved , though it be determined to a particular action . For the liberty of the Will lying in the power of determining its self either way ( as it is generally thought ) the actuall determination of the Will doth not take away the internal power in the soul ; and in that respect there may be a potentia faciendi where there is not possibilit as effectûs , a power of doing when there is no possibility the thing should be done , when the event is otherwise determined by a divine decree , as in breaking the bones of Christ upon the Crosse. So it is in reference to Christian liberty ; though the exercise of it be restrained , yet the liberty remains : because Christian-liberty lyes in the freedom of judgement ; that is , in judging those things to be free which are so ; so that if any thing that is in its self free , be done by a man with an opinion of the necessity of doing it antecedent to the Law commanding it , or without any Law prescribing it , thereby his Christian liberty is destroyed ; but if it be done with an opinion of the freedom and indifferency of the thing it self , but only with a consequential necessity of doing it , supposing the Magistrates command , he retains the power of his Christian-liberty still , though under the restraint of the exercise of it . And therefore it would be well observed , that the opinion of the necessity of any one thing undetermined by Scripture , destroys Christian-liberty more then a Magistrates command doth . And by this reason , they that hold any one posture at receiving the Lords Supper necessary ( as sitting , leaning , kneeling ) do all equally destroy their own Christian-liberty as to these things which are undetermined by the Word . So a Magistrate when commanding matters of Christian-liberty , if in the preface to the Law he declares the thing necessary to be done in its self , and therefore he commands it , he takes away as much as in him lyes our Christian-liberty . And in that case we ought to hold to that excellent Rule of the Apostle , Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath set you free , and be not intangled again with the yoke of bondage . But if the Magistrate declare the things to be in themselves indifferent , but only upon some prudent considerations for peace and order , he requires persons to observe them , though this brings a necessity of obedience to us , yet it takes not away our Christian-liberty . For an antecedent necessity expressed in the Law ( as a learned and excellent Casuist of our own observes ) doth not necessarily require the assent of the practical judgement to it ; which takes away our liberty of judgement , or our judgement of the liberty of the things ; but a consequentiall necessity upon a command supposed , doth only imply an act of the Will , whereby the freedom of judgement and conscience remaining , it is inclined to obedience to the commands of a superior Law. Now that liberty doth lye in the freedom of Judgement , and not in the freedom of Practise , and so is consistent with the restraint of the exercise of it ; appears both in the former case of scandall , and in the actions of the Apostles and primitive Christians complying with the Jews in matters of liberty ; yea which is a great deal more , in such ceremonies of which the Apostle expresly saith , that if they observed them , Christ would profit them Nothing ; and yet we find Paul himself circumcising Timothy because of the Jews . Certainly then however these ceremonies are supposed to be not only mortuae but mortiferae now the Gospel was preached , and the Law of Christian-liberty promulged ; yet Paul did not look upon it , as the taking away his liberty , at any time when it would prevent scandall among the Jews , and tend to the furtherance of the Gospel , to use any of them . It was therefore the opinion of the necessity of them was it which destroyed Christian-liberty ; and therefore it is observable , that where the opinion of the necessity of observing the Judaicall Rites and Ceremonies was entertained , the Apostle sets himself with his whole strength to oppose them , as he doth in his Epistles to the Galatians and Colossians . Whom yet we find in other places , and to other Churches , not leaven'd with this doctrine of the necessity of Judaicall Rites , very ready to comply with weak Brethren , as in his Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians . From which we plainly see , that it was not the bare doing of the things , but the doing them with an opinion of the necessity of them , is that which infringeth Christian-liberty , and not the determination of one part above the other by the Supream Magistrate , when it is declared not to be for any opinion of the things themselves as necessary , but to be only in order to the Churches peace and unity . Secondly , It appears that Liberty is consistent with the restraint of the exercise of it ; because the very power of restraining the exercise of it , doth suppose it to be a matter of liberty , and that both antecedently and consequentially to that restraint . Antecedently , so it is apparent to be a matter of liberty , else it was not capable of being restrained : Consequentially , in that the ground of observance of those things when restrained , is not any necessity of the matter , or the things themselves ; but only the necessity of obeying the Magistrate in things lawfull and undertermin'd by the Word : which leads to another argument . Thirdly , Mens obligation to these things , as to the ground of it , being only in point of contempt and scandall , argues that the things are matter of liberty still . I grant the Magistrates authority is the ground of obedience , but the ground of the Magistrates command is only in point of contempt and scandall , and for preserving order in the Church : For I have already shewed it to be unlawfull , either to command or obey ; in reference to these things , from any opinion of the necessity of them , and therefore the only ground of observing them , is to shew that we are not guilty of contempt of the power commanding them , nor of scandall to others that are offended at our not observing them . Tota igitur religio est in fugiendo scandalo & vitando contemptu , saith our learned Whitaker : All our ground of obedience is the avoiding scandall and contempt of authority . To the same purpose Pet. Martyr , speaking of the obligation of Ecclesiasticall Laws : Non obstringunt si removeatur contemptus & scandalum : So that non-observance of indifferent things commanded , when there there is no apparent contempt or scandall , do not involve a man in the guilt of sin : as suppose a Law made that all publike prayer be performed kneeling , if any thing lies in a mans way to hinder him from that posture , in this case the man offends not ; because there is no contempt or scandall : So if a Law were made that all should receive the Lords Supper fasting , if a mans health calls for somwhat to refresh him before , he sins not in the breach of that Law. And therefore it is observable which Whitaker takes notice of in the Canons of the Councils of the primitive Church , that though they did determine many things belonging to the externall Polity of the Church , yet they observed this difference in their Censures or Anathema's ; That in matte●s of meer order and decency they never pronounced an Anathema , but with the supposition of ●pp●rent contempt ; and inserted , Si quis contrà praesumpserit , si quis contumaciter contrà fecerit : but in matters of Doctrine or Life , fully determin'd by the Law of God , they pronounced a simple Anathema , without any such clause inserted . Now from this , we may take notice of a difference between Laws concerning indifferencies in civill and Ecclesiastical matters : That in civils the Laws bind to indifferencies without the case of contempt or scandall , because in these the publike good is aimed a● , of which every private person is not fit to judge , and therefore it is our duty either to obey or suffer ; but in Ecclesiasticall constitution , only peace and order is that which is looked at , and therefore , Si nihil contra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 feceris , non teneris illis , is the rule here . If nothing tending to apparent disorder be done , men break not those Laws : For the end and reason of a Law is the measure of its obligation . Fourthly , Mens being left free to do the things forbidden , either upon a repeal of the former Laws , or when a man is from under obligation to that authority which commands them , argues them still to be matters of liberty , and not matters of necessity . That Laws respecting indifferent things may be repealed , I cannot imagine that any have so little reason as to deny , upon a different state of affairs from what it was when they were first enacted ; or when they cannot attain the ends they are designed for , the peace and order of the Church , but rather tend to imbroil it in trouble and confusion : And that when men are from under the authority imposing them , men are at their own liberty again , must necessarily be granted , because the ground of restraint of that liberty was the authority they were under ; and therefore the cause being taken away , the effects follows . Therefore for men to do them when authority doth not impose them , must imply an opinion of the necessity of the things themselves , which destroyes Christian-liberty . Whence ▪ it was resolved by Augustine in the case of Rites , that every one should observe those of that Church which he was in : which he saith , he took from Ambrose . His words are these , Nec disciplina ulla ▪ in his melior gravi prudentique Christiano , quàm ut eo modo agat , quo agere viderit Ecclesiam , ad quamcunque forte devenerit . Quod enim neque contra fidem , neque contra bonos more 's injungitur , indifferenter est habendum , & pro corum inter quos vivitur societate servandum est . He tells us , He knew no better course for a serious prudent Christian to take in matters of Rites and Customes , then to follow the Churches example where he is : for whatsoever is observed neither against faith or manners , is a matter in its self indifferent , and to be observed according to the custome of those he lives among . And after , acquaints us that his Mother coming to Milan after him , and finding the Church there not observe the Saturday-fast as the Church of Rome did , was much perplexed and troubled in her mind at it ( as tender , but weak consciences are apt to be troubled at any thing contrary to their own practice ) ; she for her own satisfaction sends her Son to Ambrose , then Bishop of the Church there , who told him he would give him no other answer but what he did himself , and if he knew any thing better , he would do it . Augustine presently expects a command from him to leave off Saturday fasts : instead of that ; Ambrose tells him ; Cum Romam veni● , jejuno sabbato ; cum hic sum , non jejuno . Sic etiam tu ad quam forte Ecclesiam veneris , ejus morem serva ; si cuiquam non vis esse scandalo , n●● quenquam ▪ tibi . When I am at Rome I fast on the Sabbath , but at Milan I do not . So thou likewise , when thou comest to any Church , observe its custome , if thou wouldst neither be an offence to them , nor have them be so to thee . A rare and excellent example of the piety , prudence , and moderation of the primitive Church : far from rigid imposing indifferent customs on the one side ; from contumacy in opposing meer indifferencies on the other . Which judgement of Ambrose , Augustine saith , he alwayes looked on as often as he thought of it , tanquam caeleste oraculum , as an Oracle come from Heaven ; and concludes with this excellent Speech , which if ever God intend peace to his Church , he will make men understand : Sensi enim saepe dolens & gemens , mult as infirmorum perturbationes fieri per quorundam fr●trum contentiosam obstinationem , & superstitiosam timiditatem ; qui in rebus hujusmodi , quae neque Scripturae sanctae autoritate , neque universal is Ecclesiae traditione , neque vitae corrigendae utilitate ad certum possunt terminum pervenire ( perducere ▪ ) tantum quia subest quàliscunque ratiocinatio cogitantis , aut quia in suâ patriâ sic ipse consuevit , aut quia ibi vidis ubi peregrinationem suam quò remotiorem à suis , eò doctiorem factam putat , tam litigiosas excitant qu estiones ut nisi quod ipsi faciunt , nihil rectum existiment . I have often , saith he , found it to my grief and sorrow , that the troubles of weaker Christian● , have been caused by the contentious obstinacy of some on the one hand , and the superstitious fearfulnesse of others on the other ▪ in things which are neither determin'd by the authority of the holy Scriptures , nor by the custome of the universall Church , nor yet by any usefulnesse of the things themselves , in order to the making mens lives better ; only for some petty reason in a mans own mind , or because it hath been the custome of their Countrey● or because they have found in those Churches , which they have thought to be the nearer to truth , the further they have been from home , they are continually raising such quarrels and contentions , that they think nothing is right and lawfull , but what they do themselves . Had that blessed Saint lived in our age , he could not have utter'd any thing more true , nor more pertinent to our present state : which methinks admirers of antiquity should embrace for its authority , and others for the great truth and reason of it . Did we but set up those three things as Judges between us in our matters of Ceremonies , The Authority of the Scriptures , the practise of the Primitive Universal Church , and the tendency of them to the reforming mens lives ; how soon might we shake hands , and our controversies be at an end ! But as long as contentious obstinacy remains on one side , and a superstitious fearfulnesse on the other ( for superstition may as well lye in the imagined necessity of avoiding things indifferent , as in the necessary observing of things which are not ) we may find our storms increase , but we are not like to see any Land of Peace . How happy might we be , did men but once understand that it was their duty to mind the things of peace ! How little of that Dust might still and quiet our most contentious frayes ! Hi motus animorum , atque haec certamina tanta Pulveris exigui jactu compressa quiescunt . But in order to so happy and desireable an Union and accommodation , I shall not need to plead much from the nature of the things we differ about ; the lownesse of them in comparison of the great things we are agreed in , the fewnesse of them in comparison of the multitude of those weighty things we ought most to look after , the benefits of union , the miseries of division , which if our lamentable experience doth not tell us of , yet our Consciences may ; I shall crave leave humbly to present to serious consideration some proposalls for accommodation : which is an attempt which nothing but an earnest desire of peace can justifie , and I hope that will : which here falls in ●s the third step of my designed Discourse , about the bounds to be set in the restraint of Christian-liberty , The first is , that nothing be imposed as necessary , but what is clearly revealed in the Word of God. This there is the highest reason and equity for , since none can have command immediately over Conscience , but God himself , and what ever is imposed as necessary , doth immediately bind Conscience . And whatever binds mens conscience● with an opinion of the necessity of it , doth immediately destroy that Christian-liberty which men are necessarily bound to stand fast in , and not be intangled with any yoke of bondage . Not only the yoke of Jewish Ceremonies , but whatever yoke pincheth , and galls as that did , with an opinion of the necessity of doing the thing commanded by any but the Word of God. Which the Apostle calls Dogmatizing , Coloss. 2. 20 and v. 16. Let no man judge you in meat and drink ; nè Praepositi quidem vestri , saith Whitaker ; these impositions he calls v. 22. the commandments and doctrines of men . And such he calls a Snare , 1 Corinth . 7. 23. which was the making an indifferent thing , as Coelibate , necessary . Laqueus est quicquid praecipitur ut necessarium , quod liberum esse debet . So that though obedience be necessary to ind●fferent things when commanded ; yet it must alwayes be liber â conscientiâ , quoad res ipsas legum , no obligation to be laid upon Conscience to look upon the things as necessary . Secondly , That nothing be required , nor determin'd , but what is sufficiently known to be indifferent in its own nature . The former proposall was in reference to the manner of imposing , this respects the nature of the things themselves . The only difficulty here is , How a thing may be sufficiently known to be indifferent ; because one man looks upon that as indifferent , which another doth not . The most equal way to decide this Controversie , is to make choyce of such Judges as are not interested in the quarrel : And those are the sense of the Primitive Church in the first 4 Centuries , who were best able to judge whether they looked upon themselves as bound by any command of Scripture or no ; and withall the Judgement of the Reformed Churches : So that what shall be made appear to be left indifferent , by both the sense of the Primitive Church , and the Churches of the Reformation , may be a matter determinable by Law , and which all may be required to conform in obedience to . Thirdly , That whatever is thus determined be in order only to a due performance of what is in general required in the Word of God , and not to be looked on as any part of Divine Worship or Service . This is that which gives the greatest occasion of offence to mens Consciences , when any thing is either required ; or if not , yet generally used and looked on as a necessary part or concomitant of Gods Worship , so that without it the Worship is deemed imperfect . And there is great difference to be made between things indifferent in their own nature , and indifferent as to their use and practise . And when the generality of those who use them do not use them as Indifferent , but as necessary things , it ought to be considered , whether in this case such a use be allowable till men be better informed of the nature of the things they do . As in the case of the Papists about Image-worship , their Divines say , that the Images are only as high teners of Devotion , but the worship is fixed on God ; but we find , it is quite otherwise in the general pract●se of people who look at nothing beyond the Image . So it may be , bating the degrees of the offence , when matters of indifferency in themselves are by the generality of people not looked on as such , but used as a necessary part of divine Service . And it would be considered whether such an abuse of matters supposed indifferent being known , it be not scandalum datum to continue their use without an effectual remedy for the abuse of them . Fourthly , That no Sanctions be made , nor mulcts or penalties be inflicted on such who only dissent from the use of some things whose lawfulnesse they at present scruple , till sufficient time and means be used for their information of the nature and indifferency of the things , that it may be seen whether it be out of wilfull contempt and obstinacy of spirit , or only weaknesse of Conscience and dissatisfaction concerning the things themselves that they disobey . And if it be made evident to be out of contempt , that only such penalties be inflicted as answers to the nature of the offence ; I am sure it is contrary to the Primitive practise , and the Moderation then used , to suspend or deprive men of their ministerial function for not conforming in Habits , Gestures , or the like . Concerning Habits , Walafridus Strabo expresly tells us , There was no distinction of Habits used in the Church in the Primitive times . Vestes sacerdotales per incrementa ad eum ▪ qui nunc habetur , aucta sunt ornatum . Nam primis temporibus communi vestimento induti , Missas agebant , sicut & hactenus quidam Orientalium facere perhibentur . And therefore the Concilium Gangrense condemned Eustathius Sebastenus for making a necessity of diversity of habits among Christians for their profession , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , it being acknowledged both by Salma sius and his great Adversary Petavius , that in the Primitive times the Presbyters did not necessarily wear any distinct habit from the people , although the former endeavours to prove , that commonly they did in Tertullians time ; but yet that not all the Presbyters , nor they only did use a distinct habit , viz. the Pallium Philosophicum , but all the Christians who did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Socrates said of Sylvanus Rhet●r , all that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among them , stricter Professors of Christianity ; among which most of the Presbyters were . And Origen in Eusebius expresly speaks of Heraclas a Presbyter of Alexandria , that for a long time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he used only the common Garment belonging to Christians , and put on the Pallium Philosophicum for the study of the Grecian Learning , after that Christianity began to lose in height what it got in breadth : instead of the former simplicity of their garments as well as manners , and their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 came in the use of the byrri , Penulae Dalmaticae , and so daily increasing , as Strabo saith . I say not this in the least to condemn any distinction of habit for meer decency and order , but to shew it was not the custome of the Primitive times to impose any necessity of these things upon men , nor to censure them for bare disuse of them . He must be a great stranger in the Primitive Church that takes not notice of the great diversity of Rites and Customs used in particular Churches , without any censuring those who differed from them ; or if any by inconsiderate zeal did proceed so far , how ill it was resented by other Christians . As Victor's excommunicating the Quarto-decimani , for which he is so sharply reproved by Irenaeus , who tells him , that the Primitive Christians who differed in such things , did not use to abstain from one anothers communion for them ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; as Socrates tells us ; Those that agree in the same Faith , may differ among themselves in their Rites and Customs , as he largely shews in a whole Chapter to that purpose ; as , in the observation of Easter , some on the fourteenth day of April , others only upon the Lords Day , but some of the more Eastern Churches differed from both . In their Fasts , some observed Lent but for one day , some two , some three weeks , some six weeks , other seven : and in their Fasts some abstained from all kind of living creatures , others only from fresh , eating fish , and others ●oul : others abstained from fruit and eggs : others eat only dry bread , others not that neither . And so for their publick Assemblies ; Some communicating every Lords day , others not . The Church of Alexandria had its publick Meetings and Sermons every fourth day of the week , as he tells us . The same Church made the publick Readers and Interpreters , either of the Catechumeni , or of the baptized , differing therein from all other Churches . Several Customes were used about Digamy , and the Marriage of Ministers in several Churches . So about the time of Baptism , some having only one set time in the year for it , as at Easter in T●h●ssaly ; others two , Easter , and Dominica in Albis , so call'd from the white garments of the baptized . Some Churches in Baptism used three dippings , others only one . Great differences about the time of their being Catechumeni , in some places longer , in others a shorter time . So about the Excommunicate , and degrees of penance ( as they are call'd ) their Flentes , audientes , succumbentes , consistentes , the Communio peregrinae , the several Chrismes in vertice , in pectore , in some places at Baptism , in some after . So for placing the Altar ( as they Metaphorically called the Communion Table ) it was not constantly towards the East ; for Socrates affirms , that in the great Church at Antiochia , it stood to the West end of the Church ; and therefore it had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a different positure from other Churches . And Eusebius saith out of the Panegyrist , that in the New Church built by Paulinus at Tyre , the Altar stood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the middle . These things may suffice for a taste at present , of which more largely elsewhere ( God willing ) in due time . We see the Primitive Christians did not make so much of any Uniformity in Rites and Ceremonies ; nay I scarce think any Churches in the Primitive times can be produced , that did exactly in all things observe the same customes : Which might especially be an argument of moderation in all , as to these things , but especially in pretended Admirers of the Primitive Church . I conclude with a known saying of Austin , Indignum est ut propter ea quae nos Deo neque digniores , neque indigniores possunt facere , alii alios vel condemnemus , vel judicemus . It is an unworthy thing for Christians to condemn and judge one another for those things which do not further us at all in our way to Heaven . Lastly , That Religion be not clogg'd with Ceremonies . They when multiplied too much , if lawful , yet strangely eat out the heart , heat , life , vigour of Christianity . Christian Religion is a plain , simple , easie thing . Christ commends his Yoke to us by the easiness of it , and his burden by the lightness of it . It was an excellent testimony which Amm. Marcellinus a Heathen gave to Christianity , when speaking of Constantius , Religionem Christianam rem absolutam & simplicem a●●li superstitione confudit , That he spoiled the beauty of Christianity , by musting it up in Superstitious observations . And it is as true which Erasmus said in answer to the Sorbonists , Quò magis in corporalibus ceremoniis haeremus , hoc magis vergimus ad Iudaismum . External Ceremonies teach us backward , and bring us back from Christ to Moses ; which is fully proved as to the Papists , by our Learned Rainolds and Mr. De Croy : But we need no further Evidence then a bare perusal of Durandus Mimatensis his Rationale Divinorum officiorum . By Ceremonies , I mean not here matters of meer decency and order , for order sake ; which doubtless are lawful ( if the measure of that order be not the pomp and glory of the world , but the gravity , composure , sobriety , which becomes Christianity ) for when the Jews were the most strictly tyed up by a Ceremonial Law , they did introduce many things upon the account of order and decency : ás the building Synagogues , their hours of Prayer , their Parashoth and Haphtaroth , the Sections of the Law and Prophets ; the continuation of the Passover fourteen days by Hezekiah , when the Law required but seven : the Feast of Purim by Esther and Mordecai : the Fasts of the 4. 5. 10 moneth under the Captivity ; the Feast of Dedication by the Maccabees . The use of Baptism in Proselyting , washing the feet before the Passeover , imitated and practised by our Saviour : So that matters of Order and Decency are allowable and fitting ; but Ceremonies properly taken for actions significative , and therefore appointed because significative , their lawfulness may with better ground be scrupled . Or , taking Ceremony , in Bellarmines description of it , to be actio externa , quae non aliunde est bona & laudabilis , nisi quia fit ad Deum colendum : And in this sense it will be hard to manifest any thing to be lawful , but what is founded upon a Divine Precept ; if it be not a matter of Order , and so no Ceremony . And as for significative Ceremonies , concerning matter of Doctrine or Fact , a learned Dr. puts us in mind of the old Rule , that they be paucae & salubres , and the fewer , the more wholesome : for , as he observes from Aristotle in Insect●le Animals , the want of blood was the cause they run out into so many legs . I shall conclude this whole Discourse with another Speech of S. Austin , very pertinen● to our present purpose . Omnia itaque talia quae neque sanctarum Scripturarum autoritatibus continentur , nec in Con●iliis Episcoporum statuta inveniuntur , nec consuetudine universae Ecclesiae roborata sunt , sed diversorum locorum diversis moribus innumerabiliter variantur , ita ut vix aut omnino nunquam inveniri possint causae , quas in eis instituendis secuti sunt homines , ubi facultas tribuitur , sine ulla dubitatione resecanda existimo . All such things which are neither founded on the authority of the Scriptures , nor determined by General Councils ( for so he must be understood ) nor practised by the Catholick Church , but vary according to the customes of places , of which no rational account can be given ; ●ssoon as men have power to do it , I judge them to be cut off without any scruple : For which definitive sentence of his , he gives this most sufficient Reason ; Quamvis enim neque hoc inveniri possit , quomodo contra fidem sint ; ipsam tamen religionem ( quam paucissimis & manifestissimis celebrationem sacramentis misericordia . Dei liberam esse voluit ) servilibus oneribus premunt , ut tolerabilior sit conditio . Iudaeorum , qui etiamsi tempus libertatis non agnoverint , legalibus tamen sarcinis , non humanis praesumptionibus subjiciuntur : For although we cannot positively say , how such things as these do manifestly i●●pugn our Faith , yet in that they load our Religion with such servile burdens , ( which the mercy of God hath left free for all other observations , but the celebration of some few and most clear Sacraments ) that they make our condition worse then that of the Iews ; for they , although strangers to Gospel Liberty , had no burdens charged upon them by the Constitutions of men , but only by the Law and Commands of God : Which Sentence and Reason of his , I leave to the most Impartial Judgement of every true sober ▪ minded Christian. And thus I am at last come through this Field of Thorns and Thistles ; I hope now to find my way more plain and easie . So much for the fourth Hypothesis . The two next will be discharged with lesser trouble . Hypoth . 5. What is left undetermined both by Divine Positive Laws , and by Principles deduced from the Natural Law , if it be determined by lawful Authority in the Church of God , doth bind the Conscience of those who are subject to that Authority , to Obedience to those Determinations . I here suppose , that the matter of the Law be something not predetermined ▪ either by the Law of Nature , or Divine Positive Law● ; for against either of these no Humane Law can bind the Conscience : For if there be any moral evil in the thing Commanded , we are bound to obey God rather than men ; in which case , we do not formally and directly disobey the Magistrate , but we chuse to obey God before him . And , as we have already observed , a former Obligation from God or Nature destroys a latter ; because God hath a greater Power and Authority over mens Consciences , then any Humane Authority can have : And my Obedience to the Magistrate being founded upon a Divine Law , it must be supposed my duty to obey him first , by virtue of whose Authority I obey another ; then , the other whom I obey , because the former hath commanded me . If I am bound to obey an Inferiour Magistrate , because the Supreme requires it ; if the Inferiour command me any thing contrary to the Will and Law of the Supreme , I am not bound to obey him in it , because both the derives his Power of Commanding , and I my Obligation to Obedience , from the Authority of the Supreme , which must be supposed to do nothing against it self . So it is between God and the Supreme Magistrate ; By him Kings reign ; God when he gives them a Legislative Power , doth it cumulativè non privativè , not so as to deprive himself of it , nor his own Laws of a binding force against his ; So that no Law of a Magistrate can in reason bind against a Positive Law of God. But what is enacted by a Lawful Magistrate , in things left undetermined by Gods Laws , doth even by virtue of them bind men to Obedience , which require Subjection to the Higher Powers for Conscience sake . So that whatsoever is left indifferent , Obedience to the Magistrate in things indifferent is not : And if we are not bound to obey in things undetermin'd by the Word , I would ●ain know wherein we are bound to obey them ? or what distinct Power of Obligation belongs to the Authority the Magistrate hath over men ? For all other things we are bound to already by former Laws ; therefore either there must be a distinct Authority without Power to oblige , or else we are effectually bound to whatsoever the Magistrate doth determine in lawful things . And if it be so in general , it must be so as to all particulars contained in that general , and so in reference to matters of the Church , unless we suppose all things concerning it to be already determined in Scripture : which is the thing in Question , and shall be largely discussed in its due place . Sixthly . Hypoth . 6. Things undetermined by the Divine Law , Natural and Positive , and actually determined by lawful Authority , are not thereby made unalterable , but may be revoked , limited , and changed , according to the different ages , tempers , inclinations of men , by the same Power which did determine them . All Humane Constitutions are reversible by the same Power which made them : For the Obligation of them , not arising from the matter of them , but from the Authority of the Person binding , are consequently alterable , as shall be judged by that Power most sutable to the ends of its first promulgation . Things may so much alter , and times change , that what was a likely way to keep men in Unity and Obedience at one time , may only inrage them at another : The same Physick which may at one time cure , may at another only inrage the distemper more . As therefore the Skill of a Physitian lies most in the application of Physick to the several tempers of his Patients : So a wise Magistrate , who is , as Nicias said in Thucydides , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The Physitian to cure the distempers of the body Politick ; and considers ( as Spartian tells us Adrian used to say in the Senate , Ita se Rempub. gesturum , ut sciret populirem esse , non propriam ) that the Peoples Interest is the main care of the Prince , will see a necessity of altering , reforming , varying many Humane Constitutions , according as they shall tend most to the ends of Government , either in Church or State. Thence it is said of the several Laws of Nature , Divine , and Humane ; that Lex naturae potest poni , sed non deponi , Lex divina nec poni nec deponi , Lex humana & poni & deponi . The Law of Nature may be laid down ( as in case of Marriage with Sisters in the beginning of the world ) but not laid aside ; the Law of God can neither be laid down , nor laid aside ; but Humane Laws , both may be laid down , and laid aside . Indeed , the Laws of the Medes and Persians , are said to be unalterable , but ( if it be meant in the sense it is commonly understood in ) yet that very Law which made them unalterable ( for they were not so of their own Nature ) was an alterable Law , and so was whatever did depend upon it . I conclude then , whatever is the subject of Humane Determination , may lawfully be alter'd and changed , according to the wisdome and prudence of those in whose hands the care of the Publick is . Thus then , as those things which are either of Natural or Christian Liberty , are subjected to Humane Laws and restraints , so those Laws are not irreversible ; but if the Fences be thrown down by the same Authority which set them up , whatever was thereby inclosed , returns to the Community of Natural Right again . So much for these Hypotheses , which I have been the longer in explaining and establishing , because of the great influence they may have upon our present Peace , and the neer concernment they have to this whole Discourse , the whole Fabrick of which is erected upon these Foundations . CHAP. III. How far Church Government is founded upon the Law of Nature . Two things in it founded thereon . 1. That there must be a Society of men for the Worship of God. 2. That this Society be governed in the most convenient manner . A Society for Worship manifested , Gen. 4. 26. considered . The Sons of God , and the Sons of Men , who ? Societies for Worship among Heathens evidenced by three things . 1. Solemnity of Sacrifices ; Sacrificing how far Natural ; the antiquity of the Feast of first-fruits , largely discovered . 2. The Original of Festivals for the Honour of their Deities . 3. The Secrecy and Solemnity of their Mysteries . This further proved from Mans Sociable Nature , the improvement of it by Religion , the Honor redounding to God by such a Society for his Worship . HAving now laid our Foundation , we proceed to raise a superstructure upon it . And we now come closely to inquire how far Government in the Church is founded upon an unalterable Divine Right ? That we have found to be built upon a double Foundation , the Dictates of the Law of Nature , and Divine Positive Laws . We shall impartially inquire into both of them , and see how far Church-Government is setled upon either of these two . I begin then with the Law of Nature . Two general things , I conceive , are of an unalterable Divine Right in reference to this : First , That there be a Society and joyning together of men for the Worship of God : Secondly , That this Society be governed , preserved , and maintained in a most convenient manner . First , That there must be a Society of men joyning together for the Worship of God. For the Dictate of Nature being common to all , that God must be served , Nature requires some kind of Mutual Society for the joynt performance of their common duties . An Evidence of which Dictate of Nature , appears in the first mention we find of any Publick Society ; so that a Society for Religious Worship was as ancient as the first Civil Societies we have any Records of . Nay , the very first Publick Society we read of , was gathered upon this account . For we read in the early days of the world that the Charter for this Society was soon made use of , Gen. 4. 26. In the days of Enosh men began to call upon the Name of the Lord. Now Enosh was Seths Son , whom Adam had given to him in the place of Abel ; and assoon as the number of men did increase , that men grew into Societies , they then had their publike societies for Gods Worship . For we cannot understand that place absolutely , as though God had not been called on before , but now he was called on more signally and solemnly ; when men were increased that they began to imbody themselves into Societies , Coepit congregare populum ad tractandum simul Dei cu●tum , saith Pererius . Tunc coeptum est populariter coli Deus , Mariana . Invocare , i. e. palam colere , Emanuel Sa. relating all to the publike societies being then gathered for the worship of the true God. From which time in all probability did commence that Title of those who joyned in those societies that they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sons of God which we read of soon after . Gen. 6. 2. as they are distinguished from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sons of men : which Titles as I am far from understanding in the sense of the Fathers taking them for the Angels , ( which in likely-hood they took from that supposititious piece going under the name of Enochs Prophesie ) ; so I cannot understand them as commonly they are taken , for meer discretive Titles of the posterity of Seth and Cain ; as though all that came of Seth were the Sons of God , and all of Cain were the sons of men . For as there certainly were many bad of Seths Posterity , because the flood destroyed all of them , Noah only and his Family excepted : so there might be some good of the other , vice being no more enta●ld then vertue is ; and Jewels may sometimes lye in a heap of dung : and so this name of the sons of God might be appropriated to those who joyned themselves to those Societies for Gods worship . In which sense some understand the very words of the Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then began men to be called by the Name of the Lord : which I suppose is the sense of Aquila who thus renders the place , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , although it be brought by Dionys. Vossius to justifie the former interpretation of the words . This sense , if the construction of the words will bear it ( which Drusius questions , but others are much for it , and Theodoret , The French , and Piscator so render it ) seems most genuine and natural ; and not at all impugning what I have formerly gathered from the words , but implying it ; For this distinction of Names and Titles did argue a distinction of Societies among them . I am not ignorant that the generality of Jewish Expositors and many of their followers , do carry the sense of the words quite another way , from the ambiguity of the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may be interpreted as well to Prophane as Begin , and so they read it , tunc prophanatum est ad invocandum nomen Domini , Then men prophaned the Name of the Lord : And accordingly Maimonides begins Idolatry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the dayes of Enosh . But the words will scarce bear this construction , as Vossius upon him observes ; and besides , there is no mention at all of the name of any false Gods , but only of the true one . So much then for the first originall of this Society for Religion , which we see began assoon as there was matter for a Society to be gathered up of . Some indeed derive this Society a great deal higher ; and because we read that Abel and Cain brought their sacrifices , they thence infer , that it was to Adam , who was the publike Priest then , and performed all publike duties of worship in his own person , and so was indeed Occumenicall Bishop of the whole world , and yet had but four persons or but few more for his Charge . Such a Diocess we might be content to allow him that pleads for the same Office , and derives his Title somewhat higher then Adam ; For Pope Boniface the eighth proved there must be but one chief Priest , and so one Pope , because it is said , Gen. 1. 1. That God created the world in Principio , not in Principiis ; mark the number ; therefore there must be but one beginning , and so one Bishop , and not many . What excellent Disputants an Infallible ▪ Chair makes men ! Much good may his argument do him . As a further evidence , How much Nature dictates that such a Society there should be for Divine Worship , we shall inquire into the practise of men in their dispersion after the Flood . And what we find unanimously continued among them , under such gross Idolatry as they were given to , and which did arise not from their Idolatry as such , but from the general nature of it as a kind of Worship , we have reason to look upon as one of those planks which hath escaped the common shipwrack of humane nature by the fall of man. And so though that argument from the generall consent of Nations owning a way of Worship though a false one , in order to the proving the existence of God be slighted by some , yet there is this double evidence in it to prove it , more then is generally taken notice of , and beyond the bare testimony its self given by that consent . First , From mens being so easily imposed upon by false Religions , in that they are so soon gull'd into Idolatry ; it argues there are some Jewels in the World , or else men would never be deceived with counterfeits ; It argues that a Child hath a Father , who is ready to call every one that comes to him , Father ; So it argues there is some naturall instinct in men towards the Worship of God , when men are so easily brought to worship other things instead of God. We see no other creatures can be so imposed upon ; we read of no Idolatry among the Brutes , nor that the Bees though they have a King and honour him , did ever bow their Knees to Baal , or worship the Hive instead of him . If men had no journeys to go , others need not be sworn as the Athenians were , not to put them out of their way . If there were no inclinableness to Religion , all cautions against Idolatry were superfluous : there is then from mens proness to error , as to the person and object of Worship , an evidence of naturall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , an instinct within towards the act of Worship ; And as when I see sheep flock together , even in their wandrings , I may easily gather that though they are out of their proper pastures , yet they are of a tame and sociable nature ; So when we see Societies for Worship were preserved among men after they were degenerated into Idolatry ; it is an evident argument that such associating together for the generall nature of the act , doth flow from the nature of man. Secondly ▪ All mens agreeing in some kind of Worship , though differing as to the object and manner of it , is an evidence it comes from Nature , because it plainly evinces it could be nothing taken up out of design , received by custome , nor convey'd by tradition , because even among those whose interests and designs have been contrary to one another , and could have no mutuall compacts to deceive their people , have all agreed in this thing , though almost in all other things they have strangely differ'd . All other Customs and Traditions , are either changed , or lost among severall Nations ; as the rude barbarous Northern Nations , that in their inrodes and incursions upon other places , have left in process of time , almost all other customs but only their Religion behind them . This sticks closer then Saladines black shirt , or the old Monks cloathes , which they put not off till they dyed , Nay even those Nations , who openly , and as by a Law , violate the other received dictates of Nature , do yet maintain and hold up this . Those that have had the least of commerce and converse with civilized people , have yet had their societies for worship : And when they could find no gods to worship , they would rather make then want them . The Egyptians would rather spoyl their Sallets then be without gods ; and they that whipt their gods , yet had them still . They who had no sense of another life , yet would pray to their gods for the good things of this : and they that would not pray that the gods would do them good , yet would that they might do them no hurt : So that in the most prodigious Idolatry , we have an argument for Religion ; and in the strange diversities of the wayes of worship , we have an evidence how naturall a society for worship is . This , to shew the validity and force of the Argument drawn from Consent of Nations , even in their Idolatry . Three things I shall evidence these Societies for Worship among the Heathens by ; the solemnity of their Sacrifices , their publick Festivals , and their secret Mysteries , all which were instituted peculiarly in honour of their gods : It being necessary in such Societies for Worship to have some particular Rites , whereby to testifie the end of such Societies to be for the honour of their Deity ; and to distinguish those solemnities from all other . First then for Sacrifices ; Paulus Burgensis observing how this custome spread all the World over , concludes from thence that it was naturall to men . In qualibet aetate , & apud quaslibet hominum nationes , semper fuit aliqua sacrificiorum oblatio . Quod autem est apud omnes , naturale est . Thus far I confesse sacrificing naturall , as it was a solemn and sensible Rite of Worship ; but if he meant by that , the destroying of some living creatures to be offered up to God , I both deny the universall practice of it , and its being from the dictate of Nature : and I rather believe with Fortunius Licetus , that it was continued down by Tradition , from the sacrifices of Cain and Abel before the flood , or rather from Noahs after ; which might the easier be , because Nature dictating there must be some way of worship , and it being very agreeable to Nature it should be by sensible signs , all Nations having no other Rule to direct them , were willing to observe that Rite and Custome in it , which was conveyed down to them from their Progenitors ; But let us see what reason Burgensis gives ; Ratio naturalis dictat , ut secundum naturalem inclinationem , homines ei quod est supra omnes , subjectionem exhibeant , secundum modum homini convenientem . Qui quidem modus est , ut sensibilibus signis utatur , ad exprimendum interiorem conceptum , sicut ex sensibilibus cognitionem accipit invisibilium . Unde ex naturali ratione procedit , quod homo sensibilibus signis utatur , offerens eas Deo in signum subjectionis & honoris ad similitudinem eorum qui Dominis suis aliquid offerunt in recognitionem Dominii . But all this will extend no further , then that it is very agreeable to naturall reason , that as man attains the knowledge of invisible things by visible , so he should expresse his sense of invisible things by some visible signs , thereby declaring subjection to God as his Lord and Master ; as Tenants expresse their Homage to their Lord by offering something to them . And I withall acknowledge , that as to oblations without blood , they seem indeed very naturall : Whence we shall somewhat largely discover the antiquity of the Feasts of first-fruits , which were the clearest acknowledgement of their dependance upon God , and receiving these things from him . Aristotle tells us , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That the most ancient sacrifices and Assemblies appear to have been upon the in-gathering of fruits , such as the sacrifices of first-fruits to the gods were . To the same purpose Porphyrius , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The first sacrifices were of first-fruits . And Horace , Agricolae prisci fortes , parvoque beati Condita post frumenta , levantes tempore festo Corpus , & ipsum animum spe finis dura ferentes , Cum sociis operum & pueris & conjuge fidâ , Tellurem porco , Sylvanum lacte piabant . Although he be not so expresse for offering the very fruits of the earth ; yet it is evident from him , that their great festivals in honour of their gods ; were immediately after Harvest , and that they had great Assemblies for that purpose , and did then solemnly sacrifice . And from these solemnities came the original of Tragedies and Comedies , as Horace intimates , and is largely shewed by Isaac Casaubon in his Treatise de Satyricâ Poesi . But to fetch this yet a little higher , and so bring it downwards ; The first sacrifice we read of in Scripture , was this of the fruits of the earth ( unlesse the skins which Adam cloathed himself with , were of the beasts sacrificed , as some conjecture : ) Cains sacrifice was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an oblation of the fruits of the earth : in all probability the first-fruits , as Abel offered the first-born of the Cattel to the Lord : This seems to have been at some solemn time of sacrificing , which is implyed in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 At the end of dayes . In process of time we render it ; but the Jews understand it at the end of the year : Dayes in Scripture being often put for Years ; which Interpretation if we follow , we find a very early observation of the Anniversary Festival of First-fruits ; But however this be , we have by unquestionable tradition , that no Festival was more anciently , nor more universally observed , then this of offering the First fruits to God of their increase . The Jews were bound up so strictly to it by their Law , Leviticus 23. 14. that they were to eat nothing of their crop till the offering of first-fruits was made . And Porphyrius tells us out of Hermippus , that one of the Laws made for the Athenians by Triptolemus , was , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , To feast the gods with their fruits : Of which Xenocrates there gives a twofold reason ; sense of gratitude to the gods , and the easiness at all times to offer up these ; by which he supposed the custome would continue longer . Draco afterwards puts this among his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , his unalterable Laws , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To worship their gods with their first-fruits . Besides which , for other Greeks we have the testimony of Plutarch , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The most of the Grecians , saith he , in their most ancient sacrifices did use barley , the first fruits being offered by the Citizens : and therefore the Opuntii called their chief Priest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because he gathered in the first-fruits . The manner of offering the first-fruits among them , was much of the same nature with the Mincha among the Jews , which was of fine flower mingled with oyl for a burnt-offering to the Lord : The word there used implyes the bruising the ears of Corn in a Morter , because they were as yet moist , and could not be ground hard as Corn was . Whence , because it was not all brought to flower , the Cake was call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It is called by the Sept●agint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So I suppose it should be read , which in our great Bibles is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and it is call'd by the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which word is frequently used by Homer , and Apollonius Rhodius , whom I forbear to transcribe ; it being so obvious ; which is expounded both by the excellent Scholiast on Apollonius , and by Eustathius and the short Scholiast on Homer , to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Barley and Salt mixed together . To which among the Romans the Mola salsa answered , of which Festus : Est far tostum & sale conspersum , as the Mincha under the Law , was alwayes salted with salt , Levit. 2. 13. This Mola salsa among the Romans , had originally relation to the first-fruits : For the custome of offering up first-fruits among them , was as ancient as their institution of religious Rites ; as Pliny fully informs us , Numa instituit Deos fruge colere , & molâ salsâ supplicare ; atque ut autor est Hemina , far torrere : which likewise answers to the Jewish Mincha , which was to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tosta in igne , parched in the fire : For which purpose Numa instituted the Fornacalia , which were farris torrendi feriae , the feasts of first-fruits among them , the parching the Corn being in order thereto , For as Pliny adds , ac ne ●egustabant novas fruges , aut vina antequam sacerdotes primitias libassent : which may be exactly rendred in the very words of the Law , Leviticus 23. 14. But though the Mola salsa came originally from hence , it afterwards came to be used in most sacrifices , thence the word immolare to sacrifice , again Parallel to the Mincha accessorium , as some call it among the Jews , which was used in other sacrifices ; and was distinct from the Mincha per se , which of it self was an oblation to the Lord. From this offering up bruised Corn , some derive the name of Ceres from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies as much , and was required , Leviticus 2. 14. thence Ovid l. 8 Met. Primitias frugum Cereri , sua vina ●yaeo . But besides Ceres , they offered their first fruits among the Greeks to Hora , Diana , Apollo , Vesta , as may be seen in Meursius in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Thus we see how these three Nations did agree not only in the observation of the Feast of First-fruits , but very much in the ceremonies of their offering too . Only this difference may be observed between them , The Romans did mix their Mola salsa with water , the Jews their Mincha with oyl only ; The Greeks did not bruise the Corn in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but only mixed salt with the grains of Corn. But the Jews and Romans bo●h brui●ed and parched it , before they offered it up for the first-fruits . Thus much to shew the antiquity and observation of the offering up of the first-fruits among the most ancient and civilized Nations . Which though it may seem a Digression , yet I hope not wholly unacceptable , it being likewise the offering of my First-fruits , and therefore the more seasonable . Proceed we now to other Festivall-solemnities to see what evidences of a Society for worship we find in them . And for this , it is apparent that the first originall of Festivals among the Heathen was for the honour of the Gods. Upon which account a grave and prudent Author accounts the observation of some Festivalls naturall ; because Nature doth dictate the necessity of some Society for the worship of God. For thus Strabo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It was the custome of all Nations ( who are comprehended under his words ) to have Festival days for the honour of their Gods , which Nature its self dictates . Hence the Greeks , as Athenaeus observes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , used to say , that their Gods beg'd them all their play-days . After telling us of the mirth and jollity used after their sacrifices , which was alwayes the second course at these Festivalls , thence the Jews called their High Festival days 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 good days , or days of Mirth . We read of few Nations but had these Festival Solemnities for the honour of their Gods. The Persians had theirs for their God Mithras : The Babylonians , saith Athenaeus out of Berosus , had their Feast Sacaea , which Casaubon would have called Sesacaea , because Babylon in Scripture is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sesac , as the Ludi Romani were from Rome . It is to no purpose to mention the Festivals observed by the Greeks and Romans in honour of their Gods , being so many , that whole books have been composed of them . That which I observe from hence , is , that Societies for the Worship of God are Natural ; because of their solemn resting from their ordinary labour upon days appointed for the honour of their Gods : Thereby shewing , they looked upon those as peculiar days , and themselves as peculiar Societies upon those days , from what they were at other times . One thing more evidenceth this among them ; their solemn and secret Mysteries , which were Societies on purpose , as pretended , for this very end , in honor of their Gods. Their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as they were wont to call them , preserved with the greatest secrecy by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Their great and lesser Eleusinian , Samothracian , Cotyttian , Mithriacal Mysteries , to which none were admitted without passing through many degrees , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , before they came to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perfectly initiated . Wherein they were much imitated by the Christians in the Celebration of the Lords Supper , about the fourth or fifth Century , as is largely showed by Casaubon in a most learned Diutriba on this Subject in his Exercitations ; to which I refer the Reader . We see what strict Rules they had for Admission of any into these pretendedly Sacred , but truly most impious Societies . In those of Mithras , as Suidas and Nonnus tell us , they passed through eighty degrees , before they were throughly initiated , and seldome escaped with life . However , we may gain from them this general notion , that they looked on a peculiar distinct Society , as necessary for the worship and honor of the Deity they served . Thus we see à posteriori how a distinct Society for Gods Worship appears to be a Dictate of Nature . We shall now see if we can evidence à priori , that it is a Dictate of Nature , that there must be some Society for the Worship of God. Three things will make that appear . First , The sociableness of Mans Nature . Man is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a Creature that loves to herd it self with those of his own kind , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . If a man had all other comforts of life , and wanted Society , he would not think his life worth leading , as Aristotle observes , who further takes notice of the sociableness of mans Nature , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from the general commendation that is given to courteous and affable men . I deny not , but in the entring into a Civil State or Society , either fear , or profit , might be a main inducement to it ; but though it be an inducement , yet there must be supposed an inclinableness to a Society ; or a Commonwealth might be assoon set up among Tygers , as Men. So that they have very little ground of Reason , who from the external inducements of fear , or profit , in entring into Civil Societies , do conclude against the sociableness of Mans Nature . If then Mans Nature be sociable in all other things , then Nature will tell men , they ought to be so in things of common concernment to them all , and which is every ones work or duty , as Religion is ; if in other things men are sociable , much more in this : For Secondly , Religion gives a great improvement to mans sociable Nature ; and therefore Plutarch well calls Religion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . A Foundation that knits and joynts Societies together . And thence wisely observes , that in the Constitution of Laws , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : the first and greatest thing to be looked at , is , the Religion established , or the Opinions men entertain of the Gods. To which he subjoyns this excellent reason , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : That it is more impossible for a Commonwealth either to be formed or subsist without Religion , then a City to si and without Foundations . Thence , a prudent States-man called Religion , the best Reason of State. It appears then evidently both from reason and experience , that Religion hath a great influence upon the modelling and ordering Civil Societies , whence , as the same Moralist observes , Lycurgus did , as it were , consecrate the Lacedaemonians with Religious Rites , as Numa the Romans , Ion the Athenians , and Deucalion the Hellens . Whence some half-witted men ( but I know not whether more defective in wit , or grace ) have ( observing the great influence Religion hath to keep men in order ) been ready to look upon it as only a Politick device , to awe men with greater ease . It is not here a place largely to Examine and Refute this unworthy pretence . Only I adjure them by their onely Goddess , Reason , to tell me whence come men to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Plutarch expresseth it , To be so easily awed by the hopes and fears of another life more then other creatures are ? Why are they at all affected with the discourse of them ? Why cannot they shake off the thoughts of these things when they please ? Are not men hereby made the most miserable of creatures ? For no other creature can be perswaded that it shall ever quench its thirst in those Rivers of pleasures , nor make its bed in everlasting flames . The beasts of Sardinia that have their only refreshment by the Dew of Heaven , yet have never any hopes to ●ome there . The Lyon never keeps from his prey by the thoughts and fears of a great Tribunal . But suppose onely mankind of all creatures should be liable to be thus imposed on , as is pretended : How comes it to pass that in no age of the world this Imposture hath not been discovered , confuted , and shaken off by some people as wise as themselves ? Or have there never been any such in the world ? But whence come some men then to be wiser then others ? Whence come some to know things which all the Reason in the World could never finde out , without Revelation ? Whence comes a power to doe any thing above the course of Nature , if there be nothing but Nature ? Or are all men deceived that believe such things ? If so , then there must be somewhat that must deceive men ; men would not deceive themselves , and they could not be so long imposed upon by other men ; there must be then some evil spirit must do it ; and whence should that come ? from Nature too ? but then whence comes Nature its self ? from its self too , or some thing ' else . Did it make it self , or was it made by a greater Power then it ? if it made its self , it must be and not be at the same time ; it must be as producing , and not be as produced by that Act. And what is become of our Reason now ? There must be then a Supream , Eternal , Infinite Being , which made the world and all in it ; which hath given Nature such a Touch of its own immortality and dependance upon God , that Reason capable of Religion is the most proper distinctive Character of man from all Inferior beings . And this Touch and Sense being common to the whole Nature ; they therefore incline more to one anothers Society in the joynt performance of the common Duties , due from them to their Maker . And so Religion not onely makes all other Bonds firm ( which without it are nothing , as Oaths , Covenants , Promises , and the like , without which no civill Society can be upheld ) but must of its self be supposed especially to tye men in a nearer Society to one another ▪ in reference to the proper Acts belonging to its self . Thirdly , it appears from the greater honour which redounds to God by a sociable way of Worship . Nature that dictates that God should be worshipped , doth likewise dictate that worship should be performed in a way most for the honour and glory of God. Now this tends more to promote Gods honour , when his service is own'd a● a publike thing , and men do openly declare and profess themselves his Subjects . If the honour of a King lies in the publikely professed and avowed obedience of a multitude of Subjects ; it must proportionably promote and advance Gods honour more to have a fixed , stated Worship , whereby men may in a Community and publike Society declare and manifest their homage and fealty to the supream Governour of the World. Thus then we see the light of Nature dictates there should be a society and joyning together of men for and in the Worship of God. CHAP. IV. The second thing the Law of Nature dictates , that this society be maintained and governed in the most convenient manner . A further inquiry , what particular Orders for Government in the Church come from the Law of Nature . Six laid down , and evidenced to be from thence . First , a distinction of some persons , and their superiority over others , both in power and order , cleared to be from the Law of Nature . The power and application of the power distinguished ; this latter not from any Law of Nature binding , but permissive : therefore may be restrained . Peoples right of chosing Pastors considered . Order distinguished from the form and manner of Government : the former Natural , the other not . The second is , that the persons imployed in the Service of God , should have respect answerable to their imployment , which appears from their Relation to God as his Servants ; from the persons imployed in this work before positive Laws . Masters of Families the first Priests . The Priesthood of the first born before the Law discussed : The Arguments for it answered . The Conjunction of Civil and Sacred Authothority largely shewed , among Egyptians , Grecians , Romans , and others . The ground of Separation of them afterwards , from Plutarch and others . THe second thing which the Light of Nature dictates , in reference to Church-Government , is , That the Society in which men joyn for the Worship of God , be preserved , mantained , and governed in the most convenient manner . Nature , which requires Society , doth require Government in that Society , or else it is no Society . Now we shall inquire what particular Orders for Government of this Society established for the Worship of God , do flow from the light of Nature , which I conceive are these following . First , To the maintaining of a Society , there i● requisite a Distinction of Persons , and a Superiority of Power and Order , in some over the other . If all be Rulers , every man is sui juris , and so there can be no Society , or each man must have power over the other , and that brings confusion . There must be some then invested with Power and Authority over others , to rule them in such things wherein they are to be subordinate to them ; that is , in all things concerning that Society they are entered into . Two things are implyed in this : First Power : Secondly Order . By Power , I mean a right to Govern ; by Order , the Superiority of some as Rulers , the Subordination of others as ruled . These two are so necessary , that no Civil Society in the World can be without them : For if there be no Power , how can men Rule ? If no Order , how can men be ruled , or be subject to others as their Governours ? Here several things must be heedfully distinguished . The Power from the Application of that Power , which we call the Title to Government . The Order it self from the form or manner of Government . Some of these I Assert as absolutely necessary to all Government of a Society , and consequently of the Church , considered without positive Laws ; but others to be accidentall , and therefore variable . I say then that there be a Governing Power in the Church of God , is immutable , not onely by Vertue of Gods own Constitution , but as a necessary result from the dictate of Nature , supposing a Society : But whether this Power must be derived by Succession , or by a free Choice , is not at all determined by the Light of Nature ; because it may be a lawful Power , and derived either way : And the Law of Nature as binding , onely determines of necessaries . Now in Civil Government , we see that a lawfull Title is by Succession in some places , as by Election in other . So in the Church under the Law , the Power went by lineal Descent , and yet a lawful Power : And on the other side , none deny ( setting aside positive Lawes ) but it might be as lawful by choice and free Election . The main Reason of this is , that the Title or Manner of conveying Authority to particular Persons , is no part of the preceptive Obligatory Law of Nature , but onely of the permissive ; and consequently is not immutable , but is subject to Divine or Humane positive Determinations , and thereby made alterable ▪ And supposing a Determination , either by Scripture or lawful Authority , the exercise of that Natural Right is so far restrained as to become sinful , according to the third Proposition under the 2. Hypoth . and the 5. Hypoth . So that granting at present , that people have the Right of choosing their own Pastors ; this Right being only a part of the Permissive Law of Nature , may be lawfully restrained and otherwise determined , by those that have lawfull authority over the people , as a Civil Society , according to the 5. Hypoth . If it be pleaded that they have a right by divine positive law , that law must be produced it being already proved , that no bare Example , without a Declaration by God that such an Example binds , doth constitute a Divine Right which is unalterable . We say then , that the manner of investing Church-Governours in their Authority , is not Determined by the Law of Nature ; but that there should be a Power Governing , is ( supposing a Society ) of the immutable Law of Nature , because it is that without which no Society can be maintained . And this is one of those things which are of the Law of Nature , not in an abs●lute state of Liberty ; but supposing some Acts of Men which ( once supposed ) become immutable , and indispensable . As supposing Propriety , every Man is bound to abstain from what is in anothers Possession , without his consent , by an immutable Law of Nature ; which yet supposeth some Act of Man , viz. the voluntary introducing of Propriety by consent : So supposing a Society in being , it is an immutable dictate of the Law of Nature , that a Power of Government should be maintained and preserved in it . So I say for the second thing , Order . This , as it implies the Subordination of some in a Society to others as their Rulers , is immutable and indispensable ; but as to the Form whereby that Order should be preserved , that is , whether the Government should be in the hands of one or more , is no wise Determined by the Obligatory Law of Nature ; because either of them may be lawfull and usefull for the ends of Government , and so neither necessary by that Law : For as to the Law of Nature , the Case is the same in Civil and Religious Societies ; Now who will say , that according to the Law of Nature , any form of Government , Monarchy , Aristocracy , Democracy , is unlawfull . These things are then matters of Naturall Liberty , and not of Naturall necessity , and therefore must be examined according to positive Determinations of Divine and Humane Lawes , where we shall speak of it . This then is clear as to our purpose , That a power in the Church must be constantly upheld and preserved , fitly qualified for the ends of Government , is an immutable Law ; so that this power be lodged in some particular Persons to act as Governours , and so distinct from others , as subordinate to them ; but whether the Power of Government come from People by Election , or from Pastors by Ordination , or from Magistrates by Commission and Delegation ; whether one , two , or all these wayes , is not determined by Naturall Law , but must be looked for in Gods positive Laws ; if not there neither to be found , we must acquiesce in what is determined by lawful Authority . The same I say again , as to forms of Government , whether the Power of sole Jurisdiction , and Ordination , be invested in one person above the rank of Presbyters , or be lodged in a Colledge acting in a p●rity of Power , is a plea must be removed from the Court of common Law of Nature , to the Kings Bench ; I mean to the positive Lawes of God , or the Supream power in a Common-wealth : There being no Statutes in the Law of Nature to determine it : it must be therefore Placitum Regis , some positive Law must end the controversie . We therefore traverse the Suit here , and shall enter it at the other Court. The second thing dictated by the Law of Nature , is , That the persons imployed in the immediate Service of God , and entrusted with the Power of governing the Society appointed for that end , should have respect paid them answerable to the Nature of their imployment . This appears to have foundation in the Law of Nature , being easily deducible from one of the first principles of that Law , that God is to be worshipped ; if so , then those whose imployment is chiefly to attend upon himself , ought to have greater Reverence then others . By the same Reason in Nature , that if we do honour the King himself , the nearer any are to the Kings Person in attendance and imployment , the greater honour is to be shewed them . The ground of which is , that the honour given to servants as such , is not given to their persons , but to their Relation , or to the one only upon the account of the other ; and so it doth not fix and terminate upon themselves , but rebounds back , and reflects upon the Original and Fountain of that Honour , the Prince himself : So if any be honoured upon the account of their immediate imployment in the service of God , it is God who is chiefly honour'd , and not they ; it being the way men have to expresse their honour to God , by shewing it proportionably and respectively to those who either represent him , or are imployed by him . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Chrysostome speaks in this very case . The honour p●sseth through them to God himself . Where he largely proves this very thing from the Egyptians sparing the Lands of their Priests ; and argues at least for an equality of honour , from reason , to be given to those who serve the true God. Nay , he is so far from looking upon it as part of their superstition , that he mounts his argument à pari , to one à minori ad majus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , As much as truth exceeds errour , and the servants of God do the Idol-priests ; so much let the honour we give to them , exceed that which was given by the Heathen to theirs : But we have a further evidence of the honourablenesse of this imployment , by the light of Nature , from the persons imployed in this work , before any positive Laws did restrain it : For I say not , that the Law of Nature doth dictate , that the function of those imployed in this work should be differenced from all other ; that is done by Divine positive Laws ; but the honour of those in that function is from the Law of Nature : which appears hence , in that in the eldest times , those who had the greatest authority civil , had likewise the sacred conjoyned with it . For as Aristotle rightly observes , that the originall of civil Government was from private families : so in those families , before they came to associate for more publike worship , the Master of the family was the Priest of it . Thence we read of Noahs sacrificing , Abrahams duty to instruct his family , and his own command for offering up his Son : we read of Iacobs sacrificing , and Iobs , and so of others . Every Master of the family then was the High Priest too , and governed his family , not only as such , but as a religious Society . Afterwards ( from what institution we know not ; but certainly the reason of it , if it were so , was to put the greater honour upon the eldest son ) it is generally conceived , that the first-born had the Priesthood of the Family in their possession , till the time of the Leviticall Law. The Jewish Doctors think that was the Birthright which Iacob procured from his Father , and which Abraham gave to Isaac , when it is said , that he gave him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all that he had : For saith Postellus , if it be meant in a literall sense , how could he give those gifts to his other Sons which are mentioned before ? Wherefore he conjectures , by that All , is meant the spiritual knowledge of Christ , which he calls Intellectus generalis ; which might be more proper to him as Priest of the family . But the plain meaning is no more , than , when Abraham had bestowed Legacies on his other Children , he left Isaac haredem ex asse , his lawfull heir : I am unwilling to deny a Tradition so generally received , among both Jewish and Christian Writers , as the Priesthood of the first-born before the Law ; but this I say , I cannot yet find any other ground for it but Tradition ▪ no place of Scripture giving us sufficient evidence for it , and many against it . That which serves sufficiently for the consutation of it , is that observation of Theodoret , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ It is to be observed , that the younger are alwayes preferred before the first-born . Which he takes notice of from the case he there speaks to of Ephraim and Manasses ; and so runs it up to Abel preferr'd before Cain , Seth before Iapheth , Abraham before his elder brethren , Isaac before Ismael , Iacob before Esau , Iudas and Ioseph before Reuben , Moses before Aaron ; and David before the rest of his Brethren ; ( although that was after the Law ) . That place which gives the greatest countenanc● to the opinion is , Numbers 3. 41. And thou shalt take the Levites for me instead of the first-born : where it seems , that the first-born were formerly the Priests , in whose room the Levites were taken . But with submission to better judgements , I can see nothing implyed in this place , but only that God having delivered their first-born in Egypt , Exodus 12. 23. and calling for them to be sanctified to him , Exodus 13. 2. upon the account of the propriety he had in them , in a peculiar manner , by that deliverance ( and not on the account of any speciall service , for many were very unfit for that by reason of age ▪ and which is observable , God requires as well the first-born of beasts both to be sanctified and redeemed , Numbers 3 41. ) therefore God now setling a way of Worship , he gave the Israelites liberty to redeem them , and instead of them pitched on the Tribe of Levi for his own service . Another plac● is Exodus 24. 5. where the young men are mentioned that offered burnt-offering . It is confessed that the Chaldee Paraphrast and Arabick Version understand here the First-born ; but however the place implyes no more then that they were employed to bring the sacrifices , for so the Septuagint render it . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or else that they were employed as the Popae only to kill the Sacrifices ; for we see the sprinkling of the blood which was the main thing intended here as a foederal rite , was done by Moses himself , who was the High , priest of the people as well as Prince , till Aaron and his sons were set a part , which was not till Exodus 28. 1 , 2. and yet Aaron was three years elder then Moses , Exod. 7. 7. which is an evidence that Aaron as first-born was not the Priest ; for till his consecration , Moses and not Aaron performed the offices of Priesthood . Thence we read , Psalm 99. 6. Moses and Aaron among his Priests . For although the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be sometimes attributed to those in civill authority , 1 as 2 Samuel . 8. 18. compared with 1 Chron. 18. 17. and 2 Sam. 26. 26. Gen. 41. 50. Exodus 2. 16. Iob 12. 19. yet there is no ▪ reason so to understand it of Moses : And further , the ground why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was attributed to both Prince and Priest before the Law , was , because the same person might be both ; as the Priests of Egypt were Princes too , Gen. 41. 50. But for Moses , we read not only of the title , but the proper offices of Priests attributed to him , as sacrificing , Exodus 24. 5. consecrating Aaron and his sons , Exodus 29. 35. and therefore Aben Ezra upon that Psalm forecited , calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the High Priest. This Priest-hood of Moses leads us to another evidence of the honour of those who were employed in the service of God , which is that when Families encreased and many associated into a Common-wealth , though the private service might belong to the master of the Family , yet the publike , before positive Laws restraining it , was most commonly joyned with the civill power . That Melchizedek was both King and Priest in Salem ; if with the Jews we conclude he was Som ( which we have little reason for ) it will be a greater evidence , Sem being then the greatest Potentate Living . But we passe from him to other Nations after the dispersion , to see where the power over religious Societies was generally held . In Egypt we find that their Priests were often made Kings , as Plutarch observes out of Hecataeus , and is confessed by Strabo , Diodorus , and others . Of the Greeks the same Plutarch gives us a large testimony , that among them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Priesthood was accounted of equal dignity with the Kingdom . The same doth Aristotle in severall places of his Politicks : and particularly of the Spartans , of whom Herodotus adds , that the Priest-hood of Iupiter Coelestis and Lacedaemonius did alwayes belong to the Kings own person . For the old Latins , Virgils Anius is sufficient : and among the Romans after the powers were separated , the Pontifex Max. had royal state , his cella'curulis and Lictores , as the Consuls had , only their Priests medled not in civill affairs , of which Plutarch gives a double reason ; the impossibility of minding both imployments as they should do , and so must either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , neglect the Worship of the Gods , or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , wrong the people with the neglect of the administration of justice . The other reason is , because those that were imployed in civill affairs , were put upon execution of justice ; and it was no wayes fit a man should come reeking from the blood of Citizens , to go and sacrifice to the Gods : This conjunction of civill and sacred power is attested by Clemens Alexandrinus of the most civilized Heathens ; so likewise by Synesius of the most ancient Nations , by Strabo of the Ephesians , by the Roman Historians of the Roman Emperours , who from Augustus to Gratian , and some say after , continued the title of Pontifex Maximus among the rest of the Imperiall Honours . Thus much then may serve to manifest how the Honour of those persons who are im 〈…〉 e service of God , and the Governme 〈…〉 is a dictate of the Law of 〈…〉 CHAP. V. The third thing dictated by the Law of Nature , is the solemnity of all things to be performed in this Society ; which lies in the gravity of all Rites and Ceremonies , in the composed temper of mind . Gods worship rationall . His spirit destroyes not the use of reason . The Enthusiastick Spirit discovered . The circumstantiating of fit time and place for Worship . The seventh day , on what account so much spoken of by Heathens The Romans Holy dayes . Cessation of labour upon them . The solemnity of Ceremonies used . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Silence in Devotions . Exclusion of unfit persons . Solemnity of discipline : Excommunication among the Iews by the sound of a Trumpet , amongst Christians by a Bell. THe next thing in reference to religious Societies which Nature dictates , is , That all things , either pertaining to the immediate worship of God , or belonging to the Government of that Society , be performed with the greatest solemnity and decency that may be . Which dictate ariseth from the nature of the things themselves ; which being most grave and serious , do require the greatest gravity and seriousnesse in the doing of them . And therefore any Ceremonies , Actions , or Gestures , which tend to the discomposing mens Spirits , are upon that account to be exploded out of any religious Societies , as being so directly repugnant to the Nature , design , and performance of religious duties . Wherefore that is the standing Rule of all instituted Ceremonies , by the Law of Nature in the Worship of God , that they be such as tend immediately to the advancing the serenity , tranquillity , and composure of their minds who observe them ; and not such which in their own nature , or by continuall custome of the users of them , do either rarifie mens spirits too much into a superficiall lightnesse and vanity of spirit ; or el●e sink them too much below the command of reason , into the power of unruly passions . A clear and composed spirit , is only fit for converse with things of so high a Nature . That Region which is nearest Heaven , is the freest from clouds and vapours , as well as those dancing Meteors , which hover about in a light uncertain motion . It strangely unbecomes the Majesty of religious worship to have any thing vulgar , triviall , much more ridiculous in it . The Worship of God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a rationall worship , as well in regard of that real on which should moderate and govern the manner of service , as in regard of those faculties which should be most ●mployed in it ; or the foundation which the service hath upon the dictates of mens naturall reason . And as Nature tells us , there should be nothing too light or superficiall , so neither any thing whereby men are carried beyond the bounds of their own reason : For what men do at such a time , is not their own proper act , but is more properly to be ascribed to the power , strength , and excess of a Melancholy fancy , or else to a higher Enthusiasticall spirit , which then actuates and informs their sancies : And therefore it hath been well observed , as a Characteristicall difference between the true Propheticall spirit , and the false and counterfeit ; that the one leaves men in the free use of their reason and faculties ; the other alienates them by Panick fears , tremblings , and consternations both of body and mind . To which purpose many evidences are brought by a late learned Writer , in his Discourse of Prophecy out of the Heathen and Christian Authors . These latter discovering the vanity of the Montanisticall spirit by this one observation : which besides the Authors there cited , ( viz. Clemens Alexandrinus , Miltiades in Eusebius , Ierom and Chrysostome ) may appear from Epiphanius , who largely and excellently discourseth on this Subject , when he discovers the folly of Montanus and his followers : And gives this reason why they could be no true Prophets ; for those that were so , had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . A great consistency of sense , reason , and discourse ; and instanceth in Isaiah and Ezekiel : for saith he , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . A true Prophet had alwayes the free use of his reason and faculties , and spake from the spirit of God with consistency and coherence of Discourse . But it was quite otherwise with the M●ntanists , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . They were alwayes trembling both in body and mind ; used no consequence of reason in discourse ; their words had no proper sense , but were all dark , intricate and obscure . An exact description of a late prevailing Sect among us , who have their names from those consternations they were wont to fall into , and whose language carries as much obscurity with it , as any of the followers of Montanus could wrap up theirs into . Only , instead of Montanus his Paraclete , they tell us of a Light within , whose office is much of the same nature with the other ; And one of the great errours of Montanus was , the adhering to Enthusiasms and revelations beyond and beside the written Word ; which is the Helena of our late Opinionists , because it gives a liberty for venting any conceptions of their own brains , under the pretence and disguise of a Light within . But we see hence , how far such tremblings and consternations of body and mind are from a true , sober , Prophetick spirit : and how those Christians who lived in the time when the Spirit of Prophe●y had not yet left the Church of Christ ( as appears by Origen , Tertullian , and others : ) yet they alwayes looked upon any violent extasie , or fury , as an evidence of a false Prophet . And therefore Tertullian , when grown a Proselyte of Montanus , endeavours strongly to remove that apprehension of the exstaticall fury of Montanus , and Prisca , and Maximilla , granting , if it were true , that it was a mark of a false and counterfeit prophetical spirit . The true Prophets I grant of old , were by the strength of the impression of their visions upon their Animal spirits , sometimes thrown into a fit of trembling ; but then it was not continually so , and when it was , it might be rather a prefent astonishment from so strange and unwonted sight ( as is common in such cases ) or else from the strong apprehension they had of the dismall judgements God threatned to the people ▪ but however , it never took from them the free use of their reason and faculties , which were alwayes conversant about the matters reveased unto them . But as Proo●pius Gaz●●● observes of the false Prophets , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they were acted like mad m●● ▪ Which he takes notice of upon occassion o● Sa●●● prophe●ying when the evil spirit came upon him ; and interprets with the Jewish Writers , of a madnesse rather then true Prophecy . Such as that of Cassandra when she is brought in by Lycophron , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Utt'ring a strange confused noise , Much like unto black Sphinx's voice . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith Tz●tzes , that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is fully described by Lucan , of one pretending Enthusiasm : — sub pectore ficta qui●to Verba refert , nullo confus a murmure voci● , Instinctam sacro mentem testata furore . And soon after , — non rupta trementi Verba sono , nec vox antri complere capacis Sufficiens spatium — Whereby he discovers her , not to be a true Enthusiast , because she used not such a strange confused voice and tremblings as they did who were their proper Enthusiasts , as the Sybils and the Pythian prophetess . By this we see , that these Earthquakes of violent passions are caused by the Prince of the ayr , and not by the gentle breathings of the Divine Spirit : That these convulsions of mens spirits , are not the consequents of the inhabitation of the good Spirit , but of the violent intrusion of the evil one : That that temper of mind is most suitable to Religion , which is as well free from the bleaknesse and turbulency of passion , as the saint gleams of Lightnesse and Vanity . But a further solemnity then this is required by the dictates of Nature too , which lyes in the circumstantiating of time and place , and a dedication of both to the end of Worship . That these are very consonant to natural Reason , appears by the universall consent of all Nations agreeing : in any form of the Worship of a Deity : who have all had their set-times , and fixed places to perform this Worship in . I shall not insist as some have done , that the Seventh day hath been particularly and solemnly observed for the worship of God by the consent of Nations : Although there be many probable arguments and plausible testimonies brought for a peculiarity of honour to , if not service on , the Seventh-day , out of Iosephus , Aristobulus , Iudaeus ( and by him from Linus , Hesiod , Homer ) Clemens Alexandrinus , Tertullian , Lampridius , Seneca , Tibullus , and many others . From which Testimonies , it appears that some kind of reverence and honour was given to the Seventh-day ; but whether that day was the seventh of the week , or the seventh of the month ; ( which was consecrated among the Greeks to Apollo , upon which the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the seventh of every month were observed in honour of him ; ) whether the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did belong to the seventh as one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Festivall or inauspicious dayes ( for it was common to both ) ? Whether observed by any publike religious custome , or by some private superstition , are things too large to inquire into , too difficult now to determine , and not necessary for my present purpose ; It being sufficient in order to that , if they had any set times at all for worship , which shews how solemn the worship of God ought to be . And this is not denyed by any ; it being so necessary a consectary from the duty of Worship that there must be a time for performance of it . And not only in generall that there must be some time , but a sufficient proportion of time to be consecrated to the publike exercise of piety , both from the consideration of mans obligation to divine service from his nature , from the weight and concernment of the things that time is imployed in , and the inward sense of immortality upon the soul of man. But then what this proportion of time must exactly be , I see not how meer natural light could determine it , but it would rather suggest it to be highly reasonable to wait for and expect such a determination from the supream Rector and Governour of the world . It being far more fit for the Master to prescribe unto the servant what proportion of service he expects from him , then that the servant should both divide and choose his own time , and the proportion of service which he owes to his Master . Nay it being so much more reasonable for us to wait for Gods order , then for a servant for his Masters , as Gods power and Dominion over the creature is greater then that of a Master over his servant ; as it is the voyce and sense of nature that Gods commands cannot otherwise be but just , holy , reasonable and good : which may be otherwise from men ; as the acceptance of our persons with God , lies not barely in the work done ; but in the doing it out of obedience to the commands of God ; which is otherwise with men ▪ as , God can give strength to perform what he commands , which man cannot : which things considered make it evident to be highly reasonable that God himself should prescribe the proportion of time , and not mans nature . But when God hath thus determined it , nature cannot but assent to that particular determination , that in consideration of the works of God , it is most reasonable that rather one day in a week , then one in a month , should be dedicated to Gods service ; that the seventh day of the week upon Gods resting on that day and sanctifying it , should be the precise day , unlesse some reason equivalent to that of the first institution , and approved by God for that end , be the ground of its alteration to another of the seven , which is the reason of the change under the Gospel . As an evidence of the solemnity of times for worship , the Romans as well as other Nations had their several feriae ; their dayes set apart for the honour of their Gods. In which Macrobius tells us the Priests held them polluted , si indictis conceptisque opus aliquod fieret ; praetereâ regem sacrorum flamines que non licebat videre feriis opus fieri , & ideò per praeconem denuntiabatur nè quid tale ageretur , & praecepti negligens multabatur . If any work were done upon those dayes of Rest , the day was polluted ; and the person punished , unlesse it were as Umbro there affirms , in order to the honour of their Gods , or for necessaries of life . To which purpose Scaevola answered him that asked , what work must be done upon the Feria : Quod pratermissum noceret , What would be spoiled by letting alone ; as taking an Ox out of a ditch , strengthening a beam like to fall and ruine men ; and thence Maro allowed it lawfull to wash sheep if it were to cure , and not only to cleanse them . Balautumque gregem fluvio mersare salubri . By which last word , Macrobius saith it was only lawfull to do it for healing them , and not in order to gain . Servius informs us likewise that the Priests when they went to sacrifice , sent their servants before to bid all Tradesmen leave working , nè pro negotio suo & ipsorum oculos & Deorum ceremonias attaminent ; Feria enim operae Deorum creditae sunt ; Lest by following their work they both offend them and the Gods too : For these Holy-dayes are devoted to the service of the Gods. Festus saith that upon their dies religiosi , nisi quod necesse est , nefas habetur facere ; nothing but works of pure necessity were to be done , But by dies religiosi , probably he means the dies atr● & nefasti ; their ominous unlucky dayes , as they accounted them . But however , Macrobius distinguisheth the dayes among the Romans into Dies festi , profesti , & intercisi . The Festi were dedicated to the Gods , the Profesti to their own works , the Intercisi were divided between both , at some hours of which it was lawfull to follow their civill employments , at others not . Nam cum hostiacaeditur , fari nefas est ; inter caesa & porrecta , fari licet ; rursus cum adoletur , non licet . While the sacrifice was killing no Courts of Judicature were opened ( in which the Praetor might fari tria verba solemnia , Do , dico ; addico , thence called dies fasti ) but between the killing the sacrifice and offering up the entrails ( called Porrecta from porricere , which was verbum sacrificale pervetustum , saith Turnebus , an old word belonging to sacrificing , exta Di●s cum dabant , porricere dicebant , Varro ) then it was lawfull to open the Courts ; but again when the sacrifice was offered , it was not . By which we see as from the light of Nature , that what dayes and times , whether weekly , monthly or Anniversary , were designed and appointed as dies Festi , for the service of God , were to be spent wholly in order to that end , and not to give some part to God , and take others to themselves : as they were wont to do in their sacrifices , to offer up some part to the Gods , and feast upon the rest themselves , as Athenaeus tells us that Conon and Alcibiades offered such Hecatombs to the Gods , that they entertained the people upon the remainders of them . And from hence we may see how far short of natural light their Religion falls , who make no scruple of spending a great part of the dayes devoted to Gods worship in following either their imployments or recreations : Which latter seem more directly to impugne the end of such time appointed then the other , in as much as recreations tend more to the ratifying mens spirits ; and evaporating them into lightnesse and vanity , and so discomposing them for the duties of spirituall worship , then mens serious and lawfull callings do . But further , we observe , among the Romans severall sorts of dayes appointed for publike worship . Macrobius reckons up four sorts of them , Stative , Conceptivae , Imperativae , & Nundinae . Stativae , were the set festivall dayes observed every year by the whole people , and marked for that end in their Fasti. Such were the Agonalia , Carmentalia , Lupercalia , which are marked with red Letters in the Fasti consulares , or the Calendarium Romanum , by Ios. Scaliger call'd Calendarium Colotianum , which may be seen at large in Mr. Selden : besides which , their other anniversary festivals are there set down : which Tertullian saith , being all put together , Pentecostem implere non poterunt , make not up the number of fifty ; and so not so many as our Lords Dayes in a year are . Conceptivae , were such festivals as were annually observed , but the dayes of the keeping them were every year determined by the Magistrates of the Priests , as Latinae , Sementivae , Paganalia , Compitalia . Imperativa , were such as the Consuls or Praetors did command at their own pleasure . Such were their solemn supplications in times of trouble , and their dayes of Triumph and Thanksgiving for Victories . The Nundinae were those which returned every ninth day , and therefore the Letter by which they observed the return of the ninth day , was H. as among us Christians G. which because it notes the return of the Lords Dayes , we call the Dominical Letter . These Nundinae were the days when the Country people brought in their wares into the City to be sold , which were anciently observed as festival dayes , sacred to Iupiter , but by the Lex Hortensia were made Dies fasti , for determining the Controversies that might arise among the people in their dealings ; as the Court of Pye-powder was instituted among us upon the same account . So much for the solemnity of time used in the service of God. Another evidence of the solemnity of Wo●ship , was the extraordinary care of the Heathens in preparing themselves for it , by cleansing and purifying themselves with water , for which purpose they had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for cleansing their hands , and their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 standing at the porch of their Temples for their whole bodies , which custome was generally observed by the Heathens , as is very obvious in the severall Writers of their Customs in sacrificing ; besides which they observed likewise this washing with water , by way of lustration and expiation of their faults , as Triclinius the Sholiast on Sophocles tells us , it was an antient custome when men had murthered others , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to wash their hands in expiation of their guilt ; as Orestes did in Pausanias after the killing his mother , and some think Pilate in the Gospel did so for the same end ; but his was only to declare his innocency , and not to expiate his sin , as is observed by many upon that place . But however , from hence we may take notice of the Spring and Fountain of the Popes Holy-water : which was consecrated by Numa long before Alexander 1. to whom Polydore Virgil and others attribute the first use of it in the Christian Church : And as the use of it , and the manner of sprinkling it is the same among the Papists , as it was among the Heathen ; so likewise the end of it : witness the old Rime , Hac aqua benedicta , deleat mihi mea delicta . Which may be sufficiently answered with the Ce●sure of a Heathen ; Ah nimiùm faciles qui tristia crimina caedi● Tolli flùmineâ posse putatis aquâ ! Too easie souls who think the spots of blood Can be wash'd out with every watry flood . But from this I pass to the solemnity in their Worship it self , evidenced by the generall silence commanded in it ; which appears by Horace's Favete , linguis , Ovids Ore favent populi nunc cum venit aurea pompa ; Virgils fida silentia sacris ; Festus ' s Linguam pascito , i. e. coerceto ; The Egyptians setting Harpocrates his Image in the entrance to their Temples , and the Romans placing the Statue of Angerona on the Altar of Volupia . The Greeks had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Iulius Pollux tells us , which Plautus calls facere audientiam , to command silence : much as the Deacons afterwards did in the Primitive Church , who were wont to command silence by their Orarium , and were thence call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Christians ( for though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as applyed to the Bishop and Presbyters , did signifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to preach ; yet as it was applyed to the Deacons , it implyed only their commanding silence in order to the prayers of the Catechumeni , call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Aristenus observes on Concil . Carthag . can . 106. But this by the way . ) The formula used by the Greeks in commanding silence was , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which Aristonicus the Fidler alluded when in the Market place of Mylassa , a Town in Caria , he saw many Temples , and but few Citizens , he cryed out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But I passe these things over , as being commonly known , only observing from them the solemnity of their publick devotions ; which is further seen in their solemn excluding unfit persons from partaking with them in their sacrifices . Of which Virgil , Ovid , Statius , Silius Italicus , and others among the Romans speak ; and the Lictor in some Sacrifices stood up , saith Festus , and cryed aloud , Hostis , mulier , vinctus , exesto , i. e. extra esto : and to keep unfit persons the better ff , the Flamines had a Commentaculum , a kind of Rod in their hands . Among the Greeks the old form continued from Orpheus or Onomacritus his Orphaica , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and those that sacrifice , asked 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the other answered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . From all these things laid together , we see the great solemnity used by them in their worship , which considered in its self , was not the product of superstition , but a dictate of the Law of Nature . And it seems most naturall to the acts of discipline , that they should be performed in the most publick solemn manner , and not in any private C●andestine way : which being so done , oft times lose the designed effect of them , in making men sensible and ashamed of those miscarriages which made them deserve so sharp and severe a censure . Thence among the Jews , their solemn sentence of the greater excommunication was pronounced by the sound of a Trumpet ; and so they say Meroz was excommunicated with 400. Trumpets : and the same number they report was used in excommunicating Iesus of Nazareth , which was usually done by the Magistrate , or the Rector of the University : as they tell us a story of a man coming to buy flesh at Pombeditha ( which was one of the three Universities of the remaining Jews in Chaldea after the return from Captivity , the other were Sora and Neharda ) but offering some opprobrious language to R. Iehuda then Governour of the University , he makes no more to do , but prolatus tubis hominem excommunicavit , brings out his Trumpets and excommunicates him . And as the use of Bells , since their invention , did supply the former use of Trumpets in calling the Congregation together ( which I suppose was the account of using Trumpets in excommunicating from the Congregation ) so it seems the Bells were sometimes used to ring men out of , as well as into the Church ; thence the solemn Monkish curse , cursing men with Bell , Book and Candle , which can have no other sense but from this practice . So much shall suffice to shew the soundation which the solemnity of Worship , and the acts belonging to it , have in the dictates of Nature manifested by the voyce and consent of Nations , for herein vox Populi is vox Naturae , as at other times it is Vox Dei. CHAP. VI. The fourth thing dictated by the Law of Nature , that there must be a way to end Controversies arising , which tend to break the peace of the Society . The nature of schis●● considered ; Liberty of judgement and authority distinguished ; the latter must be parted within religious Societies as to private persons . What way the light of Nature directs to , for ending Controversies , in an equality of power , that the lesse number yield to the greater : on what Law of Nature that is founded . In a subordination of power that there must be a liberty of Appeals defined . Independency of particular Congregations considered . Elective Synods . The Original of Church-Government as to Congregations . The case paralleld between Civil and Church Government . Where Appeals finally lodge . The power of calling Synods , and confirming their acts in the Magistrate . THe fourth thing which Nature dictates in reference to a Church-society , is , That there must be a way agreed upon to determine and decide all those Controversies arising in this Society , which immediately tend to the breaking the peace and unity of it . We have seen already that natural reason requires a disparity between persons in a society : To form and constitute a Society , there must be order and power in some , there must be inferiority and subjection in others answering to the former ; And by these we suppose a Society to be now modeld . But Nature must either be supposed defective in its designs and contrivements as to the necessaries required for the management of them ; or else there must likewise be implyed a sufficient provision for the maintenance and preservation of the Societies thus entred into . It is no wise agreeable to the wisdom of Nature to erect a Fabrick with such materials , which though they may lye one upon the other , yet if not fitly compacted together , will fall in pieces again assoon as it is set up : nor yet to frame a body with meer flesh and bones , and the superiority of some members above the other ; for unlesse there be joints and sinews and ligatures to hold the parts together , the dissolution ( will immediately ) follow the formation of it . The end and design of Nature is , preservation and continuance , and therefore things necessary in order to that , must be implyed in the first design of the being of the thing ; so that at least , as to its self , there be no defect in order to that . This must in reason be supposed in all Societies , that when they are first entred , it must be upon such terms as may be sufficient to maintain and keep up those Societies in that peace and order which is requisite in order to the continuance of them . For what diseases are to bodies , Age and fire are to buildings , that divisions and animosities are to Societies , all equally tending to the ruine and destruction of the things they seize upon . And as bodies are furnished by Nature , not only with a receptive and concoctive faculty , of what tends to their nourishment , but with an expulsive faculty of what would tend to the ruine of it . So all civill bodies must not only have ways to strengthen them , but must have likewise a power to expell and disperse those noxions humours and qualities which tend to dissolve the frame , compages and constitution of them . A power then to prevent mischiefs is as necessary in a Society , as a power to settle things in order to the advancement of the common good of Society . This therefore the Church as a religious Society must likewise he endowed with , viz. a power to maintain its self , and keep up peace and unity within its self : which cannot otherwise be supposed ( considering the bilious humour in mens natures , not wholly purged out by Christianity ) without some way to decide Controversies which will arise , disturbing the peace of it . For the clearing of this , which much concerns the power and government of the Church , we shall consider what the controversies are which tend to break the Churches peace : and what way the Law of nature finds out for the ending of them , Which we are the more necessitated to speak to , because nothing hath begotten controversies more then the power of determining them hath done . The Controversies then which tend to break the peace of a religious Society , are either matter of different practice , or matter of different opinion . The former , if it comes from no just and necessary cause , and ends in a totall separation from that Society the person guilty of it was joyned with , is justly call'd Schism ; which ( as 〈…〉 it ▪ ) is an Ecclefiasticall sedition , as Sedition i● a Lay Schism ; both being directly contrary to that communion and friendlinesse which should be preserved in all Societies . The latter , if impugning somewhat fundamentall , in order to the end of constituting religious Societies , or being a lesser matter , if wilfully taken up , and obstinately maintained , is call'd Here sit ; which two are seldom seen out of each others company . , and when they are together , are like the blind and same man in the Fable , the one lent the other eyes , and the other lent him feet : one to find out what they desired , the other to run away with it when they had it . The Heretick he useth his eyes to spy out some cause or pretence of deserting Communion ▪ the Schismatick he helps him with his leg● to run away from it ; but between them both , they rob the Church of its peace and unity . But in order to the making clear what the Churches power is in reference to these , we are to take notice of these things . First , That the Church hath no direct immediate power over mens opinions : So that a matter of meer different opinion lyes not properly within the cognizance of any Church power ; the reason of it is this , because the end of power lodged in the Church , is to preserve the peace and unity of its self : now a meer different opinion doth not violate the bonds of Society ; for , Opinionum di●er sitas & opinantium unitas non sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Men may preserve communion under different apprehensions . So long then ▪ as diversity of opinion tends not to the breaking the quiet and tranquillity of the Church of God , a man may safely enjoy his own private apprehensions , as to any danger of molestation from Church ▪ Governours ; That is , so long as a man keeps his opinion to himself , and hath the power of being his own Counsellor . It is not the difference of opinion formally considered when it is divulged abroad that is punishable , but the tendency to Schism , which lyes in the div●lging of it , and drawing others away from the received Truths : For the opinion its self is an internall act of the mind , and therefore is punishable by no externall power , as that of the Magistrate or Church is ; as no internall action is under the jurisdiction or authority of a Magistrate , any further then as necessarily conjoyned with the outward action , or as it hath a direct influence upon it . The case of blasphemy , which is a thing of the highest nature in this kind , is not punishable by men , as blasphemy implyes low and undervaluing thoughts of God ; but as being a thing divulged ( else no formal blaspemy ) it tends apparently to the dishonour of God , and consequently to the breaking in pieces all such Societies , whose great foundation is the belief of the Majesty and glory of God. So Idolatry under the Law was punished , as it was immediately destructive of that obedience which men did owe to the true God. And under the Gospel , it is not meer difference of opinion , judgement , and apprehension , which layes men open to the Censures of that power which moderates and rules a religious Society ; but the endeavour by difference of opinion to alienate mens spirits one from another , and thereby to break the Society into fractions and divisions , is that which makes men liable to restraint and punishment . From whence it follows , that where the peace and unity of the Church may be preserved , and yet men keep up different apprehensions of things , there is nothing deserving any severe animadversion from the Rulers of that Society : For a power corrective , and vindictive , must suppose something acted contrary to the Laws and Rules of the Society , and the end of committing that power into the hands of Governours : now here is nothing of that nature ; for the Laws of mutual Society are observed ; and the end of Church-Government is to see nè quid Ecclesia detrimenti capiat , lest the Church as a Society be any wayes prejudiced : which cannot be while men maintain that love , affection , and communion which becomes the members of such a Society . The unity then required in the Church , is not an unity of judgement and apprehension among the members of it , which though it be their duty to endeavour after , yet it is no further attainable by mens endeavours then perfection is ; and Unio Christianorum in this sense , is one of the Jewels belonging to the Crown of Heaven . There , is no necessity then of inquiring after an infallible Judge of Controversies , unlesse we had some promise and assurance from Christ , that the members of his Church should never differ in their judgements from one another , and then what need of an infallible Judge ? and if Christ had appointed an infallible Judg , he would infallibly have discovered it to the minds of all sober men ; or else his infallibility could never attain its end : For while I question whether my Judge be infallible or no , I cannot infallibly assent to any of his determinations . And where there is no ground for an infallible Judge , for any to pretend to it , is the worst of supposable errours , because it renders all others incurable by that apprehension , and takes away all possibility of repentance while men are under that perswasion . The Unity then of the Church , is that of Communion , and not that of Apprehension ; and different opinions are no further lyable to censures , then as men by the broaching of them , do endeavour to disturb the peace of the Church of God. That then which seems most lyable to censures in a Church , is Schism , as being immediately destructive of that communion which should be maintained in a religious Society . But as to this too , we must observe something further , and not to think and judge every thing to deserve the name , which is by many call'd Schism ; it being well observed by a very learned and judicious Divine ; that Heresie and Schism , as they are commonly used , are two Theologicall scare-crows , with which , they who use to uphold a party in Religion , use to fright away such , as making enquiry into it , are ready to relinquish and oppose it , if it appear either erroneous or suspitious . For as Plutarch reports of a Painter , who having unskilfully painted a Cock , chased away all Cocks and Hens , that so the imperfection of his Art might not appear by comparison with nature ; so men willing for ends , to admit of no fancy but their own , endeavour to hinder an enquiry into it , by way of comparison of somewhat with it , peradventure truer , that so the deformity of their own might not appear . Thus he ▪ Schism then , as it imports a separation from communion with a Church-society , is not a thing intrinsecally and formally evil in it self , but is capable of the differences of good and evil according to the grounds , reasons , ends , and circumstances inducing to such a separation . The withdrawing from Society , is but the materiality of Schism ; the formality of it must be fetched from the grounds on which that is built . It is therefore a subject which deserve a strict inquiry , what things those are which may make a withdrawing from a religious Society , to which a man is joyned , to be lawfull : For as it is a great sin on the one hand , unnecessarily to divide and separate from Church-society ; so it is an offence on the other side , to continue communion when it is a duty to withdraw it . For the resolving this knotty and intricate Question , I shall lay down some things by way of premisall , and come closely to the resolution of it . First , Every Christian is under an obligation to joyn in Church-society with others , because it is his duty to professe himself a Christian , and to own his Religion publickly , and to partake of the Ordinances and Sacraments of the Gospel , which cannot be without society with some Church or other . Every Christian as such , is bound to look upon himself as the member of a body , viz. the visible Church of Christ ; and how can he be known to be a member , who is not united with other parts of the body ? There is then an obligation upon all Christian● ▪ to engage in a religious Society with others , for partaking of the Ordinances of the Gospel . It hath been a case disputed by some ( particularly by Grotius the supposed Author of a little Tract , An semper sit communicandum per symbolu ? when he designed the Syncretism with the Church of Rome ) whether in a time when Churches are divided , it be a Christians duty to communicate with any of those parties which divide the Church , and not rather to suspend communion from all of them . A case not hard to be decided ; for either the person questioning it , doth suppose the Churches divided to remain true Churches , but some to be more pure then others , in which case , by vertue of his generall obligation to communion , he is bound to adhere to that Church which appears most to retain its Evangelicall purity ; Or else he must suppose one to be a true Church , and the other not ; in which the case is clearer , that he is bound to communicate with the true Church : or he must judge them alike impure , which is a case hard to be found ; but supposing it is so , either he hath joyned formerly with one of them , or he is now to choose which to joyn with ; if he be joyned already with that Church , and sees no other but as impure as that , he is bound to declare against the impurity of the Church , and to continue his communion with it ; if he be to choose communion , he may so long suspend till he be satisfied , which Church comes nearest to the primitive constitution , and no longer . And therefore I know not whether Chrysostomes act were to be commended , who after being made a Deacon in the Church of Antioch by Meletius , upon his death , because Flavianus came in irregularly as Bishop of the Church , would neither communicate with him , nor with Paulinus another Bishop at that time in the City , nor with the Meletians , but for three years time withdrew himself from communion with any of them . Much lesse were the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Haesitantes as the Latins called them , to be commended , who after the determination of the Council of Chalcedou against Entyches , because of great differences remaining in Egypt and the Eastern Churches , followed Zenoes Henoticum , and would communicate neither with the Orthodox Churches , nor Eutychians . But I see not what censure J●●ome could in ●urr , who going into the Diocesse of Antioeh , and finding the Churches there under great divisions , there being besides the Arian Bishop , three others in the Church of Antioch , Meletius , Paulinus , and Vitalis , did so long suspend communion with any of them , till he had satisfied himself about the occasion of the Schism , and the innocency of the persons and Churches engaged in it . But if he had withdrawn longer , he had offended against his obligation to joyn in Church-society with others , for participation of Gospel-Ordinances ; which is the necessary duty of every Christian. Secondly , Every Christian actually joyned in Church-society with others , is so long bound to maintain society with them , till his communion with them becomes sin . For nothing else can justifie withdrawing from such a Society , but the unlawfulness of continuing any longer in it . Supposing a Church then to remain true , as to its constitution and essentials , but there be many corruptions crept into that Church ; whether is it the duty of a Christian to withdraw from that Church because of those corruptions , and to gather new Churches only for purer administration , or to joyn with them only for that end ? This , as far as I understand it , is the state of the Controversie between our Parochiall Churches , and the Congregationall . The resolution of this great Question must depend on this ; Whether is it a sin to communicate with Churches true as to essentialls , but supposed corrupt in the exercise of discipline ? For Parochiall Churches are not denyed to have the essentialls of true Churches by any sober Congregational men . For there is in them the true Word of God preached , the true Sacraments administred , and an implicite Covenant between Pastor and People , in their joyning together . All that is pleaded then , is corruption , and defect in the exercise and administration of Church order and Discipline . Now that it is lawfull for Christians to joyn with Churches so defective , is not only acknowledged by Reverend Mr. Norton in his answer to Apollius , but largely and fully proved . For which he layes down five Propositions which deserve to be seriously considered , by all which make that a plea for withdrawing from society with other Churches . First , A Believer may lawfully joyn himself in communion with such a Church , where he cannot enjoy all the Ordinances of God ; a● in the Jewish Church , in our Saviours time , which refused the Gospel of Christ , and the baptism of Iohn ; and yet our Saviour bids us hear the Scribes and Pharisees sitting in Moses Chair , which hearing , saith he , doth imply conjunctionem Ecclesiae Iudaicae , a joyning with the Iewish Church : and so with Churches rejecting an article of faith ; in the Church of Corinth the doctrine of the Re●●●rection , in the Churches of Galatia the doctrine of Ju 〈…〉 ion by faith ; but the Apostle no-where requires separation on that account from them . Secondly ▪ A Believer may lawfully joyn in communion with such a Church , in which some corruption in the worship of God is tolerated without Reformation . As the offering on High-places from Solomon to Hez●kiah in the Church of Iuda , observation of Circumc●sion , and the necessity of keeping the Ceremonial Law in the Churches of Gala●ia . Thirdly , A Believer may lawfully joyn himself in communion with such a Church in which such are admitted to Sacraments , who give no evident signs of grace , but seem to be Lovers of this World ; which he proves , because it is every ones main duty to examine himself , and because anothers sin is no hurt to him , and therefore cannot keep him from his duty ; and then by mens coming unworthily , non polluitur communio , licet minuitur consolatio , the communion i● not defiled , though the comfort of it be diminished . He brings instance from the Church of Corinth , among whom were many scandalous , and had not repented , 2 Cor. 12. 20 , 21. So in the Jewish Church which lay under great corruptions , when our Saviour and his Apostles communicated with it . Fourthly , Although a Believer joyn with such a Church , he is not therefore bound with the guilt , nor defiled with the pollutions of others ; which he proves , because it is lawfull to do it , and so he contract : no guilt by it . Fifthly , A Believer that hath joyned himself to such a Church , is not bound to withdraw , and separate from such a Church under pain of guilt if he doth it not , because it implyes a contradiction to be lawfull to joyn to such a Church , and yet unlawfull to continue in its communion ; for that speaks it to be a Church , and this latter to be no Church ; and by that he doth imply it to be unlawfull to separate from any Society which is acknowledged to be a true Church , Thus for that learned and Reverend man , by whom we see that the received Principles of the sober and moderate part of those of that perswasion , are not at such a distance from others , as many imagine . We see then that communicating with a Church not so pure as we desire , i● no sin by the arguments by him produced . And how it should be then lawfull to withdraw from such a Church , meerly for purer communion , I 〈…〉 stand not . This I am sure was not the case of our Churches in their separation from the Church of Rome : the main ground of which was the sin of communicating with that Church in her Idolatry and Superstition , and the impossibility of communicating with her , and not partaking of her sins , because she required a profession of her errours , and the practise of her Idolatry as the necessary conditions of her communion ; in which case it is a sin to communicate with her . And this leads me now to a closer resolution of the case of withdrawing from Churches in which men have formerly been associated , and the grounds which may make such a withdrawing lawfull . In order to that we must distinguish between these things . First , Between corruptions in the doctrine of a Church , and corruptions in the practice of a Church . Secondly , Between corruptions whether in doctrine , or practise , professed and avowed by a Church , and required as conditions of communion in all members of it , and corruptions crept in , and only tolerated in a Church . Thirdly , Between non-Communion as to the abuses of a Church , and a positive and totall separation from a Church , as it is such . From these things I lay down these following Propositions . First , Where any Church is guilty of corruptions , both in doctrine and practice , which it avoweth and professeth , and requireth the owning them as necessary conditions of communion with her , there a non-communion with that Church is necessary , and a totall and positive separation is lawfull and convenient . I have said already that the necessity and lawfulnesse of this departing from communion with any Church is wholly to be resolved by an inquiry into the grounds and reasons of the action it self . So that the matter of fact must of necessity be discussed , before the matter of Law as to separation from the Church be brought into debate . If there be a just and necessary cause for separation , it must needs be just and necessary ; therefore the cause must be the ground of resolving the nature of the ●ction . Schism then is a separation from any Church upon any slight , triviall , unnecessary cause ; but if the cause be great and important , a Departure it may be , Schism it cannot be . They who define Schism to be a voluntary separation from the Church of God ; if by voluntary , they mean that where the will is the cause of it : the definition stands good and true ; for that must needs be groundless and unnecessary as to the Church it self : but if by voluntary be meant a spontaneous departing from communion with a Church , which was caused by the corruptions of that Church , then a separation may be so voluntary , and yet no Schism : for though it be voluntary , as to the act of departing , yet that is only consequentially , supposing a cause sufficient to take such a resolution ; but what is voluntary antecedently , that it hath no other Motive but faction and humour , that is properly Schism , and ought so to be looked upon . But in our present case , three things are supposed as the causes and motives to such a forsaking communion . First , Corruption in Doctrine ; the main ligature of a religious Society is the consent of it in Doctrine with the rule of Religion , the Word of God. Therefore any thing which tends to subvert and overthrow the foundation of the gathering such a Society ( which is the profession and practice of the true Religion ) yields sufficient ground to withdraw from communion with those who professe and maintain it . Not that every small errour is a just ground of separation , for then there would be no end of separation , and men must separate from one another , till knowledge comes to its perfection , which will only be in glory ; but any thing which either directly or consequentially doth destroy any fundamental article of Christian faith . Which may be as well done by adding to fundamental articles , as by plain denying them . And my reason is this : because the very ratio of a fundamentall article doth imply , not only its necessity to be believed and practised ( and the former in reference to the latter , for things are therefore necessary to be known , because necessary to be done , and not è contrà ) but likewise its sufficiency as to the end for which it is called Fundamentall . So that the articles of faith called Fundamentall , are not only such as are necessary to be believed , but if they be , are sufficient for salvation to all that do believe them . Now he that adds any thing to be believed or done as fundamentall , that is necessary to salvation , doth thereby destroy the sufficiency of those former articles in order to salvation ; for if they were sufficient , how can new ones be necessary . The case wil be clear by an Instance . Who assert the satisfaction of Christ for sinners to be a fundamentall article , and thereby do imply the sufficiency of the belief of that in order to salvation ; now if a Pope or any other command me to believe the meritoriousnesse of good works with the satisfaction of Christ as necessary to salvation , by adding this he destroyes the former as a fundamentall article : for if Christs satisfaction be sufficient , how can good works be meritorious ? and if this latter be necessary , the other was not ; for if it were , what need this be added ! Which is a thing the Papists with their new Creed of Pius the fourth would do well to consider : and others too , who so confidently assert that none of their errours touch the foundation of faith . Where there is now such corruption in Doctrine supposed in a Church ; withdrawing and separation from such a Church , is as necessary as the avoiding of her errours , and not partaking of her sins is . Thence we read in Scripture , of rejecting such as are hereticks , and withdrawing from their society , which will as well hold , to Churches as to persons , and so much the more , as the corruption is more dangerous , and the relation nearer of a member to a Church , then of one man to another : And from the reason of that command , we read in Ecclesiasticall History , that when Eulalius , Euphronius , and Placentius were constituted Bishops of Antioch , being Arrians , many both of the Clergy and people , who resolved to adhere to the true faith , withdrew from the publike meetings , and had private Assemblies of their own . And after , when Leontius was made Bishop of Antioch , who favour'd the Arrians , Flavianus and Diodorus , not only publikely reproved him for deserting the Orthodox faith , but withdrew the people from communion with him , and undertook the charge of them themselves : So when Foelix was made Bishop of Rome , none of the Church of Rome would enter into the Church while he was there . And Vincentius Lyrinensis tells us a remarkable story of Photinus Bishop of Syrmium in Pannonia , a man of great abilities and same , who suddenly turned from the true faith , and though his people both loved and admired him , yet when they discerned his errours , Quem antea quasi arietem gregis sequebantur , eundem deinceps veluti lupum fugere coeperunt , Whom they followed before as the leader of the flock , they now run away from as a devouring woolf . This is the first thing which makes separation , and withdrawment of communion , lawfull and necessary , viz. corruption of Doctrine . The second is Corruption of practice : I speak not of practice , as relating to the civil conversation of men , but as it takes in the Agenda of Religion . When Idolatrous customs , and superstitious practices are not only crept into a Church , but are the prescribed devotion of it : Such as the adoration of the Eucharist ( chiefly insisted on by Mr. Daillé in his Apology , as a cause of separation from the Church of Rome ) invocation of Saints and Angels , worshipping Images , and others of a like nature , used among the Papists , which are of themselves sufficient to make our separation from them necessary . But then thirdly , as an accession to these two , is the publike owning and professing them , and requiring them , as necessary conditions of communion , from all the members of their Church which makes our withdrawing from them unavoidably necessary , as long as we judge them to be such corruptions as indeed they are . For men not to forsake the belief of errours , supposing them to be such , is impossible : and not to forsake the practice and profession of them upon such belief , were the highest hypocrisie : and to do so , and not to forsake the communion of that Church where these are owned , is apparently contradictious ( as Mr. Chilling worth well observes ) seeing the condition of communion with it is , that we must professe to believe all the doctrines of that Church , not only not to be errours , but to be certain and necessary truths : So that on this account , to believe there are any errours in the Church of Rome , is actually , and ipso facto , to forsake the communion of that Church ; because the condition of its communion is the belief that there are none : And so that learned and rationall Author there fully proves , that those who require unlawfull and unnecessary conditions of communion , must take the imputation of Schism upon themselves , by making separation from them just and necessary . In this case , when corruptions in opinion or practice are thus required , as conditions of communion , it is impossible for one to communicate with such a Church without sin ; both materially , as the things are unlawfull which he joyns with them in ; and formally , as he judgeth them so . This is the first Proposition . The second is , Where a Church retains the purity of doctrine in its publick profession , but hath a mixture of some corruptions , as to practice , which are only tolerated and not imposed , it is not lawfull to withdraw communion from such a Church , much lesse to run into totall separation from it : For here is no just and lawfull cause given of withdrawing ; here is no owned corruption of doctrine or practice , nor any thing required as a condition of communion , but what is in its self necessary ; and therefore there can be no plea , but only pollution from such a communion , which cannot be to any who do not own any such supposed corruptions in the Church . Men may communicate with a Church , and not communicate with the abuses of a Church ; for the ground of his communicating is , its being a Church , and not a corrupt or defective Church . And that men are not themselves ▪ guilty , by partaking with those who are guilty of corruptions in a Church , might be easily and largely proved , both from the Church of the Jews in the case of Elies sons , and the Christian Churches of As●● , and Corinth , where we read of many corruptions reproved , yet nothing spoken of the duty of the members of those Churches to separate from them , which would have been , had it been a sin to communicate with those Churches when such corruptions were in it . Besides , what reason is there that one mans sins should defile another , more then anothers graces sanctifie another ? and why corruption in another should defile him more then in himself , and so keep him from communicating with himself ? and what security any one can have in the most refined Churches , but that there is some scandalous ; or at least unworthy person among them ? and whether then it is not his duty to try and examine all himself particularly , with whom he communicates ? and why his presence at one Ordinance should defile it more then at another ? and why at any more then in wordly converse , and so turn at last to make men Anchorets , as it hath done some ? Many other reasons might be produced against this , which I forbear , it being fully spoke to by others . And so I come to the Third Proposition , which is , Where any Church , retaining the purity of doctrine , doth require the owning of , and conforming to , any unlawfull or suspected practice , men may lawfully deny conformity to , and communion with that Church in such things , without incurring the guilt of Schism . I say not , men may proceed to positive Schism as it is call'd , that is , erecting of new Churches , which from Cyprian is call'd erigere Altare contra Altare ; but only that withdrawing communion from a Church in unlawfull or suspected things , doth not lay men under the guilt of Schism : which because I know it may meet with some opposition from those men , who will sooner call men Schismaticks then prove them so , I shall offer this reason for it to consideration . If our separation from the Church of Rome . was therefore lawfull , because she required unlawfull things , as conditions of her communion ; then where-ever such things are required by any Church ; non-communion with that Church in those things will be lawfull too ; and where non-communion is lawfull , there can be no Schism in it . Whatever difference will be thought of , as to the things imposed by the Church of Rome and others , will be soon answered by the proportionable difference between bare non-conformity , and totall and positive separation . What was in its self lawfull and necessary then , how comes it to be unlawfull and unnecessary now ? Did that justifie our withdrawing from them , because they required things unlawfull , as conditions of communion ; and will not the same justifie other mens non-conformity , in things supposed by them unlawfull ? If it be said here , that the Popes power was an usurpation , which is not in lawfull Governours of Churches ; it is soon replyed , That the Popes usurpation mainly lyes in imposing things upon mens consciences as necessary , which are doubtfull , or unlawfull ; and where-ever the same thing is done , there is an usurpation of the same nature , though not in so high a degree ; and it may be as lawfull to withdraw communion from one as well as the other . If it be said , that men are bound to be ruled by their Governours , in determining what things are lawfull , and what not ? To this it is answered : first , no true Protestant can swear blind obedience to Church-Governours in all things . It is the highest usurpation to rob men of the liberty of their judgements : That which we plead for against the Papists , is , that all men have eyes in their heads as well as the Pope , that every one hath a judicium privata discretionis , which is the rule of practice , as to himself ; and though we freely allow a ministeriall power , under Christ , in the Government of the Church , yet that extends not to an obligation upon men , to go against the dictates of their own reason and conscience . Their power is only directive and declarative , and in matters of duty can bind no more then reason and evidence brought from Scripture by them doth . A man hath not the power over his own understanding , much l●sse can others have it . Nullus credit aliquid esse verum , quia vult credere id esse verum ; non est enim in potestate hominis facere aliquid apparere intellectui suo verum quando voluerit . Either therefore men are bound to obey Church-Governours in all things absolutely , without any restriction or limitation ; ( which if it be not usurpation and dominion over others faith in them , and the worst of implicite faith in others , it is hard to define what either of them is , ) or else if they be bound to obey only in lawfull things ; I then enquire who must be judge what things are lawfull in this case , what not ? if the Governours still , then the power will be absolute again ; for to be sure , whatever they command , they will say is lawfull , either in it self , or as they command it : if every private person must judge what is lawfull , and what not , which is commanded ( as when all is said , every man will be his owd judge in this case , in things concerning his own welfare ) then he is no further bound to obey then he judgeth the thing to be lawfull which is commanded . The plea of an erroneous conscience , takes not off the obligation to follow the dictates of it ; for as he is bound to lay it down , supposing it erroneous , so he is bound not to go against it , while it is not laid down . But then again , if men are bound to submit to Governours in the determination of lawfull things , what plea could our Reformers have to withdraw themselves from the Popes yoke ? it might have still held true , Boves arabant & Asina Pascebantur simul , which is Aquinas his argument for the submission of inferiours in the Church to their superiours : for did not the Pope plead to be a lawfull Governour , and if men are bound to submit to the determination of Church-Governours , as to the lawfulnesse of things ; they were bound to believe him in that as well as other things , and so separation from that Church was unlawfull then : So that let men turn and wind themselves which way they will , by the very same arguments that any will prove separation from the Church of Rome lawfull , because she required unlawfull things , as conditions of her communion , it will be proved lawfull , not to conform to any suspected or unlawfull practice , required by any Church-Governours upon the same terms ; if the thing so required , be after serious and ●ober inquiry , judged unwarrantable by a mans own conscience . And withall it would be further considered , whether when our best Writers against the Papists , do lay the imputation o● Schism , not on those who withdraw communion , but on them for requiring such conditions of communion ( whereby they did rather eject men out of their communion , than the others separate from them ) they do not by the same arguments , lay the imputation of Schism on all who require such conditions of communion , and take it wholly off from those who refuse to conform for conscience sake . To this I shall subjoyn the judgement of as learned and judicious a Divine , as most our Nation hath bred , in his excellent ( though little ) . Tract concerning Schism . In those Schisms , saith he , which concern fact , nothing can be a just cause of refusing communion , but only to require the execution of some unlawfull or suspected act ; for not only in reason , but in Religion too , that Maxim admits of no release , Cantissimi cujusque praeceptum ; Quod dubitas , nè feceris . And after instanceth in the Schism about Image-worship , determin'd by the second Council of Nice , in which he pronounceth the Schismatical party to be the Synod its self , and that on these grounds : First , because it is acknowledged by all , that it is a thing unnecessary . Secondly , it is by most suspected . Thirdly , it is by many held utterly unlawfull : Can then ( saith he ) the enjoyning of such a thing be ought else but abuse ? Or can the refusall of communion here , be thought any other thing then duty ? Here , or upon the like occasion , to separate , may peradventure bring personal trouble or danger ( against which it concerns any honest man to have pectus praeparatum ) ; further harm it cannot do , so that in these cases you cannot be to seek what to think , or what you have to do . And afterwards propounds it as a remedy to prevent Schism , to have all Liturgies and publike forms of service so framed , as that they admit not of particular and private fancies , but contain only such things , in which all Christians do agree . For , saith he , consider of all the Liturgies that are , and ever have been , and remove from them whatever is scandalous to any party , and leave nothing but what all agree on ▪ and the evil shall be , that the publike service and honour of God shall no wayes suffer : Whereas , to load our publike forms , with the private fancies upon which we differ , is the most soveraign way to perpetuate Schism unto the Worlds end . Prayer , Confession , Thanksgiving , Reading of Scriptures in the plainest and simplest manner , were matter enough to furnish out a sufficient Liturgy , though nothing either of private Opinion , or of Church Pomp , of Garments or prescribed Gestures , of Imagenary , of Musick , of matter concerning the dead , of many Superfluities , which creep into the Church , under the name of Order and Decency , did interpose it self . To charge Churches and Liturgies with things unnecessary , was the first beginning of all Superstition ; and when scruple of conscience began to be made or pretended , then Schism began to break in ; if the special Guides and Fathers of the Church , would be a little sparing of incumbring Churches with Superfluities , or not over-rigid , either in reviving obsolete customes , or imposing new , there would be far less cause of Schism or Superstition ; and all the inconvenience were likely to ensue , would be but this , they should in so doing yield a little to the imbecillity of their inferiours , a thing which Saint Paul would never have refused to do : mean while , wheresoever false or suspected Opinions are made a piece of Church-Liturgy , he that separates is not the Schismatick ; for it is alike unlawful , to make profession of known or suspected falshood , as to put in practice unlawful or suspected actions . Thus far that excellent person , whose words I have taken the pains to transcribe , because of that great wisdome , judgement , and moderation , contained in them ; and the seasonableness of his Counsel and Advice , to the present posture of affairs among us . Were we so happy but to take off things granted unnecessary by all , and suspected by many , and judged unlawful by some ; and to make nothing the bonds of our Communion but what Christ hath done , viz. one Faith , one Baptism , &c. Allowing a liberty for matters of indifferency , and bearing with the weakeness of those who cannot bear things which others account lawfull , we might indeed be restored to a true Primitive luster far sooner , then by furbishing up some antiquated ceremonies , which can derive their pedegree no higher , then from some ancient Custome and Tradition . God will one day convince men , that the Unnion of the Church lies more in the Unity of Faith and Affection , then in uniformity of doubtful Rites and Ceremonies . The bond of Church-communion should be somthing common to strong and weak Christians , as S. Austin saith of the rule of faith , that it is pusillis magnisque communis ; and certainly the Primitive Church , that did not charge mens faith with such a load of Articles , as now in these latter ages men are charged with , would much less burden men with imposing doubtful practices upon them , as the ground of Church-communion . And for publick forms of Divine Service , such of all things certainly should be so composed , as to be the least subject to any scruple from any persons whatsoever ; being on purpose composed for the declaring mens unity and consent in their publick worship : and those who are the most addicted to any one form , can never plead it unlawful to amend it ; whereas others may , that it is not lawful or convenient at least , to use it without such alterations . And therefore , were there that spirit of mutual condescention , which was most certainly in Ecclesiâ primo-primitivâ , as Gratian somwhere speaks , in the first and truly primitive Church in the Apostles time ; our breaches as to this thing too , might soon be closed up , and the voice of Schism be heard among us no more . It argued very much the prudence and temper of the French-Churches , in composing their publick forms of prayer , that they were so far from inserting any thing controversiall into them , that Amyraldus tels us , the Papists themselves would use them . Et quod vix credibile esset nisi publicè viseretur , eas inseruerunt in eos libros in quos congesserunt varias precationum formulas , And that which men would scarce believe unless they saw it , they inserted them into their own Prayer-books . The same temper was used by our Reformers in the composing our Liturgy , in reference to the Papists , to whom they had then an especial eye , as being the only party then appearing , whom they desired to draw into their communion , by coming as near them as they well and safely could : And certainly those Holy men , who did seek by any means to draw in others , at such a distance from their principles as the Papists were , did never intend by what they did for that end , to exclude any truly tender consciences from their Communion . That which they laid as a bait for them , was never intended by them as a hook for those of their own profession , But the same or greater reason which made them seek so much at that time ( before the rent between the Papists and us was grown to that height it is now at ; they being then in hopes by a fair complyance to have brought the whole Kingdom to joyn with them ) I say the same reason which at that time made them yield so far to them then , would now have perswaded them to alter and lay aside those things which yield matter of offence , to any of the same profession with themselves now . For surely none will be so uncharitable toward those of his own profession , as not to think there is as much reason to yield in complyance with them , as with the Papists . And it cannot but be looked upon as a Token of Gods severe displeasure against us , if any , though unreasonable Proposals of Peace between us and the Papists should meet with such entertainment among many ; and yet any fair Offers of Union and Accommodation among our selves , be so coldly embraced and entertained . Having thus far shewed how far the Obligation to keep in a Church Society doth reach to the several Members of it : I now proceed to shew what way the light of nature directs men to , for the quieting and composing any differences which may arise in such a Society tending to break the Peace of it . But before I come to the particular wayes directed to by the Law of Nature , for ending Controversies in the Church , I shall lay down some things by way of caution , for the right understanding of what is already spoken , lest I should be thought , instead of pleading for peace , to leave a door open for an universal liberty , and so pave a new cawse-way towards Babel . First , That though it be lawful not to conform to unlawful or suspected practises in a Church : yet it is not therefore lawful to erect new Churches . For all other essentials supposed in a Church , a meer requiring conformity in some suspected rites , doth not make it to be no true or sound Church , as to other things , from which it is lawful to make a total divorce and separation . A total separation is , when a new and distinct society for worship is entered into , under distinct and peculiar officers governing by Laws and Church-rules different from that form which they separate from . This I do not assert to be therefore lawfull , because some things are required , which mens consciences are unsatisfied in : unless others proceed to eject and cast them wholly out of communion on that account , in which case their separation is necessary , and their Schism unavoidable . Secondly , therefore I assert , that as to things in the judgement of the Primitive and Reformed Churches left undetermined by the Law of God , and in matters of meer order and decency , and wholly as to the form of Government , every one notwithstanding what his private judgement may be of them , is bound for the Peace of the Church of God to submit to the determination of the lawful Governours of the Church . And this is that power of ending Controversies , which I suppose to be lodged in a Church-Society ; not such a one as whereto every man is bound to conform his private judgement ; but whereto every private person is bound to submit in Order to the Churches Peace . That is , that in any Controversies arising in a Church , there is such a power supposed , that may give such an authoritative Decision of the controversie in which both parties are bound to acquiesce , so as to act nothing contrary to that Decision . For as it is supposed that in all Contracts and Agreements for mutuall Society , men are content to part with their own Liberties for the good of the whole : so likewise to part with the Authority of their own judgements , and to submit to the Determination of things by the Rulers of the Society constituted by them . For there must be a difference made between the Liberty and freedom of a mans own judgment , and the Authority of it : for supposing men out of all Society , every man hath both ; but Societies being entred , and Contracts made , though men can never part with the freedom of their Judgements ( Men not having a Depotical power over their own understandings ) yet they must part with the Authority of their Judgements ; i. e. in matters concerning the Government of the Society , they must be ruled by Persons in Authority over them . Else there can be nothing imagined but confusion , and disorder , in stead of Peace and Unity in every civil State and Society . The case is the same in a religious Society too , in which men must be supposed to part with the Authority of their own judgements in matters concerning the Government of the Church , and to submit to what is constituted and appointed by those who are intrusted with the care and welfare of it . Else it is impossible there should be Unity and Peace in a Church considered as a Society ; which is as much as to say , there neither is , nor can be such a Society . And that God hath commanded that which is Naturally impossible ; I mean , freedom from divisions , and the Unity and Peace of his Church : Which will appear from hence , because it can never be expected that all men should be exactly of one mind : Either then men retaining their private apprehensions , are bound to acquiesce in what is publikely determined , or there is a necessity of perpetuall confusions in the Church of God. For the main inlet of all disturbances and divisions in the Church , is from hence that Men consider themselves absolutely , and not as Members of a governed Society , and so that they may follow their own own private judgements , and are bound so to doe in matters belonging to the Government of the Church , and not to acquiesce for the Churches Peace in what is established in Order to the ruling of this so constituted Society , by lawfull Authority . These things premised , the way is now fully cleared for the discovering what wayes are prescribed by the light of Nature for ending controversies in the Church ; which will appear to be these two . 1. In societies wherein persons act with an equality of Power , for the ending differences arising , the less number must alwayes acquiesce in the determination of the greater . And therefore it i● a generally received Axiom , that in all Societies pars major ●ut habet universitatis , the greater part hath the power of the whole : And it is a standing Rule in the Civil Law , Refertur ad universos quod publice fit per majorem partem , which is determined by the Lawyers to hold , not of the persons in power , but of the persons present at the Determination ; as when Alexander Severus made fourteen of the Viri Consulares to be Curatores urbis , joyned with the Praefectis urbis , to Determine cases brought before them , what was determined by the greater part of those present , was looked upon as binding , as if the whole number had been there . And this Aristotle layes down as one of the fundamental Lawes of a Democratical Government . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That must be looked on as a just and final decision of a Case debated , which the major part determines . And therefore rationally infers , that in a Democracy the poorer sort ( and so likewise the worse ) must alwayes bear the greatest sway , because they are the most . Which is an unavoydable inconvenience in that form of Government whether in Church or State. The same he elsewhere applyes to other forms of Government which have a multitude of Rulers , as Aristocracy and Oligarchy : That which seems good to the most obtains as a Law amongst all , Which Appian thus briefly expresseth , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Dionys. Halicarnasseus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the one speaking of matter of Fact , that it doth obtain , the other of matter of Law that it should do so . It appears then from the Law and light of nature , that where ever any multitude acts in an equality of Power , the greater part have the power of the whole ; not from any right which the major part hath as superiour over the less ; but from the Law of nature , which will have every part ordered for the good of the whole ; which good cannot oft times be obtained without a special determination on one side or other ; nor that determination have its effect , if the Act of the major part may be rescinded by the less . So that in every thing requiring special determination , this is to be esteemed the most just and final decision which is done by the major part : For it would be manifestly unjust for the lesser part to determine the greater , and therefore by the Law of nature , the greater part hath the right of the whole . 2. In a society consisting of many particular Companies or Congregations , there must be a subordination of Powers by the Law of nature , which grants a right of Appeal to an injured person from the lower and subordinate Power to the higher and superiour . Appealing is defined by the Lawyers to be Provocatio iniquae sententiae querelam contineus . An address to a higher Power with complaint of wrong : and so in geneall it is defined by Ulpian to be ab Inferioris Iudicis sententiâ ad superiorem provocatio : but , as Hottoman observes , appeals may sometimes be made to a co-ordinate power upon complaint of injustice done . As one Praetor , Consul , Tribune might be appealed to , from the sentence of another . The originall of Appeals then is , that injuries may be redressed , and in order to that , nature dictates that there ought to be a subordination of Powers one to another , lest any injury done through corruption or ignorance of the immediate Judges , prove irremediable . To which purpose our learned Whitaker saith , that Appeals are juris divini & naturalis , & in omni societate admodum necessariae ; propter multorum judicum vel iniquitatem , vel ignorantiam ; alioqui actum esset de innocente , si non liceret ab iniqua sententia appestare : So that appeals are founded upon natural right , lest men should be injured in any determination of a case by those that have the cognizance of it . And in order to a redress of wrongs , and ending controversies , Nature tells us that Appeals must not be infinite , but there must be some Power , from whence Appeals must not be made : What that should be , must be determined in the same manner that it is in Civils ; not that every Controversie in the Church must be determined by an Oecumenical Council , but that it is in the Power of the Supream Magistrate , as Supream head in causes Ecclesiastical , to limit and fix this Subordination , and determine how far it shall go , and no further . The Determination being in order to the Peace of the Church , which Christian Magistrates are bound to look after , and see that causes hang not perpetually without Decision : And so we find the Christian Emperours constituting to whom Appeals should be made , and where they should be fixed , as Iustinian and Theodostus did . For when the Church is incorporated into the Common-wealth , the chief Authority in a Common-wealth as Christian , belongs to the same to which it doth as a Common-wealth : But of that already . It is then against the Law and Light of Nature , and the natural right of every man , for any particular company of men , calling themselves a Church , to ingross all Ecclesiastical Power so into their hands , that no liberty of Appeals for redress can be made from it . Which ( to speak within compass ) is a very high usurpation made upon the Civil and Religious rights of Christians ; because it leaves men under a causeless censure , without any authoritative vindication of them from it . As for that way of elective Synods , substituted in the place of authoritative Power to determine Controversies , it is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which will never be soveraign enough to cure the distemper it is brought for : For elective Synods are but like that which the Lawyers call arbitrium boni viri , which they distinguish from arbitrium ex compromisso , and binds no further then the party concerned doth judge the Sentence equall and just . So that this helps us with no way to end controversies in the Church , any further then the persons engaged are willing to account that just which shall be judged in their Case . Taking then a coercive Power , onely for such a one as may authoritatively decide a controv●rsie , we see what great Reason there is for what the Historian observes : Arbitriis ii se debent interponere , qui non parente● coercere possunt : That all Power of Arbitration should have some juridicall power going along with it , to make a finall end of quarrels . But that which seems yet more strange to me , is this , that by those who assert the Independency of particular Congregation● , it is so hotly pleaded , that Christ hath given every particular Congregation a Power over its own Members , to determine controversies arising between them : but , that if one , or many of these particular Congregations should erre , or break the Rule , he hath left no power Authoritatively to decide what should be done in such cases . Can we conceive that Christ should provide more for the Cases of particular Persons , then of particular Churches ? And that he should give Authority for Determining one , and not the other ? Is there any more coactive Power given by any to Synods , or greater Officers , then there is by them to particular Churches ? which power is onely declarative as to the Rule , though Authoritative as to persons where-ever it is lodged . Is there not more danger to Gods People , by the scandals of Churches , then Persons ? Or did Christs Power of governing his People reach to them onely as particular Congregations ? Doth not this too strongly savour of the Pars Donati ? only the Meridies must be rendred a particular Congregationall Church , where Christ causeth his Flock to rest ? But supposing the Scripture not expresly to lay down a Rule for governing many Churches , are men outlawed of their natural Rights ? that supposing a wrong Sentence passed in the Congregation , there is no hopes , way , or means to redress his injury , and make his innocency known ? Doth this look like an Institution of Christ ? But that which I conceive is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and the Original of this mistake , is , that the Churches we read of first Planted in Scripture , were onely particular Congregations ; and therefore there is no proper Church-power beyond them , or above them . I meddle not with the Ant●cedent now , which is largely discussed by others ; but the extream weakness of the consequence , is that I am here obliged to discover . For what a strange shortness of Discourse is it to Argue thus ; If when there was but one Congregation , that Congregation had all Power within its self ; then when there are more particular congregations , it must be so ; and yet this is the very Foundation of all those Kingdomes of Yvetos , as one calls them , those sole self-governing congregations . When there was but one congregation in a Church , it was necessary if it had any Church-power , that it must be lodged in that one congregation : But when this congregation was multiplyed into many more , is it not as necessary for their mutual Government , there should be a common power governing them together , as a joynt-society ? Besides , the first congregational Church in the New Testament , viz. that of Ierusalem , could be no particular Organical Church ; for it had many , if not all , Universall Officers in it ; and if they were the fixed Pastours of that Church , they could not , according to the Principles of those who thus speak , Preach to any other congregation but their own , by vertue of their Office : And so , either their Apostolicall Office and Commission must be destroyed , if they ▪ were Pastors of particular Organical Churches ; or if their Apostolicall Office be asserted , their Pastorship of particular Organicall Churches is destroyed by their own Principles , who ●ssert , that the Pastor of a Church can do no Pastorall Office out . of his own congregation . The case is the same , as to other Churches planted by the Apostles , and govern'd by themselves ; which two , as far as I can find in the New Testament , were of an equal extent ; viz. That all the Churches planted by Apostles , were chiefly governed by themselves , though they had subordinate officers under them . These first Churches then were not such particular Organized Churches , but they were as the first matter of many congregations to be propagated out of them ; which after made one Society , consisting of those several congregations imbodyed together , and ruled by one common Government . As in a Colledge , every Tutor hath his own Pupils , wich he rules ; and if we suppose but one Tutor at first in the Colledge , with his Pupils , all the power , both common to the Society , and peculiar to his Flock , is joyned together ; but when there are many more Tutors , having Pupils under their charge , all these , for their better ordering as a Society , must be governed by the common Government of the Colledge , to which the particular Government of every Tutor is and must be subordinate : But this will be more fully made appear in the Original of Civil Government . It is far more evident , that all Civil power lay at first in Adam and his Family , and afterwards in particular Families , than that all Church-power lay in particular congregations at first . We may then with as good Reason say , that there is no lawfull civil : Government now , but that of particular Families ; and that no Nationall Government hath any right or power over particular Families , because Families had once all civil Power within themselves ; as because it ●● supposed , that all Church-power lay first in particular congregations , therefore there must be no Church-power above them ; nor that particular congregations are subject to such Government as is requisite for the Regulating of the Society in common , as comprehending in it many particular congregations . Let them shew then , how any Government in the State is lawfull , when Families had the first power , and by what right now those Families are subordinate to the civill Magistrate , and what necessity there is for it ; and by the very same Reasons will we shew the lawfulness ▪ of Government in the Church over many Congregations , and that those are by the same right , and upon the same necessity , to subordinate themselves to the Government of the Church , considere●●● a Society taking in many particular Congregations . The Parallel runs on further and clearer still : For as the heads of the severall Families after the Flood , had the command over all dwelling under their Roofs , while they remained in one Family ; and when that increased into more , there power was extended over them too ; which was the first Original of Monarchy in the World : So the Planters of the first Churches , that while the Church was but one Congregation , had power over it , when this Congregation was multiplyed into more , their Power equally extended over them all . And as afterwards , several heads of Families upon their increase , did constitute distinct Civil Governments , wherein were subordinate Officers , but those Governments themselves were co-ordinate one with another : So in the Church , so many Congregations as make up one Provincial , or National Society ( as succession and prudence doth order the bounds of them ) do make up several particular Churches , enjoying their Officers ruling them , but subordinare to the Governours of the Church in common : Which Society , National or Provincial , is subordinate to none beyond its self , but enjoyes a free Power within its self of ordering things for its own Government , as it judgeth most convenient , and agreeable to the Rules of Scripture . The summe then of what I say , concerning subordination of Officers and Powers in the Society of the Church , is this , That by the light and Law of Nature it appears , that no individuall company or Congregation , hath an absolute , independent power within its self , but that , for the redressing grievances happening in them , appeals are 〈…〉 to the parties aggrieved , and a subordination of that particu 〈…〉 Congregation , to the Government of the Society in common . 〈…〉 at , the right of Appealing , and Originall of Subordination , is from Nature ; the particular manner and form of subordinate and superiour Courts , is to be fetched from positive Lawes ; the limitation of Appeals , extent of jurisdiction , the binding power of Sentence , so far as concerns external Unity in the Church , is to be fetched from the power of the Magistrate , and civil Sanctions and Constitutions . The Churches power , as to Divine Law , being onely directive and declarative ; but being confirmed by a civil Sanction , is juridicall and obligatory . Concerning the Magistrates power to call , confirm , alter , repeal the Decrees of Synods ; see Grotius , Chamier , Whitaker , Casaubon , Mornay , and others , who fully and largely handle it ; To whom having nothing to add , I will take nothing at all from them : As for that time when the Church was without Magistrates ruling in it , in those things left undetermined by the Rule of the Word , they acted out of Principles of Christian Prudence agreeable to the Rules of Scripture , and from the Principles of the Law of nature ; One of which we come in the next place to speak to . So much for the Churches Power , considered as a Society for ending controversies , arising within its self , tending to break the Peace and Unity of it . CHAP. VII . The fifth thing dictated by the Law of Nature , That all that are admitted into this Society , must consent to be governed by the Lawes and Rules of it . Civil Societies founded upon mutual consent ; express in the first entrance , implicite in others born under societies actually formed . Consent as to a Church necessary , the manner of Consent determined by Christ by Baptism and Profession . Implicite Consent supposed in all baptized ; explicite , declared by challenging the priviledges , and observing the duties of the Covenant . Explicite by express owning the Gospel when adult , very usefull for recovering the credit of Christianity . The Discipline of the Primitive Church cleared from Origen , Iustin Martyr , Pliny , Tertullian . The necessary requisites of Church Membership , whether positive signs of Grace : Explicite Covenant , how far necessary ; not the formal Constitution of a Church , * proved by several Arguments . THe Law of Nature dictates , That all who are admitted into this Society , must consent to be governed by the Laws and Rules of that Society , according to its Constitution . For none can be looked upon as a Member of a Society , but such a one as submits to the Rules and Laws of the Society , as constituted at the time of his entrance into it . That all civil Societies are founded upon voluntary consent and agreement of parties , and do depend upon Contracts and Covenants made between them , is evident to any that consider that men are not bound by the Law of Nature to associate themselves with any but whom they shall judge fit ; that Dominion and Propriety was introduced by free consent of men : and so there must be Laws and Bonds fit , agreement made , and submission acknowledged to those Lawes , else Men might plead their Naturall Right and Freedom still , which would be destructive to the very Nature of these Societies . When men then did first part with their natural Liberties , two things were necessary in the most express terms to be declared : First , a free and voluntary consent to part with so much of their Natural Rights as was not consistent with the well being of the Society : Secondly , a free submission to all Laws , which should be agreed upon at their entrance into Society , or afterwards as they see cause . But when Societies were already entred , and Children born under them , no such express consent was required in them , being bound by vertue of the Protection they find from Authority to submit to it , and an implicite consent is supposed in all such as are born under that Authority . But for their more full understanding of this Obligation of theirs , and to lay the greater tye of Obedience upon them , when they come to understanding , it hath been conceived very requisite by most States to have an explicite Declaration of their consent , either by some formal Oath of Allegiance , or some other way sufficiently expressing their fidelity , in standing to the Covenants long since supposed to be made . To apply this now to the Church . We have all along hitherto considered the Church in general , as a Society or Corporation which was necessary in order to our discovering what is in it from the light of nature without Positive Laws . But here we must take notice of what was observed by Father Laynez the Jesuit at the Council of Trent , That it is not with the Church as with other Societies , which are first themselves , and then constitute the Governours . But the Governour of this Society was first himself , and he appointed what Orders , Rules , and Lawes should govern this Society ; and wherein he hath determined any thing , we are bound to look upon that , as necessary to the maintaining of that Society which is built upon his Constitution of it . And in many of those Orders which Christ hath settled in his Church , the Foundation of them is in the Law of nature ; but the particular determination of the manner of them is from himself . Thus it is in the case we now are upon ; Nature requires that every one entring into a Society , should consent to the Rules of it . Our Saviour hath determined how this Consent should be expressed , viz. by receiving Baptism from those who have the power to dispense it : which is the federal Rite whereby our consent is expressed to own all the Laws and submit to them , whereby this Society is governed : Which at the first entring of men into this Society of the Church was requisite to be done by the express and explicite consent of the parties themselves , being of sufficient capacity to declare it , but the Covenant being once entred into by themselves , not onely in their own name , but in the name of their Posterity ( a thing implyed in all Covenants wherein benefits do redound to Posterity , that the Obligation should reach them to ; but more particular in this , it having been alwayes the T●nour of Gods Covenants with men , to enter the seed as well as the persons themselves , as to outward Priviledges ) an implicite consent as to the children in Covenant , is sufficient to enter them upon the priviledges of it by Baptism , although withal it be highly rational for their better understanding the Engagement they entred into , that when they come to age , they should explicitely declare their own voluntary consent to submit to the Lawes of Christ , and to conform their lives to the Profession of Christianity , which might be a more then probable way , and certainly most agreeable both to Reason and Scripture to advance the credit of Christianity once more in the World , which at this day so much suffers by so many professing it without understanding the terms of it ; who swallow down a profession of Christianity , as boyes do pills , without knowing what it is compounded of , which is the great Reason it works so little alteration upon their spirits . The one great cause of the great flourishing of Religion in the Primitive times , was certainly the strictness used by them in their admission of members into Church-Societies , which is fully described by Origen against Celsus , who tells us they did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , enquire into their lives and carriages , to discern their seriousness in the profession of Christianity during their being Catechumeni : Who after tells us they did require 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , true Repentance and Reformation of Life , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , then we admit them to the participation of our Mysteries . I confess the Discipline of the Primitive Church hath been very much misrepresented to us , by mens looking upon it through the glass of the modern practices and customs obtaining among us : as though all this onely concerned the Admission to the Lords Supper : though that was alwayes in chiefest veneration in the Church of God , as being the chief of Gospel-Mysteries ( as they loved to speak ) yet I cannot find that any were admitted to all other Ordinances freely with them who were debarred from this : but their admission to one , did include an admission to all ▪ so on the contrary , I finde none admitted to Baptism , who were not to the Lords Supper ; and if Catechumeni , presently after , onely confirmation intervening ( which will hardly be ever found separate from Baptism , till the distinction of the double Chrism in vertice & pectore came up , which was about Ieroms time . ) The thing then which the Primitive Church required in admitting persons adult to Baptism , and so to the Lords Supper , was a serious visible profession of Christianity ; which was looked upon by them as the greatest Evidence of their real consent to the Rules of the Gospel . For that purpose it will be worth our taking notice what is set down by Iustin Martyr , Apolog. 2. speaking of the celebration of the Lords Supper ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Where we see what was required before Admission to the Lords Supper , A Profession of Faith in the truths of the Gospel , and answerable Life to the Gospel , without which it was not lawful to participate of the Lords Supper . And further we see by Pliny , that the Christians of those times did make use of some solemn Engagements among themselves which he calls Sacramenta ; they did se Sacramento obstringere nè funta , nè latrocinia , nè adulteria committerent , nè fidem fallerent , &c. and Tertullian reports it out of Pliny , that he found nothing de Sacramentis eorum ( as Iunius first reads it out of M. S. for de Sacris , after him Heraldus , and as it is now read in Rigaltius Edition ) besides cautelam & ad confoederandam disciplinam , &c. scelera prohibentes , which Eusebius calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , pacta , Covenants between them ; and so Master Selden interprets the place of Origen in the beginning of his Book against Celsus , where Celsus begins his charge against the Christians , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : where he takes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not , as Gelenius renders it , conventus , but in its proper sense for contracts or covenants that were made by the Christians as by other Societies , onely permitted , and tolerated by the Common-wealth . And we find by Pliny , that when the hetaeriae were forbidden , he brought the Christians in under that Law ; the ground of those Societies was onely a mutual compact and agreement among the persons of it : Such as among the Essens of the Jewes , and the Schools of Philosophers among the Greeks . Iosephus mentions the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of those who were admitted into the Society of the Essens , And so in all other Societies which subsist onely from mutuall confederation in a Common-wealth . Thus I acknowledge it to be in Christianity , that there must be such a supposed contract or voluntary consent in the persons engaged in such Societies . But with this observable difference , that although there must be a consent in both , yet the one is wholly free , as to any pre-engagement or obligation to it , as well as to the act its self ; but in religious societies , though the Act of consent be free , yet there is an antecedent Obligation upon men , binding them to this voluntary consent . The want of the understanding this Difference , is the very Foundation of that Opinion men call Erastianism ; For the followers of Erastus , when they finde that Christians did act ex confoederatâ disciplinâ , they presently conclude all Church-power lay onely in mutuall consent . It is granted , Church-power doth suppose consent ; but then all Christians are under an Obligation from the Nature of Christianity to express this consent , and to submit to all censures Legally inflicted . About the hetaeriae and Societies among the Romans , we may take notice of the Law of Twelve Tables . So in the collection of Lud. Charondus , Sodalibus qui ejusdem Collegii sunt , & jus cotundi habent , potestas esto pactionis quam volent inter se ineunda dum nè quid ex publicâ lege corrumpant . Ex Caio c. 4. D. de Collec . & corp . I confesse , when persons are entred into a visible Church-So ciety by Baptism , if they will own that profession they were baptized into , and are not guilty either of plain ignorance of it , or manifest scandall , and demand as their right the other Ordinances of the Gospel ; I see not by what power they may be excluded . If we fix not in a serious visible prosession as the ground of giving right , but require positive evidences of grace in every one to be admitted to Ordinances as the only thing giving right , for my part , setting aside the many inconveniences besides which attend that in reference to the persons to be admitted , I see not how with a safe and good conscience Ordinances can be administred by any . My reason is this : Every one , especially a Minister , in that case ought to proceed upon certain grounds that the person admitted hath right to the Ordinance to be administred ; but if positive signs of grace be required , a mans conscience cannot proceed upon any certainty , without infallible knowledge of anothers spiritual state , which I suppose none will pretend to . My meaning is , that which gives right , must be something evident to the person admitting into it , if it be his duty to enquire after it ; but if only positive signs of grace be looked on , as giving right , the ground of right can never be so evident to another person , as to proceed with a good conscience , i. e. with a full perswasion of another right to the administration of any Ordinance to him . If it be said , that these are required only as tokens of a true visible profession , and it is that which gives the right ; I reply , Our knowledge of , and assent to the conclusion ▪ can be no stronger , nor more certain then to the premisses from when●● it is inferred ; if therefore true profession gives right , and our knowledge of that proceeds upon our knowledge of the work of grace , we are left at the same uncertainty we were at before . But if we say , that an outward profession of the Gospel ( where there is nothing rendring men uncapable of owning it , which is ignorance , nor declaring they do not own it , which is s●andall ) is that which gives a visible right to the Ordinances of the Church as visible , we have something to fix our selves upon , and to bottom a perswasion of the right of persons to Ordinances . Christ when he instituted Churches , did institute them as visible Societies , that is , to have marks whereby to be known and distinguished , as other Societies in the world are ; now that which puts a difference between this and other Societies , is an open profession of Christianity , which profession is looked upon as the outward expression of the internal consent of the soul to the Doctrine and Laws of the Gospel . Which outward evidence of consent , where there is nothing evidently and directly oppugning it , is that which the Church of God in admission of visible members is to proceed upon . I nowhere find that ever Christ or his Apostles in making disciples , or admitting to Church-membership , did exact any more then a professed willingnesse to adhere to the Doctrine which they preached ; nor that they refused any who did declare their desire to joyn with them . An owning Christianity is all we read of antecedent to admission of Church-members . And if any thing else be further required as necessary , we must either say , the Word of God is defective in institutions of necessity to the Church , which I suppose the assertors of it will not be so inconsistent to their own principles , as to do ; or else must produce , where any thing further is required by the Word of God. By this we may see what to answer those who require an explicite Covenant from all members of the Church , as that which gives the form and being to a Church . If they mean only in the first constitution of a visible Church , an expresse owning of the Gospel-covenant ; there is none will deny that to be necessary to make one a member of the visible Church of Christ. If they further mean , that there must be a real confederation between those who joyn together in Gospel-Ordinances in order to their being a Church , I know none will question it that know what it is that makes a Society to be so ; which is such a real confederation with one another : If they mean further , that though Christians be bound by vertue of their Gospel-covenant to joyn with some Church ▪ Society , yet not being determined by Scripture to what particular Church they should joyn ; therefore for Christians better understanding what their mutuall duty is to one another ; and who that Pastor is to whom they owe the relation of member , that there should be some significant declaration either by words or actions of their willingnesse to joyn with such a particular Society in Gospel-Ordinances ; I shall grant this to be necessary too . But if beyond this their meaning be , that a formal explicite covenant be absolutely necessary to make any one a member of a Church , I see no reason for it . For , 1. If there may be a real confederation without this ; then this is not necessary ; but there may be a real confederation without this explicite covenant : as appears in those Churches of Christ , both in the primitive times , and since the Reformation , who have never used it , which none I suppose who maintain this opinion will deny to have been true visible Churches of Christ. 2. If the Gospel-covenant entred into by any gives a right to Gospel-Ordinances by its self , then an explicite covenant is not that which makes one a member of a Church ; but the Gospel-covenant gives that right to all Gospel-Ordinances . If by Baptism , the person baptized have a legal title to all Gospel-Ordinances , then , &c. The Minor appears , in that they are admitted Church-members by Baptism ; and how can any be a Member of a Church , and not have right to all Ordinances in it , supposing capacity to receive them ? A right once received , continues till it be forfeited , especially when it is such a right as is not limited to any particular priviledges , but to all the priviledges of that Society into which they are entred . 3. The reality of consent may be sufficiently manifested without an explicite covenant ; as in the joyning with those who are under the same profession in the common acts of the Society and acceptance of , and submission to the Rulers of that Society , which implicitely is that Covenant which they would have expressed ; and actions in this case , are as declarative and significative as words . 4. If a Church may cease to be a true Church , without explicite disowning such a Covenant , then it is not explicite covenanting which makes a Church ; but a Church may cease to be a true Church without explicite disowning it ; as in case of universall corruption , as to Word and Sacraments ; as in the Church of Rome , that still owns her self for a Church . The ground of the consequence , is from the parity of reason as to contraries . But though I see no reason at all , why an explicite Covenant should be so necessary to a Church , that we cannot suppose a true Church without it ; yet I no wayes deny the lawfulnesse or expediency , in many cases , of having a personal profession from all baptized in Infancy , when they come to age ( which we may , if we please , call Confirmation ) and the necessity of of desiring admission , in order to participation of all Ordinances : which desire of admission , doth necessarily imply mens consenting to the Laws of that Society , and walking according to the duties of it ; and so they are consequentially and virtually , though not expresly and formally , bound to all the duties required from them in that relation . When Churches are over-run with loosnesse , ignorance , and prophanesse , or when Christians are under persecution , an externall profession of the Gospel-covenant , and declaring their owning the Society they are entred into , and submitting to the Laws of it , may be , if not wholly necessary , yet very usefull and expedient : And indeed , at all times we see people understand so little of their duty or engagements , and are so hardly brought under the exercise of Gospel-discipline , that an open profession of their submission to the Rules of the Gospel , seems the most likely way to advance the practise , Power , and purity of Religion : But of this much is spoken by others lately , and therefore I supersede . From all this we see , that every Society implying a joyning together in some common duties , Nature tells us there must be a reall consenting together , explicite , or implicite in all persons , who enter into such a Society . CHAP. VIII . The last thing dictated by the Law of Nature , is , that every Offender against the Laws of the Society , must give an account of his actions to the Governours of it , and submit to the censures inflicted upon him by them . The originall of penalties in Societies . The nature of them , according to the nature and ends of Societies . The penalty of the Church no civil mulct ; because its Laws and ends are different from civill Societies . The practice of the Druids in excommunication . Among the Iews , whether a meer civill or sacred penalty . The latter proved by six arguments . Cherem Col Bo objections answered . The originall of the mistake shewed . The first part concluded . NAture dictates further , that in a well-ordered Society , every offender against the Rules of that Society , must give an account of his actions to the Governours of that Society , and submit to the censures of it , according to the judgement of the Rulers of it . In all Societies subsisting by Laws , men being more ruled by hopes and fears , then by a sense of duty , or love of goodness , it is necessary for maintaining a Society , that there must be not only a declaration of what men ought to do , but a setting forth the penalties which they must undergo upon violation of the Laws whereon the Society doth subsist : And as there must be penalties annexed , as the sanction of the Law , so it must of necessity be implyed in a well-ordered Society , that every person , as he doth promise obedience to the Law , so by the same obligation he is bound to submit to the penalties upon disobedience : For whatever Laws binds to duty where there is a penalty threatned , doth bind likewise to punishment upon neglect of duty : for no sooner is the Law broken , but the offender lyes under the penall sanction of that Law , and is thereby bound to give an account of himself and actions , to those Governours who are bound to see the Laws obeyed , or offenders punished . Guilt follows immediately upon the breach of the Law , which is nothing else but the offenders obligation to punishment . From this obligation on the offenders part , ariseth a new relation between the Governour of the Society and the offender . On the Governours part a right to punish , vindictive justice supposing offences committed , and on the offender● part , an obligation to undergo what shall be inflicted upon him for his offence : Punishment being nothing else , but malum passionis ob malum actionis . There must be then these things supposed in any well ordered Society ; Laws to be governed by , Rulers to see the Laws kept , or offenders punished , penalties made known for offenders , submission of the persons in the Societies to the penalties , if they deserve them . But now of what kind , nature , and degree the penalties must be , must be resolved according to the nature , end , and design of the constitution of the Society If it be a Society for preservation of the rights of Bodies , or Estates , the penalties must be either pecuniary or corporal : And the ground is , because the end of legall punishment is not properly revenge , but the preservation of the Society , which without punishments could not be : A threefold end is therefore assigned to punishments ; the reformation of the offending person , the prevention of further offences in the Society of the same kind , and the being a terrour and example to others ; the first is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , being for the preservation of the honour of the Magistrate : the third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , when the punishment is inflicted upon one , that others should take notice of it ; which must be alwayes done in a publike manner : So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ in Matthew , is opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . These things being thus in general considered , come we now to apply it to the Church considered as a Society . That it hath peculiar Laws to be governed by , appears by the distinct nature , end , and design of the constitution of it ; which is not to preserve any outward Rights , but to maintain and keep up a religious Society for the service of God ; and therefore the penall sanctions of these Laws cannot properly be any corporall or pecuniary mulct , but somewhat answerable to the nature of the Society . It must be then somewhat which implyes the deprivation of that which is the chiefest benefit of that Society . The benefits of it are the priviledges and honour which men enjoy by thus associating themselves for so high an employment : That punishment then must be the loss of those priviledges which the Corporation enjoyes , which must be by exclusion of the offending person from communion with the Society . Hence we see it is evident , that which we call Excommunication is the greatest penalty which the Church , as a Society , can inflict upon the members of it , considered as such . And hence it is likewise clear , that as the Society of the Church is distinct from others , the Laws , ends , Governours of a different nature ; so the punishment must be a punishment distinct from civill , and ordained wholly in order to the peculiar ends of this Society ; which they do not well consider , who deny any such power as that of Excommunication peculiar to the Church , which is as much as to deny that the Laws whereby the Church is ruled , are different from the civil Laws , or the end of this Society from the ends of civil Societies : for the punishment must be proportioned to the Laws , and referred immediately to its proper ends . It were no wayes difficult to answer the pretences brought against this : For although I acknowledge a subordination of this religious Society to the Supream Authority in the Commonwealth , and that the Rules concerning the Government of the Society in common must have their sanction from thence ; yet this no wayes implyes but it may have its peculiar penalties and power to inflict them , any more then any Company of Tradesmen have not power to exclude any from their Company for breaking the Rules of the Company , because they are subordinate to the Supream Authority : or any Colledge to expell any from thence , for breaking the locall Statutes of it , which are distinct from the Common-Laws . Nor is it any argument , that because Christians had mutuall confederations in times of persecution for the exercise of censures , therefore these censures were only arbitrary and humane ; unless it be proved , that it was not a duty in them so to confederate & joyn together , nor was there any antecedent obligation to inflict those censures upon offenders . Much lesse , thirdly , because their jurisdiction is not civil and coactive , therefore they have none at all ; which is as much as to say , the Laws of Scripture are not our common-Laws , therefore they are none at all . I shall not here insist upon the divine Right of power to excommunicate offenders , founded upon the positive Laws of Chist , it being my only businesse now to shew what foundation such a power hath in the Law of Nature , which we have seen doth follow upon the Churches being a distinct Society ruled by other Laws , acting on other ends , subsisting upon different grounds from any other Society . A further evidence we have of this , how consonant it is to the light of Nature , from the practice of all Societies pretending to be for the Worship of God , who have looked upon this as the proper penalty of offenders among them , to be excluded out of those Societies . Thus we find among the Druids , whose great office was to take care of the worship of their gods , and to instruct the people in Religion , as Caesar relates , Illi rebus divinis intersunt , sacrificia publica ac privata procurant , religiones interpretantur ; and accordingly the punishment of disobedience among them was excommunication from their sacrifices , which they looked upon as the greatest punishment could be inflicted upon them , as Caesar at large describes it ; Si quis aut privatus aut pubicus eorum decreto non stetit , sacrificiis interdicunt : haec poena apud eos est gravissima : quibus ita est interdictum , ii numero impiorū & sceleratorum habentur ; iis omnes decedunt , aditū eorū sermonemque defugiunt , nè quid ex contagione incommodi accipiant , neque iis petentibus jus redditur , neque honos ullus communicatur . The practice of Excommunication among the Jews is not questioned by any , but the right ground and orignall of that practice , with the effect and extent of it . Some conceive it to have been only taken up among the Jews , after the power of capitall punishments was taken from them ; and that it was used by them , wholly upon a civill account , not extending to the exclusion of men from their worship in the Temple or Synagogues , but only to be a note of insamy upon offending persons . This opinion though entertained by persons of much skill and learning in the Jewish antiquities , yet carries not that evidence with it to gain my assent to it . For first , the causes of excommunication were not such as were expressed by their Law to deserve such civil punishments as might have been inflicted by them upon offenders , nor were they generally matters of a civill nature , but matters of offence and scandall , as will appear to any that shall peruse the twenty four causes of Excommunication , related out of the Jewish Writers by Selden and Ioh. Coch. Such were the neglecting the Precepts of the Scribes , the vain pronouncing the Name of God , bearing witness against a Iew before Heathen tribunals , doing any common work in the afternoon of the day before the Passover , with others of a like Nature . If Excommunication had been then taken up among them onely ex confoederatâ disciplinâ , to supply the defect of civil Judicatories , at least all Capitall offenders must have lain under the Sentence of Excommunication . But here we read not of any being Excommunicated for those , but for other lesser matters , which were looked upon as matters of scandal among them : and though some of them were matters of civil injuries , yet it follows not that men were Excommunicated for them as such , but for the scandall which attended them . As , in the Christian Church , men are Excommunicated for matters which are punishable by the civil Magistrate , but not under that notion , but as they are offences to that Christian Society which they live among . Secondly , It appears that Excommunication was not a meer civil Penalty , because the increasing or abatement of that Penalty did depend upon the person's Repentance , and desire of Absolution . Now civil Penalties do not regard the intention and mind of the Person , but the quality and desert of the Action ; the Reason is , because Humane Lawes do respect immediately actionem ipsam , and not animum agentis , unless it be onely so far as the mind hath influence upon the Action . But now it is otherwise in such Lawes which take immediate Notice of the intention of the minde , and onely of outward Actions as they are significative and expressive of the inward intention : for in these , though the ground of proceeding to Penalties be from the notice taken of the outward Action , yet that outward Action being subject to Penalty , as expressive of the minds intention ; where there may be sufficient evidence given of the Integrity and Uprightness of the Intention afterwards , there may be proportionably a Relaxation of the penalty ; because the end of the Penalty inflicted was not to be an Act of Justice excluded from Mercy in the end of Administration as in Civil Judicatories , but an Act of Justice whose end was mercy , that is , the regaining and recovering the offenders soul from sin , by inflicting such a penalty upon him , as might humble him under the sense of it . Hence appears the great reasonablenesse of their proceedings in the managery of Discipline in the primitive times , who did not fix a certain time as a standing Law for all offenders , but did encrease , or lessen both the time and weight of their penance , according to the evidences given of their submission and true repentance for their miscarriages . That it was thus now in reference to excommunication among the Jews , appears from what is asserted by the learned Buxtorf concerning the time of the lesser excommunication , called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Niddui , which remained thirty dayes usually , but were shortned by confession and desire of absolution ; durat 30. dies qui tamen poenitentiâ & deprecatione decurtantur . But if after thirty dayes past , he continue impenitent , the Judge as he sees sit , encreaseth the punishment , so as to double or treble the time , or extend it to his whole life : if he dyed without repentance , a stone is laid upon his Bier , to shew he deserved lapidation ; they wept not for him , nor buryed him in the common place of buriall . Further , Buxtorf there alledgeth this constitution of their Law : that if he that was under Niddui , and desired not absolution , was the second time under it , if that did no good on him , then he was excommunicated with the higher sort of excommunication , called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is likewise observed by Ioh. Coch. Mr. Selden , and others . From whence it is evident that this was an Ecclesiasticall censure , and not meerly Civill , because the main end of it was not satisfaction to the Law , but the repentance of the person who lay under the fault ; and according to the evidence given of it , the penalty was relaxed or encreased , which argument not yet taken notice of nor improved by Writers on this subject , seems to make the case clear , that excommunication among the Jews was not a meer out-lawry , as some conceive it to have been . Thirdly , I argue , If it was not the breach of the Law , but the publikeness of the offence , or the scandall of it which was the ground of excommunication ; then it was not a meer civil penalty , but an Ecclesiasticall censure : for civill penalties do proceed upon the breach of the Law , and alter not as to the publikeness or privateness of the offence ; but here it is evident that the same offence deserving excommunication if done in publike , did not if done in private , or was left at the persons liberty to have the offender excommunicated or not . That which is reckoned as the first cause of excommunication , is affront or contempt put upon a wise man , or Rabbi , or one that was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Student in the Law ; now it is determined by them in this case , that if it were done in private , the Rabbi might pardon him : but if in publike , he could not . For as Ioh. Coch. gives the reason , publicum Doctoris ludibrium in legis contemptum redundas : the contempt of publike Teachers of the Law , redounds to the dishonour of the Law its self . Thus it was the scandall of the fault . and not the bare offence which made excommunication necessary among them ; and not as that scandall was a meer defamation of the person , but as it redounded to the contempt of the Law. Fourthly , I argue from the form used in excommunication by them . There are two ▪ forms produced of their excommunications , the one by Buxtorf out of an old Hebrew Manuscript , the beginning of which is , Ex sententiâ Domini Dominorum , sit in Anathemate Plo●i filius Ploni , in utraque domo judicii , superiorum , sc. & inferiorum , &c. where two things evidence , it was accounted a sacred and no civill action , doing it immediately in the name and authority of the Lord of lords ; and pronouncing him excommunicate both in Heaven and Earth . So R. Elieser , speaking of the Excommunication of the Cuthites or Samaritans , Atque anathemate devovebant Cuthaos mysterio nominis Amphorasch , & Scriptura exarata in tabulis , & anathemate domus judicii superioris , atque anathemate curia inferioris , as it is translated by Guli . Vorstius , who in his Notes upon that Book produceth a most dreadfull sentence of Excommunication used to this day in many ▪ Synagogues , which they call Cherem Col Bo. from the book whence it is taken , which runs most solemnly in the several names of God , whereby they do Chamatize , curse and devote the persons against whom it is pronounced . Fifthly , It appears not to be a meerly civil thing instead of civill power , because they use it against those over whom they have no civill Jurisdiction , as appears by their Schamatizing the Christians in their Liturgies , as Buxtorf observes . Sixthly , I argue from the Effects of it , because they who lay under it were excluded from publike Worship , which is averred by Buxtorf , Goc● . and others in the places forecited . It is acknowledged that he that was onely under Niddui , might be present at publike Worship ; but even there he was under his Separation too , of four Cubits from any other Israelite . And hence in probability might the mistake arise , because those under Niddui might appear at the Temple or Synagogue , therefore Excommunication was no prohibition à Sacris . But he that was under Cherem , Non docet , non docetur , Neither teacheth others , nor is taught himself , saith Ioh. Cocceius ; and Buxtorf of one under Cherem , omninò à coetu sacro excluditur : and in this sense Buxtorf expresly takes the turning out of the Synagogue , Ioh. 9. 22 — 12. 42. which , saith he , is done by Cherem . But against this it is strongly pleaded by our Learned Mr. Selden , that putting out of the Synagogue is nothing else but Excommunicating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to separate from the Congregation , taking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the civil and not sacred sense , as it denotes an excluding them from common Society ; but though it be freely granted that that is sometimes the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Mat. 10. 17. yet those particulars being considered , which are already laid down , I shall leave it to consideration whether it be more probable to take the word Synagogue here in a Civil or Sacred Sense ; when the occasion expressed is meerly a matter of Doctrine and Opinion , and not any thing condemned by their Law. Another thing which hath been , I believe a great ground of mistaking in this matter , is , that excluding from the civill Society among them was alwayes consequent upon Excommunication ; the Reason whereof was , because the Church and Common-wealth were not distinct among the Jews ; and the same persons who took care of Sacred , did likewise of Civil things ( there being no distinct Sanhedrins among them as some imagine : ) but from hence it no wayes follows , but their Excommunication might be an exclusion from Sacred Worship as well as Civil Society . However , were it as they pretend , that it was from civill commerce , yet the whole people of the Jews being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gods peculiar people , and his only Church in being before the times of the Gospel , an exclusion in that respect from the common Society of them , might deservedly be looked upon as a sacred action , and not meerly civill , it being a separation from a people whose main ligature was their being a Church of God , or a Community gathered together for Gods worship and service . Thus we see the Church of the Jews had this power among them ; and for the Christian Church , the practice of Discipline upon offenders was never questioned , though the right hath been ; so that from hence we gather , in that it hath been the practice of Societies constituted for the Worship of God , to call offenders to an account for their offences , and if upon examination they be found guilty , to exclude them their Society ; that it is a dictate of the Law of Nature , That every offender against the Laws of a Society must give an account of his actions to the Rulers of it , and submit to the Censures inflicted on him by them . Thus I am now come to the end of my first stage , to shew how far Church-Government is founded upon the Law and Light of Nature , And so to the end of the first Part. PART . II. CHAP. I. The other ground of Divine Right considered , viz. Gods positive Laws ; which imply a certain knowledge of Gods intention to bind men perpetually . As to which , the Arguments drawn from Tradition , and the practice of the Church in after-ages , proved invalid by several arguments . In order to a right stating the Question , some Concessions laid down . First , That there must be some form of Government in the Church . The notion of a Church explained : whether it belongs only to particular Congregations , which are manifested not to be of Gods primary intention , but for our necessity . Evidence for National Churches under the Gospel . A National Church-Government necessary . I Now come to the second way , whereby any thing comes to be of unalterable Divine Right , which is , by the positive Laws of God , which do bind universally to obedience . In the entrance into this Discourse , it is necessary to lay down the ways , whereby we find out a Divine positive Law determining an unalterable Obligation : which must be either by express words of Scripture , or by some other certain way , whereby to gather from thence , that it was Gods intention to bind men . For the main thing requisite to make a standing universal positive Law , is Gods declaring his mind , that the thing enquired into , should unalterably bind men to the practice of it . Now whatever doth sufficiently manifest Gods intention , is a medium to find out such a Law by , and nothing else : But it must be such a manifestation as gives a mans mind sufficient evidence and testimony whereon to build a true , certain , and divine assent to the thing , as revealed : So that whatsoever binds the conscience as a Law , must first be entertained by the understanding as a matter of faith ; not as it imports something meerly doctrinall and dogmaticall , but as it implyes the matter of a Divine Revelation , and the object of an assent upon the credibility of a Testimony . For God having the only immediate authority over the consciences of men , nothing can bind immediately the conscience but a Divine Law , neither can any thing bind as such , but what the understanding assents unto , as revealed by God himself . Now the Word of God being the only Codex and Digests of Divine Laws , whatever Law we look for , must either be found there in express terms , or at least so couched therein , that every one by the exercise of his understanding , may by a certain and easie collection , gather the universall obligation of the thing enquired after . In this case then , whatsoever is not immediately founded upon a Divine Testimony , cannot be made use of as a Medium to infer an universally binding Law by : So that all Traditions and Historicall evidence will be unserviceable to us , when we enquire into Gods intentions in binding mens consciences . Matters of fact , and meer Apostolicall practice , may I freely grant , receive much light from the Records of succeeding ages ; but they can never give a mans understanding sufficient ground to inferr any Divine Law , arising from those facts attested to be the practice or Records of succeeding ages . For first , The foundation and ground of our assent in this case , is not the bare testimony of Antiquity ; but the assurance which we have , either that their practice did not vary from what was Apostolicall ; or in their Writings , that they could not mistake concerning what they deliver unto us : And therefore those who would inferr the necessary obligation of men to any form of Government , because that was practised by the Apostles , and then prove the Apostolicall practice from that of the ages succeeding , or from their Writings , must first of all prove , that what was done then , was certainly the Apostles practice , and so prove the same thing by its self , or that it was impossible they should vary from it , or that they should mistake in judging of it : For here something more is required then a meer matter of fact , in which I confess their nearnesse to the Apostles times doth give them an advantage above the ages following , to discern what it was ; but such a practice is required , as inferrs an universall obligation upon all places , times , and persons . Therefore these things must be manifested , that such things were unquestionably the practice of those ages and persons ; that their practice was the same with the Apostles ; that what they did , was not from any prudential motives , but by vertue of a Law which did bind them to that practice . Which things are easily passed over by the most eager Disputers of the controversie about Church-Government , but how necessary they are to be proved before any form of Government be asserted , so necessary , that without it there can be no true Church , any weak understanding may discern . Secondly , Supposing that Apostolicall practice be sufficiently attested by the following ages , yet unless it be cleared from Scripture , that it was Gods intention that the Apostles actions should continually bind the Church , there can be nothing inferred that doth concern us in point of Conscience . I say , that though the matter of fact be evidenced by Posterity , yet the obligatory nature of that fact must depend on Scripture : and the Apostles intentions must not be built upon mens bare ●urmises , nor upon after-practices , especially if different from the constitution of things during the Apostles times . And here those have somewhat whereon to exercise their understandings , who assert an obligation upon men to any form of Government , by vertue of an Apostolicall practice , which must of necessity suppose a different state of things from what they were when the Apostles first established Governours over Churches . As how those who were appointed Governours over particular Congregations by the Apostles , come to be by vertue of that Ordination , Governours over many Congregations of like nature and extent with that over which they were set : And whether , if it were the Apostles intention that such Governours should be alwayes in the Church , is it not necessary that that intention of theirs be declared by a standing Law , that such there must be ; for here matter of fact and practice can be no evidence , when it is supposed to be different from the constitution of Churches afterward : But of this more hereafter . Thirdly , Supposing any form of Government in its self necessary , and that necessity not determined by a Law in the Word of God , the Scripture is thereby apparently argued to be insufficient for its end ; for then deficit in necessariis ; some things are necessary for the Church of God which the Scripture is wholly silent in . I say not , that every thing about Church-Government must be written in Scripture ; but supposing any one form necessary , it must be there commanded , or the Scripture is an imperfect Rule , which contains not all things necessary by way of Precept : For there can be no other necessity universall , but either by way of means to an end , or by way of Divine Command : I know none will say , that any particular form of Government is necessary absolutely , by way of means to an end ; for certainly , supposing no obligation from Scripture , Government by an equality of power in the Officers of the Church , or by superiority of one order above another , are indifferent in order to the generall ends of Government , and one not more necessary then the other . If any one form then be necessary , it must be by that of command ; and if there be a command universally binding , whose footsteps cannot be traced in the Word of God , how can the Scriptures be a perfect Rule , if it fails in determining binding Laws ? So that we must , if we own the Scriptures sufficiency as a binding Rule , appeal to that about any thing pleaded as necessary , by vertue of any Divine command : and if such a Law cannot be met with in Scripture , which determines the case in hand one way or other by way of necessary obligation , I have ground to look upon that which is thus left undetermined by Gods positive Laws , to be a matter of Christian-liberty ; and that neither part is to be looked upon as necessary for the Church of God , as exclusive of the other . This I suppose is the case , as to particular forms of Government in the Church of God : but that I may not only suppose but prove it , I now come to the stating of the Question , which if ever necessary to be done any where , it is in the Controversie of Church-Government , the most of mens heats in this matter arising from want of right understanding the thing in question between them . In the stating the Question , I shall proceed by degrees , and shew how far we acknowledge any thing belonging to Government in the Church to be of an unalterable Divine Right . First , That there must be a form of Government in the Church of God , is necessary by vertue , not only of that Law of Nature which provides for the preservation of Societies , but likewise by vertue of that Divine Law , which takes care for the Churches preservation in peace and unity . I engage not here in the Controversie , Whether a particular Congregation be the first Political Church or no ; it sufficeth for my purpose , that there are other Churches besides particular Congregations : I mean , not only the Catholick visible Church , which is the first , not only in order of consideration , but nature too , as a totum Integrale before the similar parts of it , but in respect of all other accidentall modifications of Churches , from the severall wayes of their combination together . They who define a Church by stated worshipping Congregations , do handsomely beg the thing they desire , by placing that in their definition of a Church , which is the thing in question : which is , Whether there be no other Church but such particular Congregations ? Which is as if one should go about to prove , that there were no civil Societies but in particular Corporations , and to prove it , should give such a definition of civill Society , that it is , A company of men joyned together in a Corporation , for the preservation of their Rights and Priviledges , under the Governours of such a place . It must be first proved , that no other company of men can be call'd a civill Society besides a Corporation : and so that no other society of men joyning together in the profession of the true Religion , can be call'd a Church , but such as joyn in particular Congregations . To which purpose it is very observable , That particular Congregations are not de primariâ intentione divinâ ; for if the whole world could joyn together in the publike Worship of God , no doubt that would be most properly a Church , but particular Congregations are only accidental , in reference to Gods intention of having a Church , because of the impossibility of all mens joyning together for the convenient distribution of Church-priviledges , and administration of Gospel-Ordinances . For it is evident , that the Priviledges and Ordinances , do immediately and primarily belong to the Catholick visible Church , in which Christ to that end hath set Officers , as the Apostle clearly expresseth , 1 Corinth . 12. 28. ( for how Apostles should be set as Officers over particular Congregations , whose Commission extended to the whole World , is , I think , somewhat hard to understand ) but for the more convenient participation of Priviledges and Ordinances , particular Congregations are necessary : This will be best illustrated by Examples . We read that ( Esther 1. 3. ) King Ahashuerus made a feast for all his Princes and Servants : Doubtlesse the King did equally respect them all as a Body in the feasting of them , and did bestow his entertainment upon them all as considered together ; but by reason of the great multitude of them , it was impossible that they should all be feasted together in the same Room ; and therefore for more convenient participation of the Kings bounty , it was necessary to divide themselves into particular companies , and to associate as many as conveniently could in order to that end . So it is in the Church , Christ in donation of priviledges equally respects the whole Church ; but because men cannot all meet together to participate of these priviledges , a more particular distribution was necessary for that end . But a clearer example of this kind we have yet in Scripture , which is Mark 6. 39. in our Saviours feeding the multitude with five loaves and two fishes ; where we see our Saviours primary intention , was to feed the whole multitude ; but for their more convenient partaking of this food , our Saviour commands them to sit down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , according to the Hebraism of ingeminating the words , to note the distribution of them , and therefore the Vulg. Lat. renders it secundum contubernia , that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Camerarius expounds it , according to so many companies and divisions as might conveniently sit together , as at a Table : Where we plainly see this distribution was only accidentall , as to Christs primary intention of feeding the multitude , but was only necessary for their own conveniency . Thus the case is evident , as to the Church of God , it is our necessity and conveniency which makes severall Congregations of the Catholike visible Church , and not Gods primary intention , when he bestowed such priviledges upon the Church , that it should be understood of particular Congregations . If then particular Congregations be only accidentall for our conveniency , it evidently follows that the primary notion of a Church , doth not belong to these ; nor that these are the first subject of Government which belongs to a Church as such , and not as crumbled into particular Congregations ; although the actual exercise of Government be most visible and discernable there ; Because the joyning together for participation of Gospel-Ordinances must be in some particular company or other associated together for that end . Where ever then we find the notion of a Church particular , there must be government in that Church ; and why a National Society incorporated into one civil Government , joyning in the profession of Christianity , and having a right thereby to participate of Gospel-Ordinances in the convenient distributions of them in particular congregations , should not be called a Church ; I confesse I can see no reason . The main thing objected against it , is , that a Church implyes an actual joyning together for participation of all Gospel-Ordinances ; but as this , as I said before , is only a begging the Question , so I say now , that actual communion with any particular Congregation , is not absolutely necessary to a member of a Church ; for supposing one baptized at Sea , where no setled Congregation is ( nor any more Society then that which Aristotle calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) yet such a one is thereby a member of the Church of God , though not of any Congregation ; so likewise a Church then may consist of such as have a right to Ordinances , without the inserting their actual participation of them in fixed Congregations . A particular Church then I would describe thus , That it is , A society of men joyning together in the visible profession of the true Faith ; having a right to , and enjoying among them the Ordinances of the Gospel . That a whole Nation professing Christianity , in which the Ordinances of the Gospel are duly administred in particular Congregations , is such a Society , is plain and evident . A clear instance of such a National constitution of a Church under the Gospel , we have in the Prophesie of the Conversion of Egypt and Assyria in Gospel-times . Isaiah 19. 19 , 21 , 24 , 25. We have Egypts professing the true Faith , and enjoying Gospel Ordinances , vers . 19. 21. which , according to the Prophetical stile are set down under the representation of such things as were then in use among the Jewes : by an Altar in the midst of the Land , ver . 19. The Altar noting the true worship of God ; and being in the midst of the Land , the universal owning of this worship by all the people of the land . God owns them for a Church , v. 25. Whom the Lord of hosts shall bless , saying , Blessed be Egypt my people . The very name whereby Israel was called while it was a Church . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hosea , 2. 1. And when God unchurched them , it was under this name , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye are not my people . As much then as Israel was a Church when God owned it for his People : so should Egypt be upon their conversion to the Faith of Christ , which was done upon Marks preaching at Alexandria not long after the death of Christ. This then we have now briefly cleared , that a Nation joyning in profession of Christianity , is a true Church of God : whence it evidently follows , that there must be a Form of Ecclesiastical Government over a Nation as a Church , as well as of Civil Government , over it , as a Society governed by the same Lawes . Therefore some make this necessary to a Nationall Church , National Union in one Ecclesiasticall body in the same Community of Ecclesiasticall Government . For every Society must have its Government belonging to it as such a Society ; and the same Reason that makes Government necessary in any particular Congregation , will make it necessary for all the particular Congregations joyning together in one visible society as a particular National Church . For the unity and peace of that Church , ought much more to be looked after then of any one particular Congregation , in as much as the Peace of all the particular combinations of men for participation of Ordinances doth depend upon , and is comprehended in the Peace of the whole . But though I say from hence that some form of publike Government by the subordination of particular Assemblies to the Government of the whole body of them is necessary , yet I am far from asserting the necessity of any one form of that Government , much more , from saying that no Nationall Church can subsist without one Nationall Officer , as the High-Priest under the Law , or one Nationall place of Worship , as the Temple was . The want of considering of which , viz that Nationall Churches may subsist without that Form of them under the Jewes , is doubtless the great Ground of Mens quarrelling against them ; but with what Reason , let Men impartially judge . This then we agree , that some from of Government is necessary in every particular Church , and so that Government in the Church of Divine and unalterable Right ; and that not onely of particular Congregations , but of all Societies which may be called Churches , whether Provinciall , or Nationall . CHAP. II. The second Concession is , That Church-government formally considered , must be administred by Officers of Divine appointment . To that end , the continuance of a Gospel . Ministry fully cleared from all those Arguments , by which positive Lawes are proved immutable . The reason of the appointment of it continues ; the dream of a seculum Spiritûs Sancti discussed , first broached by the M●ndicant Friers . It s occasion and unreasonableness shewed . Gods declaring the perpetuity of a Gospel Ministry , Matth. 28. 19. explained . A novell Interpretation largely refuted . The world to come , what . A Ministry necessary for the Churches continuance , Ephes. 4. 12. explained , and vindicated . SEcondly , That the Government of the Church ought to be Administred by Officers of Divine appointment , is another thing I will yield to be of Divine Right ▪ but the Church here , I take not in that latitude which I did in the former Concession , but I take it chiefly here for the Members of the Church , as distinct from Officers , as it is taken in Acts 15. 22. So that my meaning is , that there must be a standing perpetuall Ministry in the Church of God , whose care and imployment must be , to oversee and Govern the People of God , and to administer Gospel-Ordinances among them , and this is of Divine and perpetuall Right . That Officers were appointed by Christ in the Church for these ends at first , is evident from the direct affirmation of Scripture , God hath set in the Church , first Apostles , secondly Prophets , thirdly Teachers , &c. 1 Corinth . 12. 28. Eph. 4. 8 , 11. and other places to the same purpose . This being then a thing acknowledged , that they were at first of Divine Institution , and so were appointed by a Divine positive Law , which herein determines and restrains the Law of Nature ( which doth not prescribe the certain qualifications of the persons to govern this Society , nor the instalment or admission of them into this employment , viz by Ordination . ) The only enquiry then left , is , Whether a standing Gospel-ministry be such a positive Law , as is to remain perpetually in the Church , or no ? which I shall make appear by those things which I laid down in the entrance of this Treatise , as the Notes whereby to know when positive Laws are unalterable . The first was , when the same reason of the command continues still ; and what reason is there why Christ should appoint Officers to rule his Church then , which will not hold now ? Did the people of God need Ministers then to be as Stars ( as they are call'd in Scripture ) to lead them unto Christ , and do they not as well need them now ? Had people need of guides then , when the doctrine of the Gospel was confirmed to them by miracles , and have they not much more now ? Must there be some then to oppose gainsayers , and must they have an absolute liberty of prophecying now , when it is foretold what times of seduction the last shall be ? Must there be some then to rule over their charge , as they that must give an account , and is not the same required still ? Were there some then ▪ to reprove , rebuke , exhort , to preach in season , out of season , and is there not the same necessity of these things still ? Was it not enough then , that there were so many in all Churches that had extraordinary gifts of tongues , prophecying , praying , interpretation of tongues , but besides those there were some Pastors by office , whose duty it was to give attendance to reading , to be wholly in these things ; and now when these extraordinary gifts are ceased , is not there a much greater necessity then there was then , for some to be set apart and wholly designed for this work ? Were Ordinances only then administred by those whom Christ commissioned , and such as derived their authority from them ; and what reason is there that men should arrogate and take this imployment upon themselves now ? If Christ had so pleased , could he not have left it wholly at liberty for all believers to have gone about preaching the Gospel ? or why did he make choice of 12. Apostles chiefly for that work , were it not his Will to have some particularly to dispense the Gospel ? and if Christ did then separate some for that work , what Reason is there why that Office should be thrown common now , which Christ himself inclosed by his own appointment ? There can be no possible Reason imagined , why a Gospel-Ministry should not continue still , unless it be that Fanatick pretence of a Seculum Spiritus Sancti , a Dispensation of the Spirit , which shall evacuate the use of all means of Instruction , and the use of all Gospel-Ordinances ; which pretence is not so Novell as most imagine it to be ; for setting aside the Montanistical spirit in the Primitive Times , which acted upon Principles much of the same Nature with these we now speak of : The first rise of this Ignis fatuus was from the bogs of Popery , viz. from the Orders of the Dominicans and Franciscans , about the middle of the twelfth Century . For no sooner did the Pauperes de Lugduno , or the Waldenses appear , making use of the Word of God to confute the whole Army of Popish Traditions , but they finding themselves worsted at every turn while they disputed that ground , found out a Stratagem whereby to recover their own Credit , and to beat their adversaries quite out of the field . Which was , that the Gospel which they adhered to so much , was now out of date , and instead of that they broached another Gospel out of the Writings of the Abbot Ioachim , and Cyrils visions , which they blasphemously named Evangelium Spiritus Sancti , Evangelium Novum , and Evangelium Aeternum , as Gulielmus de Sancto Amore , their great Antagonist , relates in his Book de periculis noviss . temporum , purposely designed against the Impostures of the Mendicant Friers , who then like Locusts , rose in multitudes with their shaven crowns out of the bottomless pit . This Gospel of the Spirit they so much magnified above the Gospel of Christ , that the same Author relates these words of theirs concerning it ; Quod comparatum ad Evangelium Christi , tanto plus perfectionis ac dignitatis habet , quantum Sol ad Lunam comparatus , aut ad nucleum testa ; that it exceeded it as much as the kernell doth the shell , or the Light of the Sun doth that of the Moon . We see then from what quarter of the World this new Light began to rise : but so much for this digression . To the thing it self . If there be such a dispensation of the Spirit which takes away the use of Ministry and Ordinances , it did either commence from the time of the effusion of the Spirit upon the Apostles , or some time since . Not then ; for even of those who had the most large portion of the Spirit poured upon them , we read that they continued in all Gospel ordinances , Acts 2. 42 , and among the chief , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , under the Apostles Ministry , it may be better rendred than in the Apostles Doctrine : And which is most observable , the Prophecy of Ioel about the Spirit , is then said to be fulfilled , Acts 2. 17. Besides , if either that place of Ioel , or that of Ieremy , cited Heb. 8. 11. or the Unction of the Spirit , 1 John 2. 20 , 27. did take away the use of preaching , how did the Apostles themselves understand their meaning , when they were so diligent in preaching and instructing others : Iohn writes to those , to try the Spirits , of whom he saith , They have an Unction to know all things : and those to whom the Apostle writes , that they need not teach every one his Neighbour ; of them he saith , that they had need to be taught the first principles of the Oracles of God. And even in that very Chapter where he seems to say , they that are under the New Covenant , need not be taught , he brings that very Speech in as an argument , that the old dispensation of the Law was done away : And so goes about to teach , when he seems to take away the use of it . These Speeches then must not be understood in their absolute and literal sense , but with a reflection upon , and comparison with , the state of things in the times wherein those Prophecies were utter'd : For God to heighten the Jews apprehensions of the great blessings of the Gospel , doth set them forth under a kind of Hyperbolical expressions , that the dull capacity of the Jews might at least apprehend the just weight and magnitude of them , which they would not otherwise have done . So in that place of Ieremy , God to make them understand how much the knowledge of the Gospel exceeded that under the Law , doth as it were set it down in this Hyperbolicall way , that it will exceed it as much , as one that needs no teaching at all , doth one that is yet but in his rudiments of learning . So that the place doth not deny the use of teaching under the Gospel , but because Teaching doth commonly suppose ignorance , to shew the great measure of knowledge , he doth it in that way , as though the knowledge should be so great , that men should not need be taught in such a way of Rudiments as the Jews were , viz by Types and Ceremonies , and such things . We see then no such dispensation was in the Apostles times ; for the same Apostle after this in Chapt. 10. 25. bids them not to forsake the Assembling themselves together as some did ; Wherefore were these Assemblies , but for Instruction ? and in the last Chapter , bids them obey their Rulers . What need Rulers , if no need of Teaching ? But so sensless a dream will be too much honour'd with any longer confutation . In the Apostles times then , there was no such dispensation of the Spirit , which did take away the use of Ministry and Ordinances . If it be expected since their times , I would know whence it appears , that any have a greater measure of the Spirit then was poured out in the Apostles times ; for then the Ministry was joyned with the Spirit : and what Prophecies are fulfilled now , which were not then ? Or if they pretend to a Doctrine distinct from , and above what the Apostles taught , let them produce their evidences , and work those miracles which may induce men to believe them : Or let them shew what obligation any have to believe pretended new Revelations , without a power of miracles , attesting that those Revelations come from God ? Or whereon men must build their faith , if it be left to the dictates of a pretended Spirit of Revelation ? Or what way is left to discern the good Spirit from the bad , in its actings upon mens minds , if the Word of God be not our Rule still ? Or how God is said to have spoken in the last dayes by his Son , if a further speaking be yet expected ? For the Gospel-dispensation is therefore called the Last dayes , because no other is to be expected : Times being differenced in Scripture according to Gods wayes of revealing himself to men . But so much for this . The second way whereby to know when Positive Lawes are unalterable , is when God hath declared that such Lawes shall bind still . Two wayes whereby God doth express his own Will concerning the perpetuity of an Office founded on his own Institution . First , if such things be the work belonging to it , which are of necessary and perpetual use . Secondly , if God hath promised to assist them in it perpetually , in the doing of their work . First , the Object of the Ministerial Office are such things which are of necessary and perpetual use ; I mean the Administration of Gospel-Ordinances . viz. the Word and Sacraments , which were appointed by Christ for a perpetual Use. The Word as a means of Conversion and Edification ; the Sacraments not onely as notes of distinction of Professors of the true faith from others , but as Seals to confirm the Truth of the Covenant on Gods part towards us , and as Instruments to convey the blessings sealed in the Covenant to the hearts of Believers . Now the very Nature of these things doth imply their perpetuity and continuance in the world , as long as there shall be any Church of God in it . For these things are not typi rerum futurarum , only Ceremonies to represent somthing to come , but they are symbola rerum invisibilium , signs to represent to our Senses things invisible in their own Nature : and between these two there is a great difference , as to the perpetuity of them : For Types of things as to come , must of necessity expire when the thing typified appears ; but representation of invisible things cannot expire on that account , because the thing represented as invisible , cannot be supposed to be made visible , and so to evacuate the use of the Signes which represents them to us . Types represent a thing which is at present invisible ; but under the Notion of it as future . Symbols represent a thing at present invisible , but as present ; and therefore Symbols are designed by Gods Institution for a perpetuall help to the weakness of our Faith. And therefore the Lords Supper is appointed to set forth the Lords Death , till he come : whereby the continuance of it in the Church of God is necessarily implied . Now then , if these things which are the proper object of the Ministerial Function be of a perpetual Nature ; when these things are declared to be of an abiding Nature , it necessarily follows , that that Function to which it belongs to administer these things , must be of a perpetual Nature . Especially if we consider in the second place , that Christ hath promised to be with them continually in the administration of these things : For that , notwithstanding the dust lately thrown upon it , we have a clear place , Matth. 28. 19. Go teach and baptize , &c. Loe I am with you alwayes to the end of the World. If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , did not signifie perpetuity , yet certainly the latter words do ; for how could Christ be with the Apostles themselves personally to the end of the World ? It must be therefore with them , and all that succeed them in the Office of Teaching and Baptizing , to the Worlds end : For that I assert to be the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . I insist not barely on the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , either as to its supposed Etymology , or as it Answers the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 knowing how fallible the Arguments drawn from thence are , when in the Dispute of the Eternity of the Law of Moses with the Jewes , it is confessed that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relates onely to a long continuance of Time. But however , I suppose that it will hardly be found in Scripture , that either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth barely relate to the time of Life of any individuall persons , especially , if absolutely put as it is here . One great signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the New Testament ( which we are to inquire into , and not how it is used among Greek Authours ) is that wherein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for the world its self which Vorstius reckons among the Hebraisms of the New Test. in which sense the Jewes call God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and great persons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Magnates mundi in which Sense , in the New Testament , the Devil is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Ioh. 12. 31. — 14. 31. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 2 Cor. 4. 4. And so God is said to create 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the worlds , Heb. 1. 2. — 11. 3. If we take it in this Sense , Christs promise must of necessity relate to the dissolution of the Fabrick of the World , and that he would be with his Servants in the Gospel , till all things be dissolved . Against this it is pleaded , that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here relates to the destruction of Ierusalem , and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implies the state of things under the Law , which would continue till Ierusalem were destroyed , from which time a new 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would commence . But to this I answer , first ; I absolutely deny , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , doth ever in Scripture relate to the destruction of the Jewish State. This will be best made out by a particular view of the places wherein this Phrase occurres . The first time we meet with this phrase is in Matth. 13. where we have it thrice , ver . 39. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : Now can any be so senslesse , as to imagine that the Harvest wherein the Tares shall be gathered , and cast into unquenchable fire , when the Angels are said to be the Reapers , and to gather out of Christs Kingdome every thing that offends , should be attributed to the destruction of Ierusalem ? and so ver . 40. and ver . 49. where the same phrase expresseth the same time , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , where the Antecedents and Consequents fully Declare , what the time there is meant , which is the general Judgement of the world . The onely place pleaded for this sense , is Matthew 24. 3. where the Disciples inquire of Christ what should be the sign , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , where granting , that the former Christs coming may respect his coming to alter the present state of things , according to the Jewes apprehension of the Messias ; yet I deny that the latter doth , but it respects the generall Destruction of the World , consequent upon that alteration : For the Jewes not onely expected an alteration of the present state of things among them , but a consequent Destruction of the World , after the coming of the Messias , according to that speech of theirs cited by Doctor Lightfoot . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This World shall be destroyed for a 1000. years , and after that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there should be the State of Eternity . So that the Disciples , speaking in the Sense of the Jewes , doe not onely inquire of the signs of his altering the present state of things among them , but likewise of the Destruction of the whole World too . Accordingly it is observable , that throughout that Chapter , our Saviour intermixeth his answers to these 2 Questions . Sometimes speaking in reference to the Jewish State , as it is plain he doth , verse 15 , 16. and so on ; and when he saith , that this Generation shall not pass , till all these things be fulfilled , ver . 34. But then it is as evident , that some places must relate to the destruction of the World , as when he saith , Of that day and hour knoweth no Man , no not the Angels of Heaven , but the Father onely , ver . 36. which will appear more plainly , by comparing it with Mark 13. 32. Where the Son is excluded from knowing that hour too ; But how can any say , that the Son did not know the time of the Destruction of Ierusalem , which he himself foretold when it should be ? And those words Heaven and Earth shall pass away , ver . 35. seem to be our Saviours Transition to the Answer of the other Question , about the final destruction of all things . However that be , as we see no reason at all why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , should onely respect the subversion of the Jewish State : But supposing it should , yet there is far less reason why it should be so meant , in the place whose sense we are inquiring into . For if by Christs coming to destroy Ierusalem , the old Sate and Dispensation should be taken away , we must suppose a new state ●nder the messias to begin from thence . And how Rationall doth this sound , that Christ should promise his peculiar Presence with his own Apostles , whom he imployed in erecting the Gospel State , onely till the Old Jewish State be subverted ; but his Promise not at all to extend to that Time , wherein the State of the Kingdome of the Messias should be set up in stead of it : And how could any of the Apostles , for example , Saint Iohn , who survived the Destruction of Ierusalem , expect Christs Presence with him , by vertue of this Promise , if it extended no further then to the Destruction of the Jewish State ? Besides , it is a meer groundlesse fancy , and favours of the Jewish apprehensions of the State of the Messias Kingdome , to imagine that the Temporall State of Ierusalem must be first subverted before that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Dispensation of things was at an end . For the Jewish State and Dispensation did not lie in the Iewish Polity , but in Obligation to the Law of Moses , which expired together with Christ. And so the Gospel-tate , which is called the Kingdome of Heaven , and the Regeneration , began upon Christs Resurrection and Ascension , when he was solemnly ( as it were ) inaugurated in his Mediatory Kingdome . And presently after sends down his Vice-Roy upon the day of Pentecost , in the effusion of the Spirit upon the Apostles , making good his Promise of the Paracle●e to supply his absence : Whereby the Apostles were more signally impowered for the advancing of the Gospel state . The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then of the Gospel commenceth from Christs Resurrection , and to this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I am very inclinable to think that our Saviour hath reference in these words , when he saith , he will be with his Disciples to the end of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , if we take it for a state of things , or the Gospel-dispensation ; that is , as long as the Evangelical Church shall continue : For that in Scripture is sometime called The World to come , and that Phrase among the Jews of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the world to come , is set to express the times of the Messias ; and it may be the Apostle may referr to this , when he speaks of Apostales tasting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , the force and energy of the Gospel preached ; whence the Kingdom of God is said to be not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not in word , but in power , which is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , spoken of by the Apostle elsewhere , the powerfull demonstration of the Spirit accompanying the preaching of the Gospel . When Christ is called by the Prophet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the everlasting Father , the Septuagint renders it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and so the Vulgar , Latin. Pater futuri saeculi , the Father of the World to Come : that is , the Gospel State , and to this sense Christ is said to be made an High Priest , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the Law to be a shadow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of good things which should be under the new state of the Gospel . And which is more plain to the purpose , the Apostle expresseth what was come to passe in the dayes of the Gospel , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the Ages to come , where the very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used to this sense . And according to this importance of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , some very probably interpret that place of our Saviour concerning the sin against the Holy Ghost , that it should not be forgiven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , neither in the present state of the Iewish Church , wherein there is no sacrifice of expiation for contumacious sinners , but they that despised Moses Law dyed without mercy ; so neither shall there be , any under the World to come , that is the dispensation of Gospel Grace , any pardon proclaimed to any such sinners who ●●ample under foot the blood of the Covenant , and offer despight to the Spirit of grace . Thus we see how properly the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may agree here to the Gospel-State , and so Christs promise of his Presence doth imply the perpetuity of that Office as long as the Evangelical state shall remain , which will be to the Worlds end . The third thing , whereby to know when positive institutions are unalterable , is , when they are necessary to the being , succession , and continuance of the Church of God. Now this yields a further evidence of the perpetuity of Officers in the Church of God , seeing the Church its self cannot be preserved without the Government ; and there can be no Government without some to Rule the members of the Church of God , and to take care for a due administration of Church-priviledges , and to inflict censures upon offenders , which is the power they are invested in by the same authority which was the ground of their institution at first . It is not conceivable how any Society , as the Church is , can be preserved without the continuance of Church-Officers among them . As long as the Body of Christ must be edified , there must be some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , fitted for the work of the Ministry , which is appointed in order to that end ; For that I suppose is the Apostles meaning in Ephes. 4. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . following the Complutensian copy , leaving out the comma between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which makes as though it were a distinct thing from the former ; whereas the Original carryes the sense on ; for otherwise it should have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. and those who follow the ordinary reading , are much at a loss how to explain that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coming in so in the midst without dependance upon the former . Therefore the vulg . Latin best renders it , ad consummationem sanctorum ad opus ministerii ; for the compleating of the Saints for the work of the ministry , in order to the building up of the body of Christ ; and to this purpose Musculus informs us , the German version renders it . And so we understand the enumeration in the verse before of Apostles , Prophets , Evangelists , Pastors and Teachers , not for the persons themselves , but for the gifts of those persons , the office of Apostles , Evangelists , Pastors , &c. which is most suitable to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the eighth verse . He gave gifts to men ; now these gifts , saith he , Christ gave to men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for the fitting the Saints for the work of the Ministry . Not as a late Democratical Writer would perswade us , as though all the Saints were thereby fitted for this Work of the Ministry ; ( for that the Apostle excludes by the former enumeration ) ; for , are all the Saints fitted for Apostles ? are all Prophets , are all Evangelists , are all Pastors and Teachers ? as the Apostle himself elsewhere argues . And in the 8 v. of that chapter , he particularly mentions the several gifts qualifying men for several usefull employments in the Church of God , the Spirit dividing to every man severally as he will. Therefore it cannot be that all the Saints are hereby fitted for this Work ; but God hath scattered these gifts among the Saints , that those who have them might be fitted , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because God would not leave his Church without persons qualified for the service of himself in the work of the Ministry , in order to the building up of the Body of Christ. And by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , here may be meant no other then those he speaks of in the chapter before , when he speaks of the Revelation made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to his holy Apostles and Prophets , and so God gave these gifts for the fiitting the holy Apostles , &c. for the work of the Ministry . It cannot be meant of all , so as to destroy a peculiar function of the Ministry ; for Gods very giving these gifts to some and not to others , is an evidence that the function is peculiar . For else had the gifts been common to all , every Saint had been an Apostle , every believer a Pastor , and Teacher , and then where had the People been that must have been ruled and governed ? So that this very place doth strongly assert both the peculiarity of the Function , from the peculiarity of gifts in order to fitting men for it ; and the perpetuity of the Function from the end of it , the building up of the Body of Christ. Thus I have now asserted the perpetual divine Right of a Gospel-Ministry , not only for teaching the Word , but administration of Ordinances , and governing the Church as a Society : which work belongs to none but such as are appointed for it , who are the same with the dispencers of the Word , as appears from the titles of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Governours , Rulers , Pastors , all which necessarily imply a Governing power , which having been largely proved by others , and yeelded by me , I pass over . CHAP. III. The Question fully stated . Not what form of Government comes the nearest to the Primitive practice , but whether any be absolutely determined . Several things propounded for resolving the Question . What the form of Church-Government was under the Law. How far Christians are bound to observe that . Neither the necessity of superiority , nor the unlawfulnesse can be proved thence . ANd now I come to the main Subject of the present Controversie , which is acknowledging a form of Government necessary , and the Governours of the Church perpetuall ; Whether the particular form whereby the Church must be governed , be determined by any positive Law of God , which unalterably binds all Christians to the observation of it . By Church here , I mean not a particular Congregation , but such a Society which comprehends in it many of these lesser Congregations united together in one body under a form of Government . The forms of Government in controversie , the Question being thus stated , are only these two ▪ the particular officers of several Churches , acting in an equality of Power , which are commonly called a Colledge of Presbyters ; or a Superiour Order above the standing Ministry , having the Power of Jurisdiction and Ordination belonging to it by vertue of a Divine Institution . Which order is by an Antonomasia called Episcopacy . The Question now , is not , which of these two doth come the nearest to Apostolical practice , and the first Institution , which hath hitherto been the controversie so hotly debated among us ; but whether either of these two forms be so setled by a jus divinum , that is , be so determined by a positive Law of God , that all the Churches of Christ are bound to observe that one form so determined , without variation from it : or whether Christ hath not in setling of his Church ( provided there be some form of Government , and a setled Ministry for the exercise of it , ) left it to the prudence of every particular Church , consisting of many Congregations , to agree upon its own form which it judgdeth most conducing to the end of Government in that particular Church . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Here now we fix our selves , and the first thing we do , is to agree upon our wayes of resolution of this Question , whereby to come to an end of this debate . And the most probable way to come to an issue in it , is , to go through all the wayes whereon men do fix an unalterable divine Right , and to see whether any of these do evince a divine Right setled upon a positive Law or no , for one of these forms . The pleas then for such a divine Right are these : Either some formal Law standing in force under the Gospel , or some plain Institution of a New Law by Christ in forming his Church , or the obligatory nature of Apostolical practice , or the general sense of the Primitive Church , to which we shall add by way of Appendix , the Judgement of the chief Divines and Churches since the Reformation ; if we go happily through these , we may content our selves with having obtained the thing we aim at . The first inquiry then is , Whether any formal Law of God concerning a form of government for his Church , either by persons acting in an equality of Power , or subordination of one Order to another , under the Gospel , doth remain in force or no , binding Christians to the observing of it . The Reason why I begin with this , is , because I observe the Disputants on both sides make use of the Pattern under the Law to establish their form by . * Those who are for Superiority of one Order above another in the government of the Church , derive commonly their first argument from the Pattern under the Law. * Those who are for an equality of Power in the persons acting in government , yet being for a subordination of Courts , they bring their first argument for that , from the Jewish Pattern . So that these latter are bound by their own argument , though used in another case , to be ruled in this Controversie by the Jewish Pattern . For why should it be more obligatory as to subordination of Courts , then as to the superiority of Orders ? If it holds in one case : it must in the other . And if there be such a Law for Superiority standing unrepealed , there needs no New Law to inforce it under the Gospel . We shall therefore first enquire what foundation there is for either form in that Pattern , and how far the argument drawn from thence is obligatory to us now . For the practice then in the Jewish Church , That there was no universal equality in the Tribe of Levi which God singled out from the rest for his own service , is obvious in Scripture . For there we find Priests above the Levites ; the family of Aaron being chosen out from the other families of Cohath ( one of the three sons of Levi ) to be employed in a nearer attendance upon Gods Service then any of the other families . And it must be acknowledged , that among both Priests and Levites there was a Superiority ; For God placed Eleazar over the Priests , Elizaphan over the Cohathites , Eliasaph over the Gershonites ; Zuriel over the Merarites , and these are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Rulers over their several families ; for it is said of every one of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was Ruler over the house of his Father . Neither were these equal ; for over Eliasaph and Zuriel God placed Ithamar , over Elisaphan and his own family God set Eleazar , who by reason of his authority over all the rest , is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ruler of the Rulers of Levi , and besides these there were under these Rulers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the chief Fathers of the several distinct families , as they are called Exodus 6. 25. Thus we briefly see the subordination that there was in the Tribe of Levi ; the Levites first , over them the heads of the Families , over them the Rulers , or the chief of the heads , over them Ithamar , over both Priests and Levites , Eleazar ; Over all , Aaron the High Priest. There being then so manifest an inequality among them , proceed we to shew how obligatory this is under the Gospel . For that end it will be necessary to consider , whether this imparity and Superiority were peculiarly appointed by God for the Ecclesiastical government of the Tribe of Levi , as it consisted of persons to be employed in the service of God , or it was only such an inequality and Superiority as was in any other Tribe . If only common with other Tribes , nothing can be inferred from thence peculiar to Ecclesiasticall government under the Gospel , any more then from the government of other Tribes to the same kind of government in all civil States . We must then take notice that Levi was a particular distinct Tribe of it self , and so not in subordination to any other Tribe ; for they had the heads of their Fathers as well as others , Exodus 6. 25. and although when they were setled in Canaan , their habitations were intermixt with other Tribes in their forty eight Cities , yet they were not under the government of those Tribes among whom they lived , but preserved their authority and government intire among themselves . And therefore it was necessary there should be the same form of government among them , which there was among the rest . The whole body of the Nation then was divided into thirteen Tribes ; these Tribes into their several families ; some say seventy , which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , these Families were divided into so many Housholds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , their Housholds into persons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; over the several persons were the several Masters of Families ; over the several Housholds were the Captains of 1000 and 100 , 50 — 10. Over the Families , I suppose , were the heads of the Fathers . And over the thirteen Tribes were the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the chief Fathers of the Tribes of the Children of Israel , Numb . 32. 28. and we have the names of them set down , Numb . 34. 17 , &c. So that hitherto , we find nothing peculiar to this Tribe , nor proper to it as employed in the service of God. For their several Families had their several Heads , and Eleazar over them as chief of the Tribe . And so we find throughout Numbers 2. all the Heads of the several Tribes are named and appointed by God as Eleazar was . The only things then which seem proper to this Tribe , were the superiority of the Priests over the Levites in the service of God , and the supereminent power of the High Priest , as the type of Christ. So that nothing can be inferred from the order under the Law to that under the Gospel , but from one of these two . And from the first there can be nothing deduced but this , that as there was a superiority of Officers under the Law , so likewise should there be under the Gospel ; which is granted by all in the superiority of Priests over Deacons , to whom these two answer in the Church of God , in the judgement of those who contend for a higher order by divine Institution above Presbyters . And withall we must consider , that there was under that order no power of jurisdiction invested in the Priests over the Levites , but that was in the heads of the Families ; and ordination there could not be , because their office descended by succession in their several Families . Those who would argue from Aarons power , must either bring too little , or too much from thence ; Too little , if we consider his office was typical and ceremonial , and as High Priest had more immediate respect to God then men , Heb. 5. 1. and therefore Eleazar was appointed over the several Families during Aarons life-time ; and under Eleazar , his son Phinehas . Too much , If a necessity be urged for the continuance of the same authority in the Church of God ; which is the argument of the Papists , deriving the Popes Supremacy from thence . Which was acutely done by Pope Innocentius the third , the Father of the Lateran Council , who proved , that the Pope may exercise temporall jurisdiction from that place in Deuteronomy 17. 8. and that by this reason , because Deuteronomy did imply the second Law , and therefore what was there written , in Novo Testamento debet observari , must be observed under the Gospel , which according to them is a new Law. All that can be inferred then from the Jewish pattern , cannot amount to any obligation upon Christians , it being at the best but a judicial Law , and therefore binds us not up as a positive Law ; but only declares the equity of the thing in use then . I conclude then , That the Jewish pattern is no standing Law for Church-Government now , either in its common or peculiar form of Government ; but because there was some superiority of order then , and subordination of some persons to others under that government , that such a superiority and subordination is no wayes unlawfull under the Gospel ; for that would destroy the equity of the Law. And though the form of Government was the same with that of other Tribes , yet we see God did not bind them to an equality , because they were for his immediate service , but continued the same way as in other Tribes ; thence I inferr , that as there is no necessary obligation upon Christians to continue that form under the Jews , because their Laws do not bind us now ; so neither is there any repugnancy to this Law in such a subordination , but it is very agreeable with the equity of it , it being instituted for peace and order , and therefore ought not to be condemned for Antichristian . The Jewish pattern then of Government , neither makes equality unlawfull , because their Laws do not oblige now ; nor doth it make superiority unlawfull , because it was practised then . So that notwithstanding the Jewish pattern , the Church of Christ is left to its own liberty for the choyce of its form of Government , whether by an equality of power in some persons , or superiority and subordination of one order to another . CHAP. IV. Whether Christ hath determined the form of Government by any positive Laws . Arguments of the necessity why Christ must determine it , largely answered ; as First , Christs faithfulness compared with Moses , answered , and retorted ; and proved , that Christ did not institute any form of Church Government , because no such Law for it as Moses gave ; and we have nothing but general Rules , which are applyable to several forms of Government . The office of Timothy and Titus , what it proves in order to this question : the lawfulnesse of Episcopacy shewn thence , but not the necessity . A particular form , how far necessary , as Christ was the Governour of his Church ; the similitudes the Church is set out by , prove not the thing in question . Nor the difference of Civil and Church Government ; nor Christ setting Officers in his Church ; nor the inconvenience of the Churches power in appointing new Officers . Every Minister hath a power respecting the Church in common , which the Church may restrain . Episco●acy thence proved lawfull , the argument from the Scriptures perfection answered . VVE come then from the Type to the Antitype , from the Rod of Aaron to the Root of Iess● ▪ from the Pattern of the Jewish Church , to the Founder of the Christian : To see whether our Lord & Saviour hath determined this controversie , or any one form of government for his Church , by any universally binding act or Law of his . And here it is pleaded more hotly by many that Christ must do it , than that he hath done it . And therefore I shall first examine the pretences of the necessity of Christs determining the particular form ; and then the arguments that are brought that he hath done it . The main pleas that there must be a perfect form of Church-government laid down by Christ for the Church of God , are from the comparison of Christ with Moses , from the equal necessity of forms of Government now which there is for other Societies , from the perfection and sufficiency of the Scriptures ; all other arguments are reducible to these three Heads . Of these in their order . First , From the comparison of Christ with Moses , they argue thus : If Moses was faithfull in his house as a servant , much more Christ as a Son ; now Moses appointed a particular form of Government for the Church under the old Testament ; therefore Christ did certainly lay down a form of Church Government for the New Testament . To this I answer : first , Faithfulnesse implyes the discharge of a trust reposed in one by another : so that it is said vers . 2. he was faithful to him that appointed him : Christs faithfulnesse then lay in discharging the Work which his Father laid upon him , which was the Work of mediation between God and us ; and therefore the comparison is here Instituted between Moses as typical Mediator , and Christ as the true Mediator ; that as Moses was faithfull in his Work , so was Christ in his . Now Moses his faithfulnesse lay in keeping close to the Pattern received in the Mount , that is , observing the commands of God ; Now therefore if Christs being faithfull in his office , doth imply the setling any one form of Goverment in the Church , it must be made appear that the serling of this form was part of Christs Mediatory Work , and that which the Father commanded him to do as Mediator ▪ and that Christ received such a form from the Father for the Christian Church , as Moses did for the Jewish . To this it is said , That the Government is laid upon Christs shoulders , and all power in his hands ; and therefore it belongs to him as Mediatour . Christ I grant is the King of the Church , and doth govern it outwardly by his Laws , and inwardly by the conduct of his Spirit : but shall we say , that therefore any one form of Government is necessary , which is neither contained in his Laws , nor dictated by his Spirit ? the main original of mistakes here , is , the confounding the external and internal Government of the Church of Christ , and thence whensoever men read of Christs power , authority and government , they fancy it refers to the outward Government of the Church of God , which is intended of his internal Mediatory power over the hearts and consciences of men . But withall I acknowledge , that Christ for the better government of his Church and people , hath appointed Officers in his Church , invested them by vertue of his own power with an authority to preach and baptize , and administer all Gospel-Ordinances in his own Name , that is , by his authority , for it is clearly made known to us in the Word of God , that Christ hath appointed these things . But then , whether any shall succeed the Apostles in superiority of power over Presbyters , or all remain governing the Church in an equality of power , is nowhere determined by the Will of Christ in Scripture , which contains his Royal Law : and therefore we have no reason to look upon it as any thing flowing from the power and authority of Christ as Mediator ; and so not necessarily binding Christians . Secondly , I answer ; If the correspondency between Christ and Moses in their work , doth imply an equal exactnesse in Christs disposing of every thing in his Church , as Moses did among the Jews ; then the Church of Christ must be equally bound to all circumstances of Worship as the Jews were . For there was nothing appertaining in the least to the Worship of God , but was fully set down even to the pins of the Tabernacle in the Law of Moses ; but we find no such thing in the Gospel . The main Duties and Ordinances are prescribed indeed , but their circumstances and manner of performance are left as matters of Christian-liberty , and only couched under some general Rules : which is a great difference between the legal and Gospel-state . Under the Law all Ceremonies and Circumstances are exactly prescribed : but in the Gospel we read of some general Rules of direction for Christians carriage in all circumstantial things . These four especially contain all the directions of Scripture concerning Circumstantials . All things to be done decently and in order . All to be done for edification . Give no offence . Do all to the glory of God. So that the particular circumstances are left to Christian-liberty with the observation of general Rules . It is evident as to Baptism and the Lords Supper , which are unquestionably of divine Institution , yet as to the circumstances of the administration of them , how much lesse circumstantial is Christ then Moses was ! As to circumcision and the pass-over under the Law , the age , time , persons , manner , place , form , all fully set down ; but nothing so under the Gospel : Whether Baptism shall be administred to Infants or no , is not set down in expresse words , but left to be gathered by Analogy and consequences ; what manner it shall be administred in , whether by dipping or sprinkling , is not absolutely determined ; what form of words to be used , whether in the name of all three persons , or sometimes in the Name of Christ only , as in the Acts we read ( if that be the sense , and not rather in Christs Name , i. e. by Christs authority ) . Whether ▪ sprinkling or dipping shall be thrice as some Churches use it , or only once as others . These things we see relating to an Ordinance of Divine Institution , are yet past over without any expresse command determining either way in Scripture . So as to the Lords Supper ; What persons to be admitted to it , whether all visible professors , or only sincere Christians : upon what terms , whether by previous examination of Church-officers , or by an open profession of their faith , or else only by their own tryal of themselves , required of them as their duty by their Ministers ; whether it should be alwayes after Supper as Christ himself did it ; whether taking fasting , or after meat ; whether kneeling , or sitting , or leaning ? Whether to be consecrated in one form of words , or several ? These things are not thought fit to be ▪ determined by any positive command of Christ , but left to the exercise of Christian-liberty ; the like is as to preaching the Word , publike Prayer , singing of Psalmes ; the duties are required , but the particular Modes are left undetermined . The case is the same as to Church-governwent . That the Church be governed , and that it be governed by its proper Officers , are things of Divine appointment : but whether the Church should be governed by many joyning together in an equality , or by Subordination of some persons to others , is left to the same liberty which all other Circumstances are ; this being not the Substance of the thing it self , but onely the manner of performance of it . 3. I answer , That there is a manifest disparity between the Gospel and Jewish state : and therefore Reasons may be given why all Punctilioes were determined then which are not now : as 1. The perfection and liberty of the Gospel-state above the Jewish . The Law was onely as a Paedagogy , the Church then in her Infancy and Nonage , and therefore wanted the Fescues of Ceremonies to direct her , and every part of her lesson set her , to bring her by degrees to skill and exactness in her Understanding the mystery of the things represented to her . But must the Church now grown up under Christ be still sub ferula , and not dare to vary in any Circumstance , which doth not concern the thing it self ! A Boy at School hath his Lesson set him , and the manner of learning it prescribed him in every mode and circumstance . But at the University hath his Lectures read him , and his work set , and general Directions given , but he is left to his own liberty how to perform his work , and what manner to use in the doing of it . So it was with the Church under age : Every mode and circumstance was Determined ; but when the fulnesse of Time was come , the Church then being grown up , the main Offices themselves were appointed , and generall Directions given ; but a liberty left how to apply and make use of them , as to every particular case and occasion . Things Morall remain still in their full force , but circumstantials are left more at liberty by the Gospel-liberty ; as a Son that is taught by his Father , while he is under his instruction , must observe every particular direction for him in his Learning : but when he comes to age , though he observes not those things as formerly , yet his Son ▪ ship continues , and he must obey his Father as a Childe still , though not in the same manner . The similitude is the Apostles , Galat. 4. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. 10. which he there largely amplifies to this very purpose of freeing Christians from Judaical ceremonies . 2. The Form of Government among the Jewes in the tribe of Levi , was agreeable to the Form of Government among the other Tribes ; and so Moses was not more exact in Reference to that , then to any other ; and those persons in that Tribe who were the chief before the Institution of the A●ronicall Priest-hood , were so after ; but now under the Gospel , people are not under the same Restrictions for civil Government by a Judicial Law , as they were then . For the Form of Ecclesiastical Government then took place among them as one of their Judicial Laws ; And therefore if the Argument hold , Christ must as well Prescribe a Form for civil Government as Ecclesiastical ; if Christ in the Gospel must by his Faithfulnesse follow the Pattern of Moses . But if Christ be not bound to follow Moses Pattern as to Judicial Law , for his Church and People ; neither is he as to a Form of Ecclesiastical Government , because that was a part of their Civil and Judicial Law. 3. The people of the Jewes was a whole and entire people , subsisting by themselves when one set Form of Government was prescribed them ; but it is otherwise now under the Gospel . The Church of Christ was but Forming in Christs own time , nor the Apostles , in whose time we reade of but some Cities and no whole Nations converted to the Faith ; and therefore the same Form of Government would not serve a Church in its first constitution , which is necessary for it when it is actually formed . A Pastour and Deacons might serve the Church of a City while believers were few , but cannot when they are increased into many Congregations . And so proportionably when the Church is enlarged to a whole Nation , there must be another Form of Government then . Therefore they who call for a National Church under the Gospel , let them first shew a Nation Converted to the Faith , and we will undertake to shew the other . And this is the chief Reason why the Churches Polity is so little described in the New Testament , because it was onely growing then : and it doth not stand to Reason , that the coat which was cut out for one in his Infancy , must of necessity serve him when grown a man ; which is the argument of those who will have nothing observed in the Church , but what is expressed in Scripture . The Apostles looked at the present state of a Church in appointing Officers , and ordered things according to the circumstances of them , which was necessary to be done in the founding of a Church ; and the reason of Apostolical practice binds still , though not the individual action , that as they Regulated Churches for the best conveniency of Governing them , so should the Pastours of Churches now . But of this largely afterwards . 4. Another difference is , that the People of the Jewes lived all under one civil Government ; but it is otherwise with Christians who live under different Forms of civil Government . And then by the same reason that in the first institution of their Ecclesiastical Government it was formed according to the civil , by the same reason , must Christians doe under the Gospel , if the argument holds that Christ must be faithful as Moses was . And then because Christians do live under several and distinct Forms of civil Government , they must be bound by the Law of Christ , to contemperate the Government of the Church to that of the State. And what they have gained by this for their cause , who assert the necessity of any one Form from this Argument , I see not ; but on the contrary this is evident , that they have evidently destroyed their own principle by it . For if Moses did prescribe a Form of Government for Levi agreeable to the Form of the Common-wealth , and Christ be as faithfull as Moses was , then Christ must likewise order the Government of Christian Churches , according to that of the State , and so must have different Forms as the other hath . Thus much will serve abundantly to shew the weakness of the argument drawn from the agreement of Christ and Moses , for the proving any one form of Government necessary ; but this shall not suffice . I now shall ex abundanti from the answers to this argument , lay down several arguments that Christ did never intend to institute any one Form of Government in his Church . 1. Whatever binds the Church of God as an institution of Christ , must bind as an universal standing Law ; but one form of Government in the Church cannot bind it as a standing Law. For whatever binds as a standing ●aw , must either be expressed in direct terms as such a Law ; or deduced by a necessary Consequence from his Lawes , as of an universally binding Nature ; but any one particular form of Government in the Church , is neither expressed in any direct terms by Christ , nor can be deduced by just Consequence ; therefore no such form of Government is instituted by Christ. If there be any such Law , it must be produced , whereby it is determined in Scripture , either that there must be Superiority or Equality among Church Officers , as such , after the Apostles decease . And though the Negative of a Fact holds not , yet the Negative of a Law doth , else no superstition . I have not yet met with any such produced , and therefore shall see what consequences can be made of a binding Nature . To this I say , that no consequences can be deduced to make an institution , but onely to apply one to particular Cases : because Positives are in themselves indifferent without Institution and Divine appointment ; and therefore that must be directly brought for the making a Positive universally binding , which it doth not in its own Nature do . Now here must be an Institution of something meerly Positive supposed , which in its self is of an indifferent Nature ; and therefore no consequence drawn can suffice to make it unalterably binding , without express Declaration that such a thing shall so bind ; for what is not in its own Nature moral , binds only by vertue of a command , which command must be made known by the Will of Christ , so that we may understand its Obligatory nature . So that both a consequence must be necessarily drawn , and the Obligation of what shall be so drawn must be expressed in Scripture : which I despair of ever finding in reference to any one Form of Government in the Church . 2. If the standing Laws for Church-Government be equally applyable to several distinct Forms , then no one Form is prescribed in Scripture ; but all the standing Lawes respecting Church-Government , are equally applyable to several Forms : All the Lawes occurring in Scripture respecting Church Government , may be referred to these three heads . Such as set down the Qualifications of the Persons for the Office of Government , such as require a right management of their Office , and such as lay down Rules for the management of their Office. Now all these are equally applyable to either of these two forms we now discourse of . We begin then with those which set down the qualifications of persons employed in Government , those we have largely and fully set down by St. Paul in his Order to Timothy and Titus , prescribing what manner of persons those should be who are to be employed in the Government of the Church . A Bishop must be blamelesse as the Steward of God , not self-willed , not soon angry , not given to wine , no striker , &c. All these , and the rest of the Qualifications mentioned , are equally required as necessary in a Bishop , whether taken for one of a Superiour Order above Presbyters , or else only for a single Presbyter ; however that be , if he hath a hand in Church-government , he must be such a one as the Apostle prescribes ; And so these commands to Timothy and Titus given by Paul , do equally respect and concern them , whether we consider them as Evangelists acting by an extraordinary Commission , or as fixed Pastors over all the Churches in their several precincts ; so that from the Commands themselves nothing can be inferred either way to determine the Question ; only one place is pleaded for the perpetuity of the Office Timothy was employed in , which must now be examined : The place is 1 Tim. 6. 13 , 14. I give thee charge in the sight of God , &c. that thou keep this commandement without spot , unrebukable , untill the appearing of our Lord Iesus Christ. From hence it is argued thus : The Commandment here was the Charge which Timothy had of governing the Church ; this Timothy could not keep personally till Christs second coming ; therefore there must be a Succession of Officers in the same kind till the second coming of Christ. But this is easily answered . For first , it is no wayes certain what this Command was which St. Paul speaks of ; Some understand it of fighting the good fight of Faith , others of the precept of Love , others most probably the sum of all contained in this Epistle , which I confesse implies in it ( as being one great part of the Epistle ) Pauls direction of Timothy for the right discharging of his Office ; but , granting that the command respects Timothy's Office , yet I answer , Secondly , It manifestly appears to be something personal , and not successive ; or at least nothing can be inferr'd for the necessity of such a Succession from this place which it was brought for : Nothing being more evident then that this command related to Timothy's personal observance of it . And therefore thirdly , Christs appearing here , is not meant of his second coming to judgement , but it only imports the time of Timothy's decease ; So Chrysostome , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So Estius understands it , usque ad exitum vitae ; and for that end brings that Speech of Augustine , Tun● unicuique veniet dies adventûs Domini , cum venerit ei dies , ut talis hinc exeat , qualis ▪ judicandus est illo die . And the reason why the time of his death is set out by the coming of Christ , is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Chrysostome , and from him Theophylact observes , to incite him the more , both to diligence in his work and patience under sufferings , from the consideration of Christs appearance . The plain meaning of the words then is the same with that , Revel . 2. 10. Be thou faithful unto death , and I will give thee a Crown of life . Nothing then can be hence inferred as to the necessary succession of some in Timothy's Office , whatever it is supposed to be . Secondly , The precepts of the Gospel requiring a right management of the work , are equally applyable to either form . Taking heed to the flock over which God hath made them overseers , is equally a duty ; whether by flock we understand either the particular Church of Ephesus , or the adjacent Churches of Asia ; Whether by Overseers we understand some acting over others , or all joyning together in an equality . So exhorting , reproving , preaching in season and out of season , doing all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , without rash censures and partiality ; watching over the flock as they that must give an account : Laying hands suddenly on no man : rebuking not an Elder , but under two or three witnesses . And whatever precepts of this nature we read in the Epistles of Timothy and Titus , may be equally applyable to men acting in either of these two forms of Government : There being no precept occurring in all those Epistles prescribing to Timothy , whether he must act only as a Consul in Senatu with the consent of the Presbytery , or whether by his sole power he should determine what was the common interest , and concern of those Churches he was the Superintendent over . Neither doth the Apostle determine at all in those Epistles chiefly concerning Church-government , whether upon the removal of Timothy or Titus thence as Evangelists , as some pretend , or upon their death as fixed Pastors and Bishops , as others , any should succeed them in the power they enjoyed , or no : nor in what manner the Pastors of the several Churches should order things of common concernment , Which would seem to be a strange omission , were either of these two forms so necessary , taken exclusively of the other , as both parties seem to affirm . For we cannot conceive but if the being and right constitution of a Church did depend upon the manner of the Governours acting in it , but that care which Paul had over all the Churches would have prompted him ( especially being assisted and guided by an infallible Spirit in the penning those Epistles ) to have laid down some certain Rules for the acting of the Pastors of the Churches after the departure of Timothy and Titus . Considering especially that the Epistles then written by him , were to be of standing perpetual use in the Church of God ; and by which the Churches in after-ages were to be guided as well as those that were then in being . The Apostle in both Epistles takes care for a succession of Pastors in those Churches : Timothy is charged to commit the things he had heard of Paul to faithful men ; who shall be fit to teach others . Had it not been as requisite to have charged him to have committed his power of Government to men fit for that , had the Apostles looked on the form of Government to be as necessary as the office of preaching ? Paul saith , he left Titus in Creete on purpose to settle the Churches and ordain Presbyters in every City : had it not been as necessary to have shewed in what order the Churches must be setled , and what power did belong to those Presbyters , and how they should act in the governing their Churches , had he thought the constitution of the Churches did depend upon the form of their acting ? We see here then , that St. Paul doth not expresse any thing necessarily inferring any one constant form to be used in the Church of God , And whence can we inferr any necessity of it , but from the Scriptures laying it down as a duty that such a form and no other there must be used in the Church of God ? For all that we can see then by Pauls direction for Church-Government , ( when if ever , this should have been expressed ) it was left to the Christian wisdome and prudence of the Churches of Ephesus and Creet to consult and determine in what manner the government of their Churches should be provided for , upon the departure of Timothy and Titus from them . But here it will be soon replyed , That though nothing be expressed in Pauls Epistles to Timothy and Titus , yet Pauls appointing Timothy and Titus over those Churches , did determine the form of Government , and they were entrusted with a power to provide for future Governours after them . To this ●answer : First , The superiority which Timothy and Titus had over those Churches , doth not prove that form of Government necessary in all Churches ; I dispute not whether they were Evangelists or no , or acted as such in that Superiority ( of that afterwards ) it is evident they might be so ; there being no convincing argument to the contrary . And the bare possibility of the truth of the Negative , destroys the necessity of the Affirmative of a Proposition . As , Si posibile est , hominem non esse animal , then that Proposition is false , Necesse est hominem esse animal . For , Necesse est esse , and Non possibile est non esse , being ●quipollents on the one side ; and Possibile est non esse , Et non necesse est esse , being ●quipollents on the other ; Possibile est non esse , must be contradictory to Necesse est esse , as Non possibile est non esse , is to Non necesse est esse . So that if only the possibility of their acting as Evangelists , that is , by an extraordinary Commission , be evicted , which I know none will deny ; the necessity of their acting as fixed Bishops is destroyed , and consequently the necessity of the continuance of their office too , which depends upon the former . For if they acted not as Bishops , nothing can be drawn from their example necessarily inforcing the continuance of the Superiority which they enjoyed . But though nothing can be inferred from hence as to the necessity of that office to continue in the Church , which Timothy and Titus were invested in ; yet from the Superiority of that power which they enjoyed over those Churches , whether as Evangelists , or as fixed Bishops , These two things may be inferred . First , That the superiority of some Church-Officers over others , is not contrary to the Rule of the Gospel : for all parties acknowledge the superiority of their power above the Presbyters of the several Cityes ; only the continuance of this power ●● disputed by many . But if they had any such power at all , it is enough for my present design , viz. that such a superiority is not contrary to the Gospel-Rule : or that the nature of the Government of the Church doth not imply a necessary equality among the Governours of it . Secondly , Hence I infer , that it is not repugnant to the constitution of Churches in Apostolical times , for men to have power over more than one particular Congregation . For such a power Timothy and Titus had , which had it been contrary to the nature of the regiment of Churches , we should never have read of in the first planted Churches . So that if those popular arguments of a necessary relation between a Pastor and particular people , of personal knowledge , care and inspection , did destroy the lawfulnesse of extending that care and charge to many particular Congregations , they would likewise overthrow the nature , end and design of the office which Timothy and Titus acted in : which had a relation to a multitude of particular and Congregational Churches . Whether their power was extraordinary or no , I now dispute not ; but whether such a power be repugnant to the Gospel or no ; which from their practice is evident that it is not . But then others who would make this office necessary , urge further , that Timothy or Titus might ordain and appoint others to succeed them in their places and care over all those Churches under their charge . To which I answer , First , What they might do is not the question , but what they did , as they might do it ; so they might not do it , if no other evidence be brought to prove it : for , Quod possibile est esse , possibile ●st non esse . Secondly , Neither what they did , is the whole question , but what they did with an opinion of the necessity of doing it , whether they were bound to do it or no ? and if so , whether by any Law extant in Scripture , and given them by Paul in his Epistles , or some private command and particular instructions when he deputed them to their several charges : If the former , that Law and command must be produced , which will hardly be , if we embrace only the received Canon of the Scripture . If the latter ▪ we must then fetch some standing Rule and Law from unwritten Traditions : for no other evidence can be given of the Instructions by word of mouth , given by Paul to Timothy and Titus at the taking their charges upon them . But yet Thirdly , Were it only the matter of fact that was disputed , that would hold a Controversie still , viz. Whether any did succeed Timothy and Titus in their Offices : but this I shall leave to its proper place to be discussed , when I come to examine the argument from Apostolical Succession . Thus we see then that neither the qualification of the persons , nor the commands for a right exercise of the office committed to them , nor the whole Epistles to Timothy and Titus , do determine any one form of Government to be necessary in the Church of God. Thirdly , Let us see whether the general Rules do require any one form ; which rules in that they are general , can determine nothing of the authority it self as to its particular mode , being intended only for the regulation of the exercise of the authority in which men are placed . And it is an evidence that nothing is particularly determined in this case , when the Spirit of God only lays down such Rules for government which are applyable to distinct forms . Otherwise , certainly some Rule would have been laid down , which could have been applyed to nothing but to that one form . That none take the office of preaching without a Call , nor go without sending , will equally hold whether the power of Ordination lye in a Bishop with Presbyters , or in Presbyters acting with equality of power , That offenders be censured , and complaints made to the Church in case of scandal , determines nothing to whom the power of Jurisdiction doth solely belong , nor what that Church is which must receive these complaints . That all things be done with decency and order , doth prescribe nothing wherein that Decency lyes , nor how far that Order may extend ; nor yet who must be the Judges of that Decency and Order . That all be done for edification , and the common benefit of the Church , doth no wayes restrain his Churches freedom in disposing of its self as to the form of its government , so the aym of the Church be for the better edification of the body of the Church , and to promote the benefit of it . But methinks , these general Orders and Rules for Discipline do imply the particular manner of government to be left at liberty to the Church of God , so that in all the several forms these general Rules be observed . Whereas had Christ appointed a superiour Order to govern other subordinate Officers and the Church together ; Christs command for governing the Church would have been particularly addressed to them : and again , had it been the will of Christ there should be no superior Order above the Pastours of particular Churches , there would have been some expresse and direct prohibition of it ; which because we no where read ; it seems evident that Christ hath left both the one and the other to the freedom and liberty of his Church . So much shall serve in this place , to shew how improbable it is that Christ did ever prescribe any one form of Government in his Church , since he hath only laid down general Rules for the management of Church government . But this will not yet suffice those , who plead that Christ must determine one immutable form of Government in his Church : but although it be a high presumption to determine first what Christ must do , before we examine what he hath done , yet we shall still proceed and examine all the pretences that are brought for this opinion . The next thing then which is generally urged for it , is , the equal necessity of Christs instituting a certain form as for any other Legislator who models a Common-wealth . Now for answer to this , I say first , That Christ hath instituted such an immutable government in his Church , as is sufficient for the succession and continuance of it , which is all which Founders of Common-wealths do look after , viz. that there be such an Order and distinction of persons , and subordination of one to the other , that a Society may still be preserved among them ; now this is sufficiently provided for by Christs appointing Officers continually to rule his Church , and establishing Laws for the perpetuating of such Officers ; so whatsoever is necessary in order to the general ends of Government is acknowledged to be appointed by Jesus Christ. Untill then that it be proved that one form of government is in it self absolutely necessary for the being of a Church , this argument can prove nothing ▪ for what is drawn from necessity , will prove nothing but in a case of necessity . Secondly , I answer , That those things which are not absolutely necessary to the being of a Church , are left to Christs liberty , whether he will determine them or no ; and are no further to be looked on as necessary then as he hath determined by his Laws whether they shall be or no , in his Church . The thing will be thus cleared . When I read that Zaleucus , Lycurgus , or Numa , did form a Common-wealth and make Laws for it ; I presently conclude that there must be some order or distinction of persons in this Common wealth ; and some rules whereby persons must be governed , and whereby others must Rule : But I cannot hence inferr that Zaleucus , or Lycurgus did institute Monarchical , Aristocratical , or Democratical Government , because any of these forms might be agreeable to their design ; and therefore what kind of government they did appoint , can no otherwise be known then by taking a view of the Laws which they made in order thereto . So it is in reference to Christ , when we read that Christ hath instituted a Church alwayes to continue in the World , we presently apprehend that there must be some power and order in the members of that Society , and Laws for the governing it : but we cannot hence gather that he hath bound up his Officers to act in any one form , because several forms might in themselves equally tend to the promoting the end of Government in his Church . And therefore what Christ hath expresly determined in his positive Laws , must be our Rule of judging in this case , and not any presumption of our own , that such a form was necessary , and therefore Christ must institute and appoint it , Which is fully expressed by judicious Mr. Hooker , whose words will serve as a sufficient answer to this Objection . As for those marvellous Discourses , whereby they adventure to argue , that God must needs have done the thing which they imagine was to be done ; I must confesse , I have often wondred at their exceeding boldnesse herein . When the question is , Whether God have delivered in Scripture ( as they affirm he hath ) a compleat particular immutable form of Church-Polity : why take they that other , both presumptuous and superfluous labour , to prove he should have done it : there being no way in this case to prove the deed of God , saving only by producing that evidence wherein he hath done it ? But if there be no such thing apparent upon record , they do as if one should demand a Legacy , by force and vertue of some written Testament , wherein there being no such thing specified , he pleadeth that there it must needs be , and bringeth arguments from the Love and good will which alwayes the Testator bore , imagining that these or the like proofs will convict a Testament to have that in it , which other men can no where by reading find . In matters which concern the actions of God , the most dutiful way on our part , is , to search what God hath done , and with meekness to admire that , rather then to dispute what he in congru●ty of reason ought to do . Thus he , with more to the same purpose . The sum then of the answer to this Argument , is this , That nothing can be inferred of what Christ must do , from his relation to his Church , but what is absolutely necessary to the being of it ; as for all other things , they being arbitrary constitutions , we can judge no more of the necessity of them , then as we find them clearly revealed in the Word of God. And therefore the Plea must be removed from what Christ must do , to what he hath done , in order to the determining the particular form of Government in his Church . But still it is argued for the necessity of a particular form of Government in the Church from the similitudes the Church is set out by in Scripture ; It is called a Vine , and therefore must have Keepers : an House , and therefore must have Government ; a City , and therefore must have a Polity ; a Body , and therefore must have Parts . I answer , First , All these Similitudes prove only that which none deny , that there must be Order , Power , and Government in the Church of God ; we take not away the Keepers from the Vine , nor the Government from ▪ the House , nor Polity from the City , nor distinction of parts from the Body ; we assert all these things as necessary in the Church of God. The keepers of the Vine to defend and prune it ; the Governours of the House to rule and order it ; the Polity of the City to guide and direct it ; the parts of the Body to compleat and adorn it . But Secondly ; None of these Similitudes prove what they are brought for ; viz. that any one immutable form of Government is determined . For may not the Keepers of the Vine use their own discretion in looking to it , so the flourishing of the Vine be that they aym at ? and if there be many of them , may there not be different orders among them , and some as Supervisors of the others work ? The House must have Governours ; but those that are so , are entrusted with the power of ordering things in the House according to their own discretion ; and where there is a multitude , is there not diversity of Offices among them ? and is it necessary that every House must have Offices of the same kind ? In great and large Families there must be more particular distinct Orders and Offices , than in a small and little one . The City must have its Polity ; but all Cities have not the like ; some have one form , and some another , and yet there is a City still and a Polity too . A body must have all its parts ; but are all the parts of the body equal one to another ? it sufficeth that there be a proportion , though not equality in them : the several parts of the body have their several offices , and yet we see the head is superintendent over them all : and thus if we make every particular Church a Body , yet it follows not that the form of cloathing that Body must alwayes be the same ▪ for the manner of Government is rather the cloathing to the Body than the parts of it , the Governours indeed are parts of the Body ; but their manner of governing is not , that may alter according to the proportion and growth of the Body , and its fashion change for better conveniency . But if these Similitudes prove nothing ; yet certainly , say they , the difference as to Civil and Ecclesiastical Government will ; for though there may be different forms in civil Government , which are therefore call'd an Ordinance of man ; yet there must be but one in Church-Government , which is an Ordinance of God , and Christ hath appointed Officers to rule it . I answer , first , We grant and acknowledge a difference between the Church and the Common-wealth , they are constituted for other ends ; the one Political , the other Spiritual ; one temporal , the other eternal ; they subsist by different Charters ; the one given to men as men , the other to men as Christians : They act upon different principles ; the one to preserve civil Rights , the other to promote an eternal Interest ; nay , their formal constitution is different ; for a man by being a member of a Common-wealth doth not become a Member of the Church , and by being excommunicated out of the Church ▪ doth not cease to be a Member of the Common-wealth : The Officers of the one are clearly distinct from the other , the one deriving their power from the Law of Christ , the other from Gods general Providence : the Magistrate hath no power to Excommunicate formally out of the Church any more then to admit into it , nor have the Church-officers any power to cast men out of the common-wealth . We see then there is a difference between Civil and Ecclesiastical Government : But then I answer , Secondly , The power of the Magistrate is not therefore called an Ordinance of man , because of the mutability of its Form , and as distinguished from the Form of Church-government . For First , The Apostle speaks not of the Form of Government , but of the Power ; Submit to every Ordinance of man , &c. the ground of Submission is not the form , but the power of civil government ; and therefore there can be no opposition expressed here between the Forms of Civil and Ecclesiastical government : but if any such opposition be , it must be between the powers ; and if this be said as to civils , that the power is an Ordinance of Man in that sense , ( whereas Paul saith it is of God ) yet as to the Church it is freely acknowledged that the Power is derived from God. Secondly , The civil power is not called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because it is a creature of mans making , and so subject to mens power ; but the ground of that Speech is , because all civil power respects men as men , without any further connotation . Humana dicitur , non quod ab hominibus sit excogitata , sed quod hominum sit propria , saith Beza . And to the same purpose Calvin , Humana dicitur Ordinatio , non quod humanitùs inventa fuerit ; sed quod propria hominum est digesta & ordinata vivendi ratio . Piscator , Humanam appellat , non quod magistratus homines authores habeat , sed quod Homines eam gerant . So then the civil power is not called an Ordinance of man , as it is of mans setting up , but as it is proper to man ; and so if there be any opposition between the civil and Church power , it is onely this , that the one belongs to men as men , the other to men as Christians . Thirdly , Although it be granted that Christ hath appointed and set up his own Officers in his Church ; yet it doth not thence follow that he hath determined in what manner they shall Rule his Church . It is true , Christ hath set up in his Church , some Apostles , some Evangelists , and some Pastours and Teachers : but it doth not thence follow , that Christ hath determined , whether the Power of Apostles and Evangelists should continue in his Church or no , as it implied Superiority over the ordinary Pastors of the Churches ; nor whether the Pastors of the Church should act in an equality in their Governing Churches . I grant , that all Church-Government must be performed by Officers of Christs appointing ; but that which I say is not determined in Scripture , is , the way and manner whereby they shall Govern Churches in common . It is yet further argued , That if the Form of Church Government be not immutably determined in Scripture , then it is in the Churches Power , to make new Officers which Christ never made , which must be a plain addition to the Lawes of Christ , and must argue the Scripture of Imperfection . This being one of the main Arguments , I have reserved it to the place of the Triarii , and shall now examine what strength there lies in it . To this therefore I answer , First , Those Officers are onely said to be new , which were never appointed by Christ , and are contrary to the first appointments of Christ for the Regulating of his Church ; such it is granted the Church hath no power to institute : but if by new Officers be meant onely such as have a charge over more then one particular congregation by the consent of the Pastours themselves ; then it is evident , such an Office cannot be said to be new . For , besides the general practice of the Church of God , from the first Primitive times which have all consented in the use of such Officers ; we finde the Foundation of this Power laid by Christ himself in the Power which the Apostles were invested in , which was extended over many , both Churches and Pastours . But if it be said , The Apostolical Power being extraordinary , must cease with the persons which enjoyed it : I answer : First , What was extraordinary did cease ; but all the Dispute is , what was extraordinary , and what not ; some things were ordinary in them , as Preaching , Baptizing , Ordaining , Ruling Churches ; some things were again extraordinary , as immediate mission from Christ ( the main distinguishing Note of an Apostle ) a Power of working Miracles to confirm the Truth of what they Preached . Now the Question is , whether the power which they enjoyed over Presbyters and Churches , be to be reckoned in the first or the second number . It must therefore be proved to be extraordinary , before it can be said to cease with them , and that must be done by some Arguments proper to their persons ; for if the Arguments brought be of a common and moral Nature , it will prove the Office to be so too . Secondly , By ceasing may be meant either ceasing as to its necessity , or ceasing as to its lawfulness : I say not , but that the necessity of the Office , as in their persons , for the first Preaching and propagating the Gospel , did cease with them ; but , that after their death it became unlawful for any particular persons to take the care and charge of Diocesan Churches , I deny . For to make a thing unlawfull which was before lawfull , there must be some expresse prohibition forbidding any further use of such a power , which I suppose men will not easily produce in the Word of God. I answer therefore Secondly , That the extending of any Ministerial power , is not the appointing of any New Office ; because every Minister of the Gospel hath a Relation in actu primo to the whole Church of God : the restraint and inlargement of which power is subject to Positive Determinations of prudence and conveniency in actu secundo ; and therefore if the Church see it fit for some men to have this power enlarged for better government in some , and restrained in others , that inlargement is the appointing no new Office , but the making use of a power already enjoyed for the benefit of the Church of God. This being a Foundation tending so fully to clear the lawfulnesse of that Government in the Church which implies a superiority and subordination of the Officers of the Church to one another : and the Churches using her prudence in ordering the bounds of her Officers , I shall do these two things . First , Shew that the power of every Minister of the Gospel doth primarily and habitually respect the Church in common . Secondly , that the Church may in a peculiar manner single out some of its Officers for the due Administration of Ecclesiastical power . First , that every Minister of the Gospel hath a power respecting the Church in common : This I find fully and largely proved by those who assert the equality of the power of Ministers ; First , from Christs bestowing the several Offices of the Church , for the use of the whole Church , Ephesians , 4. 12 , 13. Christ hath set Apostles , &c. Pastours and Teachers in his Church ; now this Church must needs be the catholicke visible Church , because indisputably the Apostles Office did relate thereto , and consequently so must that of Pastours and Teachers too : Again , the end of these Offices is the building up the Body of Christ , which cannot otherwise be understood then of his whole Church : else Christ must have as many Bodies as the Church hath partiticular congregations . Which is a new way of Consubstantiation . Secondly , The Ministerial Office was in being before any particular congregations were gathered : For Christ upon his Ascension to Glory gave these Gifts to men ; and the Apostles were impowered by Christ before his Ascension , Either then they were no Church Officers , or if they were so , they could have no other Correlate , but the whole body of the Church of God then lying under the power of Darkness , a few persons excepted . Thirdly , Because the main Designe of appointing a Gospel Ministry was the conversion of Heathens and Infidels : and if these be the proper Object of the Ministerial Function , then the Office must have reference to the whole Church of Christ ; else there could be no part of that Office performed towards those who are not yet converted . Fourthly , Else a Minister can perform no office belonging to him as such beyond the bounds of his particular congregation , and so can neither Preach nor Administer the Sacraments to any other but within the Bounds of his own particular place and people . Fifthly , Because Ministers by Baptizing do admit men into the catholike visible Church , ( else a man must be baptized again every time he removes from one Church to another ) and none can admit beyond what their office doth extend to ; therefore it is evident that every particular Pastor of a Church hath a Relation to the whole Church ; To which purpose our former observation is of great use ; viz. That particular congregations are not of Gods primary intention , but for mens conveniency , and so consequently is the fixedness of particular Pastors to their several places for the greater conveniency of the Church ; every Pastor of a Church then hath a Relation to the whole Church ; and that which hinders him from the exercise of this power , is not any unlawfulnesse in the thing , but the preserving of order and conveniency in the Church of God. This being premised , I say , Secondly , That the officers of the Church may in a peculiar manner attribute a larger and more extensive power to some particular persons for the more convenient exercise of their common power . We have seen already that their power extends to the care of the Churches in common , that the restraint of this power is a matter of order and decency in the Church of God ; Now in matters of common concernment , without all question it is not unlawful when the Church judgeth it most for Edification , to grant to some the executive part of that power , which is Originally and Fundamentally common to them all . For our better understanding of this , we must consider a twofold power belonging to Church-Officers , a power of Order , and a power of jurisdiction ; for in every Presbyter , there are some things inseparably joyned to his Function , and belonging to every one in his personal capacity , both in actu primo , and in actu secundo , both as to the right and power to do it , and the exercise and execution of that power ; such are preaching the Word , visiting the sick , administring Sacraments . &c. But there are other things which every Presbyter hath an aptitude , and a jus to , in actu primo , but the limitation and exercise of that power doth belong to the Church in common , and belong not to any one personally , but by a further power of choice or delegation to it , such is the power of visiting Churches , taking care that particular Pastors discharge their duty ; such is the power of ordination and Church censures , and making Rules for decency in the Church ; this is that we call the power of jurisdiction . Now this latter power , though it belongs habitually and in actu primo to every Presbyter ; yet being about matters of publike and common concernment , some further Authority in a Church constituted is necessary , besides the power of order ; and when this power , either by consent of the Pastors of the Church , or by the appointment of a Christian Magistrate , or both , is devolved to some particular persons , though quoad aptitudinem the power remain in every Presbyter , yet quoad executionem it belongs to those who are so appointed . And therefore Camero determins that , Ordinatio non fit à pastore quatenus pastor est , sed quatenus ad tempus singularem authoritatem obtinet , i. e. That Ordination doth not belong to the Power of Order but to the Power of Jurisdiction , and therefore is subject to Positive restraints , by Prudential Determinations . By this we may understand how lawfull the Exercise of an Episcopal Power may be in the Church of God , supposing an equality in all Church-Officers as to the Power of Order . And how incongruously they speak , who supposing an equality in the Presbyters of Churches at first , do cry out , that the Church takes upon her the Office of Christ , if she delegates any to a more peculiar Exercise of the power of Jurisdiction . The last thing pleaded why an immutable Form of Church-Government must be laid down in Scripture , is , from the perfection and sufficiency of the Scriptures ; because otherwise the Scriptures would be condemned of imperfection . But this will receive an easie dispatch : For , First , The Controversie about the perfection of the Scriptures , is not concerning an essential or integral Perfection , but a perfection ratione finis & effectuum in order to its end ; now the end of it , is to be an adaequate Rule of Faith and Manners , and sufficient to bring men to salvation ; which it is sufficiently acknowledged to be , if all things necessary to be believed or practised be contained in the Word of God : now that which we assert not to be fully laid down in Scripture , is not pleaded to be any wayes necessary , nor to be a matter of Faith , but something left to the Churches Liberty ; but here it is said by some , that this is adding to the Law of God , which destroyes the Scriptures perfection ; therefore I answer : Secondly , Whatever is done with an Opinion of the necessity of doing it , destroyes the Scriptures perfection if it be not contained in it : for that were to make it an imperfect Rule ; and in this sense every additio perficiens is additio corrumpens , because it takes away from the perfection of the Rule which it is added to : and thus Popish Traditions are destructive of the Scriptures sufficiency . But the doing of any thing not positively determined in Scripture , not looking upon it as a thing we are bound to do from the necessity of the thing , and observing the general Rules of Scripture in the doing it , is far from destroying the perfection or sufficiency of the Word of God. Thirdly , All essentials of Church-Government are contained clearly in Scripture : The essentials of Church-Government , are such as are necessary to the preservation of such a Society as the Church is : Now all these things have been not only granted , but proved to be contained in Scripture ; but whatever is not so necessary in its self , can only become necessary by vertue of Gods express command ; and what is not so commanded , is accidental , and circumstantial , and a matter of Christian liberty , and such we assert the Form of Church-Government to be . It is not our work to enquire , why God hath determined some things that might seem more circumstantial than this , and left other things at liberty ; but whether God hath determined these things or no. Which determination being once cleared , makes the thing so commanded necessary as to our observance of it ; but if no such thing be made appear , the thing remains a matter of liberty , and so the Scriptures perfection as to necessaries in order to Salvation , is no wayes impeached by it . So much now for the necessity of Christs determining the particular form of Government : We now proceed to the consideration of Christs Actions , whether by them the form of Church-Government is determined or no ? CHAP. V. Whether any of Christs Actions have determined the Form of Government . All Power in Christs hands for Governing his Church : What order Christ took in order thereto when he was in the World. Calling Apostles the first action respecting outward Government : The Name and Office of Apostles cleared ; An equality among them proved during our Saviours life . Peter not made Monarch of the Church by Christ. The Apostles Power over the seventy Disciples considered , with the nature and quality of their Office , Matth. 20. 25 , 26 , 27. largely discussed and explained . It makes not all inequality in Church Officers unlawful ; by the difference of Apostles and Pastors of Churches , Matth. 18. 15. How far that determins the Form of Church-Government . No evidence of any exact Order for Church-Government from thence , Matth. 16. 15 , 16 17 , 18. considered how far that concerns the Government of the Church . HAving considered and answered the Arguments which are brought , why Christ must determine the particular Form of Government : Our next task will be to enquire into those Actions of our Saviour which are conceived to have any plausible aspect towards the setling the Form of Government in his Church . And were it not that men are generally so wedded to an hypothesis they have once drunk in by the prevalency of interest or education , we might have been superseded from our former labour , but that men are so ready to think that Opinion to be most necessary , which they are most in love with , and have appeared most zealous for . Men are loth to be perswaded that they have spent so much breath to so little purpose , and have been so hot and eager for somewhat , which at last appears to be a matter of Christian liberty . Therefore we finde very few that have been ever very earnest in the maintaining or promoting any matter of opinion , but have laid more weight upon it , than it would really bear ; lest men should think , that with all their sweat and toile , they only beat the ayr , and break their Teeth in cracking a Nut , with a hole in it ; which if they had been so wise as to discern before , they might have saved their pains for somewhat which would have better recompenced them . But thus it generally fares with men ; they suck in principles according as interest and education disposeth them , which being once in , have the advantage of insinuating themselves into the understanding , and thereby raise a prejudice against whatever comes to disturb them ; which prejudice being the Yellow-jaundise of the Soul , leaves such a tincture upon the eyes of the Understanding , that till it be cured of that Icterism , it cannot discern things in their proper colours . Now this prejudice is raised by nothing more strongly , than when the opinion received is entertained , upon a presumption that there is a Divine stamp and Impress upon it , though no such Effigies be discernable there . Hence come all the several contending parties about Church-Government , equally to plead an interest in this Ius Divinum , and whatever opinion they have espoused , they presently conceive it to be of no lesse than Divine extract and Original , And as it sometimes was with great personages among the Heathens , when their miscarriages were discernable to the eye of the World , the better to palliate them among the vulgar , they gave themselves out to be impreguated by some of their adored Deities ; so I fear it hath been among some whose Religion should have taught them better things , when either faction , design , or interest , hath formed some conceptions within them suitable thereunto , to make them the more passable to the World , they are brought forth under the pretence of Divine Truths . Far be it from me to charge any sincere , humble , sober Christians with an offence of so high a nature , who yet may be possessed with some mistakes and apprehensions of this nature ; but these are only wrought on by the Masters of parties , who know , unlesse they fly so high , they shall never hit the game they aym at . This is most discernable in the Factors for the Roman Omnipotency ( as Paulus the fifth was call'd Omnipotentiae Pontifici● Conservaton ) ; they who see not that Interest and Faction upholds that Court rather then Church , may well be presumed to be hood-winked with more then an implicite Faith ; and yet if we believe the great supporters of that Interest , the power they plead for is plainly given them from Christ himself ; and not only offer to prove that it was so , but that it was not consistent with the Wisdom of Christ that it should be otherwise . Lest I should seem to wrong those of any Religion , hear what the Author of the Gloss upon the Extravagants ( so they may be well called ) saith to this purpose , applying that place of our Saviour , all power is given to me in heaven and earth , Matthew 28. 18. to the Pope , adds these words , Non videretur Dominus discretas fuisse , ut cum reverentia ejus loquar ; nisi unicum post se talem Vicarium reliquisset , qui hac omnia posset . We see by this , what blasphemies men may run into , when they argue from their private fancies and opinions , to what must be done by the Law of Christ. It therefore becomes all sober Christians impartially to enquire what Christ hath done , and to ground their opinions only upon that , without any such presumptuous intrusions into the Counsels of Heaven . We here therefore take our leave of the Dispute , Why it was necessary a form of Government should be established , and now enter upon a survey of those grounds which are taken from any passages of our Saviour , commonly produced as a Foundation for any particular Forms . I shall not stand to prove , that Christ as Mediator hath all the power over the Church in his own hands , it being a thing so evident from Scripture , and so beyond all dispute with those whom I have to deal with . In which respect he is the only Head of the Church , and from whom all divine Right for authority in the church must be derived . Which Right can arise only from some actions or Laws of Christ , which we therefore now search into . The first publike action of Christ after his solemn entrance upon his Office , which can be conceived to have any reference to the Government of his Church , was , the calling the Apostles . In whom for our better methodizing this Discourse , we shall observe these three ●everal steps . First , When they were called to be Christs Disciples . Secondly , When Christ sent them out with a power of Miracles . Thirdly , When he gave them their full commission of acting with Apostolical power all the world over . These three seasons are accurately to be distinguished ; for ●he Apostles did not enjoy so great power when they were ●isciples , as when they were sent abroad by Christ ; neither had ●hey any proper power of Church-government after that ●●nding forth , till after Christs Resurrection , when Christ told ●hem , All power was put into his hands , and therefore gave them ●●ll commission to go and preach the Gospel to all Nations . The first step then we observe in the Apostles towards their power of Church-government , was in their first calling to be Disciples . Two several calls are observed in Scripture concerning the Apostles : The first was more general , when they were called only to follow Christ ; The second more special , when Christ told them what he called them to , and specified and described their Office to them , by telling them he would make them Fishers of Men. We shall endeavour to digest the Order of their calling as clearly and as briefly as we ●an . Our blessed Saviour about the thirtieth year of his age , solemnly entering upon the discharge of his prophetical Office , in making known himself to be the true Messias to the World , to make his appearance more publike , goes to Iordan , and is there baptized of Iohn ; presently after he is led up by the Spirit into the Wildernesse , where he continued forty dayes . In this space of time Iohn removes from Iordan , and comes on the other side to Bethabara ; thither Christ comes to Iohn ; Iohn not only owns Christ himself , but tells his disciples , This was he into whose Name he had baptized them . Upon this , two of Iohn's disciples leave their Master and follow Christ. These two are the first Disciples we ever read our Saviour had ; whereof the one was Andrew , Peters brother , and the other probably conceived to be Iohn ( it being his custom to conceal his name when he speaks of himself ) Andrew calls his brother Peter ; Christ next day calls Philip , Philip he finds Nathaniel ; and this , as far as we read , was the first number of Christs Disciples . Here we find two or three gathered together in the Name of Christ , and Christ ( truly ) in the midst of them . These disciples it appears staid with Christ sometime , for they went with him to the marriage in Cana : and after went up with him to Ierusalem , when many professed to be his Disciples ; from thence he goes into Iudea , where he gathers many Disciples , and baptizeth them . After this he returns with his Disciples by the way of Samaria into Galilee : and these Disciples being now again at home , in probability did return for their livelyhood to their old employments for some small time , Christ having not yet commanded them to forsake all and follow him . Not long after ( about a years space from the first calling them ) Iesus being in Galilee , goes to the lake of Genezareth , there he finds Andrew and Peter fishing : after the miracle there wrought , he then in a more solemn manner calls them to leave their employment , for he had ▪ designed them for a greater , which was to be Fishers of Men. Whereby our Saviour expresseth the care , pains , diligence , design and end of the Ministerial Function he had appointed them for . Andrew and Peter presently leave all and follow Christ ; the like do Iames and Iohn whom they met with , a little further upon the shore . And now those who were before but as common Disciples , are admitted into a higher Order , and bred up by Christ as persons designed for an employment of so high a Nature . We see here a necessity of making a double call of the Apostles ; else it were impossible to reconcile the Narration of Iohn with the other Evangelists . Therefore Augustine thinks their first being with Christ in Iohn , was only for present satisfaction who he was , which assoon as they understood and admired , they returned to their own Habitations . Thomas , he makes three several callings of them ; the first ad agnitionem & familiaritatem , which is that in Iohn ; the second ad Discipulatum , that spoken of in Luke 5. 1. the third ad adh●sionem , Matth. 4. 18. Mark 1. 16. But I see no reason to make the story in Luke to be different from that of Matthew and Mark ; the former some say , was vocatio ad fidem , a general preparatory call to the latter ; the latter was vocatio ad munus Apostolicum , although they were not chosen to be Apostles till afterwards , yet now Christ made them Candidores of the Apostleship , & amicos interioris admissionis , in order to that great employment he had designed them for . Further , we must take notice that from the time of the Baptism of Iohn , the Apostles did generally continue with Christ , which appears from the qualification of an Apostle given by Peter at the choyce of Matthias ; Of those men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Iesus went in and out among us , beginning from the baptism of John , unto that same day he was taken up from us . The strength of which Tehimony is impregnable , for proving that the Apostles did generally continue with Christ after their being called to follow him ; but that time from the baptism of Iohn must not be taken strictly ; for many of the Apostles , as Matthew , &c. were not called till some time after . About four moneths after Christs more solemn calling of the Apostles , at the time ▪ of Pentecost , as Chemnitius conjectures , our Saviour proceeds to a solemn choyce of them into their Office , which is described by Luk. 6. 13. after he had prayed the whole night before v. 12. Mark ▪ he acquaints us with the ends of Christs choosing them . First , That they might continually attend upon him , the better to be fitted for their employment afterwards ; which he expresseth , when he adds , That he might send them out to preach , and to give them power over Devils and Diseases , to cast out the one , and to cure the other . Their actual sending out was not ( say some ) till half a year after , which is the story related by Mat. 10. 1. near a twelve-moneth ( say others ) but presently upon their choyce Christ makes the Sermon in the Mount , as appears by comparing Luk. 6. 17 , 20. with Mat. 5. 1. wherein among other things , our Saviour takes occasion ▪ to declare their duty to them , telling them , They were the Light of the World , &c. Which he doth , the more to fit them for the discharge of their employment . Having thus laid these things together about the Apostles , from their first calling to the time of their mission , we shall take notice of those things from them which may relate to the Office which the Apostles were called to , and to the Government of the Church by them . First , We here observe , that our Saviour no sooner began to preach the Gospel himself , but he made choyce of some persons as a peculiar Order of men for the propagation of the Gospel in the World. The peculiarity of the Function of a Gospel-Ministry under Christ was , we see , designed from Christs first publike appearance in his Office : he might have left the Apostles in the common order of Disciples , had he not intended an office in his Church distinct and peculiar from all other employments ; and therefore it is observable , that Christ did not call the ▪ Apostles off from their other employments , till he designed to make them Apostles ; before , when they were only private Disciples , they did follow their employments at some times still ; but when he calls them to be Fishers of men , be bids them leave all and follow him . Secondly , We take notice of the admirable wisdom of our Saviour in the choice he made of the Persons for first founding his Church ▪ and the means he used to fit them for it . The persons were such as were most suitable to his design ; the means such as were most suitable to the persons . The persons were such , who by reason of the known meanness of their condition , and supposed weakness of abilities , were the fittest to convince the World , that the Doctrine which they preached was not the product of humane wisdom , but the express Image and Character of Divine truth ; whose nakednesse and simplicity would gain more upon mens belief by the power which accompanied the Preaching of it , then the most refined and sublimated Notions of their wise men should do , managed with the greatest subtilty and prudence by the maintainers of them . Christ would make men see that his Doctrine stood not in need either of the wisdom or power of men , to defend or propagate it ▪ and therefore made choice of the most unlikely Instruments for that end , that mens faith should not stand in the wisdom of men , but in the power of God. But withall , we are to take notice of Christs admirable wisdom in the means he used to fit and qualifie them for the first builders of his Church ; for although the power and efficacy of their preaching was wholly from God , and not from themselves , yet our Saviour doth not ▪ presenly upon his calling them , place them in the highest Office he intended them for , but proceeds gradually with them , and keeps them a long time under his own eye and instruction , before he sends them abroad : and that for two ends chiefly : First , To be witnesses of his actions . Secondly , To be Auditors of his Doctrine . First , To be witnesses of his actions , which was looked on by the Apostles , as the most necessary qualification for an Apostle in the place fore-cited , Acts 1. 21 , 22. Peter calls himself a witnesse of the sufferings of Christ , 1 Pet. 5. 1. Iohn saith , That which was from the beginning , which we have heard , which we have seen with our eyes , which we have looked upon , and our h●●ds have handled of the Word of Life ; that which we have seen and heard , declare we unto you , 1 John 1. 1 , 3. whereby the credibility of the Gospel was sufficiently evidenced to the World , when the chief Preachers of it spoke nothing but what their own senses were witnesses of , both as to the Doctrine and actions of Christ ; and therefore it is no wayes credible , they should be deceived themselves in what they spoke ; and more improbable they would deceive others , whose interest lay wholly upon the truth of the Doctrine which they Preoched ▪ for by the very Preaching of that Doctrine they rob'd themselves of all the comforts of Life , and exposed themselves to a thousand miseries in this Life ; so that unlesse their Doctrine was true in order to another Life , they were guilty of the greatest folly this World ever heard of . We see what care our Saviour took to satisfie the reasons of men concerning the credibility of his Doctrine , when the persons he employed in the founding a Church upon it , were only such as were intimately conversant with the whole Life , Doctrine , and Works of him from whom they received it ; and thereby we cannot suppose any ignorance in them concerning the things they spoke ▪ and lest men should mistrust they might have a design to impose on others , he made their faithfulness appear , by their exposing themselves to any hazards to make good the truth of what they preached . Especially , having such a Divine Power accompanying them in the Miracles wrought by them , which were enough to perswade any rational men that they came upon a true Embassie , who carryed such Credentials along with them . Another end of our Saviours training up his Apostles so long in his School before he sent them abroad , was , that they might be Auditors of his Doctrine , and so might learn themselves before they taught others . Christ was no friend to those hasty births which run abroad with the shell on their heads ; no , although it was in his power to conferr the gifts of the Holy Ghost , as well at their first entrance into Discipleship as afterwards , yet we see he nu●tures and trains them up gradually , teaching them as Quintilian would have Masters do , guttatim , acquainting them now with one , then with another of the Mysteries of the Gospel . Christ doth not overwhelm them with floods and torrents of Discourses , but gently drops now one thing into them , then another , by which way such narrow-mouthed Vessels would be the soonest filled . Yea our Saviour useth such ●n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Greek Fathers call it , such a prudent temper in instructing them , that it is matter of just admiration to consider under how great and stupendious ignorance of the main points of Redemption ( Christs Death and Resurrection , and the nature of Christs Kingdom ) they discovered , after they had been some years under Christs Tutorage . And we see what industry and diligence was used in the training up of those for the Apostleship , who were in an immediate way sent out by Christ. And it is very probable that upon their first sending abroad they taught not by immediate Revelation , but only what they had learned from Christ during their being with him . Whence we see what a subordination there is in acquired parts , labour , and industry to the Teachings and Inspirations of the Divine Spirit ; our Saviour looked not on his labour as lost , although afterwards the Unction from the Holy One should teach them all things . It was Christs design to have them go 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from strength to strength , à domo sanctuarii in domum doctrinae , as the Chaldee Paraphrast renders that place , from one School of learning to another . As under the Law even those that waited for the R●ach hakkodesh , the inspiration of the Divine Spirit , were brought up in the Schools of the Prophets under instruction there ; which was the place where they lay expecting the gentle gale of the Holy Spirit to carry them forth ; which was the ground of Amos his complaint . that he was neither a Prophet , nor the son of a Prophet ; by which it seems evident , that Gods ordinary course was to take some of the Sons of the Prophets out of the Colledges where they lived , and employ them in the Prophetical Office. But of this largely elsewhere . Such a School of the Prophets did our Saviour now erect , wherein he entred his Disciples as Schollars , and educated them in order to the Office he intended them for . The next thing we take notice of , is , the name and nature of that Office which Christ call'd them to . They who derive the use of the name of Apostles as applyed by Christ to his Disciples , either from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at Athens , by which name the Masters of some ships were called as the ships 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or from Hesychius his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which he interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Sense of the Civil Law , which signifie the dim●ssory Letters granted for appeals ; or from the Jewish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as thereby were understood those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Epiphanius calls them , who were as Assessours and Counsellours to the Patriarch of the Jewes at Tiberias ; or those Officers who were sent up and down by the Patriarch to gather up tenths , first fruits , and such other things ; who are called thence Apostoli in the Codex . Theod. tit . de Iudaeis ; all these I say do equally lose their labour ▪ and run far to fetch that which might be found much nearer home : Our Saviour taking the word from common use , but applying it in a special manner to a peculiar Sense , which is the custome of the Scriptures : The Original of the Word properly imports such as are imployed by Commission from another for the dispatch of some businesse in his Name . So Casaubon ( who was sufficiently able to judg of the use of a Greek word ) In communi Graecorum usu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicebantur certi homines , qui negotii gerendi gratiâ , magis quam deferendi nuntii aliquò mittebantur . And so it is taken , Iohn 13. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , He that is sent is not greater then he that sent him . Thence Epaphroditus when imployed upon a special message to Paul in the Name of the Churches , is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Philippians , 2. 25. which we Translate your Messenger . And so Titus and the two other sent to the Church of Corinth to gather their Charity ▪ are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Messengers of the Churches . Thence Paul fully renders the Import and Sense of the word Apostle by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 2 Corinth . 5. 20. We act as Ambassaduors for Christ. To which purpose it is observable that the Septuagint ( whose Greek is most followed by the New Testament ) doe render the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when it signifies to imploy a Messenger upon special Service , by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as 1 King. 21. 11. — 1 King. 12. 18. Exod 4. 30. and the very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in this Sense , 1 King. 14. 6. where Ahijah saith , I am 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , A sad Messenger to thee ; for , thus saith the Lord , &c. Whereby the full Sense and Importance of the word Apostle appears to be , one that is imployed by a peculiar Commission from him that hath authority over him for the doing some special service . Thus were Christs disciples called Apostles from the immediate commission which they had from Christ for the discharge of that work which he imployed them in . Thence our Saviour makes use of the word sending in the proper and peculiar sense when he gives the Apostles their commission , in those remarkable words of Christ to them ; As the Father hath sent me , even so send I you . John 20. 21. Whereby our Saviour delegates his power and authority which he had as Doctour of the Church , to his Apostles upon his leaving the World , not in a privative way , so as to destroy his own authority over the Church , but in a cumulative way , investing them with that authority which they had not before , for both Teaching and Governing the Church . No Argument then can be drawn for the Right or Form of Church-Government from Christs actions towards his Disciples before the last and full Commission was given unto them ; because they had no power of Church-government before that time . Which will be further cleared if we consider their first sending out , spoken of Matth. 10. 1. Mark 6. 7. Luke 9. 1. Several things lie in our way to be observed in reference to this Mission of the Apostles . First , that though the Apostles had been now for some competent time , not onely called to their Office , but solemnly chosen to it ; yet we no where read that they did ever exercise that Office till now they were sent forh by Christ. They remained still at Christs feet , learning for their own instruction , and fitting themselves for their future imployment , and thought it no inconvenience while they lay for a wind , to lay in sufficient lading and provision for their voyage . Baptize indeed they did before , Ioh. 4. 2. but that I suppose was done by them by an immediate present Order from Christ himself , being by as the chief in the action , thence Christ in one place is said to baptize , Ioh. 3. 22. and yet he is said not to baptize , but his Disciples , Ioh. 4. 2. Christ did it authoritatively , the Disciples ministerially . Yet if we should grant the Disciples did then baptize as private men after the received custome of the Jews , ( among whom onely a Confessus trium was requisite to Baptize a proselyte ) this doth not at all take off from the peculiarity of a Function both to Preach and Baptize , because as yet the Gospel-Ministry was not instituted ; and therefore what might be lawfull before restraint , doth not follow it should be so after ▪ when all those scattered rayes and beam , which were dispersed abroad before , were gathered into the Ministerial Office upon Christs appointing it , as that great Hemisphere of Light in the creation , was after swallowed up in the body of the Sun. But now were the Apostles first sent out to Preach , and now God first begins to null the Jewish Ministry , and set up another instead of it , and makes good that threatning : That he was against the Shepherds , and would require the flock at their hand , and cause them to cease to feed the Flock , &c. Here then we have the first Exercise of the Apostles Ministry , for which we see , besides their former call and choice , particular mission was after necessary . Secondly , we observe that the imployment Christ sent them upon now , was onely a Temporary imployment , confined as to work and place , and not the full Apostolicall work . The want of considering and understanding this , hath been the ground of very many mistakes among Men , when they argue from the Occasional Precepts here given the Apostles , as from a standing perpetual Rule for a Gospel-Ministry : Whereas our Saviour onely suited these instructions to the present case , and the nature and condition of the Apostles present imployment , which was , not to preach the Gospel up and down themselves , but to be as so many Iohn Baptists to call people to the hearing of Christ himself ; and therefore the Doctrine they were to Preach was the same with his , The Kingdome of Heaven is at hand , whereby it appears their Doctrine was only preparatory to Christ ; it being onely to raise up higher expectations of the Gospel-state under the Messias ; and these were they whom the King now sent into the high-wayes to invite men to the marriage Feast , and to bid them to come in to him . This was the only present imployment of the Apostles in their first mission : in which they were confined to the Cities of Iudea , that they might have the first refusal of the Gospel-Offers . This mission then being occasional , limited , and temporary , can yield no Foundation for any thing perpetual to be built upon it . Thirdly , we observe that those whom Christ imploied in the first dispersing of the Gospel abroad , were furnished with arguments sufficient to evince not onely the credibility , but the certain truth of what they preached . Therefore Christ when he now sent them out , gave them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not only a meer power to work miracles , but a right conferrèd on them to do it as the Apostles of Christ. These were the Credentials which the Apostles carried along with them to shew from whom they derived their power , and by whose authority they acted . And these were the most suitable to them , as making it appear that a Divine presence went along with them , and therefore they could not salsifie to the world in what they Declared unto them ; which was the best way for them to evidence the Truth of their Doctrine , because it was not to be discovered by the Evidence of the things themselves , but it depended upon the Testimony of the Authour ; and therefore the onely way to confirm the truth of the Doctrine , was to confirm the credibility of the Authour , which was best done by doing something above what the power of nature could reach unto . And this was the prerogative of the Apostles in their first mission above Iohn the Baptist : For of him it is said that he did no miracle . Fourthly , we observe that the Apostles in this mission were invested in no power over the Church , nor in any Superiority of Order one over another . The first is evident , because Christ did not now send them abroad to gather Churches , but onely to call persons to the Doctrine of the Messias ; and while Christ was in the World among them , he retained all Church power and authority in his own hand . When this temporary mission expired , the Apostles lived as private persons still under Christs Tutorage , and we never read them acting in the least as Church-Officers all that while . Which may appear from this one argument , because all the time of our Saviours being in the World , he never made a total separation from the Iewish Church , but frequented with his Disciples the Temple worship and Service to the last ; although he super-added many Gospel Observations to those of the Law. And therefore when no Churches were gathered , the Apostles could have no Church power over them . All that can be pleaded then in order to Church-Government from the consideration of the Form of Government as setled by our Saviour , must be either from a supposed inequality among the Apostles themselves , or their superiority over the LXX . Disciples ; or from some Rules laid down by Christ in order to the Government of his Church : of which two are the most insisted on , Matthew 20. 25. Matth. 18. 17. Of these in their Order . The first argument drawn for an established form of Government in the Church , from the state of the Apostles under Christ , is , from a supposed inequality among the Apostles , and the superiority of one as Monarch of the Church ; which is the Papists Plea from Saint Peter , as the chief and head of the Apostles . Whose loud Exclamations for Saint Peters authority a●● much of the same nature with those of Demetrius the Silver-Smith at Ephesus , with his fellow craftsmen , who cried up , Great is Diana of the Ephesians , not from the honor they bore to her as Diana , but from the gain which came to them from her worship at Ephesus . But I dispute not now the entail of Saint Peters power , what ever it was to the Roman Bishop : but I onely inquire into the Pleas drawn for his authority from the Scriptures , which are written in so small a character , that without the spectacles of an implicite Faith , they will scarce appear legible to the Eyes of men . For what though Christ changed Saint Peters name ? must it therefore follow that Christ baptized him Monarch of his Church ? Were not Iohn and Iames called by Christ Boanerges ? and yet who thinks that those sons of Thunder must therefore overturn all other power but their own ? Christ gave them new names , to shew his own authority over them , and not their authority over others ; to be as Monitors of their Duty , and not as Instruments to convey power . So Chrysostome speaks of the very name Peter , given to Simon ; it was to shew him his duty of being fixed and stable in the Faith of Christ , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , this name might be ( as a string upon his finger ) a continual remembrancer of his duty . And likewise , I conceive , as an incouragement to him after his fall , that he should recover his former stability again ; else it should seem strange that he alone of the Apostles should have his name from firmness and stability , who fell the soonest , and the foulest of any of the Apostles ; unlesse it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which would be worse Divinity , then Rhetorick . The change then of St Peters name imports no such Universall Power , neither from the change , nor from the name . But why then hath Saint Peter the honour to be named first of all the Apostles ? First , it seems to be implyed as an honour given to Peter above the rest . But doth all honour carry an Universal power along with it ? there may be order certainly among equals ; and there may be first , second , and third , &c. where there is no imparity and jurisdiction in the first over all the rest . Primacy of Order as among equals , I know none will deny Saint Peter : A Primacy of Power as over Inferiours , I know none will grant , but such as have subdued their Reason to their Passion and Interest . Nay , a further Order then of m●er place may without danger be attributed to him : A Primacy in Order of Time , as being of the first called , and it may be the first who adhered to Christ , in Order of Age ; of which Ierome , aetati delatum quia Petrus senior erat , speaking of Peter and Iohn ; nay yet higher , some Order of Dignity too ; in regard of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Greek Fathers speak so much of ; the servency and heat of his spirit , whence by Eusebius he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Prolocutor among the Apostles , who was therefore most forward to inquire , most ready to answer , which Chrysostome elegantly calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alluding to the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which are frequently given to Peter by the Fathers , which import no more then praesultor in choreâ , he that that led the dance among the Disciples : but his being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implies no Superiority of Power . For Dyonys . Haliarnass . calls Appius Cla●dius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whereas all know that the Decemviri had an equality of power among themselves . Neither doth his being as the mouth of the Disciples imply his power ; For Aaron was a mouth to Moses , but Moses was Aarons Master . Neither yet doth this Primacy of Order alwayes hold in reference to Peter : For although generally he is named first of the Aposties , as Matthew , 10. 2. Mark 3. 16. Acts 1. 13. Mark 1. 36. Luk 8. 45. Acts 2. 14. — 37. Yet in other places of Scripture we finde other Apostles set in Order before him as Iames , Galat. 2. 9. Paul and Apollos , and others , 1 Cor. 3. 22. 1 Cor. 1. 12. — 9. 5. No Argument then can be drawn hence , if it would hold but onely a Primacy of Order ; and yet even that fails too in the Scriptures changing of the Order so often . But , say they , whatever becomes of this Order , we have a strong Foundation for Saint Peters Power , because Christ said , he would build his Church upon him , Matth. 16. 17. This were something indeed , if it were proved ; but I fear this Rock will not hold water , as it is brought by them ; nor Saint Peter prove to be that Rock . For indeed , Was the Church built upon Saint Peter ? then he must be the chief Foundation stone , and Peter must build upon himself , and not upon Christ , and all the Apostles upon him ; and thus in exalting the Servant , we depress the Master ; and in setting a new Foundation , we take away the only Foundation , Iesus Christ. If by being built upon Peter , they mean no more then being built by him as the chief Instrument ; it is both a very incongruous Speech , and implies nothing more then what was common to him , and the rest of the Apostles , who were all Master-builders in the Church of Christ , as Paul calls himself ; and in that respect are set forth as the twelve Foundation stones , in the walls of the New Ierusalem . The Rock then spoken of by Christ , in his Speech to Peter , if taken Doctrinally , was Saint Peters Confession , as many of the Fathers interpret it ; if taken personally , it was none other but Christ himself , who used a like Speech to this , when he said , Destroy this Temple , and in three dayes I will raise it up . Which words , though spoken by occasion of the material Temple ( as those were of Peters name ) yet Christ understood them of the Temple of his Body , ( as here likewise he doth of his person . ) But still they urge , Christ put the Keyes into Saint Peters hands , Matthew , 16. 19. Now the power of the Keyes doth denote Regal Authority . I answer , First , The Keyes may be given two wayes , either from a Prince to a Subject , or from a City to a Prince . In this latter acception , they denote principality in the Receiver , but withall inferiority and subjection in the Given : and in this sense , I am so charitable , as to think they will not say that Christ gave the Keyes to Peter ; it must be then as a Prince to a Subject ; and when they are so given , it doth not imply an universal power in the persons to whom they are given , but an investing them in that particular place he hath appointed them to ; the Office which the power of the Keyes implies , is Ministerial , and not Authoritative ; Delarative , and not Iuridical ; over persons committed to their charge , and not over Officers joyned in●equality of power with them . For so were the rest of the Apostles with Peter in the same power of the Keyes , Matth. 18. 18. Iohn 20. 23. This-power of the Keyes then was given to Peter in a peculiar manner , but nothing peculiar to him given thereby . But still there remains another Ward in Saint Peters Keyes , and the last foot to the Popes Chair which is Pasce oves , Feed my sheep ; a charge given particularly to Peter , Iohn 21. 15. Thence they infer his Power over the whole Church . But this foot hath neither joynts nor sinews in it , and is as infirm as any of the rest : sor neither did this Command rather then Commission belong onely to Peter ; for Christ had before given them all their general Commission : As the Father hath sent me , even so send I you , John 20 21. whereby is implied an investing all the Apostles equally , with the power and authority of Governing the Church of God ; although this charge be peculiarly renewed to Peter , because as he had particularly faln , so he should be particularly restored ; neither yet did we grant this : doth the word , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imply such a Power and authority as they plead for , viz. A Supream power over the Church of God : for this even by Peter himself is attributed to the fixed Presbyters of the Churches , who by this argument have as much authority conveyed them , as Saint Peter had , 1 Pet. 5. 2. and yet should we grant this , it would not infer what they desire ; for these sheep were not the whole Church of Christ , taken absolutely , but Indefinitely . For all the Apostles had a command to preach to every Creature , Matth. 28. 18. which was as to the words larger , as to the Sense the same with that to Saint Peter here . And afterwards we find Peter called the Apostle of Circumcision , and the Apostles sending him to Samaria , and Paul in the right hand of fellowship with Peter ; which had been certainly dishonourable to Peter , had he been invested with such an Universal Supream Power over the Apostles and the whole Church . Such pretences then as these are for such an Extravagant power in the Church of God , from such miserably weak Foundations , for the upholding a corrupt Interest , have given the occasion to that tart Sarcasm , In Papatu sub Petri nudo nomine Satan non amplius Larva . But that which would seem sufficient to awaken any out of this dream of Saint Peters power over the rest of the Apostles , is , the frequent contendings of the twelve Apostles , one among another , Who should be the greatest ; and that even after that Christ had said , Upon this Rock will I build my Church , as we may see Matthew 20 24. If Christ had conferred such a power on Saint Peter , what little ground had there been for the request of Iames and Iohn ? and would not our Saviour rather have told them , the chiefest place was conserred on Peter already , then have curbed their ambition in seeking who should be greatest ; and would have bid them be subject to Peter as their Head and Ruler . We see not then the least foundation for an universal Monarchy in the Church of God ; and so this form of Government is not determined by any actions or commands of Christ. We come now to consider the pleas of others , who joyn in renouncing any Supream power under Christ , over the Church of God ; but differ as to the particular forms of Government in the Church ; those who are for an inequality , usually fix on the imparity between the Apostles and the LXX . Those that are for a parity upon Matth. 20. 25. and Matth. 18. 17. I shall here proceed in the former method , to shew that none of those can prove the Form they contend for as only necessary , nor their adversaries prove it unlawful . First then for the inequality between the Apostles and the LXX . Disciples ; by that inequality is meant , either only an inequality of order ; or else , an inequality carrying superiority and subordination . It is evident that the LXX . disciples were not of the same Order with the twelve Apostles , whom Christ had designed for the chief Government of his Church , after his Ascension ; and in this respect the comparison of the twelve heads of the Tribes , and the seventy Elders , seems parallel with the twelve Apostles ; and the LXX . disciples ; but if by imparity , be meant , that the twelve Apostles had a superiority of power and jurisdiction over the LXX . disciples ; there is not the least evidence or foundation , in Reason or Scripture for it . For the LXX . did not derive their power from the Apostles , but immediately from Christ ; they enjoyed the same priviledges , were sent upon the same message , ( making way for Christs entertainment in the several Cities they went to ) yea , all things were parallel between them and the Apostles in their mission ( unlesse any difference be made in the Cities they went to , and their number ) . So that there is no superiority of office in the Apostles , above the LXX . nor of power and jurisdiction over them ; their Commissions being the same : And it seems most probable that both their missions were only temporary , and after this the LXX . remained in the nature of private Disciples , till they were sent abroad by a new Commission after the Resurrection , for preaching the Gospel , and planting Churches . For we see that the Apostles themselves were only Probationers , till Christ solemnly authorized them for their Apostolical employment , Matth. 28. 18. Iohn 20. 21. when their full Commissions were granted to them , and then indeed they acted with a plenitude of power , as Governours of the Church , but not before . Nothing can be inferred then for any necessary standing Rule for Church-government , from any comparison between the Apostles and the LXX . during the life of Christ , because both their missiors were temporary and occasional . Only we see , that because Christ did keep up the number of the twelve so strictly , that as the LXX . were a distinct number from them , so when one was dead , another was to be chosen in his stead ( which had been needlesse , if they had not been a distinct Order and Colledge by themselves ) , it is thence evident that the Apostolical power , was a superiour power to any in the Church ; and that such an inequality in Church-Officers as was between them and particular Pastors of Churches , is not contrary to what our Saviour saith , when he forbids that dominion and authority in his Disciples , which was exercised by the Kings of the earth , Matthew 20. 25. Luke 22. 25. which places , because they are brought by some , to take away all inequality among Church-Officers , I shall so far examine the meaning of them , as they are conceived to have any influence thereupon . First then , I say , that it is not only the abuse of civil power , which our Saviour forbids his Disciples , but the exercise of any such power as that is . And therefore the Papists are mistaken , when from the words of Luke , Vos autem non sic , they conclude , All power is not forbidden , but only such a tyrannical power , as is there spoken of . For those words are not a limitation and modification of the power spoken of , but a total prohibition of it ; for first , the comparison is not between the Apostles and Tyrants , but between them and Princes , yea such as Luke c●lls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Indeed , had Christ said , The Kings of the earth abuse their authority ; vos autem non sic ; then it would have been onely a limitation of the exercise of power ; but the meer exercise of civil authority being spoken of before , and then it being subjoyned , but you not so ; it plainly implyes a forbidding of the power spoken of , in the persons spoken to . But , say they , the words used in Matthew , are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which import the abuse of their power , which is forbidden . But I answer , first , in Luke it is otherwise ; for there it is the simple 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , when it follows , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So that if the abuse be forbidden in one , the use is in the other : but secondly , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by the LXX . is used frequently for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often rendred by that word ; as Psalm 72. 7. He shall have dominion , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Psalm 110. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Rule thou in the midst of thine enemies ; in both which places , it is spoken of christs Kingdom . So in Genesis 1. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Replenish the earth , and have dominion over it . In all which places , it is used simply for Dominion , and not for Tyrannical Power . It is not then the abuse of civil Power , but the use of it , which is here forbidden : which will be more evident secondly , from the importance of the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; which answers to the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and simply denyes what went before ; as when Cain expresseth his fear of being kill'd , Genesis 4. 14. The Septuagint render Gods answer by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whereby is not denyed , only the manner of his death to be as Abels was , but it is simply denyed ; and so Psalm 1. 4. the LXX . render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the wicked are not so . So , when Christ saith , Matthew 19. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from the beginning it was not so ; it imports an absolute denyal of giving bills of divorce from the beginning . Thirdly ; This no wayes answers to the scope of the Apostles contention , which was meerly about Primacy and Power , and not at all about the abuse of this Power . So that by this place , all affectation and use of a civil , co ▪ active , external power is forbidden to the Officers of the Church ; the power of the Church being only a directive , voluntary power ; and is rather a Ministry then a Power , as our Saviour expresseth there , Matthew 20. 26. Luke 22. 26. But having thus excluded all Civil Power from the Governours of the Church , as such : I say , secondly , That this place doth no wayes imply a prohibition of all inequality among the Governours of the Church ; which is abundantly cleared by this reason , because by the acknowledgement of all parties , the Apostles had a Superiour power over the ordinary Pastors of Churches ; Now if the exercise of all Superiority had been forbidden , this must have been forbidden too ; as implying plainly an exercise of authority in some over others in the Church . And therefore Musculus thus explains the place : Non exigit hoc Christus ut omnes in regno suo sint aequales , sed nè quispiam cupiat magnus & primus haberi & videri . It is not an inequality of Order , but ambition which Christ forbids ; and therefore he observes that Christ saith not . Let none be great among you , and none first ; which should have been , if all Primacy and Superiority had been forbidden , and a necessity of an equality among Church-Officers : but he that will be great among you , let him be your Minister . Let those that are above others , look upon themselves as the servants of others , and not as their masters . For God never bestows any power on any , for the sake of those that have it , but for the sake of those for whom they are employed : When men seek then their own greatnesse , and not the service of the Church , they flatly contradict this Precept of Christ , But with you it shall not be so . But however an inequality of Power and Order for the Churches good is not thereby prohibited : Which is sufficient for my purpose . The next place to be considered , is , that in Matthew 18. 15 , 16 , 17. If thy brother shall trespass against thee ▪ go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone ; if he shall hear thee , thou hast gained thy brother . But if he will not hear thee , then take with thee one or two more , that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established . And if he shall neglect to hear them , tell it to the Church ; but if he neglect to hear the Church , let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a Publican . It seems a very strange thing to consider , that this one place hath been pressed by all parties to serve under them , for the maintenance of their own particular form of Government : so that ( as the Iews fable of the Manna ) , it hath had a different taste , according to the diversity of the palats of men . Those that are for a Congregational Church , being the first receptacle of Church power , set this place in the front of their arguments ; Those who plead for Standing Presbyteries , Lay-Elders , subordination of Courts , fetch all these out of this place ; Those that are for a Power of Church Discipline to be only lodged in a higher Order of Chur 〈…〉 Officers succeeding the Apostles , derive the succession of that power from this place ; nay lest quidlibet should not be proved èquolibet , the Papists despair not of proving the constant visibility of the Church , the subordination of all to the Pope , the infallibility of general Councils , all out of this place . Methinks then it might be argument enough of the incompetency of this place to determine any one particular form , when it is with equal confidence on all sides brought to prove so many ; especially if it be made appear that the general Rule laid down in these words , may be observed under a diversity of forms of Government . For whether by the Church , we mean the community of the faithful in a particular Congregation , or the standing Officers of such a Church , or a Consistorial Court , or Synodical Assembly , or higher Church-Officers , it is still the duty of men in case of offences , to tell the Church for redresse of grievances , or vindication of the person himself , that he hath discharged his duty . This place then determines not what this Church is , nor what the form of it● Government should be , when the sense of it holds good and true under such diversity of forms . But we shall further enquire what influence this place can have upon the modelling the Government in the Church of God. Fo● Chamier tells us , the prima Politia Ecclesiasticae origo is to be found in these words ; it will be then worth our enquiry to see what foundation for Church government can be drawn out of these words . In which the variety of Expositions ( like a multitude of Physitians to a distempered Patient ) have left it worse then they found it ; I mean more difficult and obscure . We shall therefore endeavour to lay aside all pre-conceptions by other mens judgements and opinions , and see what innate Light there is in the Text it self to direct us to the full sense and meaning of it . Two things the great difficulty of the place lyes in , What the offences are here spoken of ? What the Church is which must b● spoken to ? For the First , I conceive it evident to any unprejudicated mind , that the matter our Saviour speaks of , is a matter of private offence and injury , and not a matter of scandal , as such considered in a Church-Society , which I make appear thus First , From the parallel place to this Luke 17. 3. 〈…〉 y Brother trespasse against thee , rebuke him ; and if he repent , forgive him . This can be nothing else but a matter of private injury , because it is in the power of every private person to forgive it ; which it was not in his power to do , were it a matter of scandal to the whole Church ; unlesse we make it among Christians ( as it was among the Jews ) that every private person might excommunicate another , and to release him afterward . Secondly , It manifestly appears from St. Peters words next after this Paragraph , Matth. 18. 20. Lord , how often shall my brother sin against me , and I forgive him , till seven times ? &c. Christ answers him , till seventy times seven , that is , as often as he doth it . And thence Christ brings the parable of the King forgiving his Servants , v. 23. Thirdly , Were it meant of any scandalous sin committed with the privacy of any particular person ( as many understand trespassing against thee , that is , te conscio ) then this inconvenience must necessarily follow , that matters of scandal must be brought to the Churches cognizance when there can be no way to decide them ; that is , when one offends , and only one person knows it ; here will be a single affirmation on one side , and denyal on the other side , and so there can be no way to decide it ; the matter here spoken of then is somewhat only relating to the offence or injury of some particular person , and not a matter of scandal to the whole Church . The Question then as propounded to be spoken to by our Saviour , is , What is to be done in case of private offences between man and man ? and not in case of secret sins against God , and scandalous to the Church ? Now to this our Saviour layes down his answer gradually : first , there must be private admonition ; if that succeed not , admonition before witnesses ; if not that , telling the Church ; if not that neither , reputing him as a Heathen and Publican . Now in this answer , we must conceive our Saviour speaks as to an ordinary case , so in a way easie to be understood by all that heard him : and therefore he must speak in allusion to what was at that time among the Jews in such cases , which is freely acknowledged both by Calvin and Beza upon the place . Nam certè tanquam de Iudais haec dici apparet , saltem ex eo quod addit , Sit tibi sicut Ethnicus & Publicanus . We must then see what the custom was among the Jews in such cases , and how far our Saviour doth either approve the custome received , or appoint new . The Law was very strict in case of offences , for every man in any wise to rebuke his Neighbour , and not to suffer sin upon him , Arguendo argues , our old Translation renders it , Thou shalt plainly rebuke thy Neighbour . Now this piece of necessary Discipline our Saviour endeavours to recover among them , which it seems was grown much out of use with them . For Rabbi Chanina , as Mr. Selden observes , gave this as one reason of the destruction of Ierusalem , because they left off reproving one another : Non excisa fuissent Hierosolyma , nisi quoniam alter alterum non coarguebat . Our Saviour therefore inforceth this Law upon them in case of offences ; first , to deal plainly with their Neighbour in reproving him : but our Saviour rests not here , but being himself a pattern of Meeknesse and Charity , he would not have them to rest in a bare private admonition , but to shew their own readinesse to be reconciled , and willingnesse to do good to the Soul of the offending party thereby , he adviseth further to take two or three witnesses with them , hoping thereby to work more upon him : but if still he continues refractory , and is not sensible of his miscarriage , Tell it the Church . What the Church here is , is the great Controversie ; Some , as Beza and his followers , understand an Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin among the Jews ▪ which had the proper cognizance of Ecclesiastical causes ; but it will be hard to prove any such Sanhedrin in use among them ▪ the Priests and Levites indeed were very often chosen into the Sanhedrin , ( which it may be is the ground of the mistake , but there was no such Sanhedrin among them , which did not respect matters criminal and civil : So we must understand what Iosephus speaks of the Priests among the Jews : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Priests were alwayes very studious of the Law , and other matters of concernment . These were appointed as the Overseers of all things , Iudges of Controversies , and the punishers of condemned persons . Thus we see , he is so far from attributing a distinct Ecclesiastical Court to them , that he seems to make them the only Judges in civil and criminal causes . Others ▪ by the Church , understand the Christian ▪ Church ; but herein they are divided ; some understanding by it only the Officers of the Church : so Chrysostome , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Euthemius Ecclesiam nunc vocat prasides fidelium Ecclesiae . Others understand it not in its representative notion , but in its diffusive capacity , as taking in all the members . But our Saviour speaking to a present case , must be supposed to lay down a present remedy , which could not be , if he gave only Rules for governing his Church which was not as yet gathered nor formed , there being then no Court Ecclesiastical for them to appeal unto . Suppose then this case to have fallen out immediately after our Saviours speaking it , that one brother should trespasse against another , either then notwithstanding our Saviours Speech ( which speaks to the present time , Go and tell the Church ) the offended brother is left without a power of redresse , or he must understand it in some sense of the word Church , which was then in use among the Jews . And these , who tell us , That unless 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be understood for a Church as we understand it , it would be no easie matter for us now to conceive what the Holy Ghost meant by it , would do well withall to consider how those to whom Christ spoke , should apprehend his meaning if he spoke in a sense they never heard of before . And certainly , our best way to understand the meaning of Scripture is to consider what , of whom , to whom the Scripture speaks ; for although the Scripture , as a Rule of Faith for us , be supposed to be so written , as to be easily understood by us , yet as the parcels of it were spoken upon several Occasions , they must be supposed to be so spoken , as to be apprehended by them to whom they were spoken in the common senss of the words , if nothing peculiar be expressed in the Speech , whereby to restrain them to another sense . And therefore the Church must be understood in the same sense wherein the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Syriack answering to it , was apprehended among the Jewes in our Saviours time . Which could not be for any new Consistory or Sanhedrin to be erected under the Gospel . Thence others conceiving that Christ did speak according to the Custome of the Jewes ▪ by the Church ▪ understand nothing else but the Sanhedrin , and so make the sense of the words to be this . The Case our Saviour speaks to is that of private Quarrels , wherein our Saviour layes down two Directions in a way of Charity , private admonition , and before witnesses ; but if the party continues refractory , then it may be lawful to convent him before the Courts of Judicature among them , the Triumvirate , the 23. or the great Sanhedrin ▪ for although the Romans had taken away the power of the Iewes in Capital matters , yet they allowed them liberty of judgeing in the case of private quarrels : but if he neglect to hear the Sanhedrin , then it may be lawful to implead him before the Governour of the Province in his Court of Judicature , by which Heathens and Publicans were to be judged ; which is meant by Let him be to thee , not as a brother Jew , but as a Heathen and a Publican . This Exposition is said to be first Broached by Erastus ; but much improved and enlarged by Reverend Bishop Bilson , who spends a whole Chapter upon it . But this Exposition though it seems fair and plausible , yet there are several things in it which keep me from imbracing it ; as First , It seems not very probable that our Saviour should send his Disciples to whom he speaks , to the Jewish Sanhedrin for the ending any Controversies arising among themselves ; knowing how bitter Enemies they wer to all who were the followers of Christ. Secondly , it seems not very agreeable with the scope of our Saviours Speech ▪ which was to take up differences as much as may be among his Disciples , and to make them shew all lenity and forherance towards those that had offended them , and to do good to the Souls of those that had injured and provoked them ; whereas this command of telling the Sanhedrin , and inpleading offendors before Heathen Courts , tends apparently to heighten the bitterness and animosities of Mens spirits one against another : and layes Religion so open to Obloquies , which makes Paul so severely reprove the Christians at Corinth , for going to Law before Heathen Magistrates ; therefore to say that Christ allows there going to Law before Heathens , and Paul to forbid it , were , instead of finding a way to end the differences among Christians , to make one between Christ and Paul. Thirdly , the thing chiefly aimed at by Christ , is not a mans Vindication of himself , or recovering losses by injuries received , but the recovering and gaining the offending brother ; which evidently appears by what our Saviour adds to the using admonition in private , If he shall hear thee , thou hast gained thy brother . Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the New Testament is used for the Conversion and turning others from sin . That I might gain them that are under the Law , 1 Corinth . 9. 19 , 20 , &c. So 1 Pet. 3. 1. explained by Iames 5. 20. Our Saviour then speaks not to the manner of proceeding as to civil injuries , which call for Restitution , but to such as call for Reconciliation . And so the Case I conceive is that of private Differences and Quarrels between men , and not Law-Suites nor civil Causes : I mean such Differences as respect persons and not things , which our Saviour layes down these Rules for the ending of . And therefore I cannot but wonder to see some men insist so much on that place against such an Exposition of this Luke 12. 14. where Christ saith , Who made me a Iudge , and a Divider among you ? For doth it any wayes follow , Because Christ would not take upon him to be a temporal Judge among the Jewes , therefore he should take no course for the ending differences among his Disciples , and the taking away all animosities from among them ? Nay on the contrary doth not our Saviour very often designedly speak to this very purpose , to root out all bitterness , malice , envy , and rancour from mens spirits , and to perswade them to forgive injuries , even to pray for persecutours , and by any means to be reconciled to their Brethren . Which he makes to be a Duty of so great necessity , that if a man had brought his gift to the Altar , and remembred his brother had ought against him , he bids him leave his gift there , and go , be reconciled to his Brother , and then offer up the Gift . We see hereby how suitable it was to our Saviours Doctrine and Design to lay down Rules for the ending of any differences arising among his Disciples ; and this being now cleared to be the state of the Case , it will not be difficult to resolve what is meant by telling the Church . Which I make not to be any appeal to a juridical court , acting authoritatively over the persons brought before it , but the third and highest step of Charity in a man towards a person that hath offended him , viz. That when neither private admonition , nor before two or three witnesses would serve to reclaim the offendor , then to call a select company together ( which is the Natural importance of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) and before them all to lay open the cause of the breach and difference between them , and to refer it to their Arbitration to compose and end it . Which Sense of the place , I humbly conceive to have the least force in it , and in every part of it to be most genuine and natural , and fully agreeable to the received practice among the Jewes : which the Author of the Book Musar cited by Drusius fully acquaints us with , whose words I shall Transcribe , as being a plain Paraphrase on these of our Saviour . Qui arguit socium suum , debet primum hoc facere placide inter se , & ipsum solum , verbis mollibus , ita ut non pudefaciat eum . Si resipiscit , bene est ; sin , debet eum acritèr arguere & pudefacere inter se & ipsum . Si non resipiscit , debet adhibere socios , ipsumque coram illis pudore afficere ; si nec modo quicquam proficit , debet eum pudefacere coram multis , ejusque delictum publicare . Nam certe detegendi sunt hypocritae . That which this Authour calls pudefacere eum coram multis , is that which our Saviour means when he bids him tell the Church , or the Congregation , as our Old Translation renders it . This the Jews called reproving of men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before a multitude , as the Vulg. Latin though falsly renders that place L●viticus 19. 17. publicè argue eum : and to this the Apostle may allude when he speaks of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 2 Corinth . 2. 6. censure of many ; and the reproof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before all , 1 Tim. 5. 20. which was to be in matters of publike scandal upon Religion , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Jewes call them ; but in case the offendor should still 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 slight this overture of Reconciliation , before the company selected for hearing the Case ▪ then saith our Saviour , look upon him as an obstinate refractory creature , and have no more to do with him , then with a Heathen and a Publican ; by which terms the most wilful obstinate sinners were set out among the Jewes , and by which our Saviour means a mans withdrawing himself , as much as in him lies , from all familiar society with such a person . And thus saith Christ , Whatsoever you bind in Earth , shall be bound in Heaven , and whatsoever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven , v. 18. that is , If after all your endeavours of Reconciliation , the offender will hearken to no agreement , it is an evidence and token that mars sin is bound upon him , ( that is , shall not be pardoned so long as he continues impenitent , ) but if he repent of his offence , and you be reconciled , as the offence is removed on Earth thereby , so the sin is loosed in Heaven , that is , forgiven . The guilt of sin that binds , it being an Obligation to punishment ; and so the pardon of sin that looseth , as it cancels that Obligation . And so Grotius observes , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , what is called retaining in one place , is binding in another : and what is loosing in one place , is remitting in the other . But now although I assert this to be the true , proper , genuine meaning of this difficult place , yet I deny not but that this place hath influence upon Church-Government ; but I say the influence it hath , is onely by way of Accommodation , and by Analogy deduced from it . According to which , these things I conceive have Foundation in these words ; First , gradual appeals from the Method here laid down by our Saviour . Secondly , Church ▪ censures , and the Duty of submitting to Church-authority ; For although before any Church Power was actually set up , ( as when our Saviour spake these words then there was none , ) yet after that Church-Government was fixed and set up , it must in Reason be supposed that all matters of the Nature of scandals to the Church must be decided there . Thirdly , The lawfulness of the Use of excommunication in Christian Churches ; for if every particular person might withdraw from the Society of such a one as continues refractory in his Offences , then much more may a whole Society , and the Officers of it declare such a one to be avoided both in religious and familiar civil Society , which is the formal Nature of Excommunication . Herein we see the wisdom of our Saviour , who in speaking to a particular case , hath laid down such general Rules as are of perpetual use in the Church of God for accommodating differences arising therein . Thus have we hitherto cleared that our Saviour hath determined no more of Church-Govern-ment then what is appliable to a diversity of particular Forms , and so hath not by any Law or practice of his own determined the necessity of any one form . CHAP. VI. The next thing pleaded for determining the Form of Government , is Apostolical practice ; two things inquired into concerning that , What it was ? How far it binds ? The Apostles invested with the power and authority of Governing the whole Church of Christ by their Commission , Io. 20. 21. Matth. 28. 18. What the Apostles did in order to the Church Government before Pentecost , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained . How the Apostles did divide Provinces ; whether Paul and Peter were confined to the circumcision and uncircumcision , and different Churches erected by them in the same Cities ? What the Apostles did in order to settling particular Churches ? The Names and Office of Bishops , Presbyters , Deacons considered . Four general Considerations laid down about the Apostles practice . First , It cannot be fully known what is was . 2. Great probability , they observe no one certain Form in setling Churches ; proved from Epiphanius , Ierome , Ambrose or Hilary . 3. Their Case different from ours in regard of the paucity of Believers . 4. If granted for any Form , yet proves not the thing in question . For , 1. Offices appointed by them are ceased . Widdows , Deaconesses abolished . 2. Rites and Customs Apostolical grown out of use . 1. Such as were founded upon Apostolical Precepts , Acts 15. 29. considered . 2. Such as were grounded on their practice , Holy kiss , Love-feasts , dipping in Baptism , community of goods , with several others . HAving found nothing , either in our Saviours practice , or in the rules laid down by him ( conceived to respect Church-Government ) which determines any necessity of one particular Form ; the onely argument remaining which can be conceived of sufficient strength to found the necessity of any one form of Government , is , the practice of the Apostles , who were by their imployment and commission entrusted with the Government of the Church of God. For our Saviour after his Resurrection taking care for the Planting and Governing of his Church after his Ascension to Glory , doth at two several times call his Apostles together , and gives now their full Charter and Commission to them ; the first ▪ containing chiefly the power it self conferred upon them , Iohn 20. 21. The other , the Extent of that power , Matth. 28. 19. In the former our Saviour tells them , As the Father had sent him , so did he send them ▪ Which we must not understand of a parity and equality of Power , but in a similitude of the mission : that as Christ before had managed the great affairs of his Church in his own Person ; so now ( having according to the Prophecies made of him at the end of seventy weeks , made Reconciliation for iniquity by his Death , and brought in everlasting Righteousness by his Resurrection ) He dispatcheth abroad his Gospel Heralds to proclaim the Iubilee now begun , and the Act of Indempnity now past upon all penitent Offendors ; which is the Sense of the other part of their Commission ; Whosoever sins ye remit , they are remitted ; and whosoever sins ye retain , they are retained , John 20. 23. i. e. as many as upon the Preaching the Gospel by you , shall come in and yield up themselves to the tenders of Grace proclaimed therein , shall have their former Rebellions pardoned ; but such as will still continue obstinate , their former guilt shall still continue to bind them over to deserved punishment . And to the end the Apostles might have some Evidence of the power thus conferred upon them , He breathes the Holy Ghost on them , and said , Receive ye the Holy Ghost ; which we are not to understand of the Extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost , which were not received till the day of Pentecost , Act. 2. 1. but of the Authoritative power of preaching the Gospel , which was now conferred upon them , by the solemn Rite of breathing the Holy Ghost on the Apostles . In which Sense the Church of England understands that Expression in the Ordination of Ministers , as it implies onely the conferring thereby an authority for the preaching of the Gospel , which being conveyed by Ordination , is fitly expressed by the same word● which our Saviour used in the conferring the same Power upon his Apostles at his sending them forth to be Gospel-Preachers . After this comes the solemn appointed meeting of Christ with his Disciples at the mountain of Galilee , ( where in probability , besides the eleven , were present the five hundered Brethren at once . ) And here Christ more solemnly inaugurates the Apostles in their Office , declaring all power to be in his hands ; and therefore appoints the Apostles to preach the Gospel to every creature , that is , to all men indefinitely , Gentiles as well as Jewes , which Matthew fully expresseth by all Nations . Now are the Apostles left as chief Governours of the Church under Christ ; and in this last Commission wherein the extent of the Apostles power is more fully expressed , there is nothing mentioned of any order for the Government of the Church under them , not what course should be taken by the Church after their decease . All that remains then to be inquired into , is what the Apostles practice was , and how far they acted for the determining any one form of Government as necessary for the Church . The Apostles being thus invested in their authority , we proceed to consider the Exercise of this authority for the Governing of the Church . And here we are to consider , that the Apostles did not presently upon their last Commission from Christ goe forth abroad in the World to Preach , but were commanded by Christ to go first to Ierusalem , and there to expect the coming of the Holy Ghost according to our Saviours own appointment , Luke 24. 49. And therefore what Mark adds , Mark 16. 20. that after Christs appearance to them , the Apostles ▪ went abroad and preached every where , working Miracles , must either be understood of what they did onely in their way returning from Galile oo Ierusalem : or else more probably of what they did indefinitely afterwarps . For presently after we find them met together at Ierusalem , whence they came from Mount Olivet where Christs Ascension was . Here we find them imployed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith Saint Luke in his Gospel , which we render the Temple ; but I understand it rather as referring to the action than the place , and is best explained by what Luke saith in Acts 1. 14. they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , continuing in Prayer and Supplication . And that it cannot be meant of the Temple , appears by the mention of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , an upper room , where they continued together . For that it should be meant of any of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , about the Temple , is most improbable to conceive , because not only those ninty Cells about the Temple were destined and appointed for the Priests in their several 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or times of Ministration ; and it is most unlikely the chief Priests and Masters of the Temple should suffer those whom they hated so much , to continue ●o near them without any molestation or disturbance . While the Apostles continue here , they proceed to the choice of a new Apostle instead of Iudas , thereby making it appear now necessary that number was to the first forming of Churches , when the vacant place must be supplyed with so great solemnity . Which office of Apostleship ( which Iudas once had , and Matthias was now chosen into ) is call'd by Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Acts 3. 24. which a Learned Interpreter ●enders , the portion of his Apostolacy , or the Province which fell to Iudas his lot in the distribution of them among the Apostles , which saith he , is call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , into which Matthias did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 go , and from which Judas fell by his sin . This Exposition is very often suggested by that learned Author : but ( with all due reverence to his name and memory ) ; I cannot see any such evidence either from Scripture or reason , to enforce any such Exposition of either phrase , yielding us sufficient ground to for sake the received sense of both of them . For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is plainly nothing else but that office of the Apostleship which belonged to Iudas , without any relation to a Province ; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is that proper place which belonged to Iudas , as he is call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Son of perdition , and no other . But the very foundation of this mistake ▪ is , that the several Provinces , into which the Apostles were to go for preaching the Gospel , were distributed among them before they were filled with the Holy Ghost , which is an Hypothesis will not easily be granted by any one that doth but impartially consider these things . That if the Provinces were so distributed among them , it must be either before the death of Christ , or after ; and it must be before , if Iudas had a peculiar Province assigned to him , which this Exposition necessarily implyes ; but how Provinces could be divided among them before they had their Commission given them to preach to all Nations , is somewhat hard to understand . It must be then immediately after Christ had bid them preach to every creature , that they thus distributed the Provinces among them ; but several things make this very improbable . First , The grosse mistake of the Apostles concerning the very nature of Christs Kingdom ▪ which we read , Acts 1. 6 ▪ when they jointly ask Christ , Lord , wilt thou at this time restore the Kingdom to Israel ? They dream● still of a temporal Kingdom , according to the common opinion of the Jews ; and , Is it probable they should distribute among themselves the several Provinces for Preaching the Gospel , who thought that Christs Kingdom would have been established by other means then going up and down the World ? They looked that Christ himself should do it by his own power , Wilt thou at this time , &c. and did not think it must be done by their means ; much lesse by their single going into such vast parts of the World , as the twelve divisions of the World would be . Secondly , It appears very improbable any such division of Provinces should be made then , when they were commanded to stay at Ierùsalem , and not to stir thence till the promise of the Spirit was fulfilled upon them . Tarry ye in the City of Jerusalem till ye be endued with power from on high , Luke 24. 49. And being assembled together with them , be commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem , but wait for the promise of the Father , Acts 1. 4. Is it likely , when the Apostles were thus straightly charged not to leave Ierusalem , till they were endued with the power of the Holy Ghost , they should contrive the dispersing themselves abroad all over the World ? especially when Christ told them , that it should be after the coming of the Spirit that they should go abroad , Acts 1. 8. and that the Spirit should fit them for their work , ( Iohn 15. 26 , 27. Iohn 16. 13. ) by teaching them , and testifying of Christ. Thirdly , If such a distribution of Provinces had been made so early among the Apostles , how comes it to passe , that after they were endued with the Holy Ghost , they did not every one betake himself to his several Province ? there could have been then no plea nor excuse made for their stay any longer at Ierusalem after the promise of the Spirit was fulfilled upon them . And yet after the persecution raised at Ierusalem , when most of the Church were dispersed abroad , we find the Apostles remaining still at Ierusalem , Acts 8. 1 , 14. Would they have been so long absent from their charge , if any such distribution had been made among themselves ? Fourthly , The Apostles occasional going to places as they did , argues there was no such set division of Provinces among them . The first departure of any of the Apostles from Ierusalem , was that of Peter and Iohn , who were sent by common order of the Apostles to Samaria , after they heard that by Philips preaching , they had received the Word of God. Not the least mention of any peculiar Province of theirs which they were sent to . So Peters going from Ioppa to Casarea , was occasioned by Cornelius his sending for him . Fifthly , That Provinces were not divided , appears , because of so frequent reading of many of the Apostles being together in one place : first the whole twelve at Ierusalem , after that Peter and Iohn together at Samaria ; about four years after Pauls conversion , we met with Iames and Peter together at Ierusalem ; fourteen years after this , we find Iames , Peter ▪ and Iohn there . Is it any wayes probable , if all these had their distinct Provinces assigned then , they should be so often found together at Ierusalem , which certainly must belong but to the Province of one of them ? Sixthly , It seems evident that they divided not the World into Provinces among them , because it was so long before they thought it to be their duty to preach unto the Gentiles ; Peter must have a Vision first before he will go to Cornelius , and as yet we see they retained that perswasion , that it is unlawful for a Iew to keep company , or come unto one that is of another Nation , Acts 10. 28. Nay more then this , Peter is accused for this very action ▪ before the Apostles at Ierusalem , Acts 11. 2 , 3. and they laid this a● the ground of their quarrel , that he went in to men uncircumcised , and did eat with them : how this is reconcilable with the whole Worlds being divided into Provinces so early among the Apostles , is not easie to conceive : unlesse some of them thought it unlawful to go to their own Provinces , which certainly must be of the Gentiles , most of them . Seventhly , Another evidence that Provinces were not divided so soon , is , that Peters province so much spoken of , viz. That of the circumcision , fell not to his share , till near twenty years after this time we now speak of , upon the agreement between Paul and Peter at Ierusalem . If Province had been so soon divided , how comes the Apostleship of the Circumcision to be now at last attributed to Peter ? Was it not known what Peters Province was before this time ? and if it was ▪ how come Paul and he now to agree about dividing their Provinces ? Nay further : Eighthly , These Provinces after all this time were not so divided , as to exclude one from anothers Province , which is requisite for a distribution of them , much lesse were they so at first ; for as to this division of the Jews and Gentiles between Paul and Peter , it cannot be understood exclusively of others ; for , what work then had the rest of the Apostles to do ? neither taking them distributively , was Paul excluded from preaching to ●he Iews , or Peter to the Gentiles ? We see Paul was at first chosen to be a Vessel to bear Christs name before the Gentiles and Kings , and the children of Israel . We see hereby he was appointed an Apostle as well to Jews as Gentiles : and accordingly we find him presently preaching Christ in the Synagogues , and confounding the Iews . So in all places where Paul came , he first preached to the Jew● in the Synayogues , and when they would not hearken to him , then he turned to the Gentiles . Neither was this done only before the Apostles meeting at Ierusalem , supposed to be that spoken of Acts 15 ▪ but after at Ephesus , we find him entring into the Synagogues there , and preaching to the Jews . So likewise he did at Corinth , Acts 18. 4. And he reasoned in the Synagogue every Sabbath , and perswaded the Iews and the Greeks . Paul then we see thought not himself excluded from preaching to the Jews , because they were St. Peters Province . Neither did Peter think himself excluded from the Gentiles , he was the first that opened the door of Faith to them by preaching to them ; in which respect it is not altogether improbably conceived by some , that the power of the Keys was peculiarly given to him . And afterwards in the open Council at Ierusalem , he owns himself as the Apostle to the Gentiles : God made choyce among us , that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the Gospel and believe . This then evidently destroys any such early distinction of Provinces ; when Peter , whose Province seems most expresse in Scripture , viz. the Circumcision , yet we find him acting as an Apostle to the Gentiles too . I deny not but at the meeting of Paul and Peter at Ierusalem , when they observed how God did blesse the one most in the circumcision , the other in the uncircumcision , there was an agreement between them , for the one to lay out his pains chiefly upon the Iews , and the other upon the Gentiles ; and in probability where they met in any City , the one gathered a Church of the Iews , and the other of the Gentiles ; but this makes no such distinction of Provinces , as to exclude the one from the others charge : and further , this agreement between Paul and Peter then after both had preached so many years , makes it fully clear , that the pretended division of Provinces so early among the Apostles , is only the wind-egge of a working Fancy , that wants a shell of Reason to cover it . As for the division of Provinces mentioned in Ecclesiastical Writers , though as to some few they generally agree ; as that Thomas went to Parthia , Andrew to Scythia , Iohn to the lesser Asia , &c. yet as to the most they are at a losse where to find their Province● , and contradict one another in reference to them ; and many of them seem to have their first original from the Fable of Dorotheus , Nicephorus , and such Writers . Having shewed that the Apostles observed no set-order for distributing Provinces , we come to shew what course they took for the setling of Churches in the places they went to . In the clearing of which , nothing is more necessary then to free our judgements of those prejudices and prepossessions , which the practice either of the former ages of the Church , or our own have caused within us . For it is easie to observe , that nothing hath been a more fruitful mother of mistakes and errours , then the looking-upon the practice of the primitive Church through the glass of our own customs . Especially when under the same name , ( as it is very often seen ) something far different from what was primarily intended by the use of the word , is set forth to us . It were no difficult task to multiply examples in this kind , wherein men meeting with the same names , do apprehend the same things by them , which they now through custome signifie , without taking notice of any alteration in the things themselves signified by those names . Thus since the name Missa was appropriated by the Papists to that which they call the Sacrifice of the Altar , wherever they meet among ancient Writers with that Name , they presently conceive the same thing was understood by it then . Whereas it was then only taken for the publike Service of the Church , so called from the dismission of the people after it , with an Ite , Missa est ; and from the different forms of Christians , they had two several Services , the one called Missa Catechumenorum , because at the end of that the Catechumeni were dismissed out of the Assembly ; the other Missa fidelium , at which they received the Lords Supper ; which afterwards ( the former discipline of the Church decaying ) ingrossed the name Missa to its self ; and when the Sacrifice of the Altar came up among the Papists , it was appropriated to that . For though they innovated things never so much , yet it hath been alwayes the Policy of that Church not to innovate names , that so the incautelous might be better deceived with a pretence of antiquity ; and thus under the anciently simple name of Missa , lyes at this day couched a Masse of errours . So after the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was applyed by them to that Sacrifice , wherever they meet that word in Scripture , they interpret it in that sense ; and hence when we only read of the Teachers at Antioch , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , no other rendring of the words will be taken but Sacrificantibus illis , although it be not only contrary to the sense of the word in the New Testament , but to the Exposition of Chrysostome , Theophylact , and Oecumenius , who expound it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Thus when publike Liturgies were grown into use in the Church after the decay of the gifts of the first primitive Church , Eusebius his bare calling S. Iames 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( though he relates only to his Ministry in the Church of Jerusalem ) is enough to entitle him Father to a Liturgy , which soon crept forth under his name : by an argument much of the same strength with that which some have brought for reading Homilies , because it is said of St. Paul , Acts 20. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Of the same stamp is Bellarmin●s argument for Invocation of Saints , because of Iacobs saying , Invocetur super eos nomen meum . But we need not go far for examples of this kind . The businesse we are upon , will acquaint ●s with some of them . As the argument for popular Election of Pastors , from the Grammatical sense of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for L●y-Elders from the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and modern Episcopacy from the use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Scriptures . Names and Things must then be accurately distinguished , and the sense of the names must neither be fetched from the custome now used , nor from the Etymologie of the word , but from the undoubted practice of Apostolical times , if that can be made appear what it was . Which will be best done , if we can once find out what course and order the Apostles took in the forming and modelling the Churches by them planted . That which we lay then as a foundation , whereby to clear what Apostolical practice was , is , that the Apostles in the forming Churches did observe the customes of the Jewish Synagogues . Totum regimen Ecclesiarum Christi conformatum fuit ad Synagogarum exemplar , saith Grotius truly . Praesides & curatores Ecclesiarum ad instar Presbyterorum Synagogae Iudaicae constitutos fuisse constat , as Salmasius often affirms . In which sense we understand that famous speech of the Author of the Commentary on St. Pauls Epistles , which goes under the name of Ambrose , but now judged by most to be done by Hilary a Deacon of the Church of Rome , under which name St. Augustine quotes some words on the fifth to the Romanes , which are found still in those Commentaries . Nam apud omnes utique gentes honorabilis est senectus , unde & Synagoga & postea Ecclesia Seniores habuit , sine quorum consilio nihil agebatur in Ecclesiâ , which words are not to be understood of a distinct sort of Presbyters from such as were employed in preaching the Word , but of such Presbyters as were the common Council of the Church , for the moderating and ruling the affairs of it ; which the Church of Christ had constituted among them , as the Jewish Synagogue had before . And from hence we observe that the Ebionites , who blended Judaism and Christianity together ( whence Ierome saith of them , Dum volent & Iudai esse & Christiani , nec Iudaei sunt nec Christiani , they made a Linsey-woolsey Religion , which was neither Iudaism nor Christianity ) . These , as Epiphanius tells us , called their publike Meeting-place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the Pastors of their Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Thereby implying the resemblance and Analogy between the form of Government in both of them . But this will best be made appear by comparing them both together . For which we are to take notice , how much our Saviour in the New Testament did delight to take up the received practices among the Jews only , with such alterations of them as were suitable to the Nature and Doctrine of Christianity , as hath been abundantly manifested by many learned men , about the Rites of the Lords Supper , taken from the post-coenium among the Jews ; the use of Baptism , from the Baptism used in initiating Proselytes ; Excommunication from their putting out of the Synagogue . As to which things , it may be observed , that those Rites which our Saviour transplanted into the Gospel-soyl , were not such as were originally founded on Moses his Law , but were introduced by a confederate Discipline among themselves . And thus it was in reference to the government of the Synagogues among them ; for although the reason of erecting them was grounded on a command in the Levitical Law , Levit. 23. 3. where holy Convocations are required upon the Sabbath-dayes ; yet the building of Synagogues in the Land , was not , as far as we can find , till a great while after . For although Moses require the duty of assembling , yet he prescribes no orders for the place of meeting , nor for the manner of spending those dayes in Gods service , nor for the persons who were to super-intend the publike worship performed at that time . These being duties of a moral nature , are left more undetermined by Moses his Law , which is most punctual in the Ceremonial part of Divine Service . And therefore even then when God did determine the positives of Worship , we see how much he left the performance of morals to the wisdom and discretion of Gods people , to order them in a way agreeable to the mind and will of God. We shall not here discourse of the more elder Customs and observations of the Synagogues , but take the draught of them by the best light we can about our Saviours time , when the Apostles copyed out the Government of Christian-Churches by them . About the time of Christ , we find Synagogues in very great request among the Jews ; God so disposing it , that the moral part of his service should be more frequented now the Ceremonial was expiring ; and by those places so erected , it might be more facile and easie for the Apostles to disperse the Gospel by preaching it in those places , to which it was the custome for the people to resort . And as Paul at Athens observing the Altar inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , To the unknown God , takes his Text from thence , and begins to preach God and Christ to them ; so the Apostles in every Synagogue meet with a Copy of the Law , from whence they might better take their rise to discover ▪ him who was the end of the Law for Righteousness to all that believe . For Moses of old time hath in every City them that Preach him , being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day . It was their constant custome then every Sabbath day to have the Law publickly read ; for which every Synagogue was furnished with a most exact Copy ; which was looked upon as the great Treasure and Glory of their Synagogue ; in the Copying out of which , the greatest care and diligence was used . In their Synagogues they read onely the Law and the Prophets , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hagiographa were not ordinarily read in publick ; the Law , for the more convenient reading it , was distributed into fifty four Sections , which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , every week one Section being read ( joyning twice two lesser Sections together ) the whole Law was read through once every year . But here I cannot say that the Jews were absolutely bound up to read the several Sections appointed for the dayes , as it is commonly thought ( from which Paraschae and the times prefixed of reading them , Cloppenburgh fetched a new Interpretation of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is , that the first Sabbath was that of the civil year which began with the Section 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the twenty fourth of the month Tisri ; but the second Sabbath after the first , was the first Sabbath of the sacred Year , which began with the Section 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the Calends of Nisan ) but I doe not see any such Evidence of so exact and curious a Division of the several Sections , so long since as the time of our Saviour is , which appears by our Saviours reading in the Synagogue at Nazareth where it seems he read after the Synagogue custome , as one of the seven called out by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to read before the people , but we find no Section assigned him by him that delivered the book to him ( the Office of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) but it is said of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , when he had unfolded the book he found out that place in Isaiah . So that then it seems there was no such Precise Observation of the several Sections to be read . And our Saviours reading the book of the Prophets in the Synagogue , puts us in mind of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Sections of the Prophets answerable to those of the Law ; which Elias Levita tells us came up after the time of Antiochu● Epiphanes , who so severely prohibited the Jewes the reading of their Law , but from that time hath been observed ever since : of which we read in Pauls Sermon at Antioch in Pisidia speaking of Christ ; For they that dwell at Jerusalem and their Rulers , because they knew him not , nor the voyces of the Prophets which are read every Sabbath day . Benjamin Tudelensis in his Itinerary , tells us , that the same Custome was not observed among all the Jewes for the reading the Sections of the Law. For in Mitsraim ( which he there takes not for Egypt it self , as it is commonly taken , but for Grand Cairo ) where there were near two thousand Jewes , there were two Synagogues , the one of Syrian , the other of Babylonian Iewes . The latter read over every week an entire Section of the Law ( as the Jewes in Spain in his time did ) and so finished the Law in a years space . The Syrian Jews , or those that were born in Iudea , divided every Section into three parts , and read not the Law through , but in three years time . These Synagogues were very much multiplyed , both in Ierusalem and elsewhere , about the time of our Saviours being in the world . When the common Tradition of the Jewes is , that in Ierusalem its self , there were foure hundred and eighty one Synagogues , which they ridiculously observe by their Gematry , from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used Isa. 1. 20. whose numeral Letters being put together , amount to that Number ; but ● clearer Evidence of the multitude of Synagogues is our Saviours so often appearing in them ; and so likewise the Apostles when they went abroad to preach the Gospel , we find in most places that they first entred into the Synagogues which were , by the liberty given to the Jews , allowed them in all the Cities where they inhabited by the Roman Governours . And so in all their Dispersions both in Babylon , Egypt , and the Western parts , we read of the Synagogues which the Jewes enjoyed , and the liberty they had therein for exercise of their own way of Worship and Discipline . And therefore even at Rome we read of their Proseuchae , Ede ubi consistas ▪ in quâ te quaero Proseucha ? Which by the old Scholiast upon Iuvenal is said to be the place ad quem convenire solebant mendici ad stipem petendam , of which Turnebus gives this account , Proseuchae fana Iudaeorum erant , ut Alexandriae & Romae , alibique ; sic nomen adeptae quòd Oracula quaedam essent , vel ( ut Christiani loquuntur ) Oratoria . Cum autem ad Eleemosynam Iudaei dandam essent propensissimi , eò ceu mendicorum conventus coibat ; sed & Iudaei & ipsi mendici , invisi erant omnibus , & mendici ea loca quod domicilia non haberent , diversores interdum occupabant , in iisque cubabant , ideoque Proseuches nomen in contemptum abierat . Scaliger thinks that the Proseucha differed from the Synagogue ; for which he is checked by Grotius from that place of Philo , where he speaks of Augustus giving the Jews the liberty of their Proseucha for the learning the Religion of their Countrey , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which in brief is that the Proseuchae were the Schools of all Religion and Learning , by which words he seems to confound not onely the Synagogue and the Proseucha together , but the Synagogue and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 too , which was their Divinity-School , whither they used to repair after dinner upon Sabbath dayes , and where the Questions about their Law were discussed ; but though I cannot say these were alwayes distinguished , yet in some places they were . Such seems the School of Tyrannus to be , where Paul taught , having withdrawn himself from the Synagogue . And so sometimes the Proseuchae were distinguished from the Synagogues , as Grotius himself elsewhere acknowledeth , viz ▪ either ▪ where there was not a competent number of Jewes ( for ten Students in the Law were required to make a Synagogue ) or else where the Magistrate would not permit the use of them , in which Case the poor Jewes were fain to content themselves with a place remote from the City , either by some River , as that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , mentioned , Acts 16. 13 , or by some grove or wood , whence that of Iuvenal , Nunc sacri fontis nemus , & delubra locantur ▪ Iudaeis , quorum cophinus foenumque suppellex . Which Fountain , as Vossius observs was extra portam Capenam in luco quem medium irrigabat ; and from hence Scaliger gathers , Iudaeos in nemoribus proseuchas collocâsse . Thus it appears now what priviledges the Jews generally enjoyed in their dispersion for their Synagogues and publike places to meet , pray , and discourse in . We now come to inquire after what manner the government of the Synagogue was model'd . Wherein we must first inquire whether there were any peculiar Government belonging to the Synagogue distinct from the civil Consistories which were in use among them . This is often left untouched by learned men in their discourse of Synagogues ; some indeed make the least Consistory or Sanhedrin in use among the Jews , viz. the Triumvirate , to be the Rulers of the Synagogue , and part of the Ten who were to be where ever there was a Synagogue . But although I cannot see sufficient evidence for a great Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin founded by Moses , answering to the great Sanhedrin of LXXI . yet I conceive it probable , that when Synagogues were so multiplied both at home and abroad , there was a distinct Bench of Officers who did particularly belong to the Synagogue to superintend the affairs of that , which I shall now endeavour to make out by these following Reasons . First , because the Ten required for the Synagogue are set down by the Jewish Writers as distinct from the number required for the civil Consistory . For in the Gemara Babylonia ( cited by Selden ) the account given why there must be 120. inhabitants where there was to be a Sanhedrin of twenty three , is this ; There must be twenty three to màke up the Sanhedrin , and three orders of twenty three , ( who sat in a hemicycle under the Sanhedrin in the same Form as they sat ) and besides these the ten who were to be imployed wholly in the affairs of the Synagogue ( for the Gloss there explains them to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decem filii hominis vacantes ab omni opere , ut parati sint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 domui Synagogae manè & vesperi , and there adds , that every City , though it be wall'd , where ten such persons are wanting , is looked on onely as a Village , and thought unworthy to have a Sanhedrin of twenty three ; ) So that by this it appears the number of the Decemvirate for the Synagogue , was distinct from the persons imployed in the civil Courts . To the same purpose Maimonides gives the account of the number of 120. who likewise requires the ten for the Synagogue as a distinct and peculiar number . Atque hi erant viri qui vacabant tantum rebus divinis , nimirum lectioni legit & sessioni in Synagogis , as Mr. Selden quotes it from another place in him . Whereby it is evident that those who were imployed in the Synagogue , did make a peculiar Bench and Consistory , distinct from the civil Judicature of the place ▪ And therefore the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are not the civil Rulers , but some peculiar Officers belonging to the service of the Synagogue : And thence when all civil Power and government was taken from the Jews , yet they retained their Archisynagogues still . Whence we read of Archisynagogues , Patriarchs and Presbyters among the Jewes in the time of Arcadius and Honorius , when all civil Power and Jurisdiction was taken from them . The Second Reason is from the peculiar Ordination of those who were the Rulers of the Synagogues . This I know is denyed by many : because , say they , Ordination was proper onely to the Presbyters among the Jewes , who were thereby made capable of being members of the Sanhedrin , thence it was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ordinatio Presbyterorum , i. e. Impositio manuum quâ Presbyteri fiunt . This Ordination was I grant primarily used in order to the making men Members of the great Sanhedrin , and therefore the Jewes derive the custome of ordaining them , from Moses his first constituting the LXX Elders , which say they , was done by imposition of hands : which was seconded by the example of Moses laying his hands on Ioshua , from whence the custome was continued down among them till the time of Adrian , who severely prohibited it by an Edict , that whosoever should ordain another should forfeit his life , and so every one that was so ordained . Thence the Jewes tell us that R. Iehuda Ben Baba is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ordainer , because in the time of that Edict he ordained five Presbyters , without which they had wholly lost their succession of Presbyters for Courts of Judicature . But though it be thus evident that their Ordination was chiefly used in Order to the fitting men to be members of the Sanhedrin , yet that besides this there was a peculiar Ordination for persons not imployed in civil matters , will appear ; First , from the different Forms of their Ordination ; some were general without any restriction or limitation at all : which power was conferred in words to this purpose ; Ordinatus jam sis , & sit tibi facultas judicandi etiam causas poenales . He that was thus ordained , was ●it for any Court of Judicature ; but there was another Form of Ordination which was more particular and restrained ; a Form limiting the general power , either to pecuniary Cases , or criminal , or onely to the power of binding and loosing , without any judiciary power at all . Now those that were thus Ordained , were the Jewish Casuists , resolving men onely in for● conscientiae of the lawfulness and unlawfulness of things propounded to them . This they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Facultas decernendi circa ligatum & solutum ; that is , a power of Decreeing what was lawful or unlawfull . For in that sense binding and loosing is used by the Jewish Writers . In which sense they tell us commonly that one School , as that of Hille● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 binds , that is , judgeth a thing unlawful ; another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 looseth ( as that of Schammai ) that is , judgeth it lawful and free to be done . Now the persons thus ordained with this power onely , were thereby no Members of any civil Court of Judicature , nor thereby made capable of it : it appears then that this Ordination was peculiar to a particular function , which exactly answers to the Ministerial Office under the Gospel . And that those who were thus ordained , either might not , or did not exercise that Office of theirs in the Synagogue , I can see no reason ; I am sure it was most suitable to that place , or at least to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where there was such a one distinct from the Synagogue . But a clearer evidence of the particular ordination of those imployed in the Synagogue , we have from Benjamin in his Itinerary ; for granting his palpable mistakes about the civil power of the Jewes in his time ( which was about the middle of the twelfth Century ) sufficiently discovered by the Learned L'Empereur , yet as to the ordaining of persons for the severall Synagogues , we have no ground to suspect his Testimony , which is very plain and evident . For speaking of R. Daniel Ben Hasdai , who was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Head of the Captivity then residing at Bagdad : He tells us , the Synagogues of Babylon , Persia , Choresan , Sheba , Mesopotamia and many other places , derived power from him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of ordaining a Rabbi and Preacher over every Synagogue , which he tells us was done by laying on his hands upon them . These two , the Rabbi and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he makes to be the fixed Officers of every Synagogue , and the Office of the latter lay chiefly in expounding the Scriptures . The like he hath of R. Nathaniel the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Egypt , to whose Office it belonged to ordain in all the Synagogues in Egypt , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 th 〈…〉 bbies and Lecturers of the Synagogue : by which we see 〈…〉 arly ▪ that there was a peculiar Ordination for the Ministers belonging to the Synagogue . Thence Scaliger wonders how Christ at twelve years old should be permitted to sit among the Doctours asking Questions when he was no ordained Rabbi , to whom that place belonged . But although 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may possibly mean no more then sitting on one of the lower seats belonging to those who were yet in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Minority , where they sat at the feet of their Teachers , which was not within the Temple its self ; but , as Arias Montanus thinks , was at the East-gate of the Temple where the Doctors sat ; yet this is evident by Scaliger , that he looked on an Ordination for that end , as necessary to those who sat in the Synagogues , as the Doctors there : which is likewise affirmed by Grotius , who tell us , that among the Jews , not onely all publick civil Offices were confer'd by imposition of hands , Sed & in Archisynagogis & senioribus Synagogae , idem observatum ; unde mos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad Christianos transiit : But likewise all the Rulers and Elders of the Synagogue were so ordained , from whence the custome was translated into Christianity ( of which afterwards . ) Thus now we have cleared that there was a peculiar Government belonging to the Synagogue , distinct from the civil Judicatures . Having thus far proceeded in clearing that there was a peculiar Form of Government in the Synagogue ; we now inquire what that was , and by what Law and Rule it was observed . The Government of the Synagogue , either relates to the Publick Service of God in it , or the publick Rule of it as a society . As for the Service of God to be performed in it , as there were many parts of it , so there were many Officers peculiarly appointed for it . The main part of publick service lay in the Reading and Expounding the Scriptures : For both , the known place of Philo will give us light for understanding them . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Coming to their Holy places called Synagogues , they sit down in convenient order ac●●●ding to their several Forms , ready to hear , the young under 〈…〉 der ; then one taketh the Book and readeth , another of those best skilled comes after , and expounds it . For so Grotius reads it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , out of Eusebius . We see two several Offices here , the one of the Reader in the Synagogue , the other of him that did interpret what was read . Great difference I find among Learned men about the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Synagogue : some by him understand the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , called sometimes in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and so make him the under . Reader in the Synagogue ; and hence I suppose it is ( and not from looking to the poor , which was the Office of the Parnasim ) that the Office of Deacons in the Primitive Church is supposed to be answerable to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Jewes ; for the Deacons Office in the Church , was the publick Reading of the Scriptures : And hence Epiphanius parallels the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Jewes , to the Bishop , Presbyters , and Deacons among the Christians . But others make the Office of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be of a higher nature not to be taken for the Reader himself , ( for that was no office ; but upon every Sabbath day seven were call'd out to do that work , as Buxtorf tells us ; first a Priest , then a Levite , and after , any five of the people ; and these had every one their set-parts in every Section to read , which are still marked by the numbers in some Bibles . ) But the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was he that did call out every one of these in their order to read , and did observe their reading , whether they did it exactly or no. So Buxtorf speaking of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Hic maximè oratione sive precibus & cantu Ecclesi● praeibat , praeerat lectioni legali , docens quod & quomodo legendum , & similibus quae ad sacra pertinebant . So that according to him the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the Superintendent of all the publick service , thence others make him parallel to him they call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Angel of the Church , Legatus Ecclesiae . L'Empereur renders it , as though the name were imposed on him as acting in the name of the Church , which could only be in offering up publick prayers ; but he was Angelus Dei , as he was inspector Ecclesiae , because the Angels are supposed to be more immediately present in , and Supervisors over the publick place , and duties of worship ; see 1 Cor. 11. 10. this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is by L'Empereur often rendred Concionator Synagogae , as though it belonged to him to expound the meaning of what was read in the Synagogue , but he that did that was call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to enquire ; thence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the enquirer , or disputer of this world , thence R. Moses Haddarsan ; but it is in vain to seek for several Offices from several Names ; nay , it seems not evident , that there was any set-Officers in the Jewish Church for expounding Scriptures in all Synagogues , or at least not so fixed , but that any one that enjoyed any repute for Religion or knowledge in the Law , was allowed a free liberty of speaking for the instruction of the people ; as we see in Christ and his Apostles ; for the Rulers of the Synagogue sent to Paul and Barnabas after the reading of the Law , that if they had any word of exhortation , they should speak on . From hence it is evident , there were more then one who had rule over the Synagogues , they being call'd Rulers here . It seems very probable , that in every City where there were ten wise men , ( as there were supposed to be in every place , where there was a Synagogue ) that they did all jointly concurr for the ruling the affairs of the Synagogue . But what the distinct Offices of all these were , it is hard to make out , but all joyning together seem to make the Consistory , or Bench as some call it , which did unanimously moderate the affairs of the Synagogue , whose manner of sitting in the Synagogues , is thus described by Mr. Thorndike out of Maimonides , whose words are these : How sit the people in the Synagogue ? The Elders sit with their faces towards the people , and their backs towards the He●all ( the place where they lay the Copy of the Law ) and all the people sit rank before rank , the face of every rank towards the back of the rank before it , so the faces of all the people are towards the Sanctuary , and towards the Elders , and towards the Ark ; and when the Minister of the Synagogue standeth up to prayer , he standeth on the ground before the Ark with his face to the Sanctuary , as the rest of the people . Several things are observable to our purpose in this Testimony of Maimonides : First , That there were so many Elders in the Synagogue , as to make a Bench or Consistory , and therefore had a place by themselves , as the Governours of the Synagogue . And the truth is , after their dispersion we shall find little Government among them , but what was in their Synagogues , unlesse it was where they had liberty for erecting Schools of Learning . Besides this Colledge of Presbyters , we here see the publick Minister of the Synagogue , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Episcopus congregationis , the Superintendent over the Congregation , whose peculiar office it was to pray for , and to blesse the people . We are here further to take notice of the form of their sitting in the Synagogues ; The Presbyters sat together upon a Bench by themselves , with their faces towards the people , which was in an Hemicycle , the form wherein all the Courts of Judicature among them sat ; which is fully described by Mr. Selden , and Mr. Thorndike in the places above-cited . This was afterwards the form wherein the Bishops and Presbyters used to sit in the primitive Church , as the last named learned Author largely observes and proves . Besides this Colledge of Presbyters , there seems to be one particularly call'd the Ruler of the Synagogue , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the Scriptures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which in the importance of the New Testament Greek ( following that of the Alexandrian Iews in the version of the Old Testament ) implyes no more then a primacy of order in him above the rest he was joyned with . And thence sometimes we read of them in the Plural number , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Acts 13. 15. implying thereby an equality of power in many ; but by reason of the necessary primacy of one in order above the rest , the name may be appropriated to the President of the Colledge . Acts 18. 8 , 17. we read of two , viz. Crispus and Sosthenes , and either of them is call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which could not be , did the name import any peculiar power of Jurisdiction lodged in one exclusive of the rest , unlesse we make them to be of two Synagogues , which we have no evidence at all for ; I confesse , Beza his argument from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Mark 5. 22. for a multitude of those so call'd in the same Synagogue , is of no great force , where we may probably suppose there were many Synagogues . But where there is no evidence of more then one in a place , and we find the name attributed to more then one , we have ground to think that there is nothing of power or Jurisdiction in that one , which is not common to more besides himself . But granting some peculiarity of honour belonging to one above the rest in a Synagogue , which in some places , I see no great reason to to deny , yet that implyes not any power over and above the Bench of which he was a Member , though the first in order ; Much as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Prince of the Sanhedrin , whose place imported no power peculiar to himself , but only a Priority of dignity in himself above his fellow Senators : as the Princeps Senatûs in the Roman Republick answering to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the great Sanhedrin , who was next to the Nasi , as the Princeps Senatûs to the Consuls , which was only a Honorary Dignity and nothing else : Under which disguise that Politick Prince Augustus ravished the Roman Commonwealth of its former liberty . The name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , may I suppose in propriety of speech be rendred in Latin Magister ordinis , he being by his Office Praesul , a name not originally importing any power , but only dignity ; Those whom the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Latins render Magistros sui ordinis , and so Suetonius interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Magisterium sacerdotii . They who meet then with the name Archisynagogues , either in Lampridius , Vopiscus , Codex Theodosii , Iustinians Novels , in all whom it occurs , and in some places as distinct from Presbyters , will learn to understand thereby only the highest honour in the Synagogue ; considering how little , yea nothing of power the Jews enjoyed under either the Heathen , or Christian Emperours . One thing more we add , touching this honour of the Rulers of the Synagogue among the Jews , that whatever honour , title , power or dignity is imported by that name , it came not from any Law enforcing or commanding it , but from mutual con●oederation and agreement among the persons imployed in the Synagogue , whose natural reason did dictate , that where many have an equality of power , it is most convenient ( by way of accumulation upon that person , of a power more then he had , but not by deprivation of themselves of that inherent power which they enjoyed ) to entrust the management of the executive part of affairs of common concernment to one person specially chosen and deputed thereunto . So it was in all the Sanhedrins among the Jews , and in all well-ordered Senates and Councils in the World. And it would be very strange , that any Officers of a religious Society , should upon that account be out-Lawed of those natural Liberties , which are the results and products of the free actings of Reason . Which things , as I have already observed , God hath looked on to be so natural to man , as when he was most strict and punctual in ceremonial Commands , he yet left these things wholly at liberty . For we read not of any command , that in the Sanhedrin one should have some peculiarity of honour above the rest ; this mens natural reason would prompt them to , by reason of a necessary priority of Order in some above others ; which the very instinct of Nature hath taught irrational creatures , much more should the Light of Reason direct men to . But yet all order is not power , nor all power juridical , nor all juridical power a sole power ; therefore it is a meer Paralogism in any from Order to inferr power , or from a delegated power by consent , to inferr a juridical power by Divine Right ; or lastly , from a power in common with others , to deduce a power excluding others . All which they are guilty of , who meerly from the name of an Archisynagogue , would fetch a perpetual necessity of jurisdiction in one above the Elders joyned with him , or from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Sanhedrin , a power of a sole Ordination in one without the consent of his fellow Senators . But of these afterwards . Thus much may suffice for a draught in little of the Government of the Jewish Synagogue . Having thus far represented the Jewish Synagogue , that the Idea of its government may be formed in our understandings , we now come to consider how far , and in what the Apostles in forming Christian ▪ Churches did follow the pattern of the Jewish Synagogue . Which is a notion not yet so far improved as I conceive it may be , and I know no one more conducible to the happy end of composing our differences , touching the government of the Church then this is . I shall therefore for the full clearing of it , premise some general considerations to make way for the entertainment of this hypothesis in mens minds , at least as probable ; and then endeavour particularly to shew how the Apostles did observe the model of the Synagogue ; in its publike service , in ordination of Church Officers , in forming Presbyteries in the several Churches , in ruling and governing those Presbyteries ▪ The general consideration I premise , to shew the probability of what I am asserting , shall be from these things : from the community of name and customs between the believing Iews and others , at the first forming of Churches : from the Apostles forming Churches out of Synagogues in their travelling abroad ; from the agreeablenesse of that model of Government to the State of the Christian Churches at that time . I begin with the first , From the community of names and customs between the believing and unbelieving Iews at the first forming Churches . All the while our blessed Saviour was living in the World , Christ and his Disciples went still under the name of Jews ; they neither renounced the name , nor the customs in use among them . Our Saviour goes up to the Feasts at Ierusalem , conforms to all the Rites and Customs in use then ; not only those commanded by God himself , but those taken up by the Jews themselves , if not contrary to Gods commands , as in observing the feast of Dedication , in going into their Synagogues , and teaching so often there , in washing the Feet of the Disciples , ( a custome used by them before the Passeover ) in using baptism , for the proselyting men to the profession of Christianity , &c. In these and other things our Saviour conformed to the received practice among them , though the things themselves were no wayes commanded by the Law of Moses . And after his Resurrection , when he took care for the forming of a Church upon the doctrine he had delivered , yet we find not the Apostles withdrawing from communion with the Jews , but on the contrary , we find the Disciples frequenting the Temple , Act. 2. 46. Act. 3. 1. Act. 5. 20 , 21 , 26. Whereby it appears how they owned themselves as Jews still , observing the same both time and place for publike Worship which were in use among the Jews . We find Paul presently after his conversion in the Synagogues , preaching that Christ whom he had before persecuted ; and where ever he goes abroad afterwards , we find him still entering into the Synagogues to preach ; where we cannot conceive he should have so free and easie admission , unlesse the Jews did look upon him as one of their own Religion , and observing the same customs in the Synagogues with themselves , only differing in the point of the coming of the Messias , and the obligation of the ceremonial Law , the least footsteps of which were seen in the Synagogue-worship . But that which yet further clears this , is the general prejudice of the Disciples against the Gentiles , even after the giving of the Holy Ghost , as appears by their contending with Peter for going in to men uncircumcised . It is evident , that then the Apostles themselves did not clearly apprehend the extent of their Commission ; for else what made Peter so shy of going to Corn●lius ? but by every creature , and all nations , they only apprehended the Jews in their dispersions abroad , or at least , that all others who were to be saved , must be by being proselyted to the Jews , and observing the Law of Moses , together with the Gospel of Christ. And therefore we see the necessity of circumcision much pressed by the believing Jews which came down from Ierusalem , which raised so high a Dispute , that a Convention of the Apostles together at Ierusalem was called for the ending of it ; And even there we find great heats before the businesse could be decided , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , After there had been much disputing . Nay after this Council , and the determination of the Apostles therein , all the ease and release that was granted , was only to the Gentile-converts ; but the Jews stick close to their old Principles still , and are as zealous of the customes of the Jews as ever before . For which we have a pregnant testimony in Act. 21. 20 , 21 , 22. Where the Elders of the Church of Ierusalem tell Paul there were many myriads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of believing Iews , who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , all very zealous for the Law still , and therefore had conceived a sinister opinion of Paul , as one that taught a defection from the Law of Moses , saying , they might not circumcise their Children , nor walk after the customs . One copy reads it as Beza tells us , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to follow the custome of their Fathers . We see how equally zealous they are for the customes obtaining among them , as for the Law its self . And is it then any wayes probable that these who continued such Zealots for the customs among them , should not observe those customs in use in the Synagogues for the Government of the Church ? Might not they have been charged as well as Paul with relinquishing the customs , if they had thrown off the model of the Jewish Synagogue , and take up some customes different from that ? And that which further confirms this , is , that this Church of Ierusalem continued still in its zeal for the Law , till after the destruction of the Temple ; and all the several Pastors of that Church ( whom Ecclesiastical Writers call Bishops ) were of the circumcision . For both we have the testimony of Sulpitius Severus , speaking of the time of Adrian . Et quia Christiani ex Iudaeis potissimum putabantur ( namque tum Hierosolymae , non nisi ex circumcisione habebat Ecclesia sacerdotem ) militum cohortem custodias in perpetuum agitare jussit , quae Iudaeos omnes Hierosolymae aditu arceret . Quod quidem Christiana fidei proficiebat ; quia tum pene omnes Christum Deum , sub legis observatione , credebant . We see hereby that the Christians observed still the Law with the Gospel ; and that the Jews and Christians were both reckoned as one body , which must imply an observation of the same Rites and Customes among them : For those are the things whereby Societies are distinguished most . Now it is evident , that the Romans made no distinction at first between the Jews and Christians . Thence we read in the time of Claudius , when the Edict came out against the Jews , Aquila and Priscilla , though converted to Christianity , were forced to leave Italy upon that account , being still looked on as Jews ; yet these are called by Paul , his helpers in Christ Iesus . For which Onuphrius gives this reason , Nullum adhuc inter Iudaeos & Christianos discrimen noscebatur , which account is likewise given by Alphonsus Ciaconius ; Congeneres & comprofessores ejusdem religionis gentilibus censebantur ( Christiani pariter ac Iudaei ) . The Edict of Claudius we may read still in Suetonius , Iudaeos impulsore Christo assiduè tumultuantes Roma expulit . We find here the Edict fully expressed for banishing the Jews , and the occasion set down ; which most interpret of the Doctrine of Christ , as the occasion of the stirs between the Jews and Christians . For the Romans called Christ Chrestus , and Christians , Chrestiani , as the authors of the Christians Apologies against the Heathens often tell us . But Marcellus Donatus conjectures this Christus to have been some seditious Jew called by that name ; for which he brings many Inscriptions wherein the name occurrs , but none wherein it is given to a Jew ; which should be first produced , before we leave the received interpretation of it . However that be , we see the Jews and Christians equally undergo the punishment without any difference observed in them ; and therefore when Paul was brought before Gallio the Proconsul of Achaia , he looked upon the difference between the Jews and Paul to be only a Question of words and names , and of their Law , and thereupon refused to meddle with it . And so Celsus upbraids both Jews and Christians , as though their contentions were about a matter of nothing . By all this we may now consider , how little the Christians did vary from the customs and practice of the Jews , when they were thought by those who were equally enemies to both , to be of the same body and community . Which consideration will make the thing I aim at , seem more probable , when withall we observe that the Jewish customs in their Synagogues , were those whereby they were most known among the Romans ; and therefore when they looked on the Christians as of the same Religion with the Jews , it is evident they observed no difference as to their publick practises in their religious Societies . Which is the first consideration , to shew how probable it is that Christians observed the same form in Government with what they found in the Synagogues . To which I add a second Consideration ; which is the Apostles forming Christian Churches out of Jewish Synagogues . We have already shewed how much their resort was to them in their preaching from the constant practice of Paul , although he was in a more peculiar manner the Apostle of the uncircumcision ; much more then is it probable that the others , especially Peter , Iames , and Iohn did resort to the Circumcision . And in the setling things at first , we see how fearful the Apostles were of giving offence to the Jews , how ready to condescend to them in any thing they lawfully might . And can we think that Paul would yield so far to the Jews as to circumcise Timothy , rather then give offence to the Jews in those parts where he was , ( and that in a thing which seemed most immediately to thwart the design of the Gospel , as circumcision did , witness the Apostle himself ; ) that yet he would scruple the retaining the old model of the Synagogue , when there was nothing in it at all repugnant to the Doctrine of the Gospel , or the nature and constitution of Christian Churches ? When the Apostles then , did not only gather Churches out of Synagogues , but at some places in probability whole Synagogues were converted as well as whole Churches formed , What shew of reason can be given why the Apostles should flight the constitution of the Jewish Synagogues , which had no dependance on the Jewish Hierarchy , and subsisted not by any command of the ceremonial Law ? The work of the Synagogue not belonging to the Priest as such , but as persons qualified for instructing others , and the first model of the Synagogue government is with a great deal of probability derived from the Schools of the Prophets and the Government thereof . This consideration would be further improved , if the notion of distinct coetus of the Jewish and Gentile Christians in the same places could be made out by any irrefragable Testimony of Antiquity , or clear evidence of reason drawn from Scripture : Because the same reason which would ground the distinction of the Jewish Church from the Gentile , would likewise hold for the Jewish Church to retain her old form of Government in the Synagogue way . For it must be some kind of peculiarity supposed by the Jews in themselves as distinct from the Gentiles , which did make them form a distinct Congregation from them ; which peculiarity did imply the observing those customes among them still , by which that peculiarity was known to others ; among which those of the Synagogue were not the least known or taken notice of . But I must freely confesse , I find not any thing brought by that learned Person , who hath managed this Hypothesis with the greatest dexterity , to have that evidence in it which will command assent from an unprejudicated mind . And it is pitty that such infirm Hypotheses should be made use of for the justifying our separation from Rome , which was built upon reasons of greater strength and evidence , then those which have been of late pleaded by some assertors of the Protestant Cause , though men of excellent abilities and learning . For there are many reasons convictive enough , that Peter had no universal power over the Church , supposing that there was no such thing as a distinction between the Jewish and Gentile Coetus . I deny not but at first , before the Jews were fully satisfied of the Gentiles right to Gospel priviledges , they were very shy of communicating with them , especially the believing Jews of the Church of Ierusalem , : Upon the occasion of some of whom coming down to Antioch from Iames , it was , that Peter withdrew and separated himself from the Gentiles , with whom before he familiarly conversed . Which action of his is so far from being an argument of the setling any distinct Church of the Jews from the Gentiles there , that it yields many reasons against it . For first , Peters withdrawing was only occasional , and not out of design ; whereas , had it been part of his commission to do it , we cannot conceive Peter so mindlesse of his Office , as to let it alone till some Jews came down from Ierusalem to tell him of it . Secondly , It was not for the sake of the Jews at Antioch that he withdrew , but for the Jews which came down from Ierusalem ; whereas , had he intended a distinct Church of the Jews , he would before have setled and fixed them as members of another body ; but now it evidently appears , that not only Peter himself , but the Jews with him , did before those Jews coming to Antioch associate with the Gentiles , which is evident by v. 13. And other Iews dissembled likewise with him , in so much that Barnabas also was carryed away with their dissimulation . Whereby it is clear , that these Jews did before joyn with the Gentile-Christians , or else they could not be said to be led away with the dissimulation of Peter . Thirdly , St. Paul is so far from looking upon this withdrawing of Peter , and the Iews from the Gentiles society to be a part of St. Peters Office , that he openly and sharply reproves him for it . What then , was Paul so ignorant , that there must be two distinct Churches of Iews and Gentiles there , that he calls this action of his dissimulation ? In all reason then , supposing this Notion to be true , the blame lights on Paul , and not on Peter : as not understanding , that the Jews were to be formed into distinct bodies from the Gentile-Christians . And therefore it is observable that the same Author who is produced , as asserting , that seorsim quae ex Iudais erant Ecclesiae habebantur , nec his quae ●rant ex Gentibus miscebantur , is he , who makes this reproo● of Peter by Paul , to be a meer matter of dissimulation between them both ; which sense of that action whoever will be so favourable to it as to embrace it , ( as some seem inclinable to do it ) will never be able to answer the arguments brought by St. Augustine against it . This place then was unhappily light upon to ground a distinction of the several Coeius , or distinct Churches of Jews and Christians at Antioch . But , it may be , more evidence for it may be seen in the Rescript of the Council of Ierusalem , which is directed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , To the Brethren of Antioch , those of the Gentiles . But. lest some hidden mysteries should lye in this curtailing the words , let us see them at large . Unto the Brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch , and Syria , and Cilicia . There was nothing then peculiar to those of the Gentiles at Antioch more then in Syria and Cilicia ; and if those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imply a Coetus distinct of Gentile-Christians , from the Jews at Antioch , it must do so through all Syria , and Cilicia , which was Pauls Province , and not Peters , as appears by his travels in the Acts. E●the● then the Apostle of the uncircumcision must form distinct : Churches of Iews and Gentiles in his preaching through Syria and Silicia ▪ ( which is irreconcilable with the former pretence of distinct Provinces , asserted by the same Author , who pleads for distinct Coetus ) or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , can imply no such thing as a distinct Church of Gentiles to whomsover it is spoken ; and so not at Antioch more then through all Syria and Silicia . The plain ground then of the Apostles inscribing the order of the Council to the Brethren of the Gentiles , was , because the matter of that Order did particularly concern them , and not the Jews , as is obvious to any that will but cast an eye upon the 23 , 24 , 29. verses of the 15. of the Acts. As well might then an order supposed from the Apostles to the several Pastors of the Churches in things concerning them as such , imply that they make distinct Churches from their people , as this order concerning the Gentile Brethren , being therefore directed to them , doth imply their making distinct Churches from the Jewish Brethren in the Cities where they lived together . What is further produced out of Antiquity to this purpose , hath neither evidence nor pertinency enough , to stop the passage of one who is returning from this digression to his former matter . Although then we grant not any such distinct Coetus of the Jews from the Christians , yet that hinders not , but that both Jews and Christians joyning together in one Church , might retain still the Synagogue form of Government among them ; which there was no reason at all , why the Christians should scruple the using of , either as Jews or Gentiles , because it imported nothing either Typical and Ceremonial , or heavy and burdensome , which were the grounds , why former customs in use among the Jews were laid aside by the Christians . But instead of that , it was most suitable and agreeable to the state of the Churches in Apostolical times , which was the third consideration to make it probable , that the Synagogue form of Government was used by the Christians . And the suitablenesse of this Government to the Churches , lay in the conveniency of it for the attaining all ends of Government in that condition wherein the Churches were at that time . For Church Officers acting then either in gathering or governing Churches ▪ without any authority from Magistrates , such a way of Government was most suitable to their several Churches , as whereby the Churches might be governed , and yet have no dependancy upon the secular power , which the way of Government in the Synagogues was most convenient for ; for the Jews , though they enjoyed a bare permission from the civil state where they lived , yet by the exercise of their Synagogue Government ▪ they were able to order all affairs belonging to the service of God , and to keep all members belonging to their several Synagogues in unity and peace among themselves . The case was the same as to Synagogues and Churches ; these subsisted by the same permission which the others enjoyed ; the end of these was the service of God , and preserving that order among them which might best become societies so constituted ; there can be no reason then assigned , why the Apostles in setling particular Churches should not follow the Synagogue in its model of Government . These things may suffice to make it appear probable that they did so , which is all these considerations tend to . Having thus prepared the way by making it probable , I now further enquire into the particular part of Government , and what orders in the Synagogue were , which there is any evidence for , that the Apostles did take up and follow . Here I begin with the thing first propounded , The orders of publick Worship , which did much resemble those of the Synagogue ; Only with those alterations which did arise from the advancing of Christianity . That the Christians had their publick and set ▪ meetings for the service of God , is evident from the first rising of a society constituted upon the account of Christianity . We read of the three thousand converted by Peters Sermon , That they continued in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship , and breaking of bread , and prayers . Where we have all that was observed in the Synagogue , and somewhat more ; here there is publick joyning together , implyed in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , their solemn prayers expressed , which were constantly observed in the Synagogue ; instead of reading the Sections of the Law and Prophets , we have the Apostles teaching by immediate inspiration ; and to all these as the proper service of Christianity , is set down the celebration of the Lords-supper , which we shall seldome or ever in the Primitive Church , read the publick service on Lords Dayes performed without . During the Apostolical times , in which there was such a Land-flood of extraordinary gifts overflowing the Church , in the publick meeting we find those persons who were indued with those gifts , to be much in exercising them ( as to the custom , agreeing with the Synagogue ; but , as to the gifts , exceeding it ) concerning the ordering of which for the publick edification of the Church , the Apostle Paul layes down so many Rules in the fourteenth Chapter to the Corinthians ; but assoon as this flood began to abate , which was then necessary for the quicker softening the World for receiving Christianity , the publick service began to run in its former channel , as is apparent from the unquestionable testimonies of Iustin Martyr and Tertullian , who most fully relate to us , the order of publick Worship used among the Christians at that time . Iustin Martyr , the most ancient next to Clemens ( whose Epistle is lately recovered to the Christian World ) of the unquestionable Writers of the Primitive Church , gives us a clear Narration of the publick Orders observed by the Church in his time : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Upon the Day call'd Sunday , all the Christians whether in Town or Country assemble in the same place , wherein the Memoires or Commentaries of the Apostles and the writings of the Prophets are read as long as the time will permit ; Then the Reader sitting down , the President of the Assembly stands up and makes a Sermon of Instruction and Exhortation to the following so good Examples . After this is ended , we all stand up to prayers ; prayers ended , the Bread , Wine and Water are all brought forth ; then the President again praying and praising to his utmost ability , the people testifie their consent by saying Amen . What could have been spoken with greater congruity or correspondency to the Synagogue , abating the necessary observation of the Bucharist as proper to Christianity ? Here we have the Scriptures read by one appointed for that purpose , as it was in the Synagogue ; after which follows the word of Exhortation in use among them by the President of the Assembly , answering to the Ruler of the Synagogue ; after this , the publick prayers performed by the same President , as among the Jews by the publick Minister of the Synagogue ( as is already observed out of Maimoni ) , then the solemn acclamation of Amen by the people , the undoubted practice of the Synagogue . To the same purpose Tertullian , who , if he had been to set forth the practice of the Synagogue , could scarce have made choyce of words more accommodated to that purpose . Coimus ( saith he ) in coetum & congregationem , ut ad Deum quasi manu factà precationibus ambiamus or antes — Cogimur ad divinarum literarum Commemorationem , si quid praesentium temporum qualitas aut praemonere cogit aut recognoscere . Certè fidem sanctis vocibus pascimus , spem erigimus , fi●uciam figimus , disciplinam praeceptorum nihilominus inculcationibus densamus ; ibidem etiam exhortationes , castigationes , & censura divina . Nam & judicatur magno cum pondere , ut apud certos de Dei conspectu , summumque futuri judicii prae judicium est , siquis ita deliquerit , ut à communicatione orationis & conventûs & omnis sancti commercii relegetur . Prasident probati quique seniores , honorem istum non pretio sed testimonio adepti . Where we have the same orders for Prayers , reading the Scriptures according to occasions , and Sermons made out of them for increase of faith , raising hope , strengthening confidence . We have the Discipline of the Church answering the admonitions , and excommunication of the Synagogue ; and last of all , we have the Bench of Elders sitting in these Assemblies , and ordering the things belonging to them . Thus much for the general correspondency between the publick service of the Church and Synagogue ; they that would see more particulars , may read our Learned Mr. Thorndikes Discourse of the service of God in Religious Assemblies . Whose design throughout is to make this out more at large ; But we must only touch at these things by the way ; as it were , look into the Synagogue , and go on our way . We therefore proceed from their service , to their custom of Ordination , which was evidently taken up by the Christians from a correspondency to the Synagogue . For which we are first to take notice , that the Rulers of the Church under the Gospel , do not properly succeed the Priests and Levites under the Law , who●e Office was Ceremonial , and who were not admitted by any solemn Ordination into their Function , but succeeded by birth into their places ; only the great Sanhedrin did judge of their fitnesse , as to birth and body , before their entrance upon their Function . So the Jewish Doctors tell us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. In the stone Parlour , the great Sanhedrin of Israel sat , and did there judge the Priests . The Priest that was found defective , put on mourning garments , and so went forth ▪ he that was not , put on white , and went in and ministred with the Priests his Brethren . And when no fault was found in the sons of Aaron , they observed a festival solemnity for it . Three things are observable in this Testimony : First , That the inquiry that was made concerning the Priests , was chiefly concerning the purity of their birth , and the freedom of their bodies from those defects which the Law mentions , unlesse in the case of grosser and more scandalous sins , as Idolatry , Murther , &c. by which they were excluded from the Priestly Office. The second , is , That the great Sanhedrin had this inspection over , and examination of the Priests before their admission ; For what that Learned man Const. L'Empereur there conjectures , That there was an Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin which did passe judgement on these things , is overthrown by the very words of the Talmudists already cited . The last thing observable , is , The garments which the Priests put on , viz. white rayment upon his approbation by the Sanhedrin , and soon after they were admitted into the Temple with great joy ; to which our saviour manifestly alludes , Revel . 3. 4. 5. Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments , and they shall walk with me in white , for they are worthy . He that overcometh , the same shall be cloathed in white Rayment . But the Priests under the Law , were never ordained by imposition of hands , as the Elders and Rulers of the Synagogue were ; and if any of them came to that Office , they as well as others had peculiar designation and appointment to it . It is then a common mistake to think that the Ministers of the Gospel succeed by way of correspondence and Analogy to the Priests under the Law ; which mistake hath been the foundation and original of many Errors . For when in the Primitive Church , the name of Priests came to be attributed to Gospel-Ministers from a fair Complyance ( as was thought then ) of the Christians onely to the name used both among Jewes and Gentiles ; in process of time , corruptions increasing in the Church , those names that were used by the Christians by way of Analogy and Accommodation , brought in the things themselves primarily intended by those names ; so by the Metaphorical names of Priests and Altars , at last came up the sacrifice of the Mass ; without which , they thought the names of Priests and Altar were insignificant . This mistake we see run all along through the Writers of the Church , assoon as the name Priests was applyed to the Elders of the Church , that they derived their succession from the Priests of Aarons order , Presbyterorum ordo exordium sumpsit à filiis Aaron . Qui enim sacerdotes vocabantur in v●teri Testamento , hi sunt qui nunc appestantur Presbyteri : & qui nuncupabantur principes sacerdotum , nuno Episcopi nominantur ; as Isidorus ; and Ivo tell us . So before them both , Ierome in his known Epistle to Evagrius . Et ut sciamus traditiones Apostolicas sumptas de veteri Testamento , Quod Aaron & filii ejus atque Levitae in Temple fuerunt : hoc sibi Episcopi & Presbyteri atque Diaconi vendicent in Ecclesia . From which words a leo●ned Doctor , and strenuous assertor of the jus divinum of Prelacy , questions not but to make Ierome , either apparently contradictious to himself , or else to assert , that the superiority of Bishops above Presbyters was by his Confession an Apostolical Tradition . For saith he , Nihil manifestius dici potuit ; and S. 2. Quid ad hoc responderi possit , aut quo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 artificio deliniri aut deludi tam diserta affirmatio , fateor ego ●e divinando assequi non posse ; sed è contra exiis quae D. Blondellus , quae Walo , quae Ludov. Capellus h●c in re praestiterunt , mihi persuasissimum esse , Nihil uspiam contra aperta● lucem obtendi posse . In a case then so desperate as poor Ierome lies in , by a wound he is supposed to have given himself , when the priest and the Levite hath passed him by , it will be a piece of Charity in our passing by the way a little to consider his Case , to see whether there be any hopes of recovery . We take it then for granted , that Ierome hath already said , that Apostolus perspi●uè docet , eosdem esse Presbytsros quos & Episcopos , in the same Epistle which he proves there at large ; and in another place ; Si●●t ergo Presbyteri sciunt se ex Ecclesiae consuetudine , ei qui sibi praeposi●us fuerit , esse subjectos ; it a Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine , quam disposition is Dominicae veritate Presbyteris esse majores , & in commune debere Ecclesiam regere . The difficulty now lyes in the reconciling this with what is before c●ted out of the same Author ; Some solve it by saying , that , in Ieroms sense Apostolical Tradition and Ecclesiaestical Custome are the same , as ad Marcellum , he saith the observation of Lent is Apostolica traditio , and advers . Luciferian , shith , it is Ecclesiae consu●tudo ; so that by Apostolical Tradition , he meant not an Apostolical Institution , but an Ecclesiastical Custome . And if Ierome speak according to the general Vogue , this Solution may be sufficient notwithstanding what is said against it : for , according to that common rule of Austin , Things that were generally in use , and no certain Author assigned of them , were attributed to the Apostles . Two things therefore I shall lay down for reconciling Ierome to himself : The first is , the difference between Traditio Apostolica , and Traditio Apostolorum ; this latter doth indeed imply the thing spoken of to have proceeded from the Apostles themselves ; but the former may be applyed to what was in practice after the Apostles times ; and the reason of it is ▪ that what ever was done in the Primitive Church , supposed to be agreeable to Apostolical practice , was called Apostolical . Thence the Bishops See was called Sedes Apostolic● , as Tertullian tells us , ob consang●i●itatem doctrinae . So Sidonius Apollinaris calls the See of L●p●s the Bishop of Tricassium in France , Sedem Apostolicam . And the Bishops of the Church were called Viri Apostolici , and thence the Constitutions which goe under the Apostles names , were so called , saith ▪ Albaspinaeus , ab antiquitate : ●nam cum corum aliquot ab Apostolorum successoribus ( qui teste Tertullian● ▪ Apostolici viri ●omi●ahantur . ) facti essent , Apostolicorum primù●● Canones , deinde nonnullorum Latinorum ignorantia , aliquot literarum detractione , Apostolorum dicti sunt . By which we see what ever was conceived to be of any great antiquity in the Church , though it was not thought to have come from the Apostles themselves , yet it was called Apostolioal ▪ so that in this sense , Traditio Apostolica , is no more then Traditio autiqua , or ab Apostolicis viris profecta , which was meant rather of those that were conceived to succeed the Apostles , then of the Apostles themselves . But I answer , Secondly , that granting Traditio Apostolica to mean Traditio Apostolorum , yet Ierome is far from contradicting himself , which is obvious to any that will read the words before , and consider their coherence . The scope and drift of his Epistle , is to chastise the arrogance of one who made Deacons superiour to Presbyters . Audio quendam in tantam erupisse vecordiam ut Diaconos Presbyteris , id est , Episcopis anteferret , and so spends a great part of the Epistle , to prove that a Bishop and Presbyter are the same ; and at last brings in these words ; giving the account , Why Paul to Timothy and Titus mentions no Presbyters ; Quia in Episcopo & Presbyter continetur . Aut igitur ex Presbytero ordinetur Diaconus , ut Presbyter minor Diacono comprobetur , in quem crescat ex parv● ; aut si ex Diacono ordinatur Presbyter , noverit se lucris minorem , Sacerdo●i● esse majorem . And then presently adds , Et ut sciamus traditiones Apostolicas sumptas de veteri Testamento , Quod Aaron & Filii ejus atq ▪ Levitae in Templo fuerunt , hoc sibi Episcopi & Presbyteri atque Diaconi vendicent in Ecclesiâ . It it imaginable that a man who had been proving all along the superiority of a Presbyter above a Deacon , because of his Identity with a Bishop in the Aposties times , should at the same time say , that a Bishop was above a Presbyter by the Apostles institution , and so directly overthrow all he had been saying before ? Much as if one should go about to prove that the Pr●fectus urbis , and the Curatores urbis in Alexander Severus his time● ▪ were the same Office , and to that end should make use of the Constitution of that Emperour whereby he appointed 14. Curatores urbis , and set the Praefectus in an Office above them . Such an incongruity is scarce incident to a man of very ordinary esteem for intellectuals , much less to such a one as Ierome is reputed to be . The plain meaning then of Ierome is no more but this , that as Aaron and his sons in the order of Priesthood were above the Levites under the Law : So the Bishops and Presbyters in the order of the Evangelical Priesthood are above the Deacons under the Gospel . For the comparison runs not between Aaron and his sons under the Law , and Bishops and Presbyters under the Gospel ; but between Aaron and his sonnes as one part of the comparison under the Law , and the Levites under them as the other ; so under the Gospel , Bishops and Presbyters make one part of the comparison , answering to Aaron and his Sonnes in that wherein they all agree ; viz. The Order of Priest hood ; and the other part under the Gospel is that of Deacons answering to the Levites under the Law. The Opposition is not then in the power of jurisdiction between Bishops and Priests , but between the same power of Order , which is alike both in Bishops and Presbyters ( according to the acknowledgement of all ) to the Office of Deacons which stood in Competition with them . Thus I hope we have left Ierome at perfect Harmony with himself , notwithstanding the attempt made to make him so palpably contradict himself ; which having thus done , we are at liberty to proceed in our former course ; onely hereby we see how unhappily those arguments succeed which are brought from the Analogy between the Aaronical Priest hood , to endeavour the setting up of a Ius Divinum of a parallel superiority under the Gospel . All which arguments are taken off by this one thing we are now upon , viz. that the orders and degrees under the Gospel , were not taken up from Analogy to the Temple , but to the Synagogue : Which we now make out as to Ordination , in three things ; the manner of conferring it , the persons authorized to do it , the remaining effect of it upon the person receiving it . First ▪ For the manner of conferring it ; that under the Synagogue was done by laying on of hands : Which was taken up among the Jewes as a significative rite in the ordaining the Elders among them , and thereby qualifying them either to be members of their Sanhedrins , or Teachers of the Law. A● twofold use I find of this Symbolical Rite , beside the solemn designation of the person on whom the hands are laid . The first is to denote the delivery of the person or thing thus laid hands upon , for the right , use , and peculiar service of God , And that I suppose was the reason of laying hands upon the Beast under the Law , which was to be sacrificed , thereby noting their own parting with any right in it , and giving it up to be the Lords for a sacrifice to him . Thus in the Civill Law this delivery is requisite in the transferring Dominion , which they call translatio de manu in manum . The second end of laying on of hands was the solemn Iuvocation of the Divine presence and assistance to be upon , and with the person upon whom the hands are thus laid . For the hands with us being the instruments of action , they did by stretching out their hands upon the person , represent the efficacy of Divine Power which they implored in behalf of the per●on thus designed . Tunc enim ●rabant ut sic Dei efficacia esset super illum , sicut manus efficaciae symbolum , ei imponebatur as Grotius observes . Thence in all solemn Prayers , wherein any person was particularly designed , they made use of this Custome of imposition of Hands : from which Custome , Augustine speaks , Quid aliud est manuum impositio nisi oratio super hominem ? Thence when Iacob prayed over Iosephs Children , he laid his hands upon them ; so when Moses prayed over Ioshua . The practice likewise our Saviour used in blessing Children , healing the Sick , and the Apostles in conferring the Gifts of the Holy-Ghost ; and from thence it was conveyed into the practice of the Primitive Church ▪ who used it in any more solemn invocation of the name of God in behalf of any particular persons , As over the sick upon Repentance and Reconciliation to the Church , in Confirmation , and in Matrimony ; which ( as Grotius observes ) is to this day used in the Abissine Churches . But the most solemn and peculiar use of this Imposition of hands among the Jews was in the designing of any Persons for any publike imployment among them : Not as though the bare Imposition of hands , did conferre any power upon the Person , ( no more then the bare delivery of a thing in Law gives a legall Title to it , without express transferring Dominion with it ) but with that Ceremony they joyned those words whereby they did confer that Authority upon them : Which were to this purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecce sis tu Ordinatus , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ego ordino te , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sis ordinatus , to which they added according to the authority they ordained them to , some thing peculiarly expressing it , whether it was for causes finable , or pecuniary , or binding and loosing , or ruling in the Synagogue . Which is a thing deserving consideration by those who use the rite of imposing hands in Ordination , without any thing expressing that authority they convey by that Ordination . This custome being so generally in use among the Jews in the time when the Apostles were sent forth with Authority for gathering and setling Churches , we find them accordingly making use of this , according to the former practice , either in any more solemn invocation of the presence of God upon any persons , or designation and appointing them for any peculiar service or function : For we have no ground to think that the Apostles had any peculiar command for laying on their hands upon persons in Prayer over them , or Ordination of them : But the thing its self being enjoyned them , viz. the setting apart some persons for the peculiar work of attendance upon the necessities of the Churches by them planted , they took up and made use of a laudable Rite and Custome then in use upon such occasions . And so we find the Apostles using it in the solemn designation of some persons to the Office of Deacons , answering to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Synagogue , whose Office was to collect the moneys for the poor , and to distribute it among them . Afterwards we read it used upon an occasion not heard of in the Synagogue , which was for the conferring the gifts of the Holy-Ghost ; but although the occasion was extraordinary , yet supposing the occasion , the use of that rite in it , was very suitable , in as much as those gifts did so much answer to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Jewes conceived did rest upon those who were so ordained by imposition of hands . The next time we meet with this rite , was upon a peculiar Designation to a particular service of persons already appointed by God for the work of the Ministry , which is of Paul and Barnabas by the Prophets and Teachers at Antioch ▪ whereby God doth set forth the use of that Rite of Ordination to the Christian Churches ▪ Accordingly we find it after practised in the Church ▪ Timothy being ordained by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery . And Timothy hath direction given him for the right management of it afterwards , Lay hands suddenly on no man. For they that would interpret that of reconciling men to the Church by that Rite , must first give us Evidence of so early an use of that Custome , which doth not yet appear . But there is one place commonly brought to prove that the Apostles in Ordaining Elders in the Christian Churches , did not observe the Jewish Form of laying on of hands , but observed a way quite different from the Jewish practice , viz. appointing them by the choice consent and suffrages of the people . Which place is Acts 14 ▪ 23. where it is said of Paul and Barnabas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : We render it Ordaining them Elders in every Church . But others from the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would have it rendered ▪ When they had appointed Elders by the suffrages of the people . But how little the peoples power of Ordination can be inferred from these words , will be evident to any one that shall but consider these things . First , that though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did originally signifie the choosing by way of suffrage among the Greeks , yet before the time of Lukes writing this , the word was used for simple designation without that Ceremony . So Hesychius interprets it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the word used of Titus for ordaining Elders in every City ; and in Demosthenes and others it occurs for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to decree and appoint ; and that sense of the word appears in Saint Luke himself , Acts 10. 41. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Witnesses foreappointed of God. Many examples of this signification are brought by Learned men of Writers , before , and about the time when Luke Writ , from Philo Iudaeus , Iosephus , Appian , Lucian and others . But Secondly ▪ granting it used in the primary signification of the word , yet it cannot be applied to the people , but to Paul and Barnabas ; for it is not said that the people did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but that Paul and Barnabas did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : now where ever that word is used in its first signification , it is implyed to be the action of the persons themselves giving suffrages , and not for other persons appointing by the suffrages of others . Thirdly , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may import no more then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in that laying on of the hands must suppose the stretching them out : Which is onely a common figure in Scripture for the Antecedent to be put for the Consequent , or one part for the whole action ; and concerning this sense of the word in Ecclesiastical Writers , see the large quotations in Bishop Bilson to this purpose . Fourthly , It seems strangely improbable that the Apostles should put the choice at that time into the hands of the people , when there were none fitted for the work the Apostles designed them for ; but whom the Apostles did lay their hands on , by which the Holy Ghost sell upon them , whereby they were fitted and qualified for that work . The people then could no wayes choose men for their abilities when their abilities were consequen● to their ordination . So much to clear the manner of Ordination to have been from the Synagogue . The second thing we consider , is , The persons authorized to do it : whom we consider under a double respect , before their liberties were bound up by compact among themselves ; and after . First , Before they had restrained themselves of their own liberty , then the general rule for Ordinations among them was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every one regularly ordained , himself had the power of Ordaining his Disciples , as Maimonides affirms . To the same purpose is that Testimony of the Gemara Babylonia in Master Selden 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rabbi Abba Bar Ionah said , that in times of old , every one was wont to ordain his own Disciples : to which purpose many instances are there brought . But it is generally agreed among them , that in the time of Hillel this course was altered , and they were restrained from their former liberty ; in probability finding the many inconveniences of so common Ordinations ; or , as they say , out of their great reverence to the house of Hillel , they then agreed that none should ordain others without the presence of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Prince of the Sanhedrin , or a license obtained from him for that end ; and it was determined that all Ordinations without the consent of the Prince of the Sanhedrin should be looked upon as null and void ; which is attested by the former Authors . The same distinct on may be observed under the Gospel in reference to the fixed Officers of the Church ; for we may consider them in their first state and period , as the Presbyters did rule the Churches in common , as Hierom tells us , communi Presbyterorum conci●io Ecclesi● gubernabantur : before the jurisdiction of Presbyters was restrained by mutual consent , in this instant doubtlesse , the Presbyters enjoyed the same liberty that the Presbyters among the Jews did , of ordaining other Presbyters by that power they were invested in at their own ordination . To which purpose we shall only at present take notice of the Confession of two Canonists , who are the h●ghest among the Papists , for defence of a distinct order of Episcopacy . Yet Gratian himself confesseth , Sacros ordines dicimus Diaconatum & Presbyteratum ; hos quidem solos Ecclesia primitiva habuisse dicitur . And Iohannes Semeca in his Gloss upon the Canon Law ; Dicunt quidem quod in Ecclesia prima-primitiva commune erat officium Episcoporum & Sacerdotum , & nomina erant communia . — Sed in secundâ primitivâ coeperunt distingui & nomina & officia . Here we have a distinction of the Primitive Church very agreeable both to the opinion of Hierom , and the matter we are now upon ; in the first Primitive Church , the Presbyters all acted in common for the welfare of the Church , and either did or might ordain others to the same authority with themselves ; because the intrinsecal power of order is equally in them , and in those who were after appointed Governours over Presbyteries . And the collation of orders doth come from the power of order , and not mee●ly from the power of jurisdiction . It being likewise fully acknowledged by the Schoolmen , that Bishops are not superiour above Presbyters , as to the power of order . But the clearest evidence of this , is in the Church of Alexandria , of which Hierom speaks ; Nam & Alexandria à Marco Evangelistâ usque ad Heraclam & Dionysium Episcopos , Presbyteri semper unum ex se electum , in excelsiori gradu coll●catum , Episcopum nominabant ; quomodo si exercitus Imperatorem faciat , aut Diaconi eligant de se quem industrium noverint , & Archidiaconum vocent . That learned Doctor who would perswade us that the Presbyters did only make choice of the person , but the ordination was performed by other Bishops , would do well first to tell us , who and where those Bishops in Aegypt were , who did consecrate or ordain the Bishop of Alexandria after his election by the Presbyters ; especially , while Aegypt remained but one Province , under the Government of the Praefectus Augustalis . Secondly , how had this been in the least pertinent to Hieroms purpose to have made a particular instance in the Church of Alexandria , for that which was common to all other Churches besides ? For the old Rule of the Canon-Law for Bishops was , Electio clericorum est , consensus principis , petitio plebis . Thirdly , this election in Hierom must imply the conferring the power and authority whereby the Bishop acted . For first , the first setting up of his power is by Hierom attributed to this choice , as appears by his words . Quod autem postea unus electus est qui caeteris praeponeretur , in schismatis remedium factum est , ne unusquisque ad se trahens Christi Ecclesiam rumperet . Whereby it is evident Hierom attributes the first original of that Exsors potestas , as he calls it elsewhere in the Bishop above Presbyters , not to any Apostolical institution , but to the free choice of the Presbyters themselves : which doth fully explain what he means by consuetudo Ecclesiae before spoken of , viz. that which came up by a voluntary act of the Governours of Churches themselves . Secondly , it appears that by election , he means conferring authority , by the instances he brings to that purpose ; As the Roman Armies choosing their Emperours , who had then no other power but what they received by the length of the sword ; and the Deacons choosing their Archdeacon , who had no other power but what was meerly con●erred by the choice of the Co●ledge of Deacons . To which we may add what Eutychius , the Patriarch of Alexandria , saith in his Origines Ecclesiae Alexandrinae published in Arabick by our mo●● learned Selden , who expresly affirms , that the twelve Presbyters constituted by Mark upon the vacancy of the See , did choose out of their number one to be head over the rest , and the other eleven did lay their hands upon him , and blessed him , and made him Patriarch . Neither is the authority of Eutychius so much to be sleighted in this case , coming so near to Hierom as he doth , who doubtless , had he told us that Mark and Anianus , &c. did all there without any Presbyters , might have had the good fortune to have been quoted with as much frequency and authority as the Anonymous Author of the martyrdome of Timothy in Photius ( who there unhappily follows the story of the seven sleepers ) or the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions , whose credit is everlastingly blasted by the excellent Mr. Duille De Pseudepigraphis Apostolorum ; so much doth mens interest●tend to the inhancing or abating the esteem and credit both of the dead and the living . By these we see , that where no positive restraints from consent and choice , for the unity and peace of the Church , have restrained mens liberty as to their external exercise of the power of order or jurisdiction , every one being himself advanced into the authority of a Church . Governour , hath an internal power of conferring the same upon persons fit for it . To which purpose the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery , is no wayes impertinently alledged , although we suppose St. Paul to concur in the action , ( as it is most probable he did ) because , if the Presbytery had nothing to do in the ordination , to what purpose were their hands laid upon him ? Was it only to be witnesses of the fact , or to signifie their consent ? both those might have been done without their use of that ceremony ; which will scarce be instanced in , to be done by any but such as had power to confer what was signified by that ceremony . We come therefore to the second period or state of the Church , when the former liberty was restrained , by some act of the Church it self ▪ for preventing the inconveniences which might follow the too common use of the former liberty of ordinations , So Antonius de Rosellis fully expresseth my meaning in this ; Quilibet Presbyter & Presbyteri ordinabant indiscretè , & schismata oriebantur . Every Presbyter and Presbyters did ordain indifferently , and thence arose schisms : thence the liberty was restrained and reserved peculiarly to some persons who did act in the several Presbyteries , as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Prince of the Sanhedrin , without whose presence no ordination by the Church was to be looked on as regular . The main controversie is , when this restraint began , and by whose act ; whether by any act of the Apostles , or only by the prudence of the Church its self , as it was with the Sanhedrin . But in order to our peace , I see no such necessity of deciding it , both parties granting that in the Church such a restraint was laid upon the liberty of ordaining Presbyters : and the exercise of that power may be restrained still , granting it to be radically and intrinsically in them . So that this controversie is not such as should divide the Church . For those that are for ordinations only by a Superiour order in the Church , acknowledging a radical power for ordination in Presbyters , which may be exercised in case of necessity , do thereby make it evident , that none who grant that , do think that any positive Law of God hath forbidden Presbyters the power of ordination ; for then it must be wholly unlawful , and so in case of necessity it cannot be valid . Which Doctrine I dare with some confidence assert to be a stranger to our Church of England , as shall be largely made appear afterwards . On the other side , those who hold ordinations by Presbyters lawful , do not therefore hold them necessary , but it being a matter of liberty , and not of necessity ( Christ having no where said that none but Presbyters shall ordain ) this power then may be restrained by those who have the care of the Churches Peace ; and matters of liberty being restrained , ought to be submitted to , in order to the Churches Peace . And therefore some have well observed the difference between the opinions of Hierom and Aerius . For as to the matter it self , I believe upon the strictest enquiry Medina's judgement will prove true , that Hierom , Austin , Ambrose , Sedulius , Primasius , Chrysostome , Theodores , Theophylact , were all of Aerius his judgement , as to the Identity of both name and order of Bishops and Presbyters in the Primitive Church : but here lay the difference ▪ Aerius from hence proceeded to separation from Bishops and their Churches , because they were Bishops . And Blondell well observes that the main ground why Aerius was condemned , was for unnecessary separation from the Church of Sebastia , and those Bishops too who agreed with him in other things , as Eustathius the Bishop did : Whereas , had his meer opinion about Bishops been the ground of his being condemned , there can be no reason assigned , why this heresie , if it were then thought so , was not mentioned either by Socrates , Theodoret ; Sozomen , or Evagrius , before whose time he lived ; when yet they mention the Eustathiani , who were co-temporaries with him . But for Epiphanius and Augustine , who have listed him in the roul of Hereticks , it either was for the other heretical opinions maintained by him , or they took the name Heretick ( as it is evident they often did ) for one , who , upon a matter of different opinion from the present sense of the Church , did proceed to make separation from the Unity of the Catholick Church ; which I take to be the truest account of the reputed Heresie of Aerius . For otherwise it is likely that Ierome , who maintained so great correspondency and familiarity with Epiphanius , and thereby could not but know what was the cause why Aerius was condemned for Heresie , should himself run into the same Heresie , and endeavour not only to assert it , but to avouch and maintain it against the Judgement of the whole Church ? Ierome therefore was not ranked with Aerius , because , though he held the same opinion as to Bishops and Presbyters , yet he was far from the consequence of Aerius , that therefore all Bishops were to be separated from ; nay , he was so far from thinking it necessary to cause a schism in the Church , by separating from Bishops , that his opinion is clear , that the first institution of them , was for preventing schisms , and therefore for peace and unity he thought their institution very useful in the Church of God. And among all those fifteen testimonies produced by a learned Writer ou● of Ierome for the superiority of Bishop● above Presbyters , I cannot find one that doth found it upon any Divine Right , but only upon the conveniency of such an order for the peace and unity of the Church of God : Which is his meaning in that place most produced to this purpose ; Ecclesiae salus in summi sacerdotis dignitate pendet , cui si non exsors quaedam & ab omnibus eminens detur potestas , tot in Ecclesiis efficientur schismata , quot sacerdotes . Where nothing can be more evident than that he would have some supereminent power attributed to the Bishop for preventing schisms in the Church . But granting some passages may have a more favourable aspect towards the superiority of Bishops over Presbyters in his other writings , I would fain know whether a mans judgment must be taken , from occasional and incidental passages , or from designed and set discourses ; which is as much as to ask , whether the lively representation of a man by picture , may be best taken , when in haste of other business he passeth by us , giving only a glance of his Countenance , or when he purposely and designedly sits , in order to that end that his countenance may be truly represented ? Besides , it is well known that Hierom in his Commentaries on Scripture , ( where he doth not expresly declare his own opinion ) doth often transcribe what he finds in others , without setting down the name of any Authour he had it from . For which we have his ingenuous confession in his Epistle to Augustine , Itaque ut simpliciter fatear , legi haec omnia ( speaking of former Commentaries ) & in mente mea plurima conservans ; accito notario , vel mea vel aliena dictavi , nec ordinis , nec verborum interdum , nec sensuum memor . A strange way of writing Commentaries on Scripture , wherein a man having jumbled other mens notions together in his brain , by a kind of lottery draws out what next comes to hand , without any choice : yet this we see was his practice , and therefore he puts Austin to this hard task of examining what all other men had writ before him , and whether he had not transcribed out of them , before he would have him charge him with any thing which he finds in his Commentaries . How angry then would that hasty Adversary have been , if men had told him he had contradicted himself in what he writes on the forty fifth Psalm about Bishops , if it be compared with his Commentaries on Titus , where he professeth to declare his opinion , or his Epistles to Evagrius and Oceanus ! But yet some thing is pleaded even from those places in Hierom , wherein he declares his opinion more fully , as though his opinion was only , that Christ himself did not appoint Episcopacy , which ( they say ) he means by Dominica dispositio , but that the Apostles did it , which , in opposition to the former , he calls Ecclesiae consuetudo , but elsewhere explains it by traditio Apostolica ; and this they prove by two things ; First , The occasion of the institution of Episcopacy , which is thus set down by him , antequam Diaboli instinctu , studia in religione fierent , & diceretur in populis ; Ego sum ▪ Pauli , ego Apollo , ego autem Cephae , communi Presbyterorum consilio Ecclesiae guber ▪ nabantur . Thence it is argued , that the time of this Institution of Bishops was when it was said at Corinth , I am of Paul , I of Apollos , and I of Cephas ; which was certainly in Apostol cal times . But to this it is answered ; First , That it is impossible Hieroms meaning should be restrained to that individual time , because the arguments which Hierom brings that the name and office of Bishops and Presbyters were the same , were from things done after this time . Pauls first Epistle to the Corinthians , wherein he reproves their schisms , was written according to Ludovicus Cappellus in the twe●fth year of Claudius , of Christ fifty one , after which Paul writ his Epistle to Titus , from whose words Hierom grounds his discourse ▪ but most certainly Pauls Epistle to the Philippians was not written , till Paul was prisoner at Rome ; the time of the writing of it is placed by Cappellus in the third of Nero ; of Christ 56. by Blondell 57. by our Lightfoot 59. by all , long after the former to the Corinthians ; yet from the first verse of this Epistle , Hierom fetcheth one of his arguments . So Pauls charge to the Elders at Miletus , Peters Epistle to the dispersed Jews , were after that time too , yet from these are fetched two more of Hieroms arguments . Had he then so little common sense , as to say , that Episcopacy was instituted upon the schism at Corinth , and yet bring all his arguments for parity , after the time that he s●●s for the Institution of Episcopacy ? But secondly , Hierom doth not say , cum diceretur apud Corinthios , Ego sum Pauli , &c. but cum diceretur in populis , Ego sum Pauli , &c : so that he speaks not of that particular schism , but of a general and universal schism abroad among most people , which was the occasion of appointing Bishops ; and so speaks of others imitating the schism and language of the Corinthians . Thirdly , had Episcopacy been instituted on the occasion of the schism at Corinth , certainly of all places , we should the soonest have heard of a Bishop at Corinth for the remedying of it ; and yet almost of all places , those Heralds that derive the succession of Bishops from the Apostles times , are the most plunged , whom to fix on at Corinth . And they that can find any one single Bishop at Corinth at the time when Clemens writ his Epistle to them ( about another schism as great as the former , which certainly had not been according to their opinion , if a Bishop had been there before ) must have better eyes and judgement , than the deservedly admired Grotius , who brings this in his Epistle to Bignonius as one argument of the undoubted antiquity of that Epistle : Quod nusquam meminit exsortis illius Episcoporum auctoritatis , quae Ecclesiae consuetudine , post Marci mortem Alexandriae , atque eo exemplo alibi , introduci coepit ; sed planè , ut Paulus Apostolus ostendit , Ecclesias communi Presbyterorum , qui iidem omnes & Episcopi ipsi Pauloque dicuntur consilio fuisse gubernatas . What could be said with greater freedom , that there was no such Episcopacy then at Corinth ? Fourthly , They who use this argument , are greater strangers to St. Ierom's language than they would seem to be : whose custome it is upon incidental occasions to accommodate the phrase and language of Scripture to them : as when he speaks of Chrysostom's fall , Cecidit Babylon , cecidit ; of the Bishops of Palestine , Multi utroque claudicant pede ; of the Roman Clergy , Pharisaeorum conclamavit Senatus ; but which is most clear to our purpose , he applyes this very speech to the men of his own time ; Quando non id ipsum omnes loquimur , & alius dicit , Ego sum Pauli , ego Apollo , ego Cephae , dividimus spiritûs unitatem , & eam in partes & membra discerpimus . All which instances are produced by Blondell , but have the good fortune to be past over without being taken notice of . But supposing , say they , that it was not till after the schism at Corinth , yet it must needs be done by the Apostles ; else how could it be said to be toto orbe decretum , ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris ? Quomodo enim ( saith a learned man ) fieri po●uit , ut toto hoc orbe decerneretur , nullo jam Oecumenico Concilio ad illud decernendum congrega●o , si non ab Apostolis ipsis , fidem toto orbe promulgantibiss , & cum fide hanc regendi Ecclesias formam constituentibus factum sit ? So that he conceives , so general an order could not be made , unless the Apostles themselves at that time were the authors of it . But First , Ieroms In toto orbe dicret●m est , relates not to an antecedent order , which was the ground of the institution of Episcopacy , but to the universal establishment of that order which came up upon the occasion of so many schisms ; it is something therefore consequent upon the first setting up Episcopacy , which is the general obtaining of it in the Churches of Christ , when they saw its usefulness in order to the Churches peace ; therefore the Emphasis lies not in decretum est , but in toto orbe ; noting how suddenly this order met with universal acceptance when it first was brought up in the Church after the Apostles death . Which that it was Ieroms meaning , appears by what he saith after , Paulatim verò ( ut dissensionum plantaria evellerentur ) ad unum omnem solicitudinem esse delatam : Where he notes the gradual obtaining of it : which I suppose was thus , according to his opinion ; first in the Colledge of Presbyters appointed by the Apostles , there being a necessity of order , there was a President among them who had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ as the President of the Senate , i. e. did moderate the affairs of the Assembly , by proposing matters to it , gathering voices , being the first in all matters of concernment , but he had not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Casaubon very well distinguisheth them , i. e. had no power over his fellow-Presbyters , but that still resided in the Colledge or body of them . After this when the Apostles were taken out of the way , who kept the main power in their own hands of ruling the several Presbyteries , or delegated some to do it ( who had a main hand in the planting Churches with the Apostles , and thence are called in Scripture sometimes Fellow-labourers in the Lord , and sometimes Evangelists , and by Theodoret Apostles , but of a second order ) after I say , these were deceased , and the main power left in the Presbyteries , the several Presbyters enjoying an equal power among themselves , especially being many in one City , thereby great occasion was given to many schisms , partly by the bandying of the Presbyters one against another , partly by the sidings of the people with some against the rest , partly by the too common use of the power of ordinations in Presbyters , by which they were more able to increase their own party , by ordaining those who would joyn with them , and by this means to perpetuate schisms in the Church ; upon this , when the wiser and graver sort considered the abuses following the promiscuous use of this power of ordination ; and withall having in their minds the excellent frame of the Government of the Church under the Apostles , and their Deputies , and for preventing of future schisms and divisions among themselves , they unanimously agreed to choose one out of their number , who was best qualified for the management of so great a trust , and to devolve the exercise of the power of ordination and jurisdiction to him ▪ yet so as that he ●ct nothing of importance , without the consent and concurrence of the Presbyters , who were still to be as the Common Council to the Bishop . This I take to be the true and just account of the Original of Episcopacy in the Primitive Church according to Ierome : Which model of Government thus contrived and framed , sets forth to us a most lively character of that great Wisdom and Moderation , which then ruled the heads and hearts of the Primitive Christians ; and which , when men have searched and studyed all other wayes , ( the abuses incident to this Government , through the corruptions of men and times being retrenched ) will be found the most agreeable to the Primitive form , both as asserting the due interest of the Presbyteries , and allowing the due honour of Episcopacy , and by the joynt harmony of both carrying on the affairs of the Church with the greatest Unity , Concord , and Peace . Which form of Government I cannot see how any possible reason can be produced by either party , why they may not with chearfulness embrace it . Secondly , another evidence that Ierome by decretum est did not mean an order of the Apostles themselves , is by the words which follow the matter of the decree , viz. Ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris , one chosen not only out of , but by the Presbyters , should be set above the rest ; for so Ierome must be understood ; for the Apostles could not themselves choose out of all Presbyteries one person to be set above the rest ; and withall the instance brought of the Church of Alexandria makes it evident to be meant of the choosing by the Presbyters , and not by the Apostles . Besides , did Ierome mean choosing by the Apostles , he would have given some intimations of the hand the Apostles had in it : which we see not in him the least ground for . And as for that pretence , that Ecclesiae consuetudo is Apostolica traditio , I have already made it appear that Apostolica traditio in Ierome , is nothing else but Consuetudo Ecclesiae , which I shall now confirm by a pregnant and unanswerable testimony out of Ierome himself . Unaquaeque provincia abundet in sensu suo , & praecepta majorum leges Apostolicas arbitretur . Let every Province abound in its own sense , and account of the ordinances of their Ancestors as of Apostolical Laws . Nothing could have been spoken more fully to open to us what Ierome means by Apostolical traditions , viz the practice of the Church in former ages , though not coming from the Apostles themselves . Thus we have once more cleared Ierome and the truth together ; I only wish all that are of his judgement for the practice of the primitive Church , were of his temper for the practice of their own ; and while they own not Episcopacy as necessary by a divine right , yet ( being duly moderated , and joyned with Presbyteries ) they may embrace it , as not only a lawful , but very useful constitution in the Church of God. By which we may see what an excellent temper may be found out , most fully consonant to the primitive Church for the management of ordinations , and Church power , viz. by the Presidency of the Bishop and the concurrence of the Presbyterie . For the Top-gallant of Episcopacy can never be so well managed for the right steering the ship of the Church , as when it is joyned with the under-sails of a Moderate Presbyterie . So much shall suffice to speak here as to the power of ordination , which we have found to be derived from the Synagogue , and the customes observed in it , transplanted into the Church . There are yet some things remaining as to Ordination , wherein the Church did imitate the Synagogue , which will admit of a quick dispatch , as the number of the persons , which under the Synagogue were alwaies to be at least three . This being a fundamental constitution among the Jews , as appears by their writings , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ordination of Presbyters by laying on of hands must be done . by three at the least . To the same purpose Maimonides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They did not ordain any by imposition of hands into a power of judicature without the number of three . Which number Peter Galatinus and Postellus conceive necessary to be all ordained themselves ; but Master Selden thinks it was sufficient if there were but one of that number so ordained , who was to be as principal in the action ; whose opinion is favoured by Maimonides , who adds to the words last cited out of him ; Of which Three , one at the least must be ordained himself . Let us now see the Parallel in the Church of God. The first solemn Ordination of Elders under the Gospel , which some think to be set down as a Pattern for the Church to follow , is that we read of , Acts 13. 1 , 2 , 3. Which was performed by three ; for we read in the first verse , that there were in the Church at Antioch , five Prophets and Teachers , Barnabas , Simeon , Lucius , Manaen , and Saul ; of these five , the Holy-Ghost said , that two must be separated for the work whereto God had called them , which were , Barnabas and Saul ; there remain onely the other three , Simeon , Lucius and Manaen to lay their hands on them , and ordain them to their work . Accordingly those who tell us that Iames was ordained Bishop of Ierusalem , do mention the three Apostles who concurred in the ordaining of him . But most remarkable for this purpose is the Canon of the Nicene Council , wherein this number is set down as the regular number for the Ordination of Bishops , without which it was not accounted Canonical . The words are these , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. The Ordination of a Bishop should ; if possible , be performed by all the Bishops of the Province , which if it cannot easily be done , either through some urgent necessity , or the tediousness of the way , three Bishops at least must be there for the doing it , which may be sufficient for the Ordination , if those that are absent do express their consent , and by Letters approve of the doing of it . To the same purpose Theodoret , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Canons injoyn all the Bishops of the Province to be present at the Ordination of one : and forbid the Ordination of any without three being present at it . Thus we see how the Constitution of the Synagogue was exactly observed in the Church , as to the number of the persons concurring to a regular Ordination . The last thing as to Ordination bearing Analogy to the Synagogue , is the effect of this Ordination upon the person : It was the Custom of the Jews , to speak of all that were legally Ordained among them , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Divine Presence or Schecinah rested upon them , which sometimes they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Holy Spirit supposed to be in a peculiar manner present after this solemn Separation of them from others in the world , and Dedication of them unto God. Answerable to this may that of our Saviour be , when he gives his Apostles authority to preach the Gospel , he doth it in that Form of words , Receive ye the Holy Ghost , and then gives them the power of binding and loosing , usually conveyed in the Jewish Ordinations . Whose sins ye remit , they are remitted ; and whose sins ye retain , they are retained . So that as under the Law , they by their Ordination received a moral Faculty or Right to exercise that power they were Ordained to ; so under the Gospel , all who are Ordained according to Gospel Rules , have a right , authority and power conveyed thereby for the dispensing of the Word and Sacraments . Which right and power must not be conceived to be an internal indelible Character , as the Papists groundlesly conceive , but a moral legal Right , according to the Lawes of Christ , because the persons Ordaining do not act in it in a natural , but a moral Capacity , and so the effect must be moral and not physical , which they must suppose it to be , who make it a Character , and that indelible . Thus much may serve to clear how Ordination in all its circumstances was derived from the Jewish Synagogue . The other thing remaining to be spoken to , as to the correspondence of the Church with the Synagogue in its constitution is , what order the Apostles did settle in the several Churches of their Plantation for the Ruling and Ordering the Affairs of them . Before I come to speak so much to it as will be pertinent to our present purpose and design , we may take notice of the same name for Church-Rulers under the Gospel , which there was under the Synagogue , viz. that of Presbyters . The name Presbyter , as the Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though it Originally import Age , yet by way of connotation it hath been looked on as a name both of Dignity and Power . Because Wisdome was supposed to dwell with a multitude of years ; therefore persons of age and experience were commonly chosen to places of honour and trust , and thence the name importing age doth likewise cary dignity along with it . Thence we read in the time of Moses how often the Elders were gathered together . Thence Eliezer is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen. 24. 2. which the Greek renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Seignior Domo , the chief Officer in his house ; and so we read Gen. 50. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Elders of the Land of Egypt . So the Elders of M●dian , the Elders of Israel , the Elders of the Cities ; so among the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for their Council of State ; and among the Latines Senatus , and our Saxon Aldermen , in all importing both age and honour and power together . But among the Jewes , in the times of the Apostles , it is most evident that the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ imported not only dignity but power ; the Presbyters among the Jewes , having a power both of judgeing and teaching given them by their Semicha or Ordination . Now under the Gospel the Apostles retaining the name and the manner of Ordination , but not conferring that judiciary power by it , which was in use among the Jewes , to shew the difference between the Law and the Gospel , it was requisite some other name should be given to the Governours of the Church , which should qualifie the importance of the word Presbyters to a sense proper to a Gospel State ; Which was the Original of giving the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Governours of the Church under the Gospel : A name importing Duty more then Honour , and not a title above Presbyter , but rather used by way of diminution and qualification of the power implyed in the name of Presbyter . Therefore to shew what kind of power and Duty the name Presbyter imported in the Church , the Office conveyed by that name is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and Presbyters are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 1 Pet. 5 ▪ 2. where it is opposed to that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Lording it over the people , as was the custome of the Presbyters among the Jews . So that if we determine things by importance of words and things signified by them , the power of Ordination was proper to the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because the former name did then import that power , and not the latter . We come therefore from the names to the things then implyed by them ; and the Offices established by the Apostles for the ruling of Churches . But my design being not to dispute the arguments of either party ( viz. those who conceive the Apostles setled the Government of the Church in an absolute parity ; or else by Superiority and Subordination among the setled Officers of the Church , ) but to lay down those principles which may equally concern both , in Order to accommodation ▪ I find not my self at present concerned to debate what is brought on either side for the maintaining their particular Opinion any further then thereby the Apostles intentions are brought to have been to bind all future Churches to observe that individual Form they conceived was in practice then . All that ● have to say then concerning the course taken by the Apostles in setling the Government of the Churches , ( under which will be contained the full Resolution of what I promised , as to the correspondency to the Synagogue in the Government of Churches ) lies in these three Propositions , which I now shall endeavour to clear , viz. That neither can we have that certainty of Apostolical practice which is necessary to Constitute a Divine right ; nor Secondly , Is it probable that the Apostles did tye themselves up to any one fixed course in modelling Churches ; nor thirdly , if they did , doth it necessarily follow that we must observe the same . If these three considerations be fully cleared , we may see to how little purpose it is to Dispute the Significancy and Importance of words and names as used in Scripture , which hitherto the main quarrel hath been about . I therefore begin with the first of these , That we cannot arrive to such an absolute certainty what course the Apostles took in Governing Churches as to inferr from thence the only Divine Right of that one Form which the several parties imagine comes the nearest to it . This I shall make out from these following arguments . First , from the equivalency of the names , and the doubtfulness of their signification from which the Form of Government used in the New Testament should be determined . That the Form of Government must be derived from the Importance of the names of Bishop and Presbyter , is hotly pleaded on both sides . But if there can be no certain way sound out whereby to come to a Determination of what the certain Sense of those names is in Scripture , we are never like to come to any certain Knowledge of the things signified by those names . Now there is a fourfold equivalency of the names Bishop and Presbyter taken notice of 1. That both should signifie the same thing , viz. a Presbyter , in the modern Notion , i. e. one acting in a parity with others for the Government of the Church . And this Sense is evidently asserted by Theodoret , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Apostle Acts 20. 28. Philip. 1. 1. Titus 1. 5. 1 Tim. 3. 1. doth by Bishops mean nothing else but Presbyters ; otherwise it were impossible for more Bishops to govern one City . 2. That both of them should signifie promiscuously sometimes a Bishop , and sometimes a Presbyter : so Chrysostome , and after him Occumenius and Theophylact in Phil. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ and in Acts 20. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Where they assert the Community and promiscuous use of the names in Scripture ; so that a Bishop is sometimes called a Presbyter , and a Presbyter sometimes called a Bishop . 3. That the name Bishop , alwayes imports a singular Bishop ; but the name Presbyter is taken promiscuously both for Bishop and Presbyter . 4. That both the names Bishop and Presbyter , doe import onely one thing in Scripture , viz. the Office of a singular Bishop in every Church● ; which Sense , though a stranger to antiquity , is above all other embraced by a late very Learned Man , who hath endeavoured by set Discourses to reconcile all the places of Scripture where the names occur to this sense ; but with what success it is not here a place to examine . By this variety of Interpretation of the Equivalency of the names of Bishop and Presbyter , we may see how far the argument from the promiscuous use of the names is from the Controversie in hand ; unless some evident arguments be withall brought , that the Equivalency of the words cannot possibly be meant in any other Sense , then that which they contend for . Equivocal words can never of themselves determine what Sense they are to be taken in , because they are Equivocal , and so admit of different Senses . And he that from the use of an Equivocal word would inferr the necessity onely of one sense , when the word is common to many , unless some other argument be brought inforcing that necessity , will be so far from perswading others to the same belief , that he will only betray the weakness and shortness of his own reason . When Augustus would be called only Princeps Senatus , could any one inferr from thence , that certainly he was onely the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Senate , or else that he had superiority of power over the Senate , when that Title might be indifferent to either of those senses ? All that can be infer'd from the promiscuous sense of the words , is , that they may be understood only in this sense ; but it must be proved that they can be understood in no other sense , before any one particular form of Government as necess●ry can be inferred from the use of them . If notwithstanding the promiscuous use of the name Bishop and Presbyter , either that Presbyter may mean a Bishop ; or that Bishop may mean a Presbyter , or be sometimes used for one , sometimes for the other ; what ground can there be laid in the equivalency of the words , which can inferr the only Divine Right of the form of Government couched in any one of those senses ? So likewise , it is in the Titles of Angels of the Churches ; If the name Angel imports no incongruity , though taken only for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Jewish Synagogue , the publick Minister of the Synagogue , called the Angel of the Congregation , what power can be inferred from thence , any more then such an Officer was invested with ? Again , if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or President of the assembly of Presbyters , might be so called : what superiority can be deduced thence , any more then such a one enjoys ? Nay , if in the Prophetical style , an unity may be set down by way of representation of a multitude : what evidence can be brought from the name , that by it some one particular person must be understood ? And by this means Timothy may avoid being charged with leaving his first Love , which he must of necessity be , by those that make him the Angel of the Church of Ephesus at the time of writing these Epistles . Neither is this any wayes solved by the Answer given , that the name Angel is representative of the whole Church , and so there is no necessity , the Angel should be personally guilty of it . For first , it seems strange that the whole diffusive body of the Church should be charged with a crime by the name of the Angel , and he that is particularly meant by that name should be free from it . As if a Prince should charge the Maior of a Corporation as guilty of rebellion , and by it should only mean that the Corporation was guilty , but the Maior was innocent himself . Secondly , If mady things in the Epistles be directed to the Angel , but yet so as to concern the whole body , then of necessity the Angel must be taken as Representative of the Body ; and then , why may not the word Angel be taken only by way of representation of the body its self , either of the whole Church , or which is far more probable , of the Consessus or Order of Presbyters in that Church ? We see what miserably unconcluding arguments those are , which are brought for any form of Government from Metaphorical or Ambiguous expressions , or names promiscuously used , which may be interpreted to different senses . What certainty then can any rational man find what the form of Government was in the Primitive times , when onely those arguments are used which may be equally accommodated to different forms ? And without such a certainty , with what confidence can men speak of a Divine Right of any one particular form ? Secondly , The uncertainty of the Primitive form is argued , from the places most in controversie about the form of Government ; because that without any apparent incongruity they may be understood of either of the different forms . Which I shall make out by going through the several places . The Controversie then on foot is this , ( as it is of late stated ) , Whether the Churches in the Primitive times were governed by a Bishop only and Deacons , or by a Colledge of Presbyters acting in a parity of power ? The places insisted on , on both sides are these , Acts 11. 30. Acts 14. 23. Acts 28. 17 1 Tim. 3. 1. Titus 1. 5. The thing in controversie , is , Whether Bishops with Deacons or Presbyters in a parity of power , are understood in these places ? I begin then in order with Acts 11. 30. The first place wherein the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 occurrs , as applyed to the Officers of the Christian Church , Those that are for a Colledge of Presbyters , understand by these Elders , those of the Church of Ierusalem , who did govern the affairs of that Church : those that are for a solitary Episcopacy , by these Elders understand not the local Elders of Ierusalem , but the several Bishops of the Churches of Iudea . Let us now see whether there be any evidence from the place to determine which of these two must necessarily be understood . There is nothing at all mentioned in the place , but only that upon the occasion of the Famine , they sent relief to the Brethren of Judea , and sent it to the Elders by the hands of Barnabas and Paul ; Which might either be to the Elders of the Church at Ierusalem , to be distributed to the several Churches of Iudea , or else to the several Pastors of those Churches , either collectively as met together at Ierusalem to receive this contribution , or distributively as they were in their several Churches . The relief might be sent to all the Brethren of Iudea , and yet either be conveyed to the particular Elders of Ierusalem to send it abroad , or to the several Elders of the Churches within the circuit of Iudea . But other places are brought by both parties for their particular sense in this , As Acts 15. 6. here indeed mention is made of the Apostles and Elders together at Ierusalem , but nothing expressed whereby we may know whether the fixed Elders of that Church , or else the Elders of all the Churches of Iudea assembled upon this solemn occasion of the Council of the Apostles there . So Acts 21. 11. when Paul went in to Iames , it is said , That All the Elders were present . No more certainty here neither ; for , either they might be the fixed Officers of that Church , meeting with Iames upon Pauls coming ; or else they might be the Elders of the several Churches of Iudea met together , not to take account of Pauls Ministry ( as some improbably conjecture , ) but assembled together there at the Feast of Pentecost , at which Paul came to Ierusalem , which is more probable upon the account of what we read , v. 20. of the many thousand believing Iews then at Jerusalem , who were zealous of the Law : who in all probability were the believing Jews of Iudea , who did yet observe the annual Festivals of Ierusalem , and so most likely their several Elders might go up together with them , and there be with Iames at Pauls coming in to him . No certainty then of the Church of Ierusalem how that was governed ; whether by Apostles themselves , or other unfixed Elders , or onely by Iames who exercised his Apostleship most there , and thence afterward● called the Bishop of Ierusalem . We proceed therefore to the government of other Churches ; and the next place is , Acts 14. 23. And when they had ordained them Elders in every Church . Here some plead for a plurality of Elders as fixed in every Church ; but it is most evident , that the words hold true if there was but one in each Church . For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Titus 1. 5. ( for both places will admit of the same answer ) doth signifie no more then oppidatim , or Ecclesiatim , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gradatim , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , viritim , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 particulatim , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vicatim . No more then is imported than that Elders were ordained , City by City , or Church by Church , as we would render i● , and thereby nothing is expressed , but that no Church wanted an Elder , but not that every Church had more Elders then one . But the place most controverted is , Acts 20. 17. And from Miletus , Paul sent to Ephesus , and called the Elders of the Church . Those that say , these Elders were those only of the Church of Ephesus , seem to be most favoured by the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as seeming to apply it to that particular Church of Ephesus , and by the Syriack version which renders it , Venire fecit Presbyteros Ecclesiae Ephesi ; to the same purpose likewise Hierome understands it . On the contrary those that say , that these Elders were those of the several Churches of Asia , are favoured by v. 18. that from the first day he came into Asia , he had been with them at all seasons . Now Paul did not remain all the time at Ephesus , as appears by Acts 19 ▪ 10 , 22 , 26. where he is said to preach the Word abroad in Asia , and so in probability Churches were planted , and Rulers setled in them ; and that these were at this time called to Miletus by Paul , is the expresse affirmation of Irenaeus ; In Mileto enim convocatis Episcopis & Presbyteris qui era●t ab Epheso & à reliquis proximis civitatibus , quoniam ipse festinavit Hierosolymis Pentecostem agere . Here is nothing then either in the Text or Antiquity , that doth absolutely determine whence these Elders came ; but there may be a probability on either side ; and so no certainty or necessity of understanding it either way . And so for the other places in Timothy and Titus , it is certain the care of those persons did extend to many places , and therefore the Elders or Bishops made by them , are not necessarily to be understood of a Plurality of Elders in one place . Thus we see , that there is no incongruity in applying either of these two forms to the sense of the places in Question . I dispute not which is the true , or at least more probable sense , but that we can find nothing in the several places which doth necessarily determine , how they are to be understood as to one particular form of Government , which is the thing I now ayme at the proving of . And if neither form be repugnant to the sense of these places , how can any one be necessarily inferred from them ? As if the several motions and phaenomena of the Heavens may be with equal probability explained according to the Ptolemaick or Copernican Hypothesis , viz. about the rest or motion of the earth ; then it necessarily follows , that from those Phaenomena no argument can be drawn evincing the necessity of the one Hypothesis , and overturning the probability of the other . If that great wonder of Nature the flux and reflux of the Sea , might with equal congruity be solved according to the different opinions , of its being caused by Subterraneous fires , or from the motion of the Moon , or the depression of the Lunar vortex , or ( which to me is far the most probable ) by a motion of consent of the Sea with all the other great bodies of the World ; we should find no necessity at all of entertaining one opinion above another , but to look upon all as probable , and none as certain . So likewise for the composition and motion of all Natural Bodyes , the several Hypotheses of the old and new Philosophy , implying no apparent incongruity to Nature , do make it appear that all or any of them , may be embraced as Ingenious Romances in Philosophy ( as they are no more ) but that none of them are the certain truth ; or can be made appear so to be to the minds of men . So it is in Controversies in Theology , If the matter propounded to be believed , may as to the truth and substance of it be equally believed under different wayes of explication , then there is no necessity as to the believing the truth of the thing , to believe it under such an explication of it , more then under another . As for instance , in the case of Christs Descent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , if I may truly believe that Christ did Descend 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whether by that we understand the state of the Dead , or a local Descent to Hell , then there is no necessity in order to the belief of the substance of that article of the ancient Creed ( called , The Apostles ) under that restriction of a local Descent . By this time I suppose it is clear , that if these places of Scripture may be understood in these two different senses of the word Elders , viz. either taken collectively in one City , or distributively in many , then there is no certainty which of these two senses must be embraced , and so the form of Church-government , which must be thence derived , is left still at as great uncertainty as ever , notwithstanding these places of Scripture brought to demonstrate it ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Thirdly , The uncertainty of the Primitive Form of Government will be made appear from the Defectivenesse , Ambiguity , Partiality and Repugnancy of the Records of the succeeding Ages which should inform us what Apostolical practice was . When men are by the force of the former arguments driven off from Scripture , then they presently run to take Sanctuary in the Records of succeeding ages to the Apostles . Thus Estius , no mean School-man , handling this very Question of the difference of Bishops and Presbyters , very fairly quits the Scriptures , and betakes himself to other Weapons . Quod autem jure divino sint Episcopi Presbyteris superiores , et si non ita clarum est è sacris Literis , aliunde tamen satis efficaciter probari potest . Ingenuously said , however ; but all the difficulty is , how a Ius divinum should be proved when men leave the Scriptures , which makes others so loth to leave this hold ; although they do it in effect , when they call in the help of succeeding Ages to make the Scripture speak plain for them . We follow therefore the scent of the Game into this wood of Antiquity , wherein it will be easier to lose our selves , then to find that which we are upon the pursuit of , a Ius Divinum of any one particular form of Government . I handle now only the Testimony of Antiquity ( for the practice of it will call for a particular Discourse afterwards ) and herein I shall endeavour to shew the incompetency of this Testimony , as to the shewing what certain form of Church-government was practised by the Apostles ; for that , I shall make use of this four fold Argument ; From the defectivenesse of this Testimony , from the Ambiguity of it , from the Partiality of it , and from the Repugnancy of it to its self . First , then , for the defectivenesse of the Testimony of antiquity , in reference to the shewing what certain form the Apostles observed in setling the Government of Churches ; A threefold defectivenesse I observe in it , as to places , as to times , as to persons . First , defectivenesse as to places ; for him that would be satisfied , what course the Apostles took for governing Churches , it would be very requisite to observe the uniformity of the Apostles practice in all Churches of their plantation . And if but one place varied , it were enough to overthrow the necessity of any one form of Government , because thereby it would be evident , that they observed no certain or constant course , nor did they look upon themselves as obliged so to do . Now the ground of the necessity of such an universal Testimony as to places , is this ; We have already made it appear , that there is no Law of Christ absolutely commanding one form , and forbidding all other . We have no way then left to know , whether the Apostles did look upon themselves as bound to settle one form , but by their practice ; this practice must be certain and uniform in them ; this uniformity must be made known to us by some unquestionable way : the Scriptures they are very silent in it , mentioning very little more then Pauls practice , nor that fully and clearly ; therefore we must gather it from Antiquity , and the Records of following ages ; if these now fall short of our expectation , and cannot give us an account of what was done by the Apostles in their several Churches planted by them , how is it possible we should attain any certainty of what the Apostles practice was ? Now that antiquity is so defective as to Places , will appear from the general silence as to the Churches planted by many of the Apostles . Granting the truth of what Eusebius tells us , That Thomas went into Parthia , Andrew into Scythia , Iohn into the lesser Asia , Peter to the Jews in Pontus , Galatia , Bithynia , Cappadocia , Asia ; besides what we read in Scripture of Paul , what a pittiful short account have we here given in , of all the Apostles Travels , and their several fellow-labourers ! And for all these , little or nothing spoke of the way they took in setling the Churches by them planted , Who is it will undertake to tell us what course Andrew took in Scythiae , in governing Churches ? If we believe the Records of after-ages , there was but one Bishop , viz. of Tomis for the whole Countrey ; how different is this from the pretended course of Paul , setting up a single Bishop in every City ? Where do we read of the Presbyteries setled by Thomas in Parthia or the Indies ? what course Philip , Bartholomew , Matthew , Simon Zelotes , Matthias took . Might not they for any thing we know , settle another kind of Government from what we read Paul , Peter , or Iohn did , unlesse we had some evidence that they were all bound to observe the same ? Nay , what evidence have we what course Peter took in the Churches of the Circumcision ? Whether he left them to their Synagogue ▪ way , or altered it , and how or wherein ? These things should be made appear , to give men a certainty of the way and course the Apostles did observe in the setling Churches by them planted . But instead of this , we have a general silence in antiquity , and nothing but the forgeries of latter ages to supply the vacuity : whereby they filled up empty places as Plutarch expresseth it , as Geographers do Maps with some fabulous creatures of their own invention . Here is work now for a Nicephorus Callisthus , a Simeon Metaphrastes , the very Iacobus de Voragine of the Greek Church ( as one well calls him ) those Historical Tinkers , that think to mend a hole where they find it , and make three instead of it . This is the first defect in Antiquity as to places . The second is as observable as to times ; and what is most considerable : Antiquity is most defective where it is most useful , viz. in the time immediately after the Apostles , which must have been most helpfull to us in this inquiry . For , who dare with confidence believe the conjectures of Eusebius at three hundred years distance from Apostolical times , when he hath no other Testimony to vouch , but the Hypotyposes of an uncertain Clement ( certainly not he of Alexandria , if Ios. Scaliger may be credited ) and the Commentaries of Hegesippus , whose Relations and Authority are as questionable as many of the reports of Eusebius himself are in reference to those elder times : For which I need no other Testimony but Eusebius in a place enough of its self to blast the whole credit of antiquity , as to the matter now in debate . For speaking of Paul and Peter , and the Churches by them planted , and coming to enquire after their Successours , he makes this very ingenuous Confession . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Say you so ? Is it so hard a matter to find out who succeeded the Apostles in the Churches planted by them , unless it be those mentioned in the writings of Paul ? What becomes then of our unquestionable Line of Succession of the Bishops of several Churches , and the large Diagramms made of the Apostolical Churches with every ones name set down in his Order , as if the Writer had been Clarenceaulx to the Apostles themselves ? Is it come to this at last that we have nothing certain , but what we have in Scriptures ? And must then the Tradition of the Church be our rule to interpret Scriptures by ? An excellent way to find out the Truth doubtless , to bend the Rule to the crooked Stick , to make the Judge stand to the Opinion of his Lacquey , what sentence he shall pass upon the Cause in question ; to make Scripture stand cap in hand to Tradition , to know whether it may have leave to speak or no! Are all the great outcries of Apostolical Tradition , of personal Succession , of unquestionable Records resolved at last into the Scripture its self by him from whom all these long pedegrees are fetched ? then let Succession know its place , and learn to vaile Bonnet to the Scriptures ? And withall let men take heed of over-●eaching themselves when they would bring down so large a Catalogue of single Bishops from the first and purest times of the Church for it will be hard for others to believe them , when Eusebius professeth it is so hard to find them . Well might Scaliger then complain that the Intervall from the last Chapter of the Acts to the middle of Trajan , in which time Quadratus and Ignatius began to flourish , was tempus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Varro speaks , a meer Chaos of time filled up with the rude concept ons of Papias , Hermes , and others , who like Hann ibal , when they could not find a way through , would make one either by force or fraud . But yet Thirdly , here is another defect consequent to that of Time , which is that of Persons ; arising not onely from a defect of Records , the Diptychs of the Church being lost , which would have acquainted us with the times of suffering of the severall Martyrs ( by them called their Natalitia ) at which times their several names were inrolled in these Martyrologies , which some , as Iunius observes , have ignorantly mistaken for the time of their being made Bishops of the places wherein their names were entered , as Anacletus , Clytus and Clemens at Rome ; I say the defect as to Persons , not only ariseth hence , but because the Christians were so much harassed with persecutions , that they could not have that leisure then to write those things , which the leisure and peace of our ages have made us so eagerly inquisitive after . Hence even the Martyrologies are so full stuffed with Fables , witness one for all , the famous Legend of Catharina who suffered , say they , in Diocletian's time . And truly the story of Ignatius ( as much as it is defended with his Epistles ) doth not seem to be any of the most probable . For , wherefore should Ignatius of all others be brought to Rome to suffer , when the Proconsuls and the Praesides provinciarum did every where in time of persecution execute their power in punishing Christians at their own Tribunals , without sending them so long a journey to Rome to be martyred there ? And how came Ignatius to make so many and such strange excursions , as he did by the story , if the Souldiers that were his Guard were so cruel to him , as he complains they were ? Now all those uncertain and fabulous Narrations as to Persons then , arising from want of sufficient Records made at those times , make it more evident how incompetent a Judge antiquity is as to the certainty of things done in Apostolical times . If we should onely speak of the Fabulous Legends of the first Planters of Churches in these Western parts , we need no further evidence of the great defect of antiquity as to persons . Not to goe out of our own Nation ; Whence come the stories of Peter , Iames , Paul , Simon , Aristobulus , besides Ioseph of Arimathea , and his company ; all being Preachers of the Gospel , and planters of Churches here , but onely from the great defect in Antiquity , as to the Records of persons imployed in the several places for preaching the Gospell ? Thus much to shew the defectiveness as to the Records of antiquity , and thereby the incompetency of them for being a way to find out the certain course the Apostles took in Setling and Governing Churches by them Planted . The next thing shewing the incompetency of the Records of the Church for deciding the certain Form of Church-Government in the Apostles times , is , the ambiguity of the Testimony given by those Records . A Testimony sufficient todecide a Controversie , must be plain and evident , and must speak full and home to the Case under debate . Now if I make it appear that antiquity doth not so ; nothing then can be evident from thence , but that we are left to as great uncertainties as before . The matter in Controversie is , whether any in a Superiour Order to Presbyters were instituted by the Apostles themselves for the Regulating of the Churches by them planted ? For the proving of which , three things are the most insisted on : First , the Personal succession of some persons to the Apostles in Churches by them planted : Secondly , the appropriating the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Bishops in a Superiour Order to Presbyters , after the Apostles decease : Thirdly , the Churches owning the Order of Episcopacy , as of Divine Institution . If now we can make these three things evident : First , That personall Succession might be without such superiority of Order : Secondly , That the names of Bishop and Presbyters were common after the Distinction between them was introduced : and Thirdly , That the Church did not own Episcopacy as a Divine Institution , but Ecclesiasticall ; and those who seem to speak most of it , do mean no more : I shall suppose enough done to invalidate the Testimony of antiquity as to the matter in hand . First , Then for the matter of Succession in Apostolical Churches ▪ I shall lay down these four things , to evince that the argument drawn from thence , cannot fully clear the certain course which the Apostles took in setling the Government of Churches . First , That the Succession might be onely as to different Degree , and not as to a different Order ; where the Succession is clear , nothing possibly can be inferred from it beyond this . For bare Succession implies no more then that there was one in those Churches succeeding the Apostles , from whom afterwards the succession was derived . Now then supposing onely at present , that it was the Custome , in all the Churches at that time to be ruled by a Colledge of Presbyters acting in a parity of Power , and among these , one to sit as the Nasi in the Sanhedrin , having a priority of Order above the rest in place , without any superiory of Power over his Colleagues ; will not the matter of Succession be clear and evident enough notwithstanding this ? Succession of Persons was the thing inquired for , and not a Succession of Power ; if therefore those that would prove a Succession of Apostolical Power , can onely produce a List and Catalogue ▪ of names in Apostolical Churches , without any evidence of what power they had , they apparently fail of proving the thing in question , which is not , whether there might not be found out a List of persons in many Churches derived from the Apostles times ; but whether those persons did enjoy by way of peculiarity and appropriation to themselves , that power which the Apostles had over many Churches while they lived ? Now this , the meer Succession will never prove which will best appear by some Parallel instances . At Athens , after they grew weary of their ten yeares 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; the people chose nine every year to Govern the affairs of the Common-wealth : These nine enjoyed a parity of power among themselves , and therefore had a place where they consulted together about the matters of State which was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as * Demosthenes , Plutarch , and others tell us : Now although they enjoyed this equality of power , yet One of them had greater Dignity then the rest , and therefore was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of excellency , and his name was onely set in the publike Records of that year , and therefore was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the year was reckoned from him , as * Pausanias , and Iulius Pollux inform us . Here we see now the Sccession clear in one single person and yet no superiority of power in him over his Colleagues The like may be observed among the Ephori and Bidiaej at Sparta ; the number of the Ephori was alwayes five from their first institution by Lycurgus , and not nine ( as the Greek Etymologist imagines ) : these enjoyed likewise a parity of power among them ; but among these to give name to the year , they made choice of one who was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here too , ●s the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at Athens , and him they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Plutarch tells us . Where we have the very name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 attributed to him that had only his primacy of order without any superiority of power , which is used by Iustin Martyr of the President of assemblies among the Christians . Now from hence we may evidently see that meer succession of some single persons named above the rest , in the successions in Apostolicall Churches , cannot inforce any superiority of power in the persons so named , above others supposed to be as joynt ▪ Governours of the Churches with them . I dispute not whether it were so or no ; whether according to Blondel the Succession was from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or whether by choice , as at Alexandria ; but I onely now shew that this argument from Succession is weak , and proves not at all the certainty of the power those persons enjoyed . Secondly ▪ This Succession is not so evident and convincing in all places as it ought to be , to demonstrate the thing intended . It is not enough to shew a List of some persons in the great Churches of Ierusalem , Antioch , Rome , and Alexandria , ( although none of these be unquestionable ) but it should be produced at Philippi , Corinth , Caesarea , and in all the seven Churches of Asia ( and not onely at Ephesus ) and so likewise in Creet , some succeeding Titus ; and not think Men will be satisfied with the naming a Bishop of Gortyna so long after him . But , as I said before , in none of the Churches most spoken of is the Succession so clear as is necessary . For at Ierusalem it seems somewhat strange how fifteen Bishops of the Circumcision should be crouded into so narrow a room as they are ; so that many of them could not have above two years time to rule in the Church . And it would bear an inquiry where the Seat of the Bishops of Ierusalem was from the time of the Destruction of the City by Titus , when the Walls were laid even wih the Ground by Musonius ) till the time of Adrian ; for till that time the succession of the Bishops of the Circumcision continued . For Antioch , it is far from being agreed , whether Evodius or Ignatius succeeded Peter , or Paul ; or the one Peter , and the other Paul ; much less at Rome , whether Cletus , Anacletus , or Clemens are to be reckoned first ; ( but of these afterwards ) . At Alexandria where the succession runs clearest , the Originall of the power is imputedito the choice of Presbyters , and to no Divine Institution . But at Ephesus the succession of Bishops from Timothy is pleaded with the greatest Confidence ; and the Testimony brought for it , is from Leontius Bishop of Magnesia in the Council of Chalcedon , whose words are these , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From Timothy to this day there hath been a succession of seven and twenty Bishops , all of them ordained in Ephesus . I shall not insist so much on the incompetency of this single witness to pass a judgement upon a thing of that Nature , at the distance of four hundred Years , in which time Records being lost , and Bishops being after settled there , no doubt they would begin their account from Timothy , because of his imployment there once for setling the Churches thereabout . And to that end we may observe that in the after-times of the Church , they never met with any of the Apostles , or Evangelists in any place , but they presently made them Bishops of that place . So , Philip is made Bishop of Trallis , Ananias Bishop of Damascus , Nicolaus Bishop of Samaria , Barnabas Bishop of Milan , Silas Bishop of Corinth , Sylvanus of Thessalonica , Crescens of Chalcedon , Andreas of Byzantium ▪ and upon the same grounds Peter Bishop of Rome . No wonder then if Leontius make Timothy Bishop of Ephesus , and derive the succession down from him . But again , this was not an act of the Council its self , but onely of one single person delivering his private opinion in it ; and that which is most observable , is , that in the thing mainly insisted on by Leontius , he was contradicted in the face of the whole Council , by Philip a Presbyter of Constantinople . For the case of B●ssianus and Stephen , about their violent intrusion into the Bishoprick of Ephesus , being discussed before the Council ; A question was propounded by the Council where the Bishop of Ephesus was to be regularly ordained , according to the Canons . Leontius Bishop of Magnesia saith , that there had been twenty seven Bishops of Ephesus from Timothy , and all of them ordained in the place . His business was not to derive exactly the succession of Bishops , but speaking according to vulgar tradition , he insists that all had been ordained there . Now if he be convicted of the crimen falsi in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , no wonder if we meet with a mistake in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. if he were out in his allegation , no wonder if he were deceived in his tradition . Now as to the Ordination of the Bishops in Ephesus , Philip , a Presbyter of Constantinople , convicts him of falsehood in that ; for , saith he , Iohn Bishop of Constantinople going into Asia , deposed fifteen Bishops there , and ordained others in their room . And Aetius Archdeacon of Constantinople instanceth in Castinus , Heraclides , Basilius Bishop of Ephesus , all ordained by the Bishop of Constantinople . If then the certainty of succession relyes upon the credit of this Leontius , let them thank the Council of Chalcedon , who have sufficiently blasted it , by determining the cause against him in the main evidence produced by him . So much to shew how far the clearest evidence for succession of Bishops from Apostolical times is from being convincing to any rationall Man. Thirdly , the succession so much pleaded by the Writers of the Primitive Church , was not a succession of Persons in Apostolicall Power , but a succession in Apostolical Doctrine ; Which will be seen by a view of the places produced to that purpose . The first is that of Irenaeus . Quoniam valdè longum est in hoc tali volumine omnium Ecclesiarum enumerare successiones , maximae & antiquissimae , & omnibus cognitae à gloriossimis duobus Apostolis Petro & Paulo , Romae fundatae & constitutae Ecclesiae , eam quam habet ab Apostolis traditionem , & annunciatam hominibus fidem , per successiones Episcoporum perveni●n●es usque ad nos . indicantes , confundimus omnes eos , &c. Where we see Irenaeus doth the least of all aim at the making out of a Succession of Apostolical power in the Bishops he speaks of , but a conveying of the Doctrine of the Apostles down to them by their hands : ( which Doctrine is here called Tradition , not as that word is abused by the Papists to signifie something distinct from the Scriptures , but as it signifies the conveyance of the Doctrine of the Scripture it self . ) Which is cleared by the beginning of that Chapter . Traditionem itaque Apostolorum in toto mundo manifestatam in Ecclesia adest perspic ●re omnibus qui vera v●lint audire ; & habemus annumerare eos qui ab Apostolis instituti sunt Episcopi in Ecclesiis , & successores eorum usque ad nos qui nihil tale docuerunt n●que cognoverunt , quale ab his deliratur . His plain meaning is , that those persons who were appointed by the Apostles to oversee and govern Churches , being sufficient witnesses themselves of the Apostles Doctrine , have conveyed it down to us by their successours , and we cannot learn any such thing of them , as Valentinus and his followers broached . We see it is the Doctrine still he speaks of , and not a word what power and superiority these Bishops had over Presbyters in their several Churches . To the same purpose Tertullian in that known speech of his ; Edant Origines Ecclesiarum suarum , evolvant ordinem Episcoporum suorum , ita per successiones ab initio decurrentem , ut primu● ille Episcopus aliquem ex Apostolis aut Apostolicis viris habuerit authorem & antecessorem . Hoc modo Ecclesiae Apostolicae census suos deferunt ; sicut Smyrnaeorum Ecclesia habens Polycarpum à Johanne conlocatum refert , sicut Romanorum Clementem à Petro ordinatum edit ; Proinde utique & caeterae exhibent , quos ab Apostolis in Episcopatum constitutos Apostolici seminis traduces habeant . A succession I grant is proved in Apostolical Churches by these words of Tertullian , and this succession of persons , and those persons Bishops too ▪ but then it is only said that these persons derived their office from the Apostles , but nothing expressed what relation they had to the Church any more then is implyed in the general name of Episcopi ; nor what power they had over Presbyters : only that there were such persons , was sufficient to his purpose , which was to prescribe against heretickes , i. e. to Non-suit them , or to give in general reasons why they were not to be proceeded with as to the particular debate of the things in question between them . For praescribere in the civil Law ( whence Tertullian transplanted that word as many other into the Church ) is , cum quis adversarium certis exceptionibus removet à lite contestandâ , ita ut de summa rei neget agendum , eamve causam ex juris praescripto judicandā : three sorts of these prescriptions Tertullian elsewere mentions ; Hoc exigere veritatem cui nemo praescribere potest , non spatium temporum , non patrocinia personarum , non privilegium regionum . Here he stands upon the first which is a prescription of time , because the Doctrine which was contrary to that of the Hereticks was delivered by the Apostles , and conveyed down by their successors , which was requisite to be shewed in order to the making his prescription good . Which he thus further explains ; Age jam qui voles curiositatem melius exercere in negotio salutis tuae ; percurre Ecclesias Apostolicas , apud quas ipsae adhuc Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesidentur , apud quas ▪ ipsae authenticae eorum literae recitantur , sonantes vocem & praesentantes faciem uniuscujusque . Proximè est tibi Achaia ? habes Corinthum . Si non longe es à Macedonia , habes Philippos , habes Thessalonicenses . Si potes in Asiam tendere , habes Ephesum . S● autem Italiae adjaces , habes Romam , unde nobis quoque auctoritas praestò est . What he spoke before of the persons , he now speaks of the Churches themselves planted by the Apostles , which by retaining the authentick Epistles of the Apostles sent to them , did thereby sufficiently prescribe to all the novell opinions of the Hereticks . We see then evidently that it is the Doctrine which they speak of as to succession , and the persons no further then as they are the conveyers of that Doctrine ; either then it must be proved that a succession of some persons in Apostolical power is necessary for the conveying of this Doctrine to men , or no argument at all can be inferred from hence for their succeeding the Apostles in their power , because they are said to convey down the Apostolical Doctrine to succeeding ages . Which is Austins meaning in that speech of his , Radix Christianae societatis per sedes Apostolorum & successiones Episcoporum , certa per orbem propagatione diffunditur ▪ The root of Christian society , ( i. e. the Doctrine of the Gospel ) is spread abroad the world through the channels of the Apostolical Sees , and the continued successions of Bishops therein . And yet if we may believe the same Austin , Secundum honorum vocabula quae jam Ecclesiae usus obtinuit , Episcopatus Presbyterio major est . The difference between Episcopacy and Presbyterie rise from the custome of the Church , attributing a name of greater honour to those it had set above others . And as for Tertullian , I believe neither party will stand to his judgement as to the original of Church power : For he saith expresly , Differenti●m inter ordinem & plebem constituit Ecclesia auctoritas ; all the difference between Ministers and people comes from the Churches authority ; unless he mean something more by the following words , & honor per Ordinis concessum sanctificatus à Deo , viz. that the honour which is received by ordination from the Bench of Church-Officers , is sanctified by God , i. e. by his appointment as well as blessing . For otherwise I know not how to understand him . But however , we see here he makes the Government of the Church to lye in a Concessus ordinis , which I know not otherwise to render , than by a Bench of Presbyters ▪ because only they were said in ordinem cooptari , who were made Presbyters , and not those who were promoted to any higher degree in the Church . By the way we may observe the original of the name of Holy Orders in the Church , not as the Papists , and others following them , as though it noted any thing inherent by way of ( I know not what ) character in the person ; but because the persons ordained were thereby admitted in Ordinem among the number of Church-officers . So there was Ordo Senatorum , Ordo Equestris , Ordo Decurionum , and Ordo Sacerdotum among the Romans , as in this Inscription . ORDO SACERDOT . DEI HERCULIS INVICTI . From hence the use of the word came into the Church ; and thence Ordination , ex vi vocis , imports no more than solemn admission into this order of Presbyters ; and therefore it is observable , that laying on of hands never made men Priests under the Law , but only admitted them into publike Office. So much for Tertullians Concessus ordinis , which hath thus f●r drawn us ▪ out of our way , but we now return . And therefore Fourthly , This personal suceession so much spoken of , ●● sometimes attributed to Presbyters , even after the distinction came into use between Bishops and them . And that even by those Authors who before had told us the succession was by Bishops , as Irenaeus . Cum autem ad eam iterum traditionem , qu● est ab Apostolis , qu● per successiones Presbyterorum in Ecclesiis custoditur , provocamus eos qui adversantur traditioni ; dicent , se non solum Presbyteris sed etiam Apostolis existentes sapientiores , &c. Here he attributes the keeping of the Pradition of Apostolical Doctrine to the succession of Presbyters , which before he had done to Bishops . And more fully afterwards , Quapropter iis qui in Ecclesiâ sunt Presbyteris obaudire oportet , his qui successionem habent ab Apostolis , sicut ostendimus , qui cum Episcopatus successione , charisma veritatis certum secundum placitum patris acceperunt . In this place he not only asserts the succession of Presbyters to the Apostles , but likewise attributes the successio Episcopatus to these very Presbyters . What strange confusion must this raise in any ones mind , that seeks for a succession of Episcopal power above Presbyters from the Apostles , by the Testimony of Irenaeus , when he so plainly attributes both the succession to Presbyters , and the Episcopacy too , which he speaks of ? And in the next chapter adds , Tales Presbyteros nutrit Ecclesia , de quibus & Propheta ait , & dabo principes tuos in pace , & Episcopos tuos in justitiâ . Did Irenaeus think that Bishops in a superiour order to Presbyters were derived by an immediate succession from the Apostles , and yet call the Presbyters by the name of Bishops ? It is said , indeed that in the Apostles times the names , Bishop and Presbyter were comman , although the Office was distinct , but that was only during the Apostles life , say some , when after the name Bishop was appropriated to that order that was in the Apostles ( so called before ) ; but , say others , it was only till subject Presbyters was constituted , and then grew the difference between the names . But neither of these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can draw forth the difficulty in these places of Irenaeus ; for now both the Apostles were dead , and subject Presbyters certainly in some of these Apostolical Churches were then constituted , whence comes then the community of names still , that those who are said to succeed the Apostles , are called Bishops in one place , but Presbyters in another , and the very succession of Episcopacy attributed to Presbyters ? Can we then possibly conceive that these testimonies of Irenaeus can determine the point of succession , so as to make clear to us what that power was which those persons enjoyed , whom he sometimes calls Bishops , and sometimes Presbyters . But it is not Irenaeus alone ; who tells us that Presbyters succeed the Apostles ; even Cyprian who pleads so much for obedience to the Bishops as they were then constituted in the Church , yet speaks often of his compresbyteri ▪ and in his Epistles to Florentius Pupianus , who had reproached him , speaking of those words of Christ , He that heareth you , heareth me , &c. Qui dicit ad Apostoles , a● per hoc ad omnes praepositos qui Apostolis vicariâ ordinatione succedunt ▪ where he attr●butes Apostolical succession to all that were praepositi , which name implies not the relation to Presbyters as over them , but to the people , and is therefore common both to Bishops and Presbyters ; * for so afterwards he speaks , nec fraternitas habuerit Episcopum , nec pl●bs Praepositum , &c. Ierome saith , that Presbyters are loco Apostolorum , and that they do Apostolico gradui succeders ; and the so much magnified Ignatius , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that the Presbyters succeeded in the place of the Bench of Apostles ; and elsewhere of Sotion the Deacon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as it is read in the Florentine copy set out by Vossius ; but in the former Editions , both by Vedelius and the most learned Primate of Armagh it is read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that of Vossius seems to be the true reading , to which the old Latin version in Bishop Usher fully agrees ; Quoniam subjectus est Episcopo ut grati● Dei , & Presbyterio ut legi Jesu Christi . It might be no improbable conjecture to guess from hence at Ignatius his opinion concerning the original both of Episcopacy and Presbyterie . The former he looks on as an excellent gift of God to the Church ; so a learned Doctor paraphraseth Grati● Dei , i. e. Dono à Deo Ecclesiae ●ndulto ; so Cyprian often Divina dignatione , speaking of Bishops ; i. e. that they looked on it as an act of Gods special favour to the Church to find out that means for unity in the Church , to pitch upon one among the Presbyters who should have the chief Rule in every particular Church ▪ but then for Presbyterie , he looks on that as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , an institution and Law of Iesus Christ , which must on that account alwayes continue in the Church . And ●o Sotion did commendably in submitting to the Bishop as a Favour of God to the Church for preventing schism● ▪ on which account it is , and not upon the account of divine institution , that Ignatius is so earnest in requiring obedience to the Bishop , because , as Cyprian faith , Ecclesia est plebs Episcopo coad●nata , & grex Pastori adhaerens ▪ and the Bishops then being Orthodox , he layes such a charge upon the people to adher● to them , ( for it is to the people , and not to the Presbyters he speaks most ) which was as much as to bid them hold to the unity of the faith , and avoid those pernicious heresies which were then abroad ; and so Ignatius and Ierome may easily be reconciled to one another ; both owning the Council of Presbyters as of divine institution , and both requiring obedience to Bishops as a singular priviledge granted to the Church , for preventing schisms , and preserving unity in the Faith. And in all those thirty five Testimonies produced out of Ignatius his Epistles for Episcopacy , I can meet but with one which is brought to prove the least femblance of an Institution of Christ for Episcopacy ▪ and if I be not much deceived , the sense of that place is clearly mistaken too . the place is Ep. ad Ephesios ; He is exhorting the Ephesians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ which I suppose may be rendred to fulfill the will of God ; so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Apocalyps . 17. 17. and adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . He begins to exhort them to concur with the will of God , and concludes his Exhortation to concur with the will or counsel of the Bishop ; and in the middle he shews the ground of the connexion of these two together ; for Christ , saith he , who is our inseparable life is the counsel of the Father : and the Bishops who are scattered abroad to the ends of the earth , are the counsel of Iesus Christ , i. e. do concur with the will of Christ ; therefore follow the counsel of your Bishop , which also you do . Every thing is plain and obvious in the sense here , and very coherent to the expressions both before and after ; only the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be left out as plainly redundant , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must not be rendred determinati , but rather disterminati , because it refers to a place here , and so it notes their being dispersed into several places , and separated from one another , thereby implying the unity of their faith , and the coagulum fidei , notwithstanding their distance from one another as to place in the World , which in Cyprians words is , Ecclesiae universae per totum mundum unitatis vinculo copulatae . And certainly a stronger argument then this could not have been given for the Ephesians chearfull obedience to their Bishop ( which is the thing beaims at ) then the universal consent of all the Bishops in the Christian World in the unity of the faith of Christ ; so that as Christ is the will and counsel of the Father , because of that Harmony and consent which is between their wills ; so the Bishops are the will and counsel of Christ , as chearfully uniting in the profession of his Faith. So that we see Ignatius himself cannot give a doubting mind satisfaction of the Divine institution of Bishops , when in the only place brought to that purpose , his sense is quite different from what it is brought for . So that the Records of the Church are far from deciding this controversie as to the certainty of the form of Government instituted by Christ , because of the Ambiguity of those Records as to the point of succession to the Apostles ▪ in that this succession might be only of a different degree , in that it is not clear and convincing in all places : in that where it is clearest , it is meant of a succession of Doctrine , and not of persons ; in that if it were of persons , yet Presbyters are said to succeed the Apostles as well as Bishops , by the same persons who speak of these . By which last thing we have likewise cleared the Second thing propounded , to shew the ambiguity of the Testimony of Antiquity , which was the promiscuous use of the names of Bishop and Presbyters , after the distinction between their office was brought in by the Church . For we have made it appear that the names are promiscuously used , when that succession which is sometimes attributed to Bishops , is at other times given to Presbyters . Other instances might be brought of that nature ▪ as , first , that of Clemens Romanus in his excellent Epist●e , which like the River Alp●eus had run under ground for so many centuries of years ▪ but hath now in these last times of the world appeared publikely to the view of the World , to make it appear how true that is which he saith the Apostles did foresee , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that there would be great contentions about the name of Episcopacy ▪ and so there are still and that from his Epistle too . For when in one place he tells us that the Apostles ordained their first fruits to be Bishops and Deacons , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of those that should believe : afterwards he makes no scruple of calling those Bishops Presbyters in several places , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. and speaking of the present schism at Corinth , he saith , it was a most shamefull thing and unworthy of Christians , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . To hear the firm and ancient Church of Corinth , for the sake of one or two persons to raise a sedition against the Presbyters ▪ and afterwards , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Only l●t the flock of Christ enjoy its peace with the Presbyters which are set over it . But because this is said to be spoken before the time of distinction between Bishops and Presbyters , it being supposed that there were no subject Presbyters then ( although no reason can be assigned why the Apostles should ordain Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of those that should believe , and should not likewise ordain Presbyters for them ) yet to take away all scruple , we shall go farther ; when subject Presbyters , as they are called , are acknowledged to be , and yet Bishops are call'd Presbyters then too ▪ For which we have the clear testimony of the Martyrs of the Gallican Church in their Epistle to Eleutherius Bishop of Rome , who call Irenaeus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , when as Blondell observes he had been nine years Bishop of Lyons in the place of Pothinus ; neither doth Blondels argument lye here , that because they call him the Presbyter of the Church , therefore he was no Bishop , as his Antagonist supposeth ; but he freely acknowledgeth him to have succeeded Pothinus there in his Bishoprick ; but because after the difference arose between Bishop and Presbyters , yet they called him by the name of Presbyter , it seems very improbable that when they were commending one to the Bishop of another Church , they should make use of the lowest name of honour then appropriated to subject Presbyters , which instead of commending , were a great debasing of him , if they had looked on a superiour order above those Presbyters , as of divine institution , and thought there had been so great a distance between a Bishop and subject Presbyters , as we are made to believe there was . Which is , as if the Master of a Colledge in one University should be sent by the Fellows of his Society to the Heads of the other , and should in his Commendatory letters to them , be styled a Senior Fellow of that House ▪ Would not any one that read this , imagine that there was no difference between a Senior Fellow and a Master , but only a primacy of order , that he was the first of the number without any power over the rest ? This was the case of Irenaeus : he is supposed to be Bishop of the Church of Lyons ; he is sent by the Church of Lyons on a Message to the Bishop of Rome ; when notwithstanding his being Bishop they call him Presbyter of that Church , ( when there were other Presbyters who were not Bishops , ) what could any one imagine by the reading of it , but that the Bishop was nothing else but the Seniour Presbyter , or one that had a primacy of order among , but no divine Right to a power of jurisdiction over his Fellow Presbyters ? More instances of this nature are brought there by that learned Author , which the Reader may compare with the answers , and then let him judge whether the Testimony of Antiquity have not too much ambiguity in it to decide the Controversie clearly on either side . But that which seems yet more material , is , that which we observed in the third place , that those who acknowledge the superiority of Bishops over Presbyters , do impute it to an act of the Church , and not ascribe it to any divine institution . The testimony of Ierome to this purpose is well known , and hath been produced already ; that of the counterfeit Ambiose , but true Hilary , is in every ones mouth upon this Controversie ; Quia primum Presbyteri Episcopi appellabantur , ut recedente uno sequensti succederet ; sed quia coeperunt sequentes Presbyteri indigni inveniri ad primatus tenendos , immutata est ratio , prospiciente Co●cilio , ut non ordo , sed meritum crearet Episcopum multorum Sacerdotum judicio constitutum , ne indignus temer● Usurparet & esset multis scandalum ▪ Very strange that an opinion so directly contrary to the Divine right of Episcop●cy should be published by a Deacon of the Church of Rome , and these Commentaries cited by Austin , with applause of the person , without stigmatizing him for a heretick with Aerius , if it had been the opinion of the Church , that Bishops in their power over Presbyters did succeed the Apostles by a Divine Right . Nothing more clear , then that he asserts all the difference between a Bishop , and Presbyters to arise from an act of the Church choosing men for their deserts , when before they succeeded in order of place ; It is a mistake of Blundels , to attribute this to the Nicene Council ; doub less he means no more then that Hierom calls Concilium Presbyterorum , or which he himself means by judicium Sacerdotum . The testimony of Austin hath been already mentioned . Secundum honorum vocabula quae jam Ecclesiae usus obtinuit , Episcopatus Presbyterio major est . Thereby implying it was not so alwayes : else to what purpose serves that jam obtinuit , and that the original of the difference was from the Church ? But more express and full is Isidore himself the Bishop of Sevill in Spain speaking of Presbyters . His sicut Episcopis dispensatio mysteriorum Dei commissa est ; praesunt eni● Ecclesiis Christi , & in confectione corporis & sanguinis consortes cum Episcopis sunt ; similiter & in doctrina populi & in Officio praedicandi , sed sola propter auctoritatem summo sacerdoti Clericorum Ordinatio reservata est , ne à multis Ecclesiae Disciplina vindicatae , concordiam solueret , scandala generaret . What could be spoken more to our purpose then this is ? he asserts the identity of power as well as name , in both Bishops and Presbyters in governing the Church , in celebrating the Eucharist , in the Office of preaching to the people , onely for the greater Honour of the Bishop , and for preventing Schisms in the Church , the power of Ordination was reserved to the Bishop ; by those words propter Auctoritatem , he cannot possibly mean the Authority of a Divine Command , for that his following words contradict , that it was to prevent Schisms and Scandals , and after produceth the whole place of Ierome to that purpose . Agreeable to this , is the judgment of the second Council of Sevil in Spain , upon the occasion of the irregular proceeding of some Presbyters ordained by Agapius Bishop of Corduba . Their words are these : Nam quamvis cum Episcopis plurima illis Ministeriorum communis sit dispensatio , quaedam novellis & Ecclesiasticis regulis sibi prohibita noverint , sicut Presbyterororum & Diaconorum & Virginum consecratio ▪ &c. Haec enim omnia illicita esse Presbyteris , quia Pontificatus apicem non habent , quem solis deberi Episcopis authoritate Canonum praecipitur : ut per hoc & discretio graduum , & dignitatis fastigium summi Pontificis demonstretur . How much are we beholding to the ingenuity of a Spanish Council , that doth so plainly disavow the pretence of any divine right to the Episcopacy by them so strenuously asserted ? All the right they plead for , is from the novellae & Ecclesiasticae regula , which import quite another thing from Divine institution ; and he that hath not learnt to distinguish between the authority of the Canons of the Church , and that of the Scriptures , will hardly ever understand the matter under debate with us : and certainly it is another thing to preserve the honour of the different Degrees of the Clergy , but especially of the chief among them , viz. the Bishop , than to observe a thing meerly out of Obedience to the command of Christ ; and upon the account of Divine institution . That which is rejoyned in answer to these Testimonies , as far as I can learn , is onely this , that the Council and Isidore followed Jerome , and so all make up but one single Testimony . But might it not as well be said , that all that are for Episcopacy did follow Ignatius or Epiphanius , and so all those did make up but one single Testimony on the other side ? Ye● I do as yet despair of finding any one single Testimony in all Antiquity , which doth in plain terms assert Episcopacy , as it was setled by the practice of the Primitive Church in the ages following the Apostles , to be of an unalterable Divine right . Some expressions I grant in some of them seem to extoll Episcopacy very high ; but then it is in Order to the Peace and Unity of the Church , and in that Sense they may sometimes be admitted to call it Divine and Apostolical , not in regard of its institution , but of its end , in that it did in their Opinion tend as much to preserve the Unity of the Church , as the Apostles Power did over the Churches while they were living . If any shall meet with expressions seeming to carry the Fountain of Episcopal power higher , let them remember to distinguish between the power it self , and the restrained Exercise of that power ; the former was from the Apostles , but common to all Dispensers of the Word ; the latter was appropriated to some , but by an Act of the Church , whereby an eminency of power was attributed to one , for the safety of the whole . And withall let them consider , that every Hyperbolical expression of a Father will not bear the weight of an Argument : and how common it was to call things Divine , which were conceived to be of excellent use , or did come from persons in authority in the Church . One would think that should meet with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon , it could be rendred by nothing short of the Scriptures : whereas they mean no more by it , but onely the Emperours Letters to the Council . It hath been already observed how ready they were to call any custome of the Church before their times an Apostolical Tradition . And as the Heathens when they had any thing which they knew not whence it came , they usually called it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as though it came immediately from Heaven ; So the Fathers when Traditions were convey'd to them without the names of the Authors , they conclude they could have no other Fountain but the Apostles . And thus we see , many Traditions in several Churches directly contrary to one another , were looked on as Apostolical , onely from the prevalency of this perswasion , that whatever they derived from their Fathers , was of that nature . But then for that answer to the Council , and Isidore , and Ierome , that they make but one testimony : I say , that although the words be of the same Sense , yet they have the nature of a different testimony , upon these accounts . First as produced by persons of different condition in the Church ; some think they are even with Ierome , when they tell us what a pique there was between him and Iohn Bishop of Ierusalem ; and , that he might have the better advantage of his adversary , when he could not raise himself up to the Honour of Episcopacy , he would bring that down to the State of Presbytery ; but as such entertain too unworthy thoughts of one of those Fathers , whom they profess themselves admirers of ; so this prejudice cannot possibly lie against Isidore , or the Council : For the first was himself a Bishop of no mean account in the Church of God ; and the Council was composed of such ; it could be no biass then of that nature could draw them to this Opinion : and no doubt they would have been as forward to maintain their own authority in the Church , as the Truth and Conscience would give them leave . Therefore on this account one Testimony of a single Bishop , much more of a whole Council of them , against their acting by Divine Authority in the Church , is of more validity then ten for it ; in as much as it cannot but be in Reason supposed that none will speak any thing against the authority they are in , or what may tend in the least to diminish it , but such as make more Conscience of the Truth , then of their own Credit and Esteem in the World. Secondly , in that it was done in different ages of the Church : Ierome flourished about 380. Isidore succeeded Leander in Sevill , 600. The Council sat , 619. The Council of Aquen which tanscribes Isidore , and owns his Doctrine , 816. So that certainly supposing the words of all to be the same , yet the Testimony is of greater force , as it was owned in several Ages of the Church , by whole Councils , without any the least controul that we read of . And if this then must not be looked on as the Sense of the Church at that time , I know not how we can come to understand it : if what is positively maintained by different persons in different ages of the Church , and in different places without any opposing it by Writers of those ages , or condemning it by Councils , may not be conceived to be the Sense of the Church at that time . So that laying all these things together , we may have enough to conclude the Ambiguity at least , and thereby incompetency of the Testimony of Antiquity for finding out the certain form which the Apostles observed in planting Churches . We proceed to the third thing to shew the incompetency of Antiquity for deciding this Controversie , which will be from the Partiality of the Testimony brought from thence . Two things will sufficiently manifest the Partiality of the judgment of Antiquity in this Case . First their apparent judging of the practice of the first Primitive Church , according to the Customes of their own . Secondly , their stiffe and pertinacious adhering to private traditions contrary to one another , and both sides maintaining theirs as Apostolical . First , judging the practice of the Apostles by that of their own times ; as is evident by Theodoret , and the rest of the Greek Commentators , assigning that as the Reason why the Presbyters spoken of in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus , were not Bishops in the Sense of their age , because there could be but one Bishop in a City , whereas there are more expressed in those places , as being in the several Cities : whereas this is denyed of Apostolical times by the late pleaders for Episcopacy ; and it is said of them , that they spoke according to the custome of their own time . And it is now thought there were two Bishops in Apostolical times in several Cities : the one the head of the Jewish Coetus , and the other of the Gentile . I enter not the Dispute again here , whether it were so or no , onely I hence manifest , how farr those persons themselves who plead for the judgement of the Fathers as deciding this Controversie , are from thinking them impartial Judges , when as to the grounds of their Sentence they are confessed to speak onely of the practice of their own time . Who can imagine any force in Chrysostomes argument , That the Presbyters who laid hands on Timothy must needs be Bishops , because none do Ordain in the Church , but Bishops , unless he makes this the medium of his argument . That whatever was the practice of the Church in his dayes , was so in Apostolical times . There is , I know not what strange influence in a received custome , if generally embraced , that doth possess men with a ●ancy , it was never otherwise then it is with them ; nay ▪ when they imagine the necessity of such a custome at present in the Church , they presently think it could never be otherwise then it is . But of this I have spoken somewhat already . Secondly , that which makes it appear how partial the judgement of Antiquity is , in adhering to their particular Traditions , and calling them Apostolical , though contrary to one another . How can we then fix upon the Testimony of Antiquity as any thing certain or impartial in this Case ? when it hath been found so evidently partial in a Case of less concernment then this is . A witness that hath once betrayed his faithfulness in the open Court , will hardly have his Evidence taken in a Case of moment , especially when the Cause must stand or fall according to his single Testimony . For my part , I see not how any man that would see Reason for what he doth , can adhere to the Church for an unquestionable Tradition received from the Apostles ; when in the case of keeping Easter , whether with the Jewes on the fourteenth Moon , or only on the Lords day , there was so much unreasonable heat shewed on both sides , and such confidence , that on either side their Tradition was Apostolical . The Story of which is related by Eusebius , and Socrates , and many others . They had herein all the advantages imaginable in order to the knowing the certainty of the thing then in question among them . As their nearness to Apostolical times , being but one remove from them : yea the persons contending pleaded personal acquaintance with some of the Apostles themselves , as Polycarp with Iohn , and Anicetus of Rome , that he had his Tradition from Saint Peter ; and yet so great were the heats , so irreconcilable the Controversie , that they proceeded to dart the Thunderbolt of excommunication in one anothers faces ; as Victor with more zeal then piery , threw presently the Asiatick Churches all out of Communion , onely for differing as to this Tradition . The small coals of this fire kindled a whole Aetna of contention in the Christian world , the smoak and ashes , nay the flames of which , by the help of the Prince of the Aire were blown over into the bosome of the then almost Infant Northern Churches of Brittain , where a solemn dispute was caused upon this quarrel between Colmannus on one side , and Wilfride on the other . The like contest was upon this Occasion between Augustine the Monk , and the Brittish Bishops . The Observation of this strange combustion in the Primitive Church upon the account of so vain , frivolous , unnecessary a thing as this was , drew this note from a Learned and Judicious Man , formerly quoted , in his Tract of Schism ; By this we may plainly see the danger of our appeal to Antiquity , for resolution in controverted points of Faith. O how small relief are we to expect from thence ! For if the discretion of the chiefest Guides and Directors of the Church did in a point so trivial , so inconsiderable , so mainly fail them , as not to see the Truth in a Subject , wherein it is the greater marvel how they could avoid the fight of it ; Can we , without the imputation of great grossness and folly , think so poor-spirited persons , competent Iudges of the questions now on foot betwixt the Churches ? Thus that person , as able to make the best improvement of the Fathers as any of those who profess themselves the most superstitious admirers of Antiquity . But if we must stand to the judgement of the Fathers , let us stand to it in this , that no Tradition is any further to be imbraced , then as it is founded on the Word of GOD. For which purpose those words of Cyprian are very observable ; In compendio est autem apud religios as & simplices mentes , & errorem deponere , & invenire atque eruere veritatem : Nam si ad Divinae Traditionis caput & Originem revertamur , cessat error humanus . He asserts it an easie matter , for truly religious and plain-hearted men to lay aside their Errour , and to find out the Truth , which is by returning to the head and spring of Divine Tradition , viz. the Scriptures ; Which he expresseth further , with an elegant similitude : Si Canalis aquam ducens , qui copiose prius & largiter profluebat , subito deficiat , nonne ad fontem pergitur ut illic defectionis ratio noscatur , utrumne arescentibus venis , in capite unda siccaverit ; an verò integra deinde & plena procurrens , in medio itinere destiterit ? ut si vitio interrupti aut bibuli canalis effectum est , quò minus aqua continua perseveranter & jugiter flueret , refecto & confirmato canali ad usum atque ad potum civitatis aqua collecta eadem ubertate atque integritate repraesentaretur , qua de fonte proficiscitur . Quod & nunc facere oportet Dei sacerdotes praecepta divina servantes , ut si in aliquo mutaverit ( l. nutaverit ) & vacillaverit veritas , ad originem Dominicam , & Evangelicam ▪ & Apostolicam Traditionem revertamur , & inde surgat actus nostri ratio , unde & ordo & origo surrexit . His meaning is ; That as when a channel suddenly fails , we presently inquire where and how the breach was made , and look to the Spring and Fountain , to see the waters be fully conveyed from thence , as formerly : so upon any failure in the Tradition of the Church , our onely recourse must be to the true Fountain of Tradition the Word of God , and ground the Reason of our Actions upon that which was the Foundation of our profession . And when Stephen the Bishop of Rome would tedder him to tradition , Cyprian keeps his liberty by this close question , Unde illa Traditio ● utrumne de Dominica & Evangelica auctoritate descendens , an de Apostolorum mandatis atque Epistolis veniens , — Si ergo aut Evangelio praecipitur , aut in Apostolorum Epistolis , aut Actibus continetur — observetur Divina haec & Sancta traditio . We see this good man would not baulk his way on foot for the great bugbear of Tradition , unless it did bear the Character of a Divine Truth in it , and could produce the credentials of Scripture to testifie its authority to him . To the same purpose that stout Bishop of Cappadocia , Firmilian , whose unhappiness with Cyprians , was onely that of Iobs Friends , that they excellently managed a bad Cause , and with far more of the Spirit of Christianity , then Stephen did , who was to be justified in nothing but the Truth he defended . Eos autem , saith Firmilian , qui Roma sunt , non ea in omnibus observare quae sint ab origine tradita , & frustra Apostolorum auctoritatem pr●tendere , which he there makes out at large , viz. That the Church of Rome had gathered corruption betimes , which after broke out into an Impostume in the head of it . Where then must we find the certain way of resolving the Controversie we are upon ? The Scriptures determine it not , the Fathers tell us there is no believing tradition any further then it is founded in Scripture ; thus are we sent back from one to the other , till at last we conclude there is no certain way at all left to find out a decision of it . Not that we are left at such uncertainties as to matters of Faith ( I would not be so mistaken ) We have Archimedes his Postulatum granted us for that , a place to fix our Faith on , though the World be moved out of its place , I mean the undoubted Word of God : but as to matters of Fact not clearly revealed in Scripture , no certainty can be had of them , from the hovering light of unconstant Tradition . Neither is it onely unconstant , but in many things Repugnant to its self , which was the last Consideration to be spoke to , in reference to the shewing the incompetency of Antiquity for deciding our Controversie . Well then , suppose we our selves now waiting for the final Verdict of Church-Tradition to determine our present cause ; If the Iury cannot agree , we are as far from satisfaction as ever ; and this is certainly the Case we are now in . The main difficulty lyes in the immediate succession to the Apostles : if that were but once cleared , we might bear with interruptions afterwards : but the main seat of the controversie lies there , whether the Apostles upon their withdrawing from the Government of Churches did substitute single persons to succeed them or no : so that u●less that be cleared , the very Deed of Gift is questioned : and if that could be made appear , all other things would speedily follow . Yes , say some , that is clear : For at Ierusalem , Antioch , and Rome , it is evident that single persons were entrusted with the Government of Churches . In Ierusalem , say they , Iames the brother of our LORD , was made Bishop by the Apostles : But whence doth that appear ? It is said from Hegesippus in Eusebius . But what if he say no such thing ? his words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is there interpreted , Ecclesiae administrationem una cum caeteris Apostolis suscepit . And no more is thereby meant , but that this Iames who is by the Antients conceived to be onely a Disciple before , is now taken into a higher charge ; and invested in a power of governing the Church as the Apostles were . His power , it is plain , was of the same nature , with that of the Apostles themselves : And who will go about to degrade them so much as to reduce them to the Office of Ordinary Bishops ? Iames in probability did exercise his Apostleship the most at Ierusalem , where by the Scriptures we find him Resident , and from hence the Church afterwards , because of his not travelling abroad as the other Apostles did , according to the Language of their own times , they fixed the Title of Bishop upon him . But greater difference we shall find in those who are pleaded to be successours of the Apostles . At Antioch some , as Origen and Eusebius , make Ignatius to succeed Peter . Ierome makes him the third Bishop , and placeth Evodius before him . Others therefore to solve that , make them cotemporary Bishops ; the one of the Church of the Jewes , the other of the Gentiles : with what congruity to their Hypothesis of a single Bishop and Deacons placed in every City , I know not : but that Salvo hath been discussed before . Come we therefore to Rome , and here the succession is as muddy as the Tiber it self ; for here Tertullian , Rufinus , and several others place Clement next to Peter . Irenaeus and Eusebius set Anacletus before him : Epiphanius and Optatus both Anacletus and Cletus ; Augustinus and Damasus with others , make Anacletus , Cletus , and Linus , all to precede him . What way shall we find to extrica e our selves out of this Labyrinth , so as to reconcile it with the certainty of the Form of Government in the Apostles times ? Certainly , if the Line of Succession fail us here , when we most need it , we have little cause to pin our Faith upon it as to the certainty of any particular Form of Church-Government setled in the Apostles times , which can be drawn from the help of the Records of the Primitive Church : which must be first cleared of all Defectiveness , Ambiguity , Partiality , and Confusion ; before the thing we inquire for , can be extracted out of them . Having thus far shewed that we have no absolute certainty of what Form of Government was setled by the Apostles in the several Churches of their Plantation : The next Consideration which follows to be spoken to , is , that the Apostles in probability did not observe any one fixed course of setling the Government of Churches , but setled it according to the several circumstances of places and persons which they had to deal with . This will be ex abundanti as to the thing by me designed , which would be sufficiently cleared without this : and therefore I lay it not as the Foundation of my Thesis , but onely as a Doctrine of Probability , which may serve to reconcile the Controversies on foot about Church-Government . For if this be made appear , then it may be both granted that the Apostles did settle the Government in the Church in a Colledg of Presbyters , and in a Bishop and Deacons too , according to the diversity of places , and the variety of circumstances . It is easie to observe , that as to Rites and Customes in the Church , the Original of most mens mistakes , is , Concluding that to be the general Practice of the Church , which they meet with in some places : whereas that is most true which Firmiliam tells us , In plurimis Provinciis , multa pro locorum & nominum ( l. hominum ) diversitate , variantur ; nec tamen propter hoc ab Ecclesiae Catholicae pace atque unitate discossum est . Those Rites varied in divers places , retaining still the Unity of the Faith ; so , as to matter of Government , mens mistakes do arise from an universal conclusion deduced out of particular premises ; and what they think was done in one place , they conclude must be done in all : Whereas these are the grounds inducing me probably to conclude that they observed not the same course in all places . Which when an impartial Reader hath soberly considered ( with what hath gone before , ) I am in hopes , the Novelty of this Opinion may not prejudicate its entertainment with him . My grounds are these ; First , From the different state , condition and quantity of the Churches planted by the Apostles . Secondly , From the multitude of unfixed Officers in the Church then , which acted with authority over the Church where they were resident . Thirdly , from the different customes observed in several Churches , as to their Government after the Apostles decease . I begin with the first , The different State , Condition , and Quantity of the Churches planted by the Apostles : For which we are to consider these things ; First , That God did not give the Apostles alike success of their labours in all places . Secondly , That a small number of believers did not require the same number , which a great Church did , to teach and govern them . Thirdly , That the Apostles did settle Church-Officers according to the probability of increase of believers , and in order thereto , in some great places . First , That God did not give the Apostles equal success to their labours in all places . After God called them to be Fishers of men , it was not every draught which filled their Net with whole shoals of Fishes ; sometimes they might toyle all Night still and catch nothing , or very little . It was not every Sermon of Peters which converted three thousand : the whole world might at that rate soon have become Christian , although there had been but few Preachers besides the Apostles . God gave them strange success at first , to encourage them the better to meet with difficulties afterwards ; In 〈…〉 es God told them he had much people , in others we read but of few that believed . At Corinth , Paul Plants , and Apollos Waters , and God gives an abundant increase ; but at Athens ( where if moral dispositions had fitted men for Grace , and the improvements of Nature , we might have expected the greatest number of Converts ) yet here we read of many mocking , and others delaying , and but of very few believing : Dionysius and Damaris , and some others with them . The Plantations of the Apostles were very different , not from the Nature of the soile they had to deal with , but from the different influence of the Divine Spirit upon their Endeavours in severall places . We cannot think that the Church at Cenchrea ( for so it is called ) was as well stockt with Believers , as that at Corinth . Nay , the Churches generally in the Apostles times were not so filled with Numbers , as men are apt to imagine them to be . I can as soon hope to find in Apostolical times Diocesan Churches as Classical and Provincial ; yet this doth not much advantage the Principles of the Congregational men , as I have already demonstrated . Yet I do not think that all Churches in the Apostles times were but one Congregation ; but as there was in Cities many Synagogues , so there might be many Churches out of those Synagogues enjoying their former liberties and priviledges . And they that will shew me where five thousand Jewes and more did ordinarily meet in one of their Synagogues for publike worship , may gain something upon me , in order to believing the Church of Ierusalem to be but one Congregation , and yet not perswade me , till they have made it appear , that the Christians then had as publike solemn set meetings as the Jews had ; which he that understands the state of the Churches at that time , will hardly yield to the belief of . I confess , I cannot see any rule in Scripture laid down for distributing Congregations : but this necessity would put them upon ; and therefore it were needless to prescribe them ; and very little , if any , reason can I see on the other side , why , where there were so much people as to make distinct Congregations , they must make distinct Churches from one another ; but of that largely in the next chapter . All Churches then we see were not of an equal extent . The second premisal Reason will grant , viz. that a small Church did not require the same number of Officers to rule it , which a great one did . For the duty of Officers lying in Reference to the People , where the People was but few , one constant setled Officer with Deacons under him , might with as much ease discharge the work , as in a numerous Church , the joynt help of many Officers was necessary to carry it on . The same reason which tells us that a large flock of Sheep consisting of many thousands doth call for many Shepherds to attend them , doth likewise tell us that a small flock may be governed with the care of one single Shepherd watching continually over them . The third premisall was that in great Cities the Apostles did not onely respect the present guidance of those that were converted , but established such as might be useful for the converting and bringing in of others to the Faith , who were as yet strangers to the Covenant of promise , and aliens from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , society of Christians . And here I conceive a mistake of some men lies , when they think the Apostles respected onely the Ruling of those which were already converted ; for though this were one part of their work , yet they had an eye to the main Design then on foot , the subjecting the World to the Obedience of Faith ; in order to which it was necessity in places of great resort and extent , to place not onely such as might be sufficient to superintend the Affairs of the Church , but such as might lay out themselves the most in Preaching the Gospel in order to converting others . Haveing laid down these things by way of premisal , we will see what advantage we can make of them in order to our purpose . First , then I say , that in Churches consisting of a small number of Believers , where there was no great probability of a large increase afterwards : One single Pastour With Deacons under him , were onely constituted by the Apostles for the ruling of those Churches . Where the work was not so great , but a Pastour and Deacons might do it , what need was there of having more ? and in the great scarcity of fit Persons for setled Rulers then , and the great multitude and necessity of unfixed Officers for preaching the Gospel abroad , many persons fit for that work could not be spared to be constantly Resident upon a place . Now that in some places at first there were none placed but onely a Pastour and Deacons , I shall confirm by these following Testimonies . The first is that of Clement in his Epistle , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Apostles therefore preaching abroad through Countreys and Cities , ordained the First-fruits of such as believed , having proved them by the Spirit , to be Bishops and Deacons for them that should afterwards believe . Whether by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we understand Villages or Regions , is not material ; for it is certain here the Author takes it as distinct from Cities ; and there is nothing , I grant , expressed where the Apostles did place Bishops and Deacons exclusive of other places , i. e. whether onely in Cities or Countreys ; but it is evident by this , that where-ever they planted Churches , they ordained Bishops and Deacons , whether those Churches were in the City or Countrey . And here we find no other Officers setled in those Churches , but Bishops and Deacons ; And that there were no more in those Churches then he speaks of , appears from his Designe of paralleling the Church-Officers in the Gospel , to those under the Law : and therefore it was here necessary to enumerate all that were then in the Churches . The main controversie is , what these Bishops were ; whether many in one place ; or onely one ; and if but one , whether a Bishop in the modern Sense or no. For the first , here is nothing implying any necessity of having more then one in a place , which will further be made appear by and by , out of other Testimonies which will help to explain this . As for the other thing , we must distinguish of the Notion of a Bishop : For he is either such a one as hath none over him in the Church ; or he is such a one as hath a power over Presbyters acting under him , and by authority derived from him . If we take it in the first Sense , so every Pastor of a Church having none exercising jurisdiction over him , is a Bishop ; and so every such single Pastor in the Churches of the Primitive times was a Bishop in this Sense , as every Master of a Family before Societies for Government were introduced , might be called a King , because he had none above him to command him : but if we take a Bishop in the more proper Sense , for one that hath power over Presbyters and People , such a one these single Pastors were not , could not be . For it is supposed that these were onely single Pastors . But then it is said that after other Presbyters were appointed , then these single Pastors were properly Bishops ; but to that I answer : First , they could not be proper Bishops by vertue of their first Constitution ; for then they had no power over any Presbyters , but onely over the Deacons and People ; and therefore it would be well worth considering how a power of jurisdiction over Presbyters can be derived , from those single Pastors of Churches that had no Presbyters joyned with them . It must be then clearly and evidently proved that it was the Apostles intention that these single Pastors should have the power over Presbyters , when the Churches necessity did require their help , which intention must be manifested and declared by some manifestation of it as a Law of Christ , or nothing can thence be deduced of perpetual concernment to the Church of Christ. Secondly , either they were Bishops before , or onely after the appointment of Presbyters ; if before , then a Bishop , and a Presbyter having no Bishop over him , are all one ; if after onely , then it was by his communicating power to Presbyters to be such , or their choice which made him their Bishop ; if the first , then Presbyters quoad ordinem are onely a humane institution , it being acknowledged that no Evidence can be brought from Scripture for them ; and for any Act of the Apostles not recorded in Scripture for the constituting of them , it must goe among unwritten Traditions ; and if that be a Law still binding the Church , then there are such which occurre not in the Word of GOD , and so that must be an imperfect coppy of Divine Lawes : If he were made Bishop by an Act of the Presbyters , then Presbyters have power to make a Bishop , and so Episcopacy is an humane institution depending upon the voluntary Act of Presbyters . But the clearest Evidence for one single Pastour with Deacons in some Churches at the beginning of Christianity , is that of Epiphanius , which though somewhat large , I shall recite , because , if I mistake not , the curtailing of this Testimony hath made it speak otherwise then ever Epiphanius meant . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. The Sense of Epiphanius is very intricate and obscure ; we ●hall endeavour to explain it : He is giving Aerius an account why Paul in his Epistle to Timothy mentions onely Bishops and Deacons , and passeth over Presbyters . His account is this : first he cha●geth Aerius with ignorance of the Series of History ( which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) and the profound and ancient Records the Church , wherein it is expressed , that upon the first Preaching of the Gospel , the Apostle writ according to the present state of things . Where Bishops were not yet appointed ( for so certainly it should be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for then he must contradict himself ) the Apostle writes to Bishops and Deacons ; ( for the Apostles could not settle all things at first ) for there was a necessity of Presbyters and Deacons ; for by these two Orders all Ecclesiastical Offices might be performed : for where ( so I read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Sense , clearly carries it ) there was not found any worthy of being a Bishop , the place remained without one ; But where necessity required one , and there were some found fit for that Office , there some were ordained Bishops ; but for want of convenient number , there could be no Presbyters found out to be Ordained , and in such places they were contented with the Bishop and Deacons ; for without their Ministry the Bishop could not be . So that according to Epiphanius , there were three several states of Churches in the Apostles times ; first some Churches where there were onely Presbyters and Deacons without a Bishop . For , if Epiphanius speaks not at first of places where Presbyters were without a Bishop ; he must be guilty of a vain and empty Tautology , for he after tells us where the necessity of the Church required it , a Bishop was made ; therefore before he speaks of places only where Presbyters and Deacons were ; and otherwise he would not answer Aerius about 1 Tim. 4. 14. which it is his design to do , about The laying on of the hands of the Presbyterie . He grants then that at first in some places there were only Presbyters and Deacons , as when the Apostle writes to Bishops and Deacons ( where Bishops at that time of the Church were only Presbyters ) of which two orders , Presbyters and Deacons , there was an absolute necessity ; and the account he gives why they setled no higher order , above them is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Apostles could not settle all things at first ; which words are to be read with a Parenthesis , giving an account why sometimes only Bishops and Deacons were setled , that is , Presbyters so called . But , saith he , where necessity called for a higher order of Bishops above Presbyters , and any were found qualified for it , there such were appointed ; and if by reason of the want of persons of sufficient abilities to be made Presbyters in those places , there they were contented with such a superior Bishop and Deacons assisting of him ; Some Churches then according to his judgement , had a company of Presbyters to rule them being assisted with Deacons ; others had only a single Bishop with Deacons ; and after when the numbers were increased , and persons qualified were found , there were both Bishops , Presbyters , and Deacons . For , the account which he gives of the former want of some Officers in some Churches , is this , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( Read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the learned Dr. well corrects it ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Church not yet having all her offices filled , things were fain to remain in that state . For nothing can be compleated at first , but in process of time every thing receives its due perfection . So that Epiphanius doth not ( as it is thought by some ) say , that in the first times of the Church , there were none but Bishops and Deacons in all Churches , but in some Churches there were Presbyters and Deacons , in others Bishops and Deacons , according to the state , condition and necessity of the Churches . Epiphanius then fully and clearly expresseth my opinion , in reference to the Apostles not observing any one constant course in all Churches , but setling sometimes many Presbyters with Deacons , sometimes only one Pastor ( who is therefore called a Bishop ) with Deacons , and so setling Officers according to the particular occasions of every Church . The next considerable testimony to our purpose , is that of Clemens Alexandrinus in Eusebius , concerning St. Iohn after his return out of the ●sle of Patmos to Ephesus , upon the death of Domitian . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . He went abroad upon invitation into the neighbour-provinces , in some places constituting Bishops ; in some setting in order whole Churches , in others choosing out one from among the rest of those who were designed by the spirit of God , whom he set over the Church . So Salmasius contends it must be translated , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , choosing one into the Clergy ; for , those who were chosen Bishops , are sald 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and they that choose are said , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Whence Salmasius gathers out of these words the very thing I am now upon ; In majoribus urbibus plures , in minoribus pauciores Presbyteros ordinari solitos , probabile est . In pagis autem aut vicis , vel pusillis oppidis , quales 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocabant Graeci , unum aliquem Presbyterum per illa praecipuè tempora quibus non magnus erat numerus sidelium , suffecisse verisimile est . That the Apostles set a greater number of Presbyters in great Cities , fewer in less , and in small Villages but one , when the number of Believers was but small . We have yet one Author more who speaks fully to our purpose . It is the author of the Commentaries under Ambrose his name , who frequently asserts-this opinion I am now making good . Upon the fourth of Ephesians , he largely discourseth how things were setled at first , by the Apostles , by degrees , in the Church of God , evidently shewing that the Apostles did not at first observe any setled constant course , but acted according to present conveniency , as they saw good , in order to the promoting and advancing the Churches Interest . Post quam omnibus locis Ecclesiae sunt constitutae & officia ordinata , aliter composita res est quam coeperat . Thereby declaring his opinion , that while Churches were constituting , no certain course was observed . For , as he goes on , Primum enim omnes docebant , & omnes baptizabant , quibuscunque diebus vel temporibus fuisset occasio , &c. Ut ergo cresceret plebs & multiplicaretur , Omnibus inter initia concessum est & Evangelizare , & baptizare , & scripturas in Ecclesia explanare . At ubi omnia loca circumplexa est Ecclesia , conventicula constituta sunt , & rectores & caetera officia in Ecclesiis sunt ordinata ; ut nullus de Clero auderet , qui ordinatus non esset , prasumere ossicium quod sciret non sibi creditum vel concessum ; & coepit alio ordine & providentiâ gubernari Ecclesia ; quia si omnes eadem possent , irrationabile esset , & vulgaris res , & vilissima videretur , &c. Ideò non per omnia conveniunt scripta Apostoli ordinationi quae nunc est in Ecclesia , quia haec inter primordia sunt scripta ; Nam & Timotheum , ( Presbyterum à se creatum ) Episcopum vocat ; quia primum Presbyteri Episcopi appellabantur , ut recedente uno sequens ei succederet , &c. At first , he saith , All Church-Offices lay open to all persons , and every one did preach and baptize upon all occasions ; but afterwards , when Congregations were established and Churches setled , then none undertook that office but those that were ordained to it . Thence it is , that the Apostles Writings are not suitable to the present state of the Church , because they were penned in the time when things were not fully setled . For he calls Timothy , who was made a Presbyter by him , Bishop ; for so at first the Presbyters were called , among whom this was the course of governing Churches , that as one withdrew , another took his place . This opinion of his , he takes occasion to speak of in several other places . Upon Rom. 16. Adhuc rectores Ecclesiae paucis erant in locis ; Governours of Churches were as yet set up but in few places . And upon 1 Cor. 1. Propterea Ecclesiae scribit , quia adhuc singulis Ecclesiis rectores non erant instituti . And on 1 Cor. 11. Convenientibus Presbyteris , quia adh●o rectores Ecclesiis non omnibus locis erant constituti . By all which it is most evident , that this both learned and antient Author , cited with no small respect by St. Austin , doth not conceive that the Apostle , did observe any setled form in the governing of Churches , but act●d according to principles of prudence , according to the necessities and occasions of the several Churches by them planted : So that where there were small Churches , one Pastor with Deacons might suffice : in greater Churches some were governed by Presbyters acting in common Council : others , though very few at first , had Rectors placed over them , for superintending the affairs of the Church . Secondly , In Churches consisting of a multitude of believers , or where there was a probability of great increase by preaching the Gospel ; the Apostles did settle a Colledge of Presbyters , whose office was partly to govern the Church already formed , and partly to labour in the Converting more . So that in all great Cities , where either the work was already great by the number of believers , in order to the discharging of Pastoral duties to them , or where it was great in reference to the number they laboured in converting of , it seems most consonant to reason and Scripture , that the work should be carried on by the joint assistance of many associated in the same work . For , is it any ways probable that the Apostles should ordain Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Clemens speaks , of such as should believe ; and not ordain persons in order to the making them believe ? They have either a very low opinion of the work of a Gospel-Bishop , or very little consideration of the zeal , activity and diligence which was then used in preaching , reproving , exhorting , in season , out of season , that think one single person was able to undergo it all ▪ Discipline was a great deal more strict the● , Preaching more diligent , men more apprehensive of the weight of their function , than for any to undertake such a care and charge of souls , that it was impossible for them ever to know , observe , or watch over so as to give an account for them . Besides , while we suppose this one person imployed in the duties of his flock , what leisure or time could such a one have to preach to the Gentiles and unbelieving Jews in order to their Conversion ? The Apostles did not certainly aym at the setting up the honour of any one person , making the Office of the Church a matter of State and Dignity more then employment , but they chose men for their activity in preaching the Gospel , and for their usefulness in labouring to add continually to the Church . Men that were imployed in the Church then , did not consult for their ●ase or honour , and thought it not enough for them to sit still and b●d others work , but they were of Pauls mind , Necessity was laid upon them , yea , Woe was unto them if they preached not the Gospel . Publick prayers were not then looked on as the more principal end of Christian assemblies then preaching , nor consequen●ly that it was the more principal office of the Steward● of the Mysteries of God , to read the publick prayers of the Church , then to preach in season and out of season . And is it not great pitty , two such excellent and necessary duties should ever be set at variance , much less one so preferred before the other , that the one must be esteemed as Sarah , and the other almost undergo the hardship of Hagar , to be looked on as the Bond-woman of the Synagogue , and be turned out of doors ? Praying and preaching are the Iackin and Boaz of the Temple , like Rachel and Leah , both which built up the house of Israel : but though Rachel be fair and beautifull , yet Leah is the more fruitful : though prayer be lovely and amiable in the sight of God , when it comes from a heart seriously affected with what it speaks , yet preaching tends more to the turning mens souls from sin unto God. Were the Apostles commissioned by Christ to go pray or preach ? and what is it wherein the Ministers of the Gospel succeed the Apostles ? Is it in the office of Praying , or preaching ? Was Paul sent not to baptize , but to preach the Gospel ? and shall we think those who succeed Paul in his office of preaching , are to look upon any thing else as more their work then that ? Are Ministers in their ordination sent forth to be readers of publick Prayers , or to be Dispensers of Gods holy Word ? Are they ordained wholly to this , and shall this be the lesse principal part of their work ? I , but the reason is unanswerable , that praying is the more principal end of Christian-assemblies then preaching ; For , the one is the End , and the other the Means . If by End , be meant the ultimate end of all Christian duties , that cannot be Prayer : for that is a means it self in order to that ; but the chief end is the fitting souls for eternal prayses ; if then this unanswerable reason hold good , the principal end of Christian assemblies must be only prayses of God , and not prayers : If by the End , be meant the immediate end of preaching as that it referrs to , that cannot be ; for the immediate end of preaching , if the Apostle may be judge , is instruction and edification in the faith ; Rather preaching is the end of praying , in as much as the blessings conveyed by preaching , are the things which men pray for . But this is but one of those unhappy consequences which follows mens judging of the service of ▪ God , rather by the practices of the Church , when it came to enjoy ease and plenty , than by the wayes and practices of the first and purest Apostolical times : when the Apostles who were best able to judge of their own duty , looked upon themselves as most concerned in the preaching of the Gospel . But to this it is commonly said , that there was great reason for it then , because the world was to be converted to Christianity , and therefore preaching was the more necessary work at that time ; but when a Nation is converted to the faith , that necessity ceaseth . It is granted , that the preaching of the Gospel in regard of its universal extent was more necessary then , which was the foundation of Christs instituting the Apostolical Office with an unlimited commission ; but if we take Preaching as referring to particular Congregations , there is the same necessity now that there was then . People need as much instruction as ever , and so much the more in that they are apt to think now the name of Christians will carry them to Heaven . It is a too common and very dangerous deceit of men , to look upon Religion more as a profession , then matter of Life , more as a Notion then an inward temper . Men must be beat off from more things which they are apt to trust to for salvation now , than in those times : Men could not think so much then , that diligence in publike assemblies , and attendance at publick prayers , was the main Religion . Few would profess Christianity in those times , but such as were resolved before hand rather to let go their lives then their profession : but the more profess it now , without understanding the terms of salvation by it ; the greater necessity of preaching to instruct men in it . But I think more need not be said of this to those that know it is another thing to be a Christian , then to be called so . But however it is granted , that in the Apostles times preaching was the great Work ; and if so , how can we think one single person in a great City was sufficient , both to preach to , and rule the Church , and to preach abroad in order to the conversion of more from their Gentilisme to Christianity ? Especially if the Church of every City was so large as some would make it , viz. to comprehend all the Believers under the civil jurisd●ction of the City , and so both City and Countrey the only charge of one single Bishop . I think the vastness of the work , and the impossibility of a right discharge of it by one single person , may be argument enough to make us interpret the places of Scripture which may be understood in that sense , as of more then one Pastour in every City ; as when the Apostles are said to ordain Elders in every City , and Pauls calling for the Elders from Ephesus , and his writing to the Bishops and Deacons of the Church of Philippi ; this consideration , I say , granting that the Texts may be otherwise understood , will be enough to incline men to think that in greater Cities there was a society of Presbyters acting together for the carrying on the work of the Gospel in converting some to , and building up of others in the faith of Christ. And it seems not in the least manner probable to me , that the care of those great Churches should at first be intrusted in the hands of one single Pastour and Deacon , and afterwards a new order of Presbyters erected under them , without any order or rule laid down in Scripture for it , or any mention in Ecclesiastical Writers of any such after institution . But instead of that in the most populous Churches , we have many remaining footsteps of such a Colledge of Presbyters there established in Apostolical times . Thence Ignatius says , The Presbyters are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Sanhedrin of the Church appointed by God ; and the Bench of Apostles sitting together for ruling the affairs of the Church . And Origen calls it ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a Colledge in every City of Gods appointing ; and Victor Bishop of Rome ; Colligium nostrum , and Collegium fratrum ; Pius , Pauperem Senatum Christi apud Romam constitutum . Tertullian , Probatos seniores ; Cyprian , Cleri nostri sacrum venerandumque Concessum ; and to Cornelius Bishop of Rome , and his Clergy , Florentissimo Clero tecum praesidenti . Ierome , Senatum nostrum , coetum Presbyterorum , & commune Concilium Presbyterorum quo Ecclesiae gubernabantur . Hilary , Seniores sin● quorum consilio nihil agebatur in Ecclesia ; the author de 7 Ordinibus ad Rusti●um ; calls the Presbyt●●s negotiorum judices . En●ychius tells us there were twelve Presbyters at Alexandria to govern the Church ; and the author of the I●inerary of Peter ▪ of as many constituted at Caesaria , who though counterfeit , must be allowed to speak , though not ver● , yet verisimilia ; though not true , yet likely things . Is i● possible all these authors should thus speak of their several places , of a Colledge of Presbyters acting in power with the Bishop , if at first Churches were governed only by a single Bishop , and afterwards by subject Presbyters that had nothing to do in the rule of the Church , but were only deputed to some particular offices under him , which they were impowered to do only by his authority ? But the joint-rule of Bishop and Presbyters in the Churches will be more largely deduced afterwards . Thus we see a Company of Presbyters setled in great Churches ; now we are not to imagine that all these did equally attend to one part of their wo●k ; but all of them according to their several abilities laid out themselves ; some in ●verseeing and guiding the Church ; but yet so as upon occasion to discharge all pastoral acts belonging to their function ; others betook themselves chiefly to the conversion of others to the faith , either in the Cities or the adjacent countryes . By which we come to a full , clear , and easie understanding of that so much controverted place , 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The Elders that rule well are counted worthy of double honour ; especially they that labour in the Word and Doctrine . Not as though it implyed a dist●●ct sort of Elders from the Pastors of Churches , but among those Elders that were ordained in the great Churches , some attended most to ruling the flock already converted , others laboured most in converting others to the Faith by preaching ; though both these being entred into this peculiar function of laying themselves forth for the benefit of the Church , did deserve both respect and maintenance , yet especially those who imployed themselves in converting others , in as much as their burden was greater , their labours more abundant , their sufferings more ; and their very Office coming the nearest to the Apostolical function . So Chrysostome resolves it upon the fourth of the Ephesians , that those who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Theodoret expresseth it , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ the fixed Officers of particular Churches were inferiour to those who went abroad preaching the Gospel ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . An evident argument that the Apostle doth not intend any sort of Elders dictinct from these ordained Presbyters of the Cities , is from that very argument which the greatest friends to Lay-Elders draw out of this Epistle , which is from the promiscuous acception of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this very Epistle to Timothy : The argument runs thus : The Presbyters spoken of by Paul in his Epistle to Timothy , are Scripture-Bishops ; but Lay-Elders are not Scripture-Bishops ; therefore these cannot here be meant . The major is their own , from 1 Tim. 3. 1. compared with 4. 14. Those which are called Presbyters in one place , are Bishops in another ; and the main force of the argument lies in the promiscuous use of Bishop and Presbyter ; now then if Lay-Elders be not such Bishops , then they are not Pauls Presbyters ; now Pauls Bishops must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fit to teach , and therefore no Lay-Elders . Again , we may consider where Timothy now was , viz at Ephesus , and therefore if such Lay-Elders anywhere they should be there ; Let us see then whether any such were here It is earnestly pleaded by all who are for Lay-Elders , that the Elders spoken of Acts 20. 17. were the particular Elders of the Church of Ephesus , to whom Paul spoke , v. 28. where we may find their Office at large described Take heed therefore unto your selves , and all the flock over which God hath made you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishops or Overseers . Here we see both the names Elders and Bishops confounded again , so that he that was an Elder was a Bishop too , and the Office of such Elders described to be a Pastoral charge over a flock , which is inconsistent with the notion of a Lay-Elder ▪ Paul sent indefinitely for the Elders of the Church to come to him ; If any such then at Ephesus , they must come at this summons , all the Elders that came , were such as were Pastors of Churches : therefore there could be no Lay Elders there ▪ I insist not on the argument for maintenance implyed in double Honour , which Chrysostome explains by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a supply of necessaries to be given to them , as appears by ver . 18. which argument Blondel saw such strength in , that it brought him quite off from Lay-Elders in that place of Timothy . And he that will remove the Controversie from the Scriptures , to the Primitive Church , ( as we have no reason to think , that if such were appointed , they should be so soon laid aside ) will find it the greatest d●fficulty to trace the foot-steps of a Lay-Elder , through the Records of antiquity for the three first centuries especially . The Writers of the Church speak of no Presbyters , but such as preached , as appears by Origen , Cyprian , and Clement of ! Alexandria ; Origen saith , Omnes Episcopi atque omn●s Presbyteri vel Diaconi ●rudiunt nos , & erudientes adhibent correptionem , & verbis austerioribus increpant . We see all Bishops , Presbyters , and Deacons w●re in his time Preachers . So Cyprian , Et cre●ideram quidem Presbyteros & Diaconos qui illic praesentes sunt , monere vos & instruere plenissimè circa Evangelii Legem , sicut semper ab antecessoribus nostris factum est ▪ and in another Epistle about making Numidicus a Presbyter , he thus expresseth it , ut ascribatur Presbyterorum Carthaginensium numero , & nobiscum sedeat in Clero ; where to sit as one of the Clergy , and to be a Presbyter , are all one . Again , had there been any such Elders , it would have belonged to them to lay hands on those that were reconciled to the Church after Censures ; now hands were onely laid on ab Episcopo & Clero , as the same Cyprian tells us . Clemens Alexandrinus describing the Office of a Presbyter , hath these words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , where Teaching is looked on as his proper work : And elsewhere , more fully and expresly discoursing of the service of God , and distinguishing it according to the twofold service of men , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he applies these to the Churches , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The former he explains afterwards , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . A Presbyter is one that is ordained or appointed for the instruction of others in order to their amendment , implying thereby the Office of a Presbyter to be wholly conversant about teaching others , to whom on that account the art of making others better doth properly belong . So much may suffice for those first times of the Church , that there were no Presbyters then , but such as had the Office of Teaching . And for the times afterwards of the Church , let it suffice at present to produce the Testimony of a Council held in the beginning of the seventh Century , who absolutely Decree against all Lay-persons medling in Church-affairs ; Nova actione didicimus , quosdam ex nostro Collegio contra mores Ecclesiasticos , laicos habere in rebus Divinis constitutos Oeconomos . Proinde pariter tractantes eligimus , ut unusquisque nostrûm secundum Chalcedonensium Patrum decreta , ex proprio Clero Oeconomum sibi constituat . Indecorum est enim Laicum esse vicarium Episcopi , & saculares in Ecclesia judicare ; i● uno enim eodemque Offici● non debet esse dispar professio . A Canon directly leveld against all Lay-Chancellours in Bishops Courts , and such Officials : But doth with the same force take away all Lay-Elders , as implying it to be wholly against the rule of the Church to have secular persons to judge in the Church . But although I suppose this may be sufficient to manifest the no Divine right of Lay-Elders ; yet I do not therefore absolutely condemn all use of some persons chosen by the people to be as their representatives , for managing their interest in the affairs of the Church . For , now the voice of the people ( which was used in the Primitive times ) is grown out of use : such a constitution , whereby two or more of the peoples choice might be present at Church debates , might be very useful , so they be looked on onely as a prudential humane constitution , and not as any thing founded on Divine right . So much may serve for the first Ground of the probability of the Apostles not observing one setled Form of Church-Government , which was from the different state , quantity and condition of the Churches by them planted . The second was from the multitude of unfixed Officers residing in some places , who managed the Affairs of the Church in chief , during their Residence . Such were the Apostles and Evangelists , and all persons almost of note in Scripture . They were but very sew , and those in probability not the ablest , who were left at home to take care of the spoil ; the strongest and ablest , like Commanders in an Army , were not setled in any Troop , but went up and down from this company to that , to order them and draw them forth : and while they were , they had the chief authority among them ; but as Commandets of the Army , and not as Officers of the Troop . Such were Evangelists who were sent sometimes into this Countrey to put the Churches in order there , sometimes into another ; but where ever they were , they acted as Evangelists and not as fixed Officers . And s●c● were Timothy and Titus , notwithstanding all the Opposition made against it , as will appear to any that will take an impartial Survey of the arguments on both sides . Now where there were in some places Evangelists , in others not , and in many Churches it may be no other Officers but these , it will appear , that the Apostles did not observe one constant Form , but were with the Evangelists travelling abroad to the Churches , and ordering things in them as they saw cause . But as to this I have anticipated my self already . The last ground was from the different custome observed in the Churches , after the Apostles times . For no other rational account can be given of the different opinions of Epiphanius , Ierome , and Hilary , but this , that one speak● of the Custome of some Churches , and the other of others . In some as at Alexandria , the Presbyters might choose their Bishop ; in other places it might be , as Hilary saith , that when the first withdrew , another succeeded him . Not by a monethly or Annual rotation of Presidents , as some have imagined , but by a Presidency for life of one , upon whose death another succeeded in his room . For the former Opinion hath not any Evidence at all for it in Scripture or Antiquity ; or in the place brought to prove it . For , according to this Opinion , Timothy must have but his course in the rotation of Elders at Ephesus , which seems very incongruous to the Office of Timothy . I conclude th●n that in all probability the Apostles tyed not themselves up to one certain course , but in some Churches setled more or fewer Officers as they saw cause , and in others governed themselves during life ; and that at their death they did not determine any form , is probably argued from the different customes of several Churches afterwards . The third Consideration touching Apostolical practice , is concerning the Obligatory force of it in reference to us ; which I lay down in these terms , That a meer Apostolical practice being supposed , is not sufficient of its self for the founding an unalterable and perpetual right , for that Form of Government in the Church , which is supposed to be founded on that practice . This is a Proposition I am sure , will not be yielded without proving it ; and therefore I shall endeavour to doe it by a fourfold argument . First , because many things were done by the Apostles without any intention of obliging any who succeeded them afterwards to do the same . As for instance , the twelve Apostles going abroad so unprovided as they did when Christ sent them forth at first , which would argue no great wisedome or reason in that man , that should draw that practice into consequence now . Of the like nature was Pauls preaching 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to some Churches , receiving no maintenance at all from some Churches , as that at Corinth . Which instance is a manifest evidence of the monstrous weakness of Discourse in those who would make that example of Paul Obligatory to all Ministers of the Gospel now . And while they would by this argument take away their Lands and Tythes , instead of them , they give them Plaustra convitiorum , whole loads of the most reproachful Speeches that ever were given to any , but Christ and his Apostles . For my part , I think the Ministers of the Gospel would want one of the Badges of Honour belonging to their Office , were they not thus reproachfully used ▪ It is part of the State which belongs to the true Ministers of the Gospel to be followed by such blackmouthed Lacqueyes , who by their virulent Speeches are so farre their Friends , as to keep them from that Curse which our Saviour pronounceth ; Wo be unto you when all men speak well of you . But let us see how much wooll there is after all this cry ▪ too little to cloath the backs of Ministers , if such persons might be their Tythe-men ; but it is well they are so little befriended , yea so much opposed by the great Apostle , in that singular practice of his . For doth he say , It was unlawful for him to receive a maintenance from the Churches he preached to ? Nay doth he not set himself to prove not onely the lawfulness of Ministers taking it , but the duty of peoples giving it , 1 Cor. 9. from the seventh to the f●●teenth verse , giving many pregnant arguments to that purpose ? Doth he not say that all the Apostles besides him and Barnabas , did forbear working , and consequen●ly had all their necessities supplyed by the Churches ? Nay do●h not Paul himself say that he robbed other Churches , taking wages of them to do service to them ? What Paul turned hireling ? and in the plainest terms take Wages of Churches ? Yet so it is , and his forbearing it at Corinth , was apt to be interpreted as an argument that he did not love them , 2 Cor. 11. 11. So far were they from looking upon Paul as a hireling in doing it . Paul is strong and earnest in asserting his right : he might have done it at Corinth as well as elsewhere : But from some prudent considerations of his own , mentioned 2 Cor. 11. 12. he forbo●e the exercise of his right among them , although at the same time he received maintenance from other places . As for any Divine right of a particular way of maintenance , I am of the same Opinion as to that which I am in reference to particular Forms of Church-Government : and those that are of another Opinion . I would not wish them so much injury , as to want their maintenance till they prove it . But then I say , these things are clear in themselves , and I think sufficient grounds for conscience , as to the duty of paying on the one side , and the lawfulness of receiving it on the other ▪ First that a maintenance in general be given to Gospel Ministers , is of Divine right : else the Labourer were not worthy of his hire ; nor could that be true which Paul saith , that our Lord hath ordained ; that they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel . Secondly , A maintenance in general being due , Lawful authority may determine the particular way of raising it ; the equity of which way may be best derived from what was the most ancient pract●ce of the World in dedicating things to God , and was approved by God himself among his own people , the Jews : So that the way of maintenance by Tythes is the most just and equitable way . Thirdly , It being in the Magistrates power to determine the way of maintenance , what is so determined , doth bind the Consciences of all subject to that power , to an obedience to it for conscience sake : In as much as all men are bound thus to obey the Magistrate in all things established by him as Laws ; and the very same reasons any can plead for disobedience as to this , may equally serve for disobedience to any other Lawes made by the Supreme Magistrate . This I suppose is the clearest Resolution of that other more vexed then intricate Controversie about the right of Tythes ; which I have here spoken of by occasion of the mention of the Apostles practice ; and because it is resolved upon the same principles with the subject I am upon . Meer Apostolical practice we see doth not bind , because the Apostles did many things without intention of binding others . Secondly , the Apostles did many things upon particular Occasions , Emergencies , and circumstances , which things so done , cannot bind by vertue of their doing them any further then a parity of reason doth conclude the same things to be done in the same circumstances . Thus Pauls Coelibate is far from binding the Church , it being no universal practice of the Apostles by a Law , but onely a thing taken up by him upon some particular grounds , not of perpetual and universal concernment . So community of goods was used at first by the Church o● Ierusalem as most sutable to the present state of that Church ; but as far as we can find , did neither perpetually hold in that Church , nor universally obtain among other Churches ; as is most clear in the Church at Corinth by their Law-sui●● , by the different offerings of the rich and poor at the Lords Supper , and by their personal contributions . So the Apostles Preaching from house to house , was , for want of conveniency then of more publick places , as free onely for Christians ; although that practice binds now as far as the Reason doth ; viz. in its tendency the promoting the work of Salvation of mens Souls Laying on hands for conferring the gifts of the Holy Ghost can never certainly bind where the Reason of it is ceased , but may still continue ●s a rite of solemn Prayer , and not by vertue of that practice . Observing the Apostolical Decrees of abstaining from blood , and things strangled and offered to Idols , did hold as long as the ground of making them did , which was condescension to the Jews , although it must be withall acknowledged that the Primitive Christians of the second and third Centuries did generally observe them ; and the Greek Church to this day ; and some men of note and learning have pleaded for the necessary observation of them still , as Christ. Beckman , Steph. Curcellaeus in a Diatriba lately published to this purpose , to which Grotius is likewise very inclinable . The arguments are too large here to examine , although I see not how possibly that place of Paul can be avoided , Whatever is set in the shambles eat , making no scruple for conscience sak● . I conclude this with what I laid down at the entrance of this Treatise , that where any Act or Law is founded upon a particular reason or occasion as the ground of it , it doth no further oblige then the reason or occasion of it doth continue . Therefore before an acknowledged Apostolical practice be looked on as Obligatory , it must be made appear that what they did , was not according as they saw reason and cause for the doing it , depending upon the several circumstances of Time , Place , and Persons ; but that they did it from some unalterable Law of Chr●ist , or from some such indispensable reasons , as will equally hold in all Times , Places , and Persons . And so the Obligation is taken off from Apostolical practice , and laid upon that Law and Reason which was the ground of it . Thirdly , Offices that were of Apostolical appointment , are grown wholly out of use in the Church , without mens looking upon themselvs as bound now to observe them . As the Widdows of the Churches afterwards from their Office called Deaconnesses of the Church , of which number Phoebe was one , whom Paul calls the Deaconness of the Church at Cenchrea : so both Origen and Chrysostome understand it . Of them and their continuance in the Church for some Centuries of years , much is spoken by several Writers , and resolved by several Councils ; and yet we see these are laid aside by the p●etenders to hold close to Apostolical practice : if that binds , certainly it doth in its plain institutions ; if it doth not bind in them ▪ how can it in that which is only gathered but by uncertain conjectures to have been ever their practice ; So that in the issue , those who plead so much for the obligatory nature of Apostolical practice , do not think it obligatory ; for if they did , how comes this office of Widdows and Deaconesses to be neglected ? If it be answered , that these are not usefull now ; then we must say , that we look upon Apostolical practice to be binding no further then we judge it useful , or the reason of it holds ; which is as much as to say , of its self it binds not . Fourthly , Rites and customs Apostolical are altered ; therefore men do not think that Apostolical practice doth bind . For if it did , there could be no alteration of things agreeable thereunto . Now let any one consider but these few particulars , and judge how far the pleaders for a divine Right of Apostolical practice , do look upon themselves as bound now to observe them : as Dipping in baptism , the use of Love ▪ Feasts , community of goods , the Holy kiss , by * Tertullian called Signa●ulum orationis : yet none look upon themselves as bound to observe them now , and yet all acknowledge them to have been the practice of the Apostles : and therefore certainly though when it may serve for their purpose , men will make Apostolical practice to found a divine Right : yet when they are gone off from the matter in hand , they change their opinion with the matter , and can then think themselves free as to the observation of things by themselves acknowledged to be Apostolical . Thus we are at last come to the end of this chapter , which we have been the longer upon , because the main hinge of this controversie did ly● in the practice of the Apostles , which I suppose now so far cleared as not to hinder our progress towards what remains ; which we hope will admit of a quicker dispatch . We come therefore from the Apostles to the Primitive Church , to see whether by the practice of that we can find any thing whereby they looked on themselves as obliged by an unalterable Law to observe any one particular form of Church-Government . CHAP. VII . The Churches Polity in the ages after the Apostles considered : Evidences thence that no certain unalterable Form of Church-Government was delivered to them . 1. Because Church-Power did in large as the Churches did . Whether any Metropolitan Churches established by the Apostles . Seven Churches of Asia , whether Metropolitical . Philippi no Metropolis either in Civil or Eccl●siastical sense . Several degrees of inlargemext of Churches . Churches first the Christians in whole Cities , proved by several arguments , the Eulogiae an evidence of it . Churches extended into the neighbour Territories by the preaching there of City Presbyters ; thence comes the subordination between then Churches by degrees inlarged to Diocesses ; from thence to Provinces . The Original of Metropolitans and Patriarchs . 2. No certain Form used in all Churches . Some Churches without Bishops , Scots , Goths . Some with but one Bishop in their whole Countrey . Scythian , Aethiopian Churches how governed . Many Cities without Bishops . Diocesses much altered . Bishops discontinued in several Churches for many years . 3. Confor●eing Ecclesiastical Government to the civil in the extent of Diocesses . The suburbicarian Churches what . Bishops answerable to the civil Governours . Churches power rises from the greatness of Cities . 4. Validity of Ordination by Presbyters in places where Bishops were . The case of Ischyras discussed ; instances given of Ordination by Presbyters not pronounced null . 5. The Churches prudence in managing its affairs , by the several Canons , Provincial Synods , Codex Canonum . HAving largely considered the actions of Christ , and the practice of the Apostles , so far as they are conceived to have reference to the determining the certain form of Government in the Church ; our next stage is , according to our propounded method , to examine what light the practice of the Church in the ages succeeding the Apostles will cast upon the controversie we are upon . For although , according to the principles established and ●aid down by us , there can be nothing setled as an universal Law for the Church but what we find in Scriptures : yet because the general practice of the Church is conceived to be of ●o great use for understanding what the Apostles intentions , as well as actions were , we shall chearfully pass over this Rubicon , because not with an intent to increase divisions , but to find out some further evidence of a way to compose them . Our Inquiry then is , Whether the primitive Church did conceive its self obliged to observe unalterably one individual form of Government , as delivered down to them either by a Law of Christ , or an universal constitution of the Apostles ; or else did only settle and order things for Church-government , according as it judged them tend most to the peace and settlement of the Church , without any antecedent obligation , as necessarily binding to observe onely one course . This latter I shall endeavour to make out to have been the onely Rule and Law which the primitive Church observed as to Church-government , viz. the tendency of its constitutions to the peace and unity of the Church ; and not any binding Law or practice of Christ or his Apostles . For the demonstrating of which , I have made choyce of such arguments as most immediately te●d to the proving of it . For , If the power of the Church and its officers did encrease meerly from the inlargement of the bounds of Churches , if no one certain form were observed in all Churches , but great varieties as to Officers and Diocesses ; if the course used in setling the power of the chief Officers of the Church was from agreement with the civil government , if notwithstanding the superiority of Bishops , the ordination of Presbyters was owned as valid ; if in all other things concernning the Churches Polity , the Churches prudence was looked on as a sufficient ground to establish things ; then we may with reason conciude , that nothing can be inferred from the practice of the primitive Church ▪ Demonstrative of any one fixed form of Church-government delivered from the Apostles ●o them . Having thus by a l●ght 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 drawn ou● the several lines of the pourtraiture of the Polity of the antient Church , we now proceed to fill them up , though not with that life which it deserves , yet so far as the model of this Discourse will permit . Our first argument then is from the rise of the extent of the power of Church-Governours , which I assert not to have been from any order of the Apostles , but from the gradual encrease of the Churches committed to their charge . This will be best done by the observation of the growth of Churches , and how proportionably the power of the Governours did increase with it . As to that , there ●re four observable steps or periods , as so many ages of growth in the primitive Churches . First , when Churches and Cities were of the same extent . Secondly , when Churches took in the adjoyning Terri●ories with the Villages belonging to the Cities . Thirdly , when several Cities with their Villages did associate for Church-Government in the same Province . Fourthly , when several provinces did associate for Government in the Roman Empire . Of these in their order . The first period of Church government observable in the primitive Church , was , when Churches were the same with Christians in whole Cities . For the clearing of this , I shall first shew , that the primitive constitution of Churches was in a society of Christians in the same City . Secondly , I shall consider the form and manner of Government then observed among them . Thirdly , consider what relation the several Churches in Cities had to one another . First , That the Primitive Churches were Christians of whole Cities . It is but a late and novel acception of the word Church , whereby it is taken for stated , fixed congregations for publike Worship , and doubtless the original of it is only from the distinction of Churches in greater Cities into their several 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or publike places for meeting , whence the Scotch Kirk , and our English Church ; so that from calling the place Church , they proceed to call the persons there meeting by that name ; and thence some think the name of Church so appropriated to such a society of Christians as may meet at such a place , that they make it a matter of Religion not to call those places Churches , from whence originally the very name , as we use it , was derived . But this may be pardoned among other the religio●s weaknesses of well meaning , but lesse knowing people . A Church in its primary sense , as it answers to the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , applyed to Christians , is a society of Christians living together in one City , whether meeting together in many Congregations , or one , is not at all material ; because they were not called a Church as meeting together in one place , but as they were a Society of Christians inhabiting together in such a City : not but that I think a society of Christians might be called a Church , where-ever they were , whether in a City or Countrey , but because the first and chief mention we meet with in Scripture of Churches , is of such as did dwell together in the same Cities ; as is evident from many pregnant places of Scripture to this purpose . As Acts 14. 23. compared with Titus 1. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in one place , is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the other . Ordaining Elders in every Church , and ordaining Elders in every City ; which implyes , that by Churches then were meant the body of Christians residing in the Cities : over which the Apostles ordained Elders to rule them . So Acts 16. 4. 5. As they went through the Cities , &c. and so were the Churches established in the faith . The Churches here were the Christians of those Cities which they went through . So Acts 20. 17. He sent to Ephesus and called the Elders of the Church . If by the Elders we mean , as all those do we now deal with , the Elders of Ephesus , then it is here evident , that the Elders of the Church and of the City are all one ; but what is more observable , ver . 28. he calls the Church of that City , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Take heed to your selves , and to the flock over which God hath made you overse●rs , to feed the Church of God. Where several things are observable to our purpose ; first , that the body of Christians in Ephesus is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the flock of the Church , and not the several flocks and Churches , over which God hath made you Bishops . Secondly , That all these spoken to were such as had a pastoral charge of this one flock ; Paul calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and chargeth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to do the work of a Pastor towards it . So that either there must be several Pastors taking the pastoral charge of one Congregation , which is not very suitable with the principles of those I now dispute against ; or else many congregations in one City are all called but one Church , and one flock , which is the thing I plead for . And therefore it is an observation of good use to the purpose in hand , that the New Test●ment speaking of the Churches in a Province , alwayes speakes of them in the plural number , as the Churches of Iudaea , Gal. 1. 22 , 1 Thes. 2 ▪ 14. The Churches of Sama●i● and Galilee , Acts 9. 31. The Churches of Syria and C●icia , Acts 15. 41. The Churches of Galatia , 1 Cor. 16. 1. Gal , 1. 1 , 2. The Churches of Asia , Rom. 16. 16. Rev. 1. 11. But when it speaks of any particular City , then it is alwayes used in the Singular number , as the Church at Jerusalem , Acts 8. 1. — 15 4 , 22. The Church at Antioch , Acts 11. 26 — 13. 1. The Church at Corinth , 1 Cor. 1. 2. 2 Cor. 1. 1● and so of all the seven Churches of Asia , the Church of Ephesus , Smyrna , &c. So that we cannot find in Scripture the least footstep of any difference between a Church and the Christians of such a City ; whereas had the notion of a Church been restrained to a particular congregation , doubtlesse we should have found some difference as to the Scriptures speaking of the several places . For it is scarce imaginable that in all those Cities spoken of ( as for example Ephesus , where Paul was for above two years together ) that there should be no more converts then would make one Congregation . Accordingly in the times immediately after the Apostles , the same language and custom continued still . So Clement inscribes his Epistle , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The Church of God which is at Rome , to the Church of God which is at Corinth . So by that it is plain that all the Believers at that time in Rome , made up but one Church , as likewise did they at Corinth . S● Polycarp in the Epistle written by him from the Church at Smyrna to the Church at Phylomilium , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and so in his Epistle to the Philippians , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Polycarp and the Elders with him to the Church which is at Philippi . Origen compares the Church of God at Athens , Corinth , Alexandria , and o●her places , with the people of those several Cities ; and so the Churches Senate with the peoples , and the Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( that is his word ) chief Ruler , with the Maior of those Cities , implying thereby that as there was one civil Society in such places to make a City , so there was a Society of Christians incorporated together to make a Church . So that a Church setled with a full power belonging to it , and exerc sing all acts of Church-discipline within its self , was antiently the same with the Society of Christians in a City . Not but that the name Church is attributed sometimes to Families , in which sense Tertullian speaks , Ubi duo aut tres sunt , ibi Ecclesia est , licet Laici : And may on the same account be attributed to a small place , such as many imagine the Church of Cenchrea to be , it being a port to Corinth on the Sinus Sarònicus ; but Stephanus Byzantinus calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Suidas saith no more of it then that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Strabo and Pausanias only speak of the scituation of it , as one of the po●ts of Corinth , lying in the way from Tegaea to Argos ; nor is any more said of it by Pliny , then that it answers to Lechaeum , the port on the other side upon the Sinus Corinthiacus . Ubbo Emmius in his description of old Greece , calls both of them oppidula duo cum duobus praeclaris portubus in ora utriusq , maris , but withall adds that they were duo urbis emporia , the two Marts of Corinth ; therefore in probability , because of the great Merchandise of that City , they were much frequented . Cenchrea was about twelve furlongs distance from Corinth ; Where Pareus conjectures the place of the meeting of the Church of Corinth was , because of the troubles they met with in the City , and therefore they retired thither for greater conveniency and privacy : which conjecture will appear not to be altogether improbable , when we consider the furious opposition made by the Iews against the Christians at Corinth , Acts 18. 12. and withall , how usual it was both for Jews and Christians to have their place of meeting at a distance from the City . As Acts 16. 13. They went out from Philippi to the River side , where there was a Proseucha , or a place of prayer , where the Iews of Philippi accustomed to meet . According to this interpretation the Church at Cenchrea is nothing else but the Church of Corinth there assembling : as the Reformed Church at Paris hath their meeting place at Charenton , which might be called the Church of Charenton from their publick Assemblies there , but the Church of Paris from the Residence of the chief Officers and people in that City . So the Church of Corinth might be called the Church at Cenchrea upon the same account , there being no evidence at all of any setled Government there at Cenchrea distinct from that at Corinth . So that this place which is the only one brought against that position I have laid down hath no force at all against it . I conclude then , that Churches and Cities were originally of equal extent , and that the formal constitution of a Church lyes not in their capacity of assembling in one place , but acting as a society of Christians imbodyed together in one City , having Officers and Rulers among themselves , equally respecting the whole number of Believers : Which leads to the second thing , the way and manner then used for the modelling the government of these Churches , Which may be considered in a double period of time , either before several Congregations in Churches were setled , or after those we now call Parishes , were divided . First , before distinct Congregations were setled ; and this as far as I can find , was not only during the Apostles times , but for a competent time after , generally during the persecution of Churches . For we must distinguish between such a number of Believers as could not conveniently assemble in one place , and the distributing of Believers into their several distinct congregations . I cannot see any reason but to think that in the great Churches of Ierusalem , Antioch , Ephesus , and the like , there were more Believers then could well meet together , considering the state of those times ; but that they were then distributed into their several 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Centuries ( as the Athenians , and Romans divided their people ) i. e. into several worshipping congregations with peculiar Officers , I see no reason at all for it . They had no such conveniences then of setling several congregations under their particular Pastors : but all the Christians in a City looked upon themselves as one body , and met together as occasion served them , where either the chief of the Governours of the Church , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Iustin Martyrs language , did perform the solemn part of divine Worship , or some other of the Elders that were present with them . Is it not strange for men to dream of set-times , and Canonical hours , and publike places of assemblies at that time , when their chief times of meeting were in the night , or very early in the morning , which Pliny . calls conventus antelucanus , whence they were called latebrosa & lucifugax natio ; and were fain to make use of wax-lights : ( which from that custome the Papists continue still in their Tapers alwayes burning upon the Altar ; from what reason I know not , unless to shew the darkness of error and superstition which that Church lyes under still ) and the places of the Christians meetings were generally either some private rooms , or some grotts or Cryptae , Vaults under ground where they might be least discerned or taken notice of ; or in the Coemeteria , the Martyrum memoriae , as they called them , where their common assemblies were . Thence Pontius Paulinus , speaking of the Edict of Valerian against the Christians , Iussum est ut nulla conciliabula faciant , neque coemeteria ingrediantur . Indeed , when they had any publick liberty granted them , they were so mindful of their duties of publick profession of the Faith , as to make use of publick places for the worship of God , as appears by Lampridius in the life of Alexander S●verus Quum Christiani quendam locum qui publicus fuerat occupassent , contrà popinarii dicerent , sibi cum deberi ; rescripsit , melius esse ut quom●docunque illic Deus colatur , quam popinariis dedatur . But in times of persecution it is most improbable that there should be any fixed Congregations and places , when the Christians were so much hunted after , and inquired for , as appears by the former Epistle of Pliny , and the known Rescript of Trajan upon it , so much exagitated by Tertullian . They did meet often it is certain , ad confaederandum disciplinam , at which meetings Tertullian tells us , Praesident probati quique seniores , which he elsewhere explains by Consessus ordi●is , the bench of officers in the Church , which did in common consult for the good of the Church , without any Cantonizing the Christians into severall distinct and fixed Congregations . But after that believers were much increased , and any peace or liberty obtained , they then began to contrive the distribution of the work among the several Officers of the Church , and to settle the several bounds over which every Presbyter was to take his charge ; but yet so , as that every Presbyter retained a double aspect of his Office ▪ the one particular to his charge ; the other generall respecting the Church in common . For it is but a weak conceit to imagine that after the setling of Congregations , every one had a distinct presbytery to rule it , which we find not any obseure footsteps of in any of the ancient Churches ; but there was still one Ecclesiastical Senate which ruled all the several Congregations of those Cities in common , of which the several Presbyters of the Congregations were members , and in which the Bishop acted as the President of the Senate , for the better governing the affairs of the Church . And thus we find Cornelius at Rome sitting there cum florentissimo Clero : thus Cyprian at Carthage , one who pleads as much as any for obedience to Bishops , and yet none more evident for the presence and joint concurrence and assistance of the Clergy at all Church debates ; whose resolution from his first entrance into his B●shoprick , was , to do all things communi concilio Clericorum , with the Common-Council of the Clergy ; and sayes , they were cum Episcopo sacerdotali honore conjuncti . Victor at Rome decreed Easter to be kept on the Lords day , collatione facta cum Presbyteris & Diaconibus ( according to the Latine of that age ) as Damasus the supposed Authour of the lives of the Popes tells us . In the proceedings against Novatus at Rome , we have a clear Testimony of the concurrence of Presbyters : where a great Synod was called , as E●sebius expresseth it , of sixty Bishops , but more Presbyters ▪ and Deacons : and what is more full to our purpose , not onely the several Presbyters of the City , but the Country Pastours ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) did likew●se give their advice about that business . At this time Cornelius tells us there were forty six Presbyters in that one City of Rome , who concurred with him in condemning Novatus . So at Antioch in the case of Paulus Samosatenus we find a Synod gathered , consisting of Bishops , Presbyters and Deacons , and in their name the Synodal Epistle is penned and directed to the same in all the Catholick Church ; At the Council of Eliberis in Spain , were present but ninteen Bishops and twenty six Presbyters . The case between Sylvanus Bishop of Cirta in Africk , and Nundinaris the Deacon , was referred by Purpuriu● to the Clergy to decide it , For the presence of Presbyters at Synods , instances are brought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Blondel in his Apology . And that they concurred in governing the Church , and not onely by their Counsel but Authority , appears from the general Sense of the Church of God , even when Episcopacy was at the highest : Nazianzen speaking of the Office of Presbyters , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he knew not whether to call it , Ministry or Superintendency , and those who are made Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from being ruled , they ascend to be rulers themselves , And their power by him , is in several places ▪ called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . they are called by him , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Chrysostome gives this as the reason of Pauls passing over from Bishops to Deacons without naming Presbyters , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Because there is no great matter of difference between a Bishop and Presbyters , for these likewise have the instruction and charge of the Church committed to them ; which words Theophylact , Chrysostomes Eccho , repeats after him , which the Council of Aquen thus expresseth , Presbyterorum verô qui praesunt Ecclesi● Christi ministerium esse videtur , ut in doctrina praesint populis & in Officio praedicandi , nec in aliquo desides inv●nti appareant . Clemens Alexandrinus before all these , speaking of himself and his fellow-Presbyters , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . We are Pastors , and Rulers of the Churches . And that proper Acts of Discipline were performed by them , appears both by the Epistles of the Roman Clergy about their preserving Discipline to Cyprian , and likewise by the Act of that Clergy in excluding Marcion from communion with them . So the Presbyters of the Church of Ephesus excommunicated Noetus ; for after they had cited him before them , and found him obstinate in his Heresie , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they put both him and his Disciples out of the Church together . Thus we see what the manner of Government in the Church was now : The Bishop sitting as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Sanhedrin , and the Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Ignatius expresseth it , acting as the Common-Council of the Church to the Bishop ; the Bishop being as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , answering to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the Presbytery as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , answering to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Origen compares them . Whereby he fully describes the form of Government in his time in the Church , which was by an Ecclesiastical Senate , and a President in it , ruling the Society of Christians in every City . So that the Presbytery of a great City joyning together for Government , were never accounted a Provincial Assembly , but onely the Senate for Government of the Church in the whole City . The erecting Presbyteries for every particular congregation in a City , is a stranger to the ancient constitution of Churches , and hath given the greatest rise to the Independency of particular congregations . For if every particular congregation be furnished with a Government within its self , then men are apt presently to think that there is no necessity of subordination of it to any higher Church-power . Whereas , if that p●imitive constitution of Churches be held , that they are Societies of Christians under an Ecclesiastical Senate in a City ▪ then it is evident that the congregations must truck●e under the great body , as receiving their government by , and their Officers from that Senate of the Church , which superintends , and orders the affairs of that whole Body of Christians residing in such a place . And this crumbling of Church-power into every congregation is a thing absolutely disowned by the greatest , and most learned Patrons of Presbytery beyond the Seas as may be seen both in Calvin , B●za , Salmasius , Blondel , Gersome , Bucer and others . It is much disputed when the first division of Parochiall Congregations in Cities began ; Platina attributes it to Evaristus , and so doth Damasus , Hic Titulos in Urbe Roma divisit Presbyteris . He divided the several Parish Churches to the Presbyters ; these were called then Tituli : Baronius gives a double reason of the name ; either from goods belonging to the Princes Exc●equer , which have some sign imprinted , upon them that it may be known whose they are ; So , saith he , the sign of the Cross was put upon the Churches to make it known that they were devoted to Gods Service ; or else they are called Tituli , because the severall Presbyters did receive their Titles from them ; but , by the Leave of the great Cardinal , another Reason may be given of the name more proper then either of these . It hath been observed by Learned men , that the generall meetings of the Christians were in the Coemeteria or Dormitories of Christians ; So they called the Sepulchres then , which were great and capacious Vaults fit to receive many people in them ; two chief grounds of the Christians meeting in those places : the first was their own security , because the Heathens looked on it as a matter of Religion — manes temerare sepultos , to disturb the ashes of the dead ; but the chief Reason was to encourage themselves to suffe● Martyrdom by the examples of those who had gone before them , and lay buried there ; thence they were called Martyrum memoriae , because they did call to mind their actions and constancy in the Faith. Now from these Coemeteria was afterwards the original of Churches ( whence persons most reverenced for Piety , were wont still to be buried in Churches , not for any Holiness of the place , but because in such places the Martyrs lay buried ) the Churches being raised over the Vaults wherein the Martyra lay intombed . Now Churches being raised from these Coemeteries , which were called memoriae Martyrum , that they might still retain somwhat intimating their former use , were called Tituli . For Titulus , as Santius observes , is signum aliquod aut monumentum quod docet ibi latere aliquid aut accidisse , cujus nolumus perire memoriam ; thence Statues are called Tituli . So Gen. 35. 20. Erexit Iacob Titulum super Sepulchrum , as the Vulgar Latine renders it : and Gen. 28. 18. Surgens ergo Iacob mane tulit lapidem quem su●posuerat capiti suo , & erexit in titulum . So Absalom 2 Sam. 18. 18. erexit sibi Titulum . So that what was erected to maintain and preserve the memory of any thing , was called Titulus ; and thence the Churches being built upon the Coemiteries of the Martyrs , were on that account called Tituli , because intended for the preservation of their memories . This account of the Original of the name I leave to the judgement of Learned men ; but to proceed . I confess , it seems not probable to me that these Tituli were so soon divided as the time of Evaristus , who lived in the time of Trajan when the persecution was hot against the Christians ; but Damasus seems not to believe himself ; for in the life of Dionysius , ●e saith , Hic Presbyteris ecclesias divisit , coemeteria , paroecias , & dioeceses instituit ; but most probably it began assoon as the Churches enjoyed any ease and peace , it being so necessary for the convenient meeting of such a multitude of Christians as there was then . In the life of Marcellus about fourty years after Dionysius , we read of twenty five Titles in the Church of Rome ; of which number what use is made for interpreting the number 666. may be seen in Mr. Potters ingenuous Tract on that Subject . But when afterwards these Titles were much increased , those Presbyters that were placed in the ancient Titles which were the chief among them , were called Cardinales Presbyteri , which were then looked on as chief of the Clergy , and therefore were the chief members of the Council of Presbyters to the Bishop . So that at this day , the Conclave at Rome and the Pope's Consistory is an evident Argument in this great degeneracy of it , of the Primitive constitution of the Government of the Church there , by a Bishop acting with his Colledge of Presbyters . Neither was this proper to Rome alone , but to all other great Cities , which when the number of Presbyters was grown so great , that they could not conveniently meet , and joyn with the Bishop , for ordering the Government of the Church , there were some as the chief of them chosen out from the rest , to be as the Bishops Council , and these in many places , as at Milan , Ravenna , Naples , &c. were called Cardinales Presbyteri , as well as at Rome ; which were abrogated by Pius Quintus 1568 ▪ but the memory of them is preserved still in Cathedral Churches , in the Chapter there , where the Dean was nothing else but the Archipresbyt●r , and both Dean and Prebendaries were to be assistant to the Bishop in the regulating the Church-affairs belonging to the Citie , while the Churches were contained therein . So much shall suffice for the model of Government in the Churches , while they were contained within the same precincts with the City its self . We come in the third place to consider what relation these Churches in greater Cities had one to another , and to the lesser Cities which were under them . And here the grand question to be discussed is this . Whether the Churches in greater Cities by Apostolical institution , had the Government Ecclesiastical , not ▪ only of the lesser Villages under them , but likewise of all lesser Cities under the civil Jurisdiction of the Metropolis . The affirmative is of late asserted by some persons of great renown and learning . The first I find maintaining this Hypothesis ▪ of the divine right of Metropolitans , is Fregevilaeus Gantius one of the Reformed Church of France , who hath spent a whole Chapter in his Palma Christian● to that purpose , and hath made use of the same Arguments which have been since improved by all the advantages which the learning of a Reverend Dr● could add to them . But because this principle manifestly destroyes the main foundation of this discourse , it is here requisite to examine the grounds on which it stands , that thereby it may be fully cleared whether the subordination of less Churches to greater , did onely arise from the mutual association of Churches among themselves , or from Apostolical appointment and institution . The two pillars which the divine right of Metropolitans is built upon , are these . First , that the Cities spoken of in the New Testament , in which Churches are planted , were Metropoles in the civil Sense . Secondly , that the Apostles did so far follow the model of the civil Government as to plant Metropolitan Churches in those Cities . If either of these prove infirm , the Fabrick erected upon them , must needs fall ; and I doubt not but to make it appear that both of them are . I begin with the first . The notion of a Metropolis is confessed to be this , A City wherein the Courts of a civill Judicature were kept by the Roman Governours , under whose Jurisdiction the whole Province was contained . The Cities chiefly insisted on , are the seven Cities of the Lydian Asia , and Philippi which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . As for the Cities of the Proconsular Asia , although the bounds and limits of it are not so clear as certainly to know whether all these Cities were comprehended under it or no , Strabo telling us that Phrygia , Lydia , Caria and Mysia , are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , very hard to be distinguished from one another ; it being true of all four which was said of Mysia and Phrygia , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Phrygian and Mysian Borders are distinct ; but it i● is hard to find them out ▪ For Laodicea is by Ptolomy referred to Caria ; Strabo and many others , place it in Phrygia , onely Stephanus Bizantinus placeth it in Lydia ; but granting all that is produced by the late most excellent Primate of Armagh in his Learned Discourse of the Proconsular Asia , to prove all these seven Cities to be in the bounds of this Lydian Asia ; yet it is far from being evident that all these Cities were Metropoles in the Civil Sense . For Strabo tells us , That the Romans did not divide these places by Nations ; ●but according to the Dioc●sses wherein they kept their Courts , and exercised Judicature . These Cities wherein the Courts of Judicature were kept , were the Metropoles , and no other . Of five of them , Laodicea , Smyrna , Sardis , Ephesus and Pergamus , Pliny saith , that the Conventus , the Civil Courts , were kept in them : and they had Jurisdiction over the other places by him mentioned ; but for the other two , Thyatira and Philadelphia , Philadelphia is expresly mentioned as one of those Cities which was under the jurisdictio Sardiana ; so far was it from being a Metropoles of its self ; and Thyatira mentioned as one of the ordinary Cities , without any addition of Honour at all to it . And for Philadelphia , it was so ●ar unlikely to be a Metropolis , that Strabo tells us it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; very subject to Earth-quakes , and therefore had very few inhabitants ; those that ●●● , live most part in the fields , where they have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a very rich soil : but Strabo for all that , wonders at the boldness of the men that durst to venture their lives there ; and most of all admires what was in those mens heads who first built a City there . Is it then any wayes probable that this should be chosen for a Metropolis , in such an abundance of fair and rich Cities as lay thereabout ? But a Salvo is found out for Plinyes not mentioning them as Metropoles , because the addition of these two mother Cities , seemeth to have been made when Vespasian added those many new Provinces to the old Government which Su●tonius speaks of ; but this Salvo doth not reach the sore : For first , Pliny wrote his natural History , not in the beginning , but toward the latter end of the Empire of Flavius Vespasianus , when Titus had been six times Consul ●s he himself saith in his Preface ; therefore if there had been any such change , Pliny would have mentioned it . Secondly , the Provinces added by Vespasian , are expresly set down by Su●●oniu● ▪ viz. Achaia , Lysia ▪ Rhodus , Byzantium , Samos , Thracia , Cilivia ▪ Comagena , not the least mention of the Lydian or Proco●sular Asia , or any alteration made in the Metropolis there . But yet there is a further attempt made to make Philadelphia a Metropolis , which is from a subscription of Eustathius in the Council of Constantinople sub Menna , Act 5. who calls himself the Bishop of the Metropolis of Philadelphia ; but what validity there is in such a subscription in the time of the fifth Century to prove a Metropolis in the first , l●t any one judge that doth but consider how common ● thing it was to alter Metropoles , especially after the new disposition of the Roman Empire by Constantin● : But if we do stand to the Notiti● to determine this controversie , which are certainly more to be valued then a single subscription , the Metropolitanship of these Cities of the Lydian Asia will be irrecoverably overthrown . For in the old Notitia , taken out of the Vatican MS. and set forth with the rest by Caro●●●● Sancto-Paulo in his Appendix to his Geographia sacra , Ephesus is made the Metropolis of the Province of Asia , Sardis of Lydia , Laodicea of Phrygia Capatiana , as it is there written for Pacatiana , but Pergamus placed in the Province of Caesarla Cappadocia , Philadelphia under Sardis , with Thyatyra ▪ In the Notitia attributed to Hier●cl●s under the Metropolis of Ephesus is placed Smyrna and Pergamu● , under Sardi● , Thyatyra and Philadelphia , so likewise in the Notitia of the French Kings Library . So that neither in the Civil no● Ecclesiastical sense can we find these seven Cities to be all Metropoles . We therefore observe St. Pauls course , and leaving Asia , we come into Macedonia , where we are told , that Philippi was the Metropolis of Macedonia : I know not whether with greater incongruity to the Civil or Ecclesiastical sense : in ●oth which I doubt not but to make it appear , that Philippi was not the Metropolis of Macedonia , and therefore the Bishops there mentioned could not be the Bishops of the several Cities under the jurisdiction of Philippi , but must be understood of the Bishops resident in that City . We begin with it in the Civil sense ▪ which is the foundation of the other . It is confessed not to have been a Metropolis during its being called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , it being by Pausanias called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . By Theophylact out of an old Geographer ( as it is supposed ) it is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and is it not very improbable that so small a City , as it is acknowledged to be by Dio and others , should be the Metropolis of Macedonia , where were at least one hundred and fifty Cities , as Pliny and Pomponius Mela tell us ; by bo●h whom Philippi is pl●ced in Thracia , and not in Macedonia , But two arguments are brought to prove Philippi to have been a Metropolis ; the first is from St. Luke , calling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Acts 16. 12. The first City of that Part of Macedonia : but rendred by the learned Doctor , the prime City of the province of Macedonia ; but it would be worth knowing where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in all the Notitiae of the Roman Empire was translated a Province ; and it is evident that Luke calls it the first City , not ratione dignitatis , but ratione 〈◊〉 , in regard of its scituation , and not its dignity . So Camerarius understands Luke , hanc esse primam coloniam pa●tis seu Plagae Macedonicae ; nimirum a Thracia vicinia iter in Macedoniam ordiens . It is the first City of that part of Macedonia , when one goes from Thracia into it . And ▪ so it appears by Dio , describing the scituation of Philippi , that it was the next town to Neapolis , only the Mountain Symbolon comeing between them , and Neapolis being upon the shore , and Philippi built up in the plain near the Mountain Pangaeus , where Brutus and Cassius incamped themselves : its being then the first City of entrance into Macedonia , proves no more that it was the Metropolis of Macodonia , then that Calice is of France , or Dover of England . But it is further pleaded , that Philippi was a Colonie , and therefore it is most probable that the seat of the Roman Judicature was there . But to this I answer , first , that Philippi was not the only Colonie in Macedonia ; for Pliny reckons up Cassandria , Paria ▪ and others : for which we must understand that Macedonia was long since made a Province by Paulus : and in the division of the Roman Provinces by Augustus , Strabo reckons it with Illyricum among the Provinces belonging to the Roman people and Senate , and so likewise doth Dio. But it appears by Suetonius , that Tiberius ( according to the custom of the Roman Emperours in the danger of War in the Provinces , ) took it into his own hands , but it was re●urned by Claudius to the Senat● again , together with Achaia : thence Dio speaking of Macedonia in the time of Tiberius , saith , it was governed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , by those who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; the praefecti Casaris , such as were sent by the Emperour to be his Presidents in the provinces , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were the Proconsuli , who were chosen by lot after their Consulship into the several Provinces ▪ and therefore Dio expresseth Claudius his returning Macedonia into the Senates hands by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he put it to the choyce of the Senate again . Now Macedonia having been thus long a Province o● the Roman Empire , what probability is there , because Philippi was a Colonie , therefore it must be the Metropolis of Macedonia ? Secondly , We find not the least evidence either in Scripture or elsewhere ▪ that the Proconsul of Macedonia had his residence at Philippi , yea , we have some evidence against it out of Scripture ▪ Acts 16 , 20 , 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and brought them to the Magistrates ▪ if there had been the Tribunal of a Proconsul here , we should certainly have had it ment●oned , as Gallio Proconsul of Achaia is mentioned in a like case at Corinth , Acts 18. 12. Two sorts of Magistrates are here expressed : the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which seem to be the Rulers of the City , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to be the Duumviri of the Colonie , or else the Deputies of the Proconsul residing there ▪ but I incline rather to the former , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , being only a Duumvir ▪ but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Praetor ▪ as Heinsius observes from the Glossary of H. Stephen . For every Colonie had a Duumvirate to rule it , answering to the Consuls and Praetors at Rome . But all this might have been spared , when we consider how evident it is that Thessalonica was the Metropolis of Macedonia , as appears by Antipater in the Greek Epigram . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the Praefectus pr●torio Illy●ici had 〈…〉 dence a● Th●ssalonica , as Theodore● tells us , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c ▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Th●ssalonica was a great populous City , where the Leiutenant of Illyricum did reside ▪ and so in probability did the Vi●arius Macedonia . It is called the Metropolis of Macedonia likewise by Socr●●●s , and in the Ecclesiastical sense it is so called by Aetius the Bishop thereof in the Council of Sardica● and Carolus à Sancto Paulo , thinks it was not only the Metropolis of the Province of Macedonia , but of the whole Diocè●s ( which in the East was much larger then the Province ) ▪ I suppose he means that which answered to the V●carius Macedoniae . And thence in the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon , the subscription of the Bishop of Th●ssalonic● wa● next to the Patriarchs . But for Philippi the same Author acknowledgeth it not to have been a Metropolitan Church in the first six Centuries ; but , after that Macedonia was divided into prima and secunda ( which was after the div●sion of it in the Empire into prima and salutaris ) then Philippi came to have the honorary Title of a Metropolitan : although in Hierocles his Notitia , Philippi is placed as the twenty first City under the Metropoles of Th●ssalonica . So much to evidence the weakness of the first pillar , viz. that these Cities were Metropoles in the civil sense : and this being taken away , the other falls of its self ; for if the Apostles did model the Ecclesiastical Government according to the Civil , then Metropolitan Churches were planted only in Metropolitan Cities , and these being cleared not to have been the latter , it is evident they were not the former . But however , let us see what evidence is brought of such a subordination of all other Churches to the Metropolitans , by the institution of the Apostles . The only evidence produced out of Scripture for such a subordination and dependance of the Churches of lesser Cities upon the greater , is from Act● 16. 1 , 4 compared with Acts 15. 23. the argument runs thus : The question was started at Antioch , Acts 14. 26. with Acts 15. 2. from thence they sent to Ierusalem for a resolution : the decree of the Council there concerns not only A●tioch , but Syria and Cilicia , which were under the Jurisdiction of Antioch : and therefore Metropolitan Church 〈…〉 e jure divino . I am afraid the argument would sc 〈…〉 ow its self in the dress of a Syllogism . Thus it runs ; If upon the occasion of the question at Antioch , the decree of the Apostles made at Ierusalem , concern all the Churches of Syria , and Cilicia , then all these Churches had a dependance upon the Metropolis of Antioch , but the an●ecedent is true , therefore the consequent . Let us see how the argument will do in another ●orm . If upon the occasion of the question at Antioch , the decree of the Apostles concerned all the Churches of Christians conversing with Jews ; then all these Churches had dependance upon the Church of Antioch ; But , &c. How thankfull would the Papists have been , if onely Rome had been put instead of Antioch● and then the conclusion had been true , what ever the premises were . But in good earnest , doth the Churches of Syria and Cilicia being bound by this Decree , prove their subordination to Antioch , or to the Apostles ? Were they bound because Antioch was their Metropolis , or because they were the Apostles who resolved the question ? but were not the Churches of Phrygia , and Galatia , bound to observe these decrees as well as others ? For of these it is said , that the Apostles went through the Cities of them , delivering the decrees to keep , as it is expressed ▪ Acts 16. 4. compared with the 6. verse . Or do the decrees of the Apostles concern only those to whom they are inscribed , and upon whose occasion they are penned ? Then by the same reason Pauls Epistles being written many of them upon occasions , as that to the Corinthians being directed to the Metropolis of Corinth , doth only concern the Church of that City , and those of Achaia that were subject to the jurisdiction of the City ; and so for the rest of the Epistles . A fair way to make the Word of God of no effect to us ; because for sooth , we live not in obedience to those Metropoles to which the Epistles were directed ! From whence we are told , how many things we may understand by this notion of Metropolitans : Especially why Ignatius superscribes his Epistle to the Romans , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to the Church which pre●ides in the place of the Roman region , or the suburbicari●n Provinces . But let us see whether this place may not be understood better without the help of this notion . Casaubon calls it locutionem barbar●m ; Vedelius is more favourable to it , and thinks si non elegans saltem vi●ii libera est , and explains it by the suburbicarian Provinces : and makes the sense of it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the place which is the Roman region , and parallels it with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Luke 9. 10. Bellarmine thinks he hath ●ound the Popes universal power in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but methinks the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , should hardly be rendred Orbis universus , unless Bellarmine were no more skil'd in Greek , then Casaubon thinks he was , whom he calls in the p●ace forecited , hominem Graecarum literarum prorsus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The most ingenuous conjecture concerning this place , is that of our learned Mr. Thorndike . The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith he , is here used as many times besides , speaking of those places which a man would neither call Cities nor Towns , as Acts 27 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , being to sail by the places of Asia ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , it is plain it signifies the countrey ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , then must necessarily signifie here the Vaticane lying in the Fields as a suburb to Rome , and being the place where St. Peter was buried , and where the Iews of Rome then dw●lt , as we learn by Philo , legatione ad Caium , out of whom he produceth a large place to that purpose , and so makes this the Church of the Jewish Christians , the Vaticane being then the Iewry of Rome ; but there being no clear evidence of any such distinction of Churches there , and as little reason why Ignatius should write to the Church of the Jewish Christians , and not to the Church of the Gentile Christians , I therefore embrace his sense of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the Vatican , but explain it in another way , viz. as we have already shewed , that the chief places of meeting for the Christians in Gentile ▪ Rome , was in the Coemeteries of the Martyrs ; now these Coemeteria were all of them without the City ; and the Coemeteria where Peter , Linus , Cletus , and some other of the Primitive Martyrs lay interr'd in the Vatican , beyond the River Tiber. So Damasus in the life of Cletus , Qui etiam sepultus est juxta corpus B. Petri in Vaticano . The Church then in the p●ace of the region of the Romans , is the Christian-Church of Rome , assembling chiefly in the Coemeteries of the Vatican , or any other of those Vaults which were in the Fields at a good distance from the City . But yet there is one argument more for Metropolitans ▪ and that is from the importance of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is taken to signifie both the City and Countrey ; and so the inscription of Clemens his Epistle is explained , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , i. e. the Church of God dwelling about Rome , to the Church dwelling about Corinth , whereby is supposed to be comprehended the whole Territories , which ( being these were Metropoles ) takes in the whole Province . And so Polycarp , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , But all this ariseth from a mistake of the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which signifies not so much accolere as incolere : and therefore the old Latin Version renders it , Eccl●siae Dei quae est Philippis , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , one that removes from one City to sojourn in another . And the ground of attributing that name to the Christian Churches , was either because that many of the first Christians being Jews , they did truly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , being as strangers out of their own countrey , or else among the Christians , because by reason of their continual persecutions , they were still put in mind of their flitting uncertain condition in the World , their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , countrey , citizenship being in Heaven . Of this the Apostles often tell them : from hence i● came to signifie the Society of such Christians so living together ; which as it encreased , so the notion of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 encreased , and so went from the City into the countrey , and came not from the countrey into the City ; for , if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be taken for accolere , then it necessarily follows , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot signifie the Church of Rome , and the Territories belonging to it , but the Church adjacent to Rome , distinct from the Citie , and the Church in it . For in that sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is opposed to living in the City , and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are distinct from the Citizens , as in Thucydides and others ; but , I believe no instance can possibly be produced wherein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , taken in that sense , doth comprehend in it both City and Country . But being taken in the former sense , it was first applyed to the whole Church of the City : but when the Church of the City did spread it self into the Countrey , then the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comprehended the Christians , both in City and Countrey adjoyning to it . Which leads me to the second step of Christian Churches , when Churches took in the Villages and Territories adjoyning to the Cities : For which we must understand , that the ground of the subordination of the Villages and Territories about , did primarily arise from hence , that the Gospel was spread abroad from the several Cities into the Countreys about . The Apostles themselves preachedmost , as we read in Scripture , in the Cities , because of the great resort of people thither ; there they planted Churches , and setled the Government of them in an Ecclesiastical Senate , which not only took care for the government of Churches already constituted , but for the gathering more . Now the persons who were employed in the conversion of the adjacent Territories , being of the Clergy of the City , the persons by them converted were adjoyned to the Church of the City ; and all the affairs of those lesser Churches were at first determined by the Governours of the City ; Afterwards when these Churches encreased , and had peculiar Officers set over them by the Senate of the City-church , although these did rule and govern their flock , yet it alwayes was with a subordination to , and dependance upon the government of the City-church . So that by this means , he that was President of the Senate in the City , did likewise superintend all the Churches planted in the adjoyning Territories , which was the original of that which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; the Latins , the Diocess of the Bishop . The Church where the Bishop was peculiarly resident with the Clergy , was called Matrix Ecclesia , and Cathedra principali● , as the several Parishes which at first were divided according to the several regions of the City , were called Tituli , and those planted in the Territories about the City , called Paroeciae , when they were applyed to the Presbyters ; but when to the Bishop , it noted a Diocess : those that were planted in these country-parishes , were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by the Greeks , and by the Latins , Presbyteri regionarii , conregionales , forastici , ruri● agrorum Presbyteri , from whom the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were distinct , as evidently appears by the thirteenth Canon of the Council of Neocaesarea ▪ where the countrey Presbyters are forbidden to administer the Lords Supper in the presence of the Bishop on the Presbyters of the City ; but the Chorepiscopi were allowed to do it . Salmasiu● thinks these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were so called , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Episcopi villani , such as were only Presbyters , and were set over the Churches in Villages : but though they were originally Presbyters , yet they were ●aised to some higher authority over the rest of the Presbyters , and the original of them seems to be , that when Churches were so much multiplyed in the Countreys adjacent to the Cities , that the Bishop in his own person could not be present to oversee the actions and carriages of the several Presbyters of the countrey Churches , then they ordained some of the fittest in their several Dioceses to super intend the several Presbyters lying remore from the City ; from which office of theirs they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : because they did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , go about , and visit the several Churches . This is the account given of them by Beza and Blondel , as well as others . All those several places that were converted to the saith by the assistance of the Presbyters of the City , did all make but one Church with the City . Whereof we have this twofold evidence ▪ First , from the Eulogi● which were at first parcels of the bread consecrated for the Lords Supper , which were sent by the Deacons or Ac●luthi to those that were absent , in token of their communion in the same Church . Iustin Martyr is the first who acquaints us with this custome of the Church ; After , saith he , the President of the Assembly hath consecrated the bread and wine , the Deacons stand ready to distribute it to every one person , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and carry it to those that are absent . Damascus attributes the beginning of this custome to Miltiades Bishop of Rome . Hic fecit ut Oblationes consecrat● per Ecclesias ex consecratione Episcopi dirigerentur : quod declaratur fermentum . So Innocentius ad Decentium ; De fermento verò quod die Dominica per titulos mittimus , &c. ut se à nostra communione maxime illa die non judicent separa●os● Whereby it appears to have been the custome of Rome and other places to send from the Cathedral Church , the bread consecrated to the several parish-Churches , to note their joint-communion in the faith of the Gospel . Neither was it sent only to the several tituli in the City , but to the Villages round about , as appears by the Question propounded by D●centius ; although at Rome it seems they sent it only to the Churches within the City , as appears by the answer of Innocentius : but Albaspinus takes it for granted , as a general custome upon some set-dayes to send these Eulogi● through the whole Diocess . Nam cum per vicos & agros sparsi & diffus● , ex ●adem non p●ssint sumere communione , cuperentque s●mper union is Christian● , & Christi corporis speciem quam p●ssint maximam r●tinere , sol●●nissimis di●bus & festivis ex matrice per parochias , bene dictus mit●ebatur panis , ex ●ujus p●rceptione communitas quae inter omnes fideles ●jusdem D●oecesis intercedere debet , intelligebatur & repraesentabatur . Surely then the Diocesses were not very large ; i● all the several parishes could communicate on the same day with what was sent from the Cathedral Church . Afterwards they sent not part of the bread of the Lords-supper , but some other in Analogy to that , to denote their mutual contesseration in the saith and communion in the same Church ▪ Secondly , It appears that still they were of the same Church , by the presence of the Clergy of the Countrey , or the choyce of the Bishop of the City , and at Ordinations and in Councils . So at the choyce of Boniface , Relictis singuli titulis suis Presbyteri omnes aderunt qui voluntatem suam ▪ hoc est D●i judicium , proloquantur : whereby it is evident that all the Clergy had their voyces in the choyce of the Bishop . And therefore Pope L●o requires these things as necessary to the ordination of a Bishop , Subscriptio clericorum , Honoratorum testimonium . Ordinis consensus & plebis : and in the same chapter speaking of the choyce of the Bishop , he saith it was done subscribentibus plus minus septuagint● Presbyteris . And therefore it is observed , that all the Clergy con●urred to the choyce even of the Bishop of Rome , till after the time of that Hildebrand called Greg. 7. in whose time Popery came to Age : thence Casaubon calls it Haeresin Hildebrandinam . Cornelius Bishop of Rome was chosen Clericoram pene omnium testimonio ; and in the Council at Rome under Sylv●ster it is decreed , that none of the Clergy should be ordained , nisi cum tota adunata Ecclesia . Many instances are brought from the Councils of Carthage to the same purpose , which I pass over as commonly known . It was accounted the matter of an accusation against Chrysostom by his enemies , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that he ordained without the Council and assistance of his Clergy . The p●esence of the Clergy at Councils hath been already shewed . Thus we see how , when the Church of the City was enlarged into the Countrey , the power of the Governours of the Churches in the City was extended with it . The next step observable in the Churches encrease , was , when several of these Churches lying together in one Province did associate one with another . The Primitive Church had a great eye to the preserving unity among all the members of it , and thence they kept so strict a correspondency among the several Bishops in the Commercium Formatarum ( the formula of writing , which to prevent deceit , may be seen in Iustellus his Notes on the Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Africanae ) and for a maintaining of nearer correspondency among the Bishops themselves of a Province , it was agreed among themselves for the better carrying on of their common work , to call a Provincial Synod twice every year to debate all causes of concernment there among themselves , and to agree upon such wayes as might most conduce to the advancing the common interest of Christianity . Of these Tertullian speaks ; Aguntur praecept● per Gracias illas certis in locis Concilia ex universis Eccles●is , per quae & altiora quaeque in communi tractantur , & ipsa repraesentatio nominis Christiani magna v●neratione celebratur . Of these the thirty eighth Canon Apostolical ( as it is called ) expresly speaks , ( which Canons , though not of authority sufficient to ground any right upon , may yet be allowed the place of a Testimony of the practice of the Primitive Church , especially towards the third Century ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Twice a year a Synod of Bishops was to be kept for discussing matters of faith , and resolving matters of practice . To the same purpose the Council of ▪ Antioch , A. D. 343 ▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . To these Councils ; the Presbyters and Deacons came , as appears by that Canon of the Council of Antioch ; and in the seventh Canon of the Nicene Council by Alphon us Pisanus the same custome is dec●eed ▪ but no such thing occurrs in the Codex Canonum , either of Tilius or Iustellus his Edition ▪ and the Arabick edi●●●● of that Council is conceived to have been compiled above four hundred years after the Council set . But however , we see evidence enough of this practice of celebrating Provincial Synods twice a year ; now in the assembling of these Bishops together for mutual counsel in their affairs , there was a necessity of some order to be observed . There was no difference as to the power of the Bishops themselves , who had all equal authority in their several Churches , and none over one another . For , Episcopatus unus ●st cujus ● singulis in solidum pars tenetur , as Cyprian speaks ; and as Ierome , Ubicunq , Episcopus fuerit , sive Romae , sive Eugubii , sive Constantinopoli , sive R●egii , sive Alexandriae , sive Tanis , ejusdem est meriti ▪ ejusdem est & Sacerdotii . Potentia divitiarum & paupertatis humilitas , vel sublimiorem vel inferiorem Episcopum non facit : Caterum omnes Apostolorum successores sunt . There being then no difference between them , no man calling himself Episcopum Episcoporum , as Cyprian elsewhere speaks , some other way must be found out to preserve order among them , and to moderate the affairs of the Councils ; and therefore it was determined in the Council of Antioch , that he that was the Bishop of the Metropolis , should have the honour of Metropolitan among the Bishops , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because of the great confluence of people to that City , therefore he should have the pr●heminence above the rest . We see how far they are from attributing any Divine Right to Metropolitaus ; and therefore the rights of Metropolitans are called by the sixth Canon of the Nicene Council , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which had been a dishonourable introduction for the Metropolitan Rights , had they thought them grounded upon Apostolical institution . Nothing more evident in antiquity then the honour of Metropolitans depending upon their Sees ; thence when any Cities were raised by the Emperour to the honour of Metropoles , their Bishop became a Metropolitan , as is most evident in Iustiniana prima , and for it ▪ there are Canons in the Councils decreeing it ; but of this more afterwards . The chief Bishop of Africa was only called primae sedis Episcop 〈…〉 ▪ thence we have a Canon in the Codex Ecclesiae African● ▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That the Bishop of the chief See , should not be called the Exarch of the Priests , or chief Priest , or any thing of like nature , but only the Bishop of the chief seat . Therefore it hath been well observed that the African Churches did retain longest the Primitive simplicity and humility among them ; and when the voyce was said to be heard in the Church upon the flowing in of riches , Hodie venenum effusum est in Ecclesiam , by the working of which poyson the spirits of the Prelates began to swell with pride and ambition ( as is too evident in Church History ) only Africa escaped the infection most , and resisted the tyrannical incroachments of the Roman Bishop , with the greatest magnanimity and courage , as may be seen by the excellent Epistle of the Council of Carthage , to Boniface Bishop of Rome in the Codex Ecclesiae Africanae . So tha● however Africa hath been alwayes fruitfull of Monsters ; yet in that ambitious age it had no other wonder but only this , that it should escape so free from that typhus saecularis ( as they then called it ) that monstrous itch of pride and ambition . From whence we may well rise to the last step of the power of the Church , which was after the Empire grew Christian , and many Provinces did associate together , then the honour and power of Patriarchs came upon the stage . And now began the whole Christian world to be the Cock ▪ pitt , wherein the two great Prelates of Rome and Constantinople strive with their greatest force for mastery of one another , and the whole world with them , as may be seen in the actions of Paschasinus the Roman Legat in the Council of Chalcedon . From whence forward the great Levi●than by his tumbling in the waves , endeavoured to get the Dominion of all into his hands : but God hath at last put a hook into his nostrils , and raised up the great instruments of Reformation , who like the Sword ▪ fish have so pierced into his bowels , that by his tumbling he may only hasten his approaching ruine , and give the Church every day more hopes of seeing its self freed from the tyranny of an U●urped power . By this Scheme and draught now of the increase of the Churches power , nothing can be more evident , then that it rise not from any divine institution , but only from positive & Ecclesiastical Laws , made according to the several states and conditions wherein the Church was ; which as it gradually grew up , so wa● the power of the Church by mutual consent fitted to the state of the Church in its several ages . Which was the fi●st argument , that the Primitive Church did not conceive its self bound to observe any one unalterable form of Government . This being the chief , the rest that follow , will sooner be dispatched . The second is from the great varieties as to Government which were in several Churches . What comes from divine right , is observed unalterably in one uniform & constant tenour : but what we find so much diversified according to several places , we may have ground to look on only as an Ecclesiastical constitution , which was followed by every Church as it judged convenient . Now as to Church Government we may find some Churches without Bishops for a long time , some but with one Bishop in a whole Nation , many Cities without any , where Bishops were common ; many Churches discontinue Bishops for a great while where they had been ; no certain rule observed for modelling their D●ocesses where they were still continued . Will not all these things make it seem very improbable that it should be an Apostolical institution , that no Church should be without a Bishop ? First , then some whole Nations seem to have been without any Bishops at all , if we may believe their own Historians . So if we may believe the great Antiquaries of the Church of Scotland , that Church was governed by their Culdei as they called their Presbyters , without any Bishop over them , for a long time . Iohannes Maior speaks of their instruction in the faith , per Sacerdotes & Monachos sine Episcopis Scoti in fide eruditi , but least that should be interpreted only of the●r conversion , Iohannes Fordònus is clear and full to their government , from the time of their conversion about A. D ▪ 263. to the coming of Palladius A. D. 430. that they were only governed by Presbyters and Monks . Ante Palladii adventum habebant Scoti fidei D●ctores ac Sacramentorum Ministratores Presbyteros solunmodo , vel Monachos ritum sequentes Ecclesiae Primitivae . So much mistaken was that learned man , who saith , That neither Beda nor any other affirms that the Scots were formerly ruled by a Presbyterie , or so much as that they had any Presbyter among them . Neither is it any wayes sufficient to say , that these Presbyters did derive their authority from some Bishops : for however we see here a Church governed without such , or if they had any , they were only chosen from their Culdei , much after the custom of the Church of Alexandria , as Hector Boethiu● doth imply . And if we believe Philostorgius , the Gothick Churches were planted and governed by Presbyters for above seventy years ▪ for so long it was from their first conversion to the time of Ulphilas whom ▪ he makes their first Bishop . And great probability there is , that where Churches were planted by Presbyters , as the Church of France by Andochius and Benignus , that afterwards upon the encrease of Churches , and Presbyters to rule them , they did from among themselves choose one to be as the Bishop over them , as Pothinus was at Lyons . For we nowhere read in those early plantations of Churches , that where there were Presbyters already , they sent to other Churches to derive Episcop●l ordination from them . Now for whole Nations having but one Bishop , we have the testimony of Sozomen , that in Scythia which by the Romans was called Masia inferior , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Although there were many Cities they had but one Bishop . The like Godignus relates of the Ab●ssine Churches , Though their Territories be of vast extent , there is but only one Bishop in all those Dominions , who is the Bishop of Abuna . And where Bishops were most common , it is evident they looked not on it as an Apostolical rule for every City to have a Bishop , which it must have if it was an Apostolical institution for the Church to follow the civil Government . Theodoret mentions 800 Churches under his charge , in whose Di●cess Ptolomy placeth many other Cities of note besides Cirus , as Ariseria , Regia , Ruba , Heraclea , &c. In the Province of Tripoly he reckons nine Cities which had but five Bishops , as appears by the Notitia Ecclesiae Africanae ▪ In Thracia every Bishop had several Cities under h●m . The Bishop of Heraclea that and Panion ▪ , the Bishop of Byze had it and Arcadiapolis ; of Coela had it and Callipolis ; Sabsadia had it and Aphrodisias . It is needless to produce more instances of this nature either ancient or modern , they being so common and obvious . But further , we find Bishops discontinued for a long time in the greatest Churches . For if there be no Church without a Bishop , where was the Church of Rome when from the Martyrdome of Fabian , and the banishment of Lucius the Church was governed only by the Clergy ? So the Church of Carthage when Cyprian was banished ; the Church of the East , when Meletius of Antioeh , Eusebius Samosatenus , Pelagius of Laodicea , and the rest of the Orthodox Bishops were banished for ten years space , and Flavianus and Diodorus , two Presbyters ruled the Church of Antioch the mean while , The Church of Carthage was twenty four years without a Bishop in the time of Hunerik , King of the Vandals ; and when it was offered them that they might have a Bishop upon admitting the Arrians to a free exercise of their Religion among them , their answer was upon those terms , Ecclesia Episcopum non delictatur habere ; and Balsamon speaking of the Christian Churches in the East , determines it neither safe nor necessary in their present state to have Bishops set up over them . And lastly for their Diocesses , it is evident there was no certain Rule for modelling them . In some places they were far less then in others . Generally in the primitive and Eastern Churches they were very small and little , as far more convenient for the end of them in the government of the Churches under the Bishops charge : it being observed out of Walafridus Strabo by a learned man , Fertur in Orientis partibus per singulas urbes & praefecturas singulas esse Episcoporum gubernationes . In Africk , if we look but into the writings of Augustine , we may find hundreds of Bishops resorting to one Council . In Ireland alone , Saint Patrick is said by Ninius at the first Plantation of Christianity to have founded 365. Bishopricks . So Sozomen te●ls us , that among the Arabians , and Cyprians , Novatians Montanists , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the very Villages had Bishops among them . The next evidence that the Church did not look upon it self as by a Divine Law to observe any one model of Government , is , the conforming the Ecclesiasticall Government to the Civil . For , if the Obligation arose from a Law of GOD ; that must not be altered according to civil co●stitutions , which are variable according to the different state and conditions of things . If then the Apostles did settle things by a standing Law in their own times , how comes the model of Church-Government to alter with the civil Form ? Now that the Church did generally follow the civil Government , is freely acknowledged and insisted on by Learned Persons of all sides ; especially after the division of the Roman Empire by Constantine the Great . The full making out of which is a work too large to be here undertaken , and hath been done to very good purpose already , by Berterius , Salmasius , Gothofred , Blondel and others , in their Learned discourses of the suburbicarian Provinces . Which whether by them we understand that which did correspond to the Praefecture of the Provost of Rome , which was within a hundred miles compass of the City of Rome , or that which answered to the Vicarius Urbis , whose jurisdiction was over the ten Provinces distinct from Italy , properly so called , whose Metropolis was Milan ; or , which is most probable , the Metropolitan Province answering to the jurisdiction of the Praefectus Urbis , and the Patriarchate of the Roman Bishop to the Vicarius Urbis ; which way soever we take it , we see , it answered to the Civil Government . I shall not here enter that debate , but onely briefly at present set down the Scheme of both Civil and Ecclesiastical Government , as it is represented by our Learned Breerwood . The whole Empire of Rome was divided into XIII . Dioceses , whereof ●even belonged to the East Empire , and six ( beside the Praefecture of the City of Rome ) to the West . Those thirteen Dioceses , together with that Praefecture contained among them 120. Provinces , or thereabout ; so that to every Diocess belonged the administration of sundry Provinces : Lastly , every Province contained many Cities within their Territories . The Cities had for their Rulers , those inferiour Judges , which in the Law are called Defensores Civitatum ; and their seats were the Cities themselves ; to which all the Towns and Villages in their several Territories were to resort for Justice . The Provinces had for theirs either Proconsuls , or Consulares , or Praesides , or Correctores ; four sundry appellations , but almost all of equal authority ; and their Seats were the chiefest Cities or Metropoles of the Provinces : of which in every Province there was one , to which all inferiour Cities for Judgement in matters of importance did resort . Lastly , the Dioceses had for theirs the Lieutenants called Vicarii , and their Seats were the Metropoles or Principal Cities of the Diocess , whence the Edicts of the Emperour or other ▪ Lawes were publ●shed , and sent abroad into all the Provinces of the Diocess , and where the Praetorium and chief Tribunal for Judgement was placed to de●ermiue Appeals , and minister Justice ( as might be occasion ) to all the Provinces belonging to that Jurisdiction . And this was the Disposition of the Roman Governour . — And truly it is wonderful ( saith that Lear●ed Authour ) how nearly and exactly the Church in her Government did imitate this Civil Ordination of the Roman Magistrates . For first , in every City , as there was a Defensor Civitatis for secular Government , so was there placed a Bishop for Spiritual Regiment ( in every City of the East , and in every City of the West , almost a several Bishop ) whose Jurisdiction extended but to the City , and the places within the Territory . For which cause the Jurisdiction of a Bishop was anciently called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , signifying not ( as many ignorant Novelists think ) a Parish , as now the word is taken , that is , the places or habitations near a Church , but the Towns and Villages near a City : all which , together with the City , the Bishop had in charge . Secondly , in every Province , as there was a President , so there was an Arch-Bishop , and because his Seat was the principal City of the Province , he was commonly known by the name of Metropolitan . Lastly , in every Diocess , as there was a Lievtenant-General , so was there a Primate seated also in the principal City of the Diocess as the Lieutenant was , to whom the last determining of Appeals from all the Provinces in differences of the Clergy , and the soveraign care of all the Diocess for sundry points of Spiritual Government did belong . By this you may see that there were XI . Primates besides the three Patriarchs ; for of the XIII . Dioceses ( besides the Praefecture of the City of Rome , which was administred by the Patriarch of Rome ) that of Egypt was governed by the Patriarch of Alexandria , and that of the Orient by the Patriarch of Antiochia , and all the rest by the Primates : between whom and the Patriarchs was no difference of Jurisdiction and power , but onely of some Honour which accrued to them by the Dignity of their Sees ; as is clearly expressed in the third Canon of the Council of Constantinople , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whereby Constantinople is advanded to the honorary Title of a Patriarch next to Rome , because it was New Rome . Whereby it is evident that the Honour belonging to the Bishop of old Rome did arise from its being the Imperial City . The Honour of the Bishop rising , as Austin saith , that of the Deacons of Rome did , propter magnificentiam urbis Romanae quae caput esse videour omnium civitatum . Hereby we now fully see what the Original was of the power of Arch-Bishops , Metropolitans , and Patriarchs , in the Church , viz. the contemperating the Ecclesiastical-Government to the civil . The next Evidence that the Church did not look upon its self as bound by a Divine Law , to a certain Form of Government , but did order things itself in order to Peace and Unity , is , that after Episcopal Government was setled in the Church , yet Ordination by Presbyters was looked on as valid . For which these instances may suffice . About the year 390. Iohannes Cassianus reports that one Abbot Daniel in●eriour to none of those who lived in the Desart of Scetis , was made a Deacon , à B. Pa●hnutio solitudinis ejusdem Presbytero : In tantum enim virtutibus ipsius adgaudebat , ut quem vitae meritis sibi & gratiâ parem noverat , coaequare sibi etiam Sacerdotti Honore festinaret . Siquidem nequaquam ferens in inferiore eum ministerio diutius immorari , optansque sibi●et success●rem dignissimum providere , superstes eum Presbyterii honore provexit ▪ What more plain and evident then that here a Presbyter ordained a Presbyter , which we now here read was pronounced null by Theophilus then Bishop of Alexandria , or any others that at time ? It is a known instance , that in the ordination of Pelagius first Bishop of Rome , there were only two Bishops concurred , and one Presbyter : whereas according to the fourth Canon of the Nicene Council ▪ three Bishops are absolutely required for Ordina●ion 〈…〉 Bishop ; either ●hen Pelagius was no Canonical Bishop , and so the point of succession thereby fails in the Church of Rome : or else a Presbyter hath the same intrinsecal power of Ordination which a Bishop hath , but it is onely restrained by Ecclesiastical Lawes . In the time of Eustathius Bishop of Antioch , which was done A. D. 328 , as Iacobus Goth●●redus proves , till the time of the ordination of Paulinus A. D. 362. which was for thirty four years space , when the Church was governed by Paulinus and his Colleagues withdrawing from the publick Assemblies ; it will be hard to say by whom the Ordinations were performed all this while , unless by Paulinus and his Collegues . In the year 452. it appears by Leo in his Epistle to Rusticus Narbonensis , that some Presbyters took upon them to ordain as Bishops ; about which he was consulted by Rusticus what was to be done in that Case with those so ordained : Leo his resolution of that Case is observable , Siqui autem Clerici ab ist is pseudo-Episcopis in iis Ecclesiis ordinati sunt , quae ad pr●prios Episcopos pertinebant , & ordinatio ●orum cum consensn & judicio praesidentium facta est , potest rata haberi , ita ut in ipsis Ecclesiis perseverent . Those Clergy men who were ordained by such as took upon them the Office of Bishops , in Churches belonging to proper Bishops , if the Ordination were performed by the consent of the Bishops , it may be looked on as valid , and those Presbyters remain in their Office in the Church . So that by the consent ex post facto of the true Bishops those Presbyters thus ordained , were looked on as Lawful Presbyte●s , which could not be , unless their ordainers had an intrinsecal power of Ordination ; which was onely restrained by the Laws of the Church ; for if they have no power of Ordination , it is impossible they should confer any thing by their O●d●nation . If to this it be answered , that the validity of their Ordination did depend upon the consent of the Bishops , and that Presbyters may ordain , if delegated thereto by Bishops , as Paulinus might ordain on that account at Antioch . It is easily answered , that this very power of doing it by delegation , doth imply an intrinsecal power in themselves of doing it . For i● Presbyters be forbidden ordaining others by Scriptures , then they can neither do it in their own persons , nor by delegation from others . F●● Q●od alicui suo nomine ●on lices , nec 〈…〉 : An●●●●● Rule o● Cyprian must hold true , Non aliquid c●i ●●●● largiri potest humana indulgentia , ubi interc●dit & leg●● tribuit Divina ●r●scriptio . There can be no dispensing with Divine Lawes ; which must be , if that may be delegated to other persons , which was required of men in the Office wherein they are . And if Presbyters have power of conferring nothing by their Ordination , how can an after-consent of Bishops make that Act of theirs valid , for conserring Right and Power by it ? It appears then , that this Power was restrained by the Lawes of the Church , for preserving U●ity in its self ; but yet so , that in case of necessity what was done by Presbyters , was not looked on as invalid . But against this the case of Ischyras , ordained , as it is said , a Presbyter by Collutbus , and pronounced null by the Council of Alexandria , is commonly pleaded . But there is no great difficulty in answering it . For first , the pronouncing such an Ordination null , doth not evidence that they looked on the power of Ordination as belonging of Divine right onely to Bishops ; for we find by many instances , that acting in a bare contempt of Ecclesiastical Canons was sufficient to degrade any from being Presbyters . Secondly , If Ischyras had been ordained by a Bishop , there were c●rcumstances enough to induce the Council to pronounce it null . First , as done out of the Diocess , in which case Ordinations are nulled by Concil . Arel . cap. 13. Secondly , done by open and pronounced Schismaticks . Thirdly , done sine titulo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and ●o nulled by the Canons then . Thirdly , Colluthns did not act as a Presbyter in ordaining , but as a Bishop of the Meletian party in Cynus , as the Clergy of Mareotis speaking of Ischyras his ordination , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by Collytbus a Presbyter , making shew of being a Bishop ; and is supposed to have been ordained a Bishop by Meletius . More concerning this may be seen in Blondel , who fully clears all the particulars here menti●●e● . So that notwithstanding this Instance , nothing appears , but that the power of Ordination was restrained only by Ecclesiastical Law● . The last thing to prove that the Church did act upon prudence in Church-Government , is from the many restraints in other cases made by the Church , for restraint of that Liberty which was allowed by Divine Laws . He must be a stranger to the ancient Canons , and Constitutions of the Church , that takes not notice of such restraints made by Canons , as in reference to observation of several Rites and Customes in the Churches , determined by the Provincial Synods of the several Churches ; for which purpose their Provincial Synods were still kept up in the Eastern Church , as appears by the Testimony of Firmilian in his Epistle to Cyprian : Qua ex causa necessariò apud nos fit , ut per singulos annos Seniores & Praepositi in unum conveniamus , ad disponenda ea quae curae nostrae commissa sunt : Ut si quae graviora sunt communi consilio dirigantur ▪ lapsis quoque fratribus , &c. medela quaeratur : non quasi à nobis remissionem peccatorum consequ●nt●r ; sed ●t per nos ad intelligentiam delictorum suorum convertantur , & Domino pleniùs satisfacere cogantur . The several orders about the Discipline of the Church were det●rmined in these Synods ; as to which , he that would find a command in Scripture for their orde●s about the Catechumeni , and Lapsi , will take pains to no purpose , the Church ordering things it self for the better Regulating the several Churches they were placed over . A demonstrative Argument , that these things came not from Divine command , is , from the great diversi●y of these customes in several places : of which besides Socrates , Sozomen largely speaks , and may easily be gathered from the History of the several Churches . When the Church began to enjoy ease and liberty , and thereby had opportunity of enjoying greater conveniency for Councils ; we find what was detrrmined by those Councils , were entred into a Codex Canonum for that purpose , which was observed next to the Scriptures ; not from any Obligation of the things themselves , but from the conduceablene●s of those things ( as they judged them ) to the preserving the Peace and Unity of the Church . CHAP. VIII . An Inquiry into the Iudgement of Reformed Divines concerning the unalterable Divine Right of particular Forms of Church-Government : wherein it is made appear , that the most ●minent D●vines of the Reformation did never conceive any one Form necessary ; manifested by three arguments . 1. From the judgment of those who make the Form of Church-Government mutable , and to depend upon the wisdom of the Magistrate and Church . This cleared to have been the judgement of most Divines of the Church of England since the Reformation . Archbishop Cranmers judgment , with others of the Reformatiion in Edward the Sixth's , time , now first published from his authentick MS. The same ground of setling Episcopacy in Queen Elizabeth's time . The judgement of Archbishop W●itgift , Bishop Bridges , Dr. ●oe , Mr. Hooker , largely to that purpose , in King Iames his time . The Kings own Opinion . Dr. Su●cl●ffe . Since of ●rakan●horp , Mr. Hales , Mr. Chillingworth . The Testimony of Forraign Divines to the same purpose . Chemnitius , Zanchy French Divines , Peter Moul●n , Fregevil , Blondel , Bochartus , Amyraldus . Other learned men , Gro●●u● , Lord Bacon , &c. 2. Those who look upon equality as the Primitive Form , yet judge Episcopacy ▪ lawful . Augustane Confession , Mel●nchthon , Ar●icu●● Sma●caldici . Prince of Anhalt , Hyperius , Hemingius : The practice of most Forraign Churches . C●lvin and Beza both approving Episcopacy and Diocesan Churches . Salmasius , &c. 3. Those who judge Episcopacy to be the Primitive Form , yet look not on it as nec●ssary . Bishop Iewel , Fulk , Field , Bishop Downam , Bishop Banc●o●t , Bishop Morton , Bishop Andrews , Saravia , Francis Mason , and others . The Conclusion hence laid in Order to Peace Principles conducing thereto . 1. Prudence must be used in Church-Government , at last confessed by all parties . Independents in elective Synods , and Church Covenants , admission of Members , number in Congregations . Presbyterians in Classes , and Synods , Lay-Elders &c. E●iscopal in Diocesses , Causes , Rites , &c. 2. That Prudence best , which comes nearest Primitive practice . A Presidency for life over an Ecclesiastical Senate shewed to be that Form , in order to it . Presbyteries to be restored . Diocesses l●ssened . Provincial Synods kept twice a year . The reasonableness and easiness of accommodation shewed . The whole concluded . HAving thus far proceeded , through Divine assistance , in our intended method , and having found nothing determining the necessity of any one Form of Government in the several Laws of Nature and Christ , nor in the practice of Apostles , or Primitive Church ; the only thing possible to raise a suspition of Novelty in this opinion , is , that it is contrary to the judgement of the several Churches of the Reformation . I know it is the last Asylum which many run to , when they are beaten off from their imaginary Fancies , by pregnant Testimonies of Scripture and Reason , to shelter themselves under the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of some particular persons , to whom their understandings are bored in perpetual slavery : But if men would but once think their understandings at age to judge for themselves , and not make them live under a continual Pupillage ; and but take the pains to travel over the several Churches of the Reformation , they would find themselves freed of many strange misprisions they were possessed with before , and understand far better the ground and reason of their pitching upon their several Forms , than they seem to do , who found all things upon a Divine Right . I believe there will , upon the most impartial survey , scarce be one Church of the Reformation brought , which doth imbrace any Form of Government , because it looked upon that Form as onely necessary by an unalterable standing Law , but every one took up that Form of Government which was judged most suitable to the state and condition of their severall Churches : But that I may the better make this appear , I shall make use of some Arguments whereby to demonstrate , that the most eminent Divines that have lived since the Reformation , have been all of this mind , That no one Form is determined as necessary for the Church of God in all ages of the World. For if many of them have in thesi asserted the Form of Church-Government mutable ; if those who have thought an equality among Ministers the Primitive Form , have yet thought a Government by Episcopacy lawfull and usefull : If , lastly , those who have been for Episcopacy , have not judged it necessary , then I suppose it will be evident , that none of them have judged any one Form taken exclusively of others , to be founded upon an unalterable Right : For whatsoever is so founded , is made a necessary duty in all Churches to observe it , and it is unlawfull to vary from it , or to change it according to the prudence of the Church , according to the state and condition of it . I now therefore undertake to make these things out in their order . First , I begin with those who have in thesi asserted the mutability of the Form of Church Government . Herein I shall not follow the English humour , to be more acquainted with the state of Forreign places then their own ; but it being of greatest concernment to know upon what accounts Episcopal Government was setled among our selves , in order to our submission to it ; I shall therefore make inquiry into the judgement of those persons concerning it , who either have been instrumental in setling it , or the great defenders of it after its setlement . I doubt not but to make it evident , that before these late unhappy times , the main ground for setling Episcopal Government in this Nation , was not accounted any pretence of Divine Right , but the conveniency of that Form of Church Government to the State and condition of this Church at the time of its Reformation : For which we are to consider , that the Reformation of our Church was not wrought by the Torrent of a popular fury , nor the Insurrection of one part of the Nation against another , but was wisely , gravely , and maturely debated , and setled with a great deal of consideration . I meddle not with the times of Henry 8. when I will not deny but the first quickning of the Reformation might be , but the matter of it was as yet rude and undigested ; I date the birth of it from the first setlement of that most excellent Prince Edward 6. the Phosphorus of our Reformation . Who , A. D. 1547. was no sooner entred upon his Throne , but some course was presently taken in order to Reformation . Commissioners with Injunctions were dispatched to the several parts of the Land , but the main business of the Reformation was referred to the Parliament call'd November 4. the same year ; when all former Statutes about Religion were recall'd , as may be seen at large in Mr. Fox , and Liberty allowed for professing the Gospel according to the principles of Reformation , all banished persons for Religion being call'd home . Upon this , for the better establishing of Religion , and the publick order for the service of God , an Assembly of select Divines is call'd , by special order from the Kings Majesty , for debating of the settlement of things according to the Word of God , and the practice of the Primitive Church . These sate , as Mr. Fox tells us , in Windsor Castle ; where , as he expresseth it , after long , learned , wise , and deliberate advises , they did finally conclude and agree upon one uniform order , &c. No more is said by him of it , and less by the late Historian . The proceedings then in order to Reformation , being so dark hitherto , and obscure , by what is as yet extant , much light may accrue thereto by the help of some authentick MS. which by a hand of providence , have happily come into my hands ; wherein the manner and method of the Reformation will be more evident to the World , and the grounds upon which they proceeded . In the Convocation that year sitting with the Parliament , I find two Petitions made to the Archbishop and the Bishops of the upper house , for the calling an Assembly of select Divines , in order to the setling Church-affairs , and for the Kings Grant for their acting in Convocation . Which not being yet ( to my knowledge ) extant in publike , and conducing to our present business , I shall now publish from the MS. of Bishop Cranm●rs . They run thus : Certain Petitions and requests made by the Clergy of the lower house of the Convocation , to the most Reverend Father in God , the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury's Grace , and the Residue of the Prelates of the higher house , for the furtherance of certeyne Articles following . First , That Ecclesiastical Laws may be made and established in this Realm by xxxij . persons , or so many as shall please the Kings Majesty to name and appoint ; according to the effect of a late Statute made in the thirty fifth year of the most noble King , and of most Famous memory , King Henry the eighth . So that all Iudges Ecclesiastical proceeding after those Laws , may be without danger and peril . Also that according to the antient custome of this Realm , and the Tenor of the Kings Writs for the summoning of the Parliament , which be now , and ever have been directed to the Bishops of every Diocess , the Clergy of the lower house of the Convocation may be adjoyned and associate with the lower house of Parliament , or else that all such Statutes and Ordinances as shall be made concerning all matters of Religion and Causes Ecclesiastical may not pass without the sight and assent of the said Clergy . Also that whereas by the commandment of King Henry 8. certeyne Prelates and other Learned men were appointed to alter the service in the Church , and to dewise other convenient and uniform order therein , who according to the same appointment did make certeyne books a● they be informed , their request is , that the said books may be seen and perused by them for a better expedition of divine service to bee set furthe accordingly . Also that men being called to spiritual promotions or benefices , may have sum allowance for their necessary living , and other charges to be susteyned and born concerning the said Benefices in the first year wherein they pay the first Fruits . The other is , Where the Clergy in the present Convocation Assembled have made humble suite unto the most Reverend Father in God my Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury , and all other Bishops . That hit may please them to be a mean to the Kings Majesty , and the Lord Protectors Grace ; that the said Clergy , according to the tenor of the Kings will , and the auncient Laws and customes of this noble Realme , might have their rowme and place , and be associated with the Communs in the nether howse of this present Parliament ; as members of the Communwealth , and the Kings most humble subjects ; and if this may not be permitted and graunted to them , that then no Laws concerning the Christi●n Religion , or which shall concern especially the persons , possessions , rowmes , lyveings , jurisdictions , goods or cattalls of the said Clergy may passe nor be enacted , the said Clergy not being made privy thereunto , and their aunswers and reasons not heard . The said Clergy dò most humbly beseech an answer and declaration to be made unto them , what the said most Reverend Father in God , and all other the Bishoppes have done in this their humble suit and request , to the end that the said Clergy if nede bee , may chose of themself such able and diserete persons which shall effectually follow the same suite in name of them all . And where in a Statute ordeyned and established by auctorite of Parliament at Westminster , in the twenty fifth year of the reigne of the most excellent Prince , King Henry the eighth , the Cleregy of this Realme , submitting themselfe to the Kings Highness , did knowledge and confesse according to the truth , that the Convocations of the same Cleregie hath ben and ought to be assembled by the Kings writt , And did promise further in verbo sacerdotii , that they never from thenceforth wolde presume to attempt , allege , clayme , or put in ure or enact , promulge or execute any new Canons , constitutions , ordinances , provincialls or other , or by whatsoever other name they shall bee called in the convocation , oneles the Kings most royal Assent and Lisence may to them be had , to make , promulge and execute the same . And his Majesty to give his most royall Assent and Auctorite in that behalfe upon peyne of every one of the Cleregie doeyng the contrary , and beinge thereof convict , to suffre imprisonment , and make Fine at the Kings will ▪ And that noe Canons , constitutions , or ordinances shall be made or put in execution within this Realme by auctorite of the convocation of the Cleregie , which shall be repugnant to the Kings Prerogative royall , or the Customes , Laws , or Statutes of this Realme . Which Statute is eftsoons renewed and established in the xxvij . yere of the reigne of the said most noble Kinge , as by the tenor of both Statutes more at large will appear , the said Cleregie being presently assembled in Convocation by auctorite of the Kings Writ , do desire that the Kings Majesties licence in writeing may be for them obteyned and granted according to the effect of the said Statutes auctoriseing them to attempt , entreate and commune of such matters , and therein freely to geve their consents , which otherwise they may not doe , upon peyne and perill premised . Also the said Cleregie desireth that such matters as concerneth religione which be disputable , may be quietly , and in good order reasond and disputed emongst them in this howso , whereby the verites of such matters shall the better appear . And the doubtes being opened and resolutely discussed , men may be fully persuaded with the quyetnes of their consciences , and the tyme well spent . Thus far those Petitions , containing some excellent proposalls for a through Reformation . Soon after were called together by the Kings special order , the former select Assembly at Windsor Castle , where met ( as far as I can guesse by the several papers delivered ▪ in by every one of them singly , and subscribed with their own hands , all which I have perused ) these following persons . Thomas ▪ Arch Bishop of Canterbury , Edward ▪ Arch-bishop of Yorke , the Bishop of Rochester , Edmund Bishop of London , Robert Bishop of Carlisle , Dr. George Day , Dr. Thomas Robertson . Dr. I. Redmayne , Dr. Edward Leighton , Dr. Symon Matthew , Dr. William Tresham , Dr. Richard Cozen , Dr. Edgeworth , Dr. Owen Oglethorp , Dr. Thyrleby . These all gave in their several resolutions in papers , to the Questions propounded , with their names subscribed ; ( a far more prudent way then the confusion of verbal and tedious disputes ) all whose judgements are accurately summed up , and set down by the Arch-bishop of Canterbury himself . Their resolutions contain distinct answers to several Sets of questions propounded to them . The first Set contained several Questions about the Mass , about the instituting , receiving , nature , celebration of it ; and whether in the Mass it be convenient to use such speech as the people may understand , whether the whole were fit to be translated , or only some part of it ; with several other questions of the same nature . The second Set is more pertinent to our purpose , wherein are 17 Questions proposed to be resolved ; Ten of them belong to the number of Sacraments , the other 7. concern Church Government . The Questions are these : Whether the Appostells lacking a higher power , as in not having a Christian-King among them , made Bishoppes by that necessity , or by auctorite given them of God ? Whether Bishops or Priests were first ; and if the Priests were first , then the Priest made the Bishop ? Whether a Bishop hath auctorite to make a Priest by the Scripture or no , and whether any other but onely a Bishop may make a Priest ? Whether in the New Testament be required any consecration of a Bishop and Priest , or onely appointeinge to the office be sufficient ? Whether ( if it fortuned a Prince Christien lerned to conquer certen domynyons of Infidells , having non but the temporall lerned men with him ) it be defended by Gods Law , that be and they should preche and teche the word of God there or no , and also make and constitute Priests or noe ? Whether it be forefended by Goddes Law , that if it so fortuned that all the Bishopps and Priests were dedde , and that the word of God shuld there unpreached , the Sacrament of baptisme and others unministred , that the King of that region shulde make Bishoppes and Priests to supply the same or noe ? Whether a Bishop or a Priest may excommunicate ▪ and for what crimes , and whether they only may excommunicate by Goddes Law ? These are the questions , to which the answers are severally returned in distinct papers , all of them bound together in a large Volume by Archbishop Cranmer ; and every one subscribed their names , and some their seals , to the Papers delivered in . It would be too tedious a work to set down their several opinions at large ; only for the deserved reverence all bear to the name and memory of that most worthy Prelate , and glorious Martyr , Archbishop Cranmer , I shall set down his answer distinctly to every one of these questions , and the answers of some others to the more material questions to our purpose . To the 9. Q. All Christian Princes have committed unto them immediately of God the holle cure of all their subjects , as well concerning the administration of Goddes word for the cure of soul , as concerning the ministration of things Political , and civil governaunce . And in both theis ministrations thei must have sundry ministers under them to supply that which is appointed to their several office . The Cyvile ministers under the Kings Majesty in this realme of England , be those whom yt shall please his highness for the tyme to put in auctorite under him ; as for example , the Lord Chancellour , Lord Treasurer , Lord Greate Master , Lord privy seal , Lord Admyral , Mayres , Shryves , &c. The Ministers of Gods wourde under his Majesty be the Bishops , Parsons , Vicars , and such other Priests as be appointed by his highnes to that ministration ; as for example , the Bishop of Canterbury , the Bishop of Duresme , the Bishop of Winchester , the Parson of Wynwicke , &c. All the said officers and ministers , as well of th' one sorte as the other , be appointed , assigned , and elected in every place , by the Laws and orders of Kings and Princes . In the admission of many of these officers bee diverse comely ceremonies and solemnities used , which be not of necessity , but only for a good order and semely fashion . For if such offices and ministrations were committed without such solemnitye , thei were nevertheles truely committed . And there is no more promise of God , that grace is given in the committing of the Ecclesiastical office , then it is in the committing of the Cyvile . In the Apostles time , when there was no Christien Princes by whose authority Ministers of Gods Word might be appointed ; nor synnes by the sword corrected ; there was no remedie then for the correction of vice , or appoynteinge of ministers , but onely the consent of Christien multitude amonge themselfe , by an uniforme consent to follow the advice and perswasion of such persons whom God had most endued with the spirit of wisdome and counsa●le . And at that time , for as much as Christian people had no sword nor Governer among them , thei were constrained of necessity to take such Curates and Priests , as either they knew themselfes to bee meet thereunto , or else as were commended unto them by other , that were so replete with the spirit of God , with such knowledge in the profession of Christ , such wisdome , such conversation and counsell , that they ought even of very conscience to give credit unto them , and to accept such as by theym were presented . And so some tyme the Appostles and other unto whom God had given abundantly his spirit , sent or appointed Ministers of Gods word , sometime the people did chose such as they thought meete thereunto . And when any were appointed or sent by the Appostles or other , the people of their awne voluntary will with thanks did accept them ; not for the supremitie , Imperie , or dominion , that the Apostells had over them , to command as their Princes or Masters : but as good people , readie to obey the advice of good counsellours ; and to accept any thing that was necessary for their edification and benefit . The Bishops and Priests were at one time , and were not two things , but both one office in the beginning of Christs Religion . A Bishop may make a Priest by the Scriptures , and so may Princes and Governours alsoe , and that by the auctoritie of God committed them , and the people alsoe by their election . For as we reade that Bishops have done it , so Christien Emperours and Princes usually have done it . And the people before Christien Princes were , commonly did elect their Bishops and Priests . In the New Testament , he that is appointed to be a Bishop or a Priest , needeth no consecration by the Scripture ; for election or appointeing thereto is sufficient . It is not against Gods Law , but contrary they ought in dede so to doe , and there be historyes that witnesseth , that some Christien Princes and other Lay men unconsecrate have done the same . It is not forbidden by God's Law. A Bishop or a Priest by the Scripture , is neither commanded nor forbidden to excommunicate . But where the Lawes of any Region giveth him authoritie to excommunicate , there they ought to use the same in such crymes as the Lawes have such authority in . And where the Lawes of the Region forbiddeth them , there they have none authority at all . And thei that be no Priests , may alsoe excommunicate , if the Law allow thereunto . Thus fa● that excellent Person ; in whose judgment nothing is more clear , then his ascribing the particular Form of Government in the Church to the determination of the Supreme Magistrate . This judgement of his , is thus subscribed by him with his own hand , T. Cantuariens . This is mine opinion and sentence at this present , which I do not temerariously define , but do remit the judgment thereof holly to your Majesty . Which I have exactly transcribed out of the Original , and have observed generally the Form of writing at that time used . In the same M S. it appears , that the Bishop of S. Asaph , Therleby , Redman , and Cox , were all of the same Opinion with the Archbishop , that at first Bishops and Presbyters were the same ; and the two latter expresly cite the Opinion of Ierome with approbation . Thus we see by the Testimony chiefly of him who was instrumental in our Reformation , that he owned not Episcopacy ▪ as a distinct order from Presbytery of divine Right ; but only as a prudent constitution of the Civil Magistrate f●r the better governing in the Church . We now proceed to the re-establishment of Church-Government under our most happy Queen Elizabeth . After our Reformation had truly undergone the fiery trial in Queen Maries dayes , and by those flames was made much more refined and pure , as well as splendid and Illustrious ; In the articles of Religion agreed upon , our English Form of Church-Government was onely determined to be agreeable to Gods Holy Word ; which had been a very low and diminishing expression , had they looked on it as absolutely prescribed and determined in Scripture , a● the onely necessary Form to be observed in the Church . The first who solemnly appeared in Vindication of the English Hierarchy , was Archbishop Whi●gi●t a sage and prudent person , whom we cannot suppose either ignorant of the Sense of the Church of England , or afraid or unwilling to defend it . Yet he frequently against Cartwright●sserts ●sserts , that the Form of Discipline is not particularly and by name set down in Scripture : and again , No kind of Government is expressed in the Word , or can necessarily be concluded from thence ; which he repeats over again , No Form of Church-Government is by the Scriptures prescribed to , or commanded the Church of God. And so Doctor Cosins his Chancellor in Answer to the Abstract , All Churches have not the same Form of Discipline , neither is it necessary that they should , seeing it cannot be proved that any certain particular Form of Church-Government is commended to us by the Word of God. To the same purpose Doctor Low , Complaint of the Church ; No certain Form of Government is prescribed in the Word , onely general Rules laid down for it . Bishop Bridges ; God hath not expressed the Form of Church-Government , at least not so as to bind us to it . They who please but to consult the third book of Learned and Judicious Master Hookers Ecclesiastical Polity , may see the mutability of the Form of Church-Government largely asserted , and fully proved . Yea , this is so plain and evident to have been the chief opinion of the Divines of the Church of England , that Parker looks on it as one of the main foundations of the Hierarchy , and sets himself might and main to oppose it ; but with what success , we have already seen . If we come lower to the time of King Iames ▪ His Majesty himself declared it in Print , as his judgment ; Christiano cuique Regi , Principi , ac Rèipublicae concessum , externam in rebus Ecclesiasticis regiminis formam suis prascribere , quae ad civilis administrationis formam quàm proximè accedat . That the Civil power in any Nation , hath the right of prescribing what external Form of Church Government it please , which doth most agree to the Civil Form of Government in the State. Doctor Sutcliffe de Presbyterio largely disputes against those who assert that Christ hath laid down certain immutable Lawes for Government in the Church . Crakanthorp against Spalatensis doth assert the mutability of such things as are founded upon Apostolical Tradition ▪ Traditum igitur ab Apostolis , sed traditum & mutabile , & pro usu ac arbitrio Ecclesiae mutandum . To the like purpose speak the forecited Authours , as their Testimonies are extant in Parker . Bishop Bridges , Num unumquodque exemplum Ecclesiae Primitivae praeceptum aut mandatum faciat ? And again , Forte rerum nonnullarum in Primitiva Ecclesia exemplum aliquod ostendere possunt , sed nec id ipsum generale , nec ejusdem perpetuam regulam aliquam , quae omnes ecclesias & aetates omnes ad illud exemplum astringat . So Archbishop Whitgift , Ex facto aut exemplo legem facere , iniquúm est . Nunquam licet , inquit Zuinglius , à facto ad jus argumentari . By which Principles , the Divine right of Episcopacy as founded upon Apostolical practice , is quite subverted and destroyed . To come nearer to our own unhappy times ; Not long before the breaking forth of those never sufficiently to be lamented Intestine broyls , we have the judgement of two Learned , Judicious , rational Authours fully discovered as to the point in Question . The first is that incomparable man Master Hales in his often cited Tract of Schism : whose words are these ; But that other head of Episcopal Ambition ▪ concerning Supremacy of Bishops in divers See's , one claiming Supremacy over another , as is hath been from time to time a great Trespass against the Churches peace , so it is now the final ruine of it : The East and West through the fury of the two prime Bishops being irremediably separated without all hope of Reconcilement . And besides all this mischief , it is founded on a Vice contrary to all Christian Humility , without which no Man shall see his Saviour . For they doe but abase themselves and others , that would perswade us , that Bishops by Christs Institution have any Superiority over men further then of Reverence , or that any Bishop is Superiour to another , further then Positive Order agreed upon among Christians hath prescribed : For we have believed him that hath told us , that in Iesus Christ there is neither high nor low : and that in giving Honour , every Man should be ready to preferre another before himself : Which saying cuts off all claim certainly of Superiority , by Title of Christianity , except Men think that these things were spoken onely to poor and private Men. Nature and Religion agree in this , that neither of them had a hand in this Heraldry of secundum sub & supra , all this comes from composition and agreement of men among themselves ; wherefore this abuse of Christianity to make it Lacquey to Ambition , is a vice for which I have no extraordinary name of Ignominy ; and an ordinary I will not give it , lest you should take so transcendent a vice to be but trivial . Thus that grave and wise person , whose words savour of a more then ordinary tincture of a true Spirit of Christianity , that scorns to make Religion a footstool to pride and ambition . We see plainly he makes all difference between Church-Officers to arise from consent of parties , and not from any Divine Law. To the same purpose Master Chillingworth propounds this Question among many others to his adversary : Whether any one kind of these external Forms and Orders and Government be so necessary to the being of a Church , but that they may be diverse in divers places , and that a good and peaceable Christian may and ought to submit himself to the Government of the place where he lives whosoever he be ? Which Question according to the tenour of the rest to which it is joyned , must as to the former part be resolved in the Negative , and as to the latter in the Affirmative . Which is the very thing I have been so long in proving of , viz. that no one Form of Church-Government is so necessary to the being of a Church , but that a good and peaceable Christian may and ought to conform himself to the Government of that place where he lives . So much I suppose may suffice to shew that the Opinion which I have asserted , is no stranger in our own Nation , no not among those who have been professed Defenders of the Ecclesiastical Government of this Church . Having thus far acquainted our selves with the state and customes of our own Countrey , we may be allowed the liberty of visiting Forraign Churches : to see how far they concur with us in the matter in question . The first person whose judgement we shall produce asserting the mutability of the Form of Church-Government , is that great light of the German Church Chemnitius , whom Brightman had so high an opinion of as to make him to be one of the Angels in the Churches of the Revelation . He , discoursing about the Sacrament of Order , as the Papists call it , layes down these following Hypotheses , as certain truth● . 1. Non esse Dei verbo mandatum , qui vel quot tales gradus seu ordines esse debeant . 2. Non fuisse tempore Apostolorum in omnibus Ecclesiis & semper , cosdem & totidem gradus seu ordines id quod ex Epistolis Pauli ad diversas Ecclesias scriptis manifestè colligitur . 3. Non fuit tempore Apostolorum talis distributio graduum illorum , quin saepius unus & idem omnia illa officia , quae ad ministerium pertinent , sustineret . Liberae igitur fuerunt Apostolorum tempore tales ordinationes , habitâ ratione ordinis , decori & aedificationis , &c. Illud Apostolorum exemplum Primitiva Ecclesia , eadem ratione & simili libertate imitata est . Gradus enim officior um ministerii distributi fuerunt : non autem eadem plane ratione sicut in Corinthiaca vel Ephesina Ecclesia , sed pro ratione circumstantiarum cujusque Ecclesiae ; unde colligitur quae fuerit in distributione illorum graduum libertas . The main thing he asserts , is , the Curches freedom and liberty as to the orders and degrees of those who superintend the affairs of the Church , which he builds on a threefold foundation . 1. That the Word of God no where commands , what or how many degrees and Orders of Ministers there shall be . 2. That in the Apostles times , there was not the like number in all Churches , as is evivident from Pauls Epistles . 3. That in the Apostles times in some places one person did manage the several Offices belonging to a Church . Which three Propositions of this Learned Divine , are the very basis and foundation of all our foregoing Discourse , wherein we have endeavoured to prove these several things at large . The same Learned person hath a set Discourse to shew how by degrees the Offices in the Church did rise , not from any set or standing Law , but for the convenient managery of the Churches Affairs , and concludes his Discourse thus : Et haec prima graduum seu ordinum origo in Ecclesia Apostolica ostendit quae causa , quae ratio , quis usus & finis esse debeat hujusmodi seu graduum , seu ordinum ; ut scilicet pro ratione coetus Ecclesiastici , singula Officia quae ad ministerium pertinent , commodius , rectius , diligentius , & ordine cum aliqua gravitate ad aedificationem obeantur . The summ is , It appears by the practice of the Apostolical Church , that the state , condition , and necessity of every particular Church , ought to be the Standard , and measure what Offices and Degrees of persons ought to be in it . As to the uncertain number of Officers in the Churches in Apostolical times , we have a full and express Testimony of the Famous Centuriatours of Magdeburge . Quot verò in qualibet Ecclesia personae Ministerio functae sint , non est in Flistoriis annotatum , nec usquam est praeceptum , ut aeque multi in singulis essent , sed prout paucitas aut multitudo coetus postulavit , ita pauciores aut plures administerium Ecclesiae sunt adhibiti . We see by them there is no other certain rule laid down in Scripture , what number of persons shall act in the governing every Church ; onely general prudence according to the Churches necessity , was the ground of determining the number then , and must be so still . The next person whose judgement is fully on our side , is a person both of Learning and Moderation , and an earnest restorer of Discipline as well as Doctrine in the Church . I mean Hieron Zanchy , who in several places hath expressed his judgement to the purpose we are now upon . The fullest place is in his Confession of Faith , penned by him in the LXX . year of his Age ; and if ever a man speaks his mind , it must be certainly when he professeth his judgement in a solemn manner by way of his last Will and Testament to the world ( that when the Soul is going into another world , he may leave his mind behind him ) Thus doth Zanch ; in that Confession , in which he declares this to be his judgement as to the form of Church-Government ; That in the Apostles times there were but two orders under them , viz. of Pastors and Teachers : but presently subjoyns these words , Interea tamen non improbamus Patres , quod juxta variam , tum verbi dispensandi , tum regendae Ecclesiae rationem , varios quoqu● ordines ministrorum multiplicarint , quando id iis liberum fuit , sicut & nobis ; & quando constat id ab illis factum honestis de causis , ad ordinem , ad decorum & ad aedificationem Ecclesiae pro co tempore pertinentibus . And in the next Section , Novimus enim Deum nostrum , Deum esse Ordinis non confusionis ; & Ecclesiam servari ordine , perdi autem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : qua de causa multos etiam & diversos , non solum olim in Israele , verum etiam post in Ecclesia ex Iudaeis & Gentibus collecta , ministrorum ordines instituit ; & eandem etiam ob causam , liberum reliquit Ecclesiis , ut plures adderent vel non adderent , modo ad aedificationem fieret . He asserts it to be in the Churches power and liberty to add several orders of Ministers according as it judgeth them tend to edification ; and saith , he is far from condemning the Course of the Primitive Church in erecting one as Bishop over the Presbyters , for better managing Church Affairs ; yea , Arch-Bishops , Metropolitans , and Patriarchs as instituted by the Primitive Church before the Nicene Council , he thinks may be both excused and defended , although afterward they degenerated into Tyranny and Ambition . And in his Observations upon his Confession , penned chiefly upon the occasion of the exceptions of Magnus quidam Vir ( some will guess who that was ) taken at the free delivery of his mind concerning the Polity of the Primitive Church , he hath expressions to this purpose : That what was unanimously determined by the Primitive Church without any contradiction to Scripture , did come from the Holy Spirit . Hinc fit , saith he , ut quae sint hujuscemodi , ea ego improbare nec velim , nec audeam bona conscientia . Quis autem ego sim , qui quod tota Ecclesia approbavit , improbem ? Such things , saith he , as are so determined , I neither will nor can with a safe Conscience condemn . For who am I , that I should condemn that which the whole Church of God hath approved ? A Sentence as full of judgement as modesty . And that he might shew he was not alone in this opinion , he produceth two large and excellent Discourses of Martin Bucer concerning the Polity of the ancient Church , which he recites with approbation ; the one out of his Commentaries on the Ephesians , the other de Disciplina Clericali : whereby we have gained another Testimony of that famous and peaceable Divine , whose judgement is too large to be here inserted . The same opinion of Zanchy may be seen in his Commentaries upon the fourth Command , wherein he asserts no particular Form to be prescribed , but onely general Rules laid down in Scripture , that all be done to Edification ; speaking of the Originall of Episcopacy which came not dispositione Divina , but consuetudine Ecclesiastica , atque ea quidem minime improbanda ; neque enim hunc ordinem prohibuit Christus sed potius regulam generalem reliquit per Apostolum , nt in Ecclesia omnia fiant ad edificationem . It is then most clear and evident that neither Bucer , Chemnitius or Zanchy did look upon the Church as so bound up by any immutable Form of Church-Government laid down in Scripture , but it might lawfully and laudably alter it for better edification of the Church . For these Learned Divines conceiving that at first in the Church there was no difference between Bishop and Presbyter , and commending the Polity of the Church when Episcopacy was set in a higher order , they must of necessity hold that there was no obligation to observe that Form which was used in Apostolical times . Our next inquiry is into the opinion of the French Church , and the eminent Divines therein . For Calvin and B●z̄a , we have designed them under another rank . At present we speak of those who in Thesi assert the Form of Church-Government mutable . The first wee meet with here who fully layes down his opinion as to this matter , is , Ioh. Fregevil , who although in his Palma Christiana he seems to assert the Divine right of Primacy in the Church , yet in his Politick Reformer , he asserts both Forms of Government by equality and inequality , to be lawful . And we shall the rather produce his Testimony , because of the high Character given of him by the late Reverend Bishop Hall. Wise Fregevil , a deep head , and one that was able to cut even betwixt the League , the Church and State : His words are these ; As for the English Government , I say , it is grounded upon Gods Word so far forth as it keepeth the State of the Clergy instituted in the Old Testament , and confirmed in the New. And concerning the Government of the French Church , so far as concerneth the equality of Ministers , it hath the like foundation in Gods Word : namely in the example of the Apostles ; which may suffice to authorize both these Forms of Estate ; albeit in several times and places . None can deny but that the Apostles among themselves were equal , as concerning authority , albeit there were an Order for their precedency . When the Apostles first planted Churches , the same being small and in affliction , there were not as yet any other Bishops , Priests or Deacons but themselves ; they , were the Bishops and Deacons , and together served the Tables . Those men therefore whom God raiseth up to plant a Church , can do no better , then after the examples of the Apostles to bear themselves in equal authority . For this cause have the French Ministers , planters of the Reformed Church in France usurped it , howbeit provisionally — reserving liberty to alter it , according to the occurrences . But the equality that rested among the Bishops of the primitive Church , did increase as the Churches increased ; and thence proceeded the Creation of Deacons , and afterwards of other Bishops and Priests ; yet ceased not the Apostles equality in authority ; but they that were created , had not like authority with the Apostles ; but the Apostles remained as Soveraign Bishops , neither were any greater then they . Hereof I do inferr that in the State of a mighty and peaceable Church , as is the Church of England , or as the Church of France is ( or such might be , if God should call it to Reformation ) the State of the Clergy ought to be preserved . For equality will be hurtful to the State , and in time breed confusion . But as the Apostles continued Churches in their equality so long as the Churches by them planted were small ; so should equality be applyed in the planting of a Church , or so long as the Church continueth small , or under persecution ; yet may it also be admitted as not repugnant to Gods Word in those places where already it is received , rather then to innovate anything . I say therefore , that even in the Apostles times the state of the Clergy increased as the Church increased . Neither was the Government under the bondage of Egypt , and during the peace of the Land of Canaan alike ; for Israelites had first Iudges , and after their state increased , Kings . Thus far that Politique Reformer . Whose words are so full and pertinent to the scope and drift of this whole Treatise , that there is no need of any Commentary to draw them to my sense . The next I shall pitch upon in the French Church , is , a Triumvirate of three as learned persons in their several wayes as most that Church or any since the reformation hath bred ; they are Blondel , Bochartus , and Amyraldus . The first is that great Church Antiquary , Blondel the known and learned assertor of Ieromes opinion concerning the primitive equality of Presbyters , who was likewise of Ieromes mind as to the mutability of that form if the Church saw fit , as appears by these words of his speaking of that Form of Ecclesiastical Polity which Hilary speaks of , viz. the Eldest Presbyters having the primacy of order above the rest . Fac tamen , saith he , Apostolis non modo non improbantibus , sed palam laudantibus ortam , ego sanè liberè ab initio observatam , Christianisque sive ab Apostolis sive ab eorum discipulis traditam , sed ut mutabilem & pro usu ac arbitrio Ecclesiae mutandam ( prout in causâ consimili piae memoriae Crakanthorpius sensis ) crediderim : and not long after , Nec concessus capite carentes , aut multicipites , minùs horremus , quam fervidiores Hierarchici : quibus indagandum curatiùs incumbit ; An pastorum cuiquam quocunque ritulo nun● gaudeat , divino jure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eaque perpetua decreta sit ; An verò in Arbitrio Ecclesiae , ipse ( qui praeest Ecclesiae ) Spiritus religuerit , ut , quocunque modo liberet , sibi de capite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 collegia providerent . Whereby that most learned Writer for Presbyterie ( as some have call'd him ) evidently asserts the mutability of the particular Form of Church Government , and that it is left to the prudence and arbitrement of the Church , to conclude and determine , in what way and manner the Rulers of the Church shall act , for moderating the common concernments of the Church . The next is the learned and ingenuous Bochartus , who ex professo , doth assert the opinion I have been pleading thus long in the behalf of , in his Epistle to Dr. Morley . He having declared himself to be of Ieromes mind , as to the Apostles times , that the Churches were governed communi consilio Presbyterorum ; and withall , asserting the great antiquity of Episcopacy , as arising-soon after the Apostles times , and that magno cum fructu , as a very usefull Form of Government : He subjoyns these words directly overthrowing the D●vine Right of either Form of Government , by Episcopacy or Presbyterie . N●● Apostolorum praxim puto vim habuisse legis , in rebus su● natura 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Proinde tam qui Presbyteralem , quam Episcopalem ordinem juris divini esse asserunt , videntur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And therefore asserts , that the Form of Government must be determined , as that in the State is , according to the suitableness of it to the state , temper , and condition of the people it is intended for . The last is , judicious Amyraldus , whom one deservedly calls , One of the greatest wits of this Age. In his proposals for peace with the Lutherans , speaking of the different Forms of Church-Government in the several Churches of the Reformation , he layes down this for a foundation of union among the several Churches . Quando igitur Christus quidem & Apostoli hoc diserté constituerunt , Debere particulares Ecclesias omnes gubernari à Pastoribus , & aliquâ regiminis forma temperari , quod ipsa rei necessitas flagitat ; quae verò regiminis ista forma potissimùm esse debeat , utrum alii aliis auctoritate praecellant , necne , neque rei natura definivit , neque à Christo aut Apostolis aeque disertè constitutum est ; id primò in pacificatione statuendum esse videtur , ut quo jure hactenus fuerunt Ecclesiarum Evangelicarum Pastores , eodem porrò esse pergant , neque aliae aliarum statum convellere nitantur . That every Church be permitted freely to enjoy its own Form , since some kind of Government is necessary in all Churches , but no one Form is prescribed by Christ or his Apostles ; and more fully afterwards to the same purpose . Quemadmodum igitur etsi Politiarum formae aliae aliis aptiores ad finem illum Politicum obtinendum , & accomodatiores esse videntur , Deus tamen qui omnis societatis auctor est atque custos , noluit omnes hominum coetus eodem jure teneri , sed cuique communitati potestatem esse voluit suas leges sibi condendi , quas ipse divinâ suâ auctoritate sancit ; sic dubitandum quidem non est quin ex variis illis administrandarum Ecclesiarum rationibus , nonnullae sint aliquanto quam aliae conducibiliores ad eum finem adipiscendum quem religio constitutune habet : At voluit tamen sapientissimus indulgentissimusque Deus , cuique Ecclesiaejus esse sibi leges eas ferendi quae ad disciplinam spectant , & ad ordinem conservandum . Whereby he grants as much freedome and liberty to every Church , to prescribe Laws to its self , for the regulating the affairs of the Church , as to any State to pitch upon its particular rules and wayes of Government . So the Church do in its orders but observe the general rules laid down in Scripture . Having thus fully shewed how many of he most eminent Divines of the Reformation have embraced this opinion of the mutability of the Form of Church-Government , both in our own and Forraign Churches , who were far from being the Proselytes of Erastus ; it were easie to add Mantissae loco : the concurrent judgement of many very learned men , as the excellent Hugo Grotius , my Lord Bacon , Sir Will. Morice , and others , who have in print delivered this as their judgement ; but seeing such is the temper of ma ny , as to cast by their judgements with an opinion of their partiality towards the Government of the Church ; I have therefore contented my self with the judgement of Divines , most of them of the highest rank since the Reformation : whose judgements certainly will be sufficient to remove that prejudice , wherewith this opinion hath been entertained among the blind followers of the several parties . So much for those , who in terms assert the Form of Church-Government not to depend upon an unalterable Law , but to be left to the prudence and discretion of every particular Church , to determine it according to its suitableness to the state , condition , and temper of the people whereof it consists , and conduceableness to the ends for which it is instituted . We come now in the second place to those , who though they look upon equality of Ministers as the Primitive Form , yet do allow Episcopal Government in the Church as a very lawful and useful constitution . By which it is evident , that they did not judge the Primitive Form to carry an universal obligation along with it , over all Churches , ages , and places . Upon this account , our learned Crakanthorp frees all the Reformed Churches from the charge of Aërianisin , laid upon them by the Archbishop of Spalato ( when he licked up his former vomit in his Consilium reditûs ) . Crakanthorps words are these , speaking of Luther , Calvin , Beza , and all the Reformed Churches ; Non habent illi , scio , distinctos à Presbyteris , eisque in ordinandi & excommunicandi potestate superiores Episcopos . At Imparitatem istam , quod fecit Aërius , non verbo Dei repugnare docent ; non damnant eam vel in nostrâ , vel in universali per annos super mille quingentos Ecclesiâ . Per verbum Dei & Ius Divinum , liberum & licitum utrumvis censent , vel Imparitatem istam admittere vel Paritatem ; In arbitrio hoc esse ac potestate cujusvis Ecclesiae censent , utrum Paritatem ordinum admittant , an Imparitatem . So that according to the opinion of this learned Divine , all the Reformed Churches were free from the Imputation of Aërianism , because they asserted not an Imparity among the Ministers of the Gospel to be unlawful ; but thought it was wholly in the Churches liberty , to settle either a Parity or Imparity among them , as they judged convenient . But to descend more particularly to the Heroes of the Reformation : we have a whole Constellation of them together in the Augustane Confession , where they fully express their minds to this purpose , Hâc de re in hoc conveni● saepe testati sumus , nos summâ voluntate cupere , conservare Politiam Ecclesiasticam , & gradus in Ecclesiâ factos etiam humaná authoritate . Scimus enim bono & utili consilio à Patribus Ecclesiasticam disciplinam , hoc modo , ut veteres Canones describunt , constit utam esse . And afterwards , Saevitia Episcoporum in causâ est , quare alicubi dissolvitur illa Canonica Politia , quam magnopere cupiebamus conservare . And again , Hîc iterum volumus testatum , nos libenter conservaturos esse Ecclesiasticam & Canonicam Politiam , si modo Episcopi desinant in Ecclesias nostras saevire . Haec nostra voluntas , & coram Deo & apud omnes gentes ad omnem posteritatem excusabit nos , nè nobis imputari possit , quod Episcoporum authoritas labefactetur . And yet further : Saepe jam testati sumus , nos non solùm potestatem Ecclesiasticam , quae in Evangelio instituta est , summâ pietate venerari , sed etiam Ecclesiasticam Politiam , & gradus in Ecclesiâ magnoperé probare ; & , quantùm in nobis est , conservare cupere . We see with what industry they purge and clear themselves from the imputation of bearing any ill will to the several degrees that were instituted by the Church ; nay , they profess themselves desirous of retaining them , so the Bishops would not force them to do any thing against their consciences . To the same purpose they speak in the Smaraldian Articles . None speaks more fully of the agreeableness of the Form of Government used in the Ages after the Apostles to the Word of God ; then that excellent servant of God , as Bishop Downam often calls him , Calvin doth : For in his Iustitutions he speaks thus of the Polity of the Primitive Church ; Tametsi enim multos Canones ediderunt illorum temporum Episcopi quibus plus viderentur exprimere quàm sacris literis expressum esset ; ea tamen cautione totam suam Oeconomiam composuerunt ad unicam illam verbi Dei normam , ut facilè videas nihil ferè hac parte h●buisse à verbo Dei alienum . Although the Bishops of those times did make many Canons , wherein they did seem to express more then was in the word of God ; yet they used such caution and prudence in the establishing the Churches Polity according to the word of God , that hardly will any thing be found in it disagreeing to Gods Holy word . And afterwards speaking of the Institution of Arch-bishops and Patriarchs , he saith it was ad-Disciplinae conservationem , for preserving the Churches Discipline : and again , Si rem omisso vocabulo intuemur , reperiemus Veteres Episcopos non aliam regendae Ecclesiae formam voluisse fingere , ab ea quam Deus verbo suo praescripsit , If we consider the matter its self of the Churches Polity , we shall find nothing in it discrepant from , or repugnant to that Form which is laid down in the Word of God. Calvin then , what ever form of Government he judged most suitable to the state and temper of the Church wherein he was placed , was far from condemning that Polity which was used in the Primitive Church by a difference as to degrees among the Ministers of the Gospel . He did not then judge any form of Government to be so delivered in Scriptures as unalterably to oblige all Churches and ages to observe it . Beza saith , He was so far from thinking that the humane order of Episcopasy was brought into the Church through rashness or ambition , that none can deny it to have been very usefull as long as Bishops were good . And those that both will and can , let them enjoy it still . His words are these : Absit autem , ut hunc ordinem , et si Apostolica & mere divina dispositione non constitutum , tamen ut temere aut superbe invectum reprehendam ; cujus potius magnum usum fuisse quamdiu boni & sancti Episcopi Ecclesiis praefuerunt , quis inficiari possit ? Fruantur igitur illo qui volent & poterunt . And elsewhere professeth all reverence , esteem , and honour to be due to all such modern Bishops , who strive to imitate the example of the Primitive Bishops in a due reformation of the Church of God , according to the rule of the word . And looks on it as a most false and impudent Calumny of some that said , as though they intended to prescribe their form of Government to all other Churches ; as though they were like some ignorant fellows who think nothing good but what they do themselves . How this is reconcileable with the novell pretence of a Ius divinum , I cannot understand . For certainly , if Beza had judged that only Form to be prescribed in the Word which was used in Geneva , it had been but his duty to have desired all other Churches to conform to that . Neither ought Beza then to be looked on as out-going his Master Calvin in the opinion about the right of Church-Government . For we see he goes no further in it then Calvin did . All that either of them maintained , was , that the form of Government in use among them , was more agreeable to the primitive form , then the modern Episcopacy was , and that Episcopacy lay more open to Pride , Laziness , Ambition , and Tyranny , as they had seen and felt in the Church of Rome . Therefore not to give occasion to snch incroachments upon the liberty of mens consciences , as were introduced by the tyranny of the Roman Bishops , they thought it the safest way to reduce the Primitive parity ; but yet so , as to have an Ecclesiastical Senate for one Church containing City and Territories , as is evident at Geneva , and that Senate to have a President in it ; and whether that President should be for life , or only by course , they judged it an accidental and mutable thing : but that there should be one , essential and necessary . This is expresly and fully the judgement of that most Reverend and Learned man Th. Beza , as he declares it himself . Essentialefuit in eo de quo hic agimus , quod ex Dei Ordinatione perpetud necesse fuit , est , & erit , ut in Presbyterio quispiam & loco & dignitate primus actioni gubernandae praesit , cum eo quod ipsi divinitus attributum est jure . Accidentale autem fuit , quod Presbyteri in hac 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alii aliis per vices initio succedebant ; qui 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 modus paulatim postea visus est mutandus , ut unus quispiam judicio caeterorum compresbyterorum delectus , Presbyterio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esset , & permaneret . It will be worth our while truly to state the Question of Church Government between the Church of England , and that of Geneva in the time of Queen Elizabeth , and thereby we shall see how , small the difference was between them . That the Churches in the Primitive times , did take in the Christians in whole Cities , and adjoyning Territories , is acknowledged on both sides ; Calvin and Beza being both express in it , and the Constitution of the Church of Geneva speaks as much . Vnicuique civitati ( saith Calvin ) erat attributa certa regio ; quae Presbyteros inde sumeret , & velut corpori Ecclesiae illius accenserentur . In oppido cujusque Dioeceseos ( saith Beza ) praecipuo , primus Presbyter &c. in quotidianâ communi jurisdictione praeerat caeteris tum urbanis , tum aliis ejus regionis compresbyteris , i. e. toti Dioecesi . That the Government of the City did take in the City and Territories , is likewise acknowledged by them . That for more convenient order , there was one to preside over the Ecclesiastical Senate , is confessed as essential by Beza ; and Calvin acknowledgeth that even in Apostolical times , non eam fuisse tunc aequalitatem inter Ecclesiae ministros , quin unus aliquis authoritate & consilio prae●sset . There was no such equality among the Ministers of the Church , but that some one was over the rest in authority and counsell . Wherein then lay the difference For we have already seen that our Great Divines then , did not look upon their form of Government as necessary , but only lawfull ; and Calvin and Beza , would not be thought to prescribe their form to other Churches . All the difference then was , not Whether their form of Government was founded on Divine Right ? not Whether Episcopacy in the Church was lawfull or no ? not Whether Diocesan Churches were unlawfull ? or Whether every Congregation should have an Ecclesiastical Senate ? But , Whether it were more agreeable to the Primitive form , that the President of the Ecclesiastical Senate should have only an order among , or a degree above the Senate its self ? But chiefly it was , Whether in the present state of the Reformed Churches it were more convenient wholly to lay aside the form of Government by Bishops , which had been so much abused in the Roman Church : and to reduce all Ministers of the Gospel to an equality with only a Presidency of order , thereby to free themselves from the imputation of Ambition , and to prevent it ▪ in others ; or else it were more prudent only to retrench the abuses of Episcopacy under the Papacy , and to reduce it to that form wherein it was practiced in the Church , before the tyranny and Usurpation of the Roman Bishop had ingrossed all Ecclesiastical power into his own hands ? The former part was embraced generally by the Reformed Churches , the latter by our Church of England , so that the Question was not about Divine Right , but about a matter of prudence ; not What form was setled by a Law of Christ ; but what form was suitable to the present state of the Churches of the Reformation . Therefore we see none of these forraign Divines did charge the Government of this Church with unlawfulness , but inconveniency , as it was a step to pride and ambition , and an occasion whereby men might do the Church injury by the excess of their power , if they were not men of an excellent temper and moderation . Thence that prediction of Padre Paule , that the Church of England would then , find the inconveniency of Episcopacy , when a high-spirited Bishop should once come to rule that Church ; and so Beza when he had freed the Bishops of the Reformation from that imputation of Lording it over their Brethren , which he had charged the Roman Bishops with , yet he adds , that he would beg them rather to lay down their power , then to transmit that power to those after them , hanc ipsorum moderationem & aequitatem minimè forsan sequuturis , Who it may be were not like to succeed them in their meekness and moderation . What just reason there was for such fears , or may be still , let those judge who are fittest to do it ; those I mean who have the power not only to redress , but prevent abuses incroaching by an irregular power . It was not then any unlawfulness in the Government of Episcopacy its self , but its lyableness to abuses , which made the Reformed Churches reduce Modern Episcopacy into a meer Presidency of Order , which was not so lyable to the same inconveniences . A clear evidence that they judged not the Government unlawfull , is , their often profession of a ready and chearfull obedience to Bishops , if they would embrace the Gospel , and stand up in defence of the true Doctrine . For which we have the testimony of George Prince of Anhalt , in the Preface to his Sermon about false Prophets , speaking of Bishops and Arch-Bishops . Utinam sicut nomina gerunt & titulos , ita se reipsa praestarent Episcopos Ecclesia . Utinam Evangelio docerent consona , ipsoque Ecclesias fideliter regerent . O quam libenter , quantaque cum cordis laetitia , pro Episcopis ipsos habere , revereri , morem gerere , debitam jurisdictionem , & ordinationem eis tribuere , eaque sine recusatione frui vellemus : id quod nos semper , & D. Lutherus etiam saepissime tam ore quam scriptis , imo & in concione publica in Cathedrali Templ● Marsburgensi contestati promisimus● He professeth it to be both his own judgement and Luthers , that if Bishops would but teach and rule their Churches according to the Word of God , they would obey them with all chearfulness and joy of heart . To the same purpose Melancthon writing to Camerarius ; By what right or Law may we dissolve the Ecclesiastical Polity , if the Bishops will grant us that which in reason they ought to grant ? and though it were lawful for us so to do , yet surely it were not expedient . Luther was ever of this opinion . The same is professed by Calvin , and that according to his temper in a higher manner ; Verum autem nobis si contribuant Hierarchiam in qua emineant Episcopi , ut Christo subesse non recusent , ut ab illo tanquam ab unico Capite pendeant , & ad ipsum referantur , in qua si fraternam charitatem inter se colant , & non alio modo quam ejus veritate colligati , tum vero nullo non Anathemate dignos fatemur , si qui erunt , qui eam non reverenter & sumnia cum obedientia observent . If Bishops would but submit themselves to Christ , those that would not then submit themselves to them , he thinks there is no Anathema of which they are not worthy . Iacobus Heerbrandus , Divinity Professor at Tubinge , professeth it to be the most found constitution of Church-government , wherein every Diocess had its Bishop , and every Province an Arch-bishop . Saluberrimum esset si singulae Provinciae suos Episcopos , & Episcopi suos Archiepiscopos haberent . Hemingius : acknowledgeth a disparity among Church Officers , and accounts it a piece of barbarism to remove it . Quanquam enim potestas omnium eadem est ministrorum , quantum ad spiritualem jurisdictionem atti●et ; tamen dispares dignitatis ordines & gradus sunt ; idque partim Jure divino , partim Ecclesia approbatione . But he qualifies what he had said of Ius divinum by his following words ; Ecclesia cui Dominus potestatem dedit in aedificationem , ordinem ministrorum instituit pro commodo suo , ut omnia sint rite ordinata ad instaurationem corporis Christi . Hinc Ecclesia purior secuta tempora Apostolorum , fecit alios Patriarchas , alios Chorepiscopos , alios Pastores & Catechetas ; and afterwards , Inter ministros agnoscit etiam Ecclesia nostra gradus dignitatis , & ordines pro diversitate donorum , laborum magnitudine , ac vocationum diversitate ; ac judicat , Barbaricum esse de Ecclesia hunc ordinem tollere velle . Three things he placeth a superiority of Dignity in ; Excellency of gifts , Greatness of labours , difference of calling . And the truth is , the two former ought to be the measure of dignity in the Church , the Eminency of mens abilities , and the abundance of their labours above others . The necessity of a Superintendent , or an Inspector over other Ministers , is largely discovered by Zepper de Politeid Ecclesiastica , who likewise agrees with the former Divines in his judgement of the first institution of Episcopacy . Eadem officia in primitiva etiam Ecclesia , post Apostolorum tempora in usu manserunt , paucis , quibusdam gradibus , pro illorum temporum necessitate additis , qui tamen nihil fere à mente D. Pauli & verbi divini alienum habuerunt . Whereby he both assert it to be in the power of the Church to add distinct degrees from what were in the Primitive Church , and that such so added , are no wayes repugnant to the Word of God. According to this judgement of their Divines is the practice of the forraign Protestant Churches . In Sweden there is one Arch-Bishop , and seven Bishops : and so in Denmark , though not with so great authority in Holstein , Pomeren , Mecklenburgh , Brunswicke , Luneburgh , Bremen , Oldenburgh , East Frieseland , Hessen , Saxony , and all the upper part of Germany and the Protestant Imperial Cities , Church government is in the hands of Super-intendents . In the Palatinate they had Inspectores and Praepositi , over which was the Ecclesiastical Consistory of three Clergy men , and three Counsellors of State with their President : and so they have their Praepositos in Wetteraw , Hessen and Anhalt . In Transylvania , Polonia , and Bohemia , they have their Seniores enjoying the same power with anclent Bishops . So that we see all these Reformed Churches , and Divines , although they acknowledge no such thing as a divine Right of Episcopacy , but stiffely maintain Ieromes opinion of the primitive equality of Gospel Ministers ; yet they are so far from accounting it unlawfull to have some Church Officers acting in a higher degree above others , that they themselves embrace it under different names and titles , in order to the Peace , Unity , and Government of their several Churches ; Whereby they give us an evident demonstration that they looked not upon the primitive form to be immutable , but that the orders and degrees of Ministers is only a Prudential thing , and left in the liberty of every particular Church , to be determined according to their tendency to preserve the peace and settlement of a Church . We come in the last place to those who hold Episcopacy to be the Primitive Form , yet not unalterably binding all Churches and places , but that those Churches who are without it , are truly constituted Churches ; and Ministers are lawfully ordained by meer Presbyters . This is largely proved by Mr. Francis Mason , in his excellent Defence of the Ordination of Ministers beyond the Seas : to which I refer the Reader . Only I shall shew out of him how the State of the Question about the Ius divinum of Episcopacy is formed . First , If by jure divino you mean that which is according to Scripture , then the preheminence of Bishops is jure divino ; for it hath been already proved to be according to Scripture . Secondly , If by jure divino you mean the Ordinance of God , in this sense also it may be said to be jure divino . For it is an ordinance of the Apostles , whereunto they were directed by Gods Spirit , even by the Spirit of Prophecy , and consequently the ordinance of God. But if by jure divino you understand a Law and Commandment of God , binding all Christian Churches universally , perpetually , unchangeably , and with such absolute necessity , that no other form of Regiment may in any case be admitted ; in this sense neither may we grant it , nor yet can you prove it to be jure divino . Whereby we see this learned and moderate man was far from unchurching all who wanted Bishops ; and absolutely declares , that though he look on Episcopacy as an Apostolical Institution , yet that no unalterable Divine Right is founded thereupon . So before him the both learned and pious Bishop G. Downham explains himself concerning the Right of Episcopacy , in these remarkable words : Though in respect of the first Institution , there is small difference between an Apostolical and Divine Ordinance , because what was , ordained by the Apostles , proceeded from God ( in which sense , and no other , I do hold the Episcopal function to be a divine Ordinance , I mean in respect of of the first Institution ) yet in respect of perpetuity , difference by some is made between those things which be divini , and those which be Apostolici juris ; the former in their understanding being perpetually , generally , and immutably necessary : the latter not so . So that the meaning of my defence plainly i● , that the Episcopal Government hath this commendation above other forms of Ecclesiastical Government , that in respect of the first Institution ; it is a divine Ordinance ; but that it should be such a divine Ordinance as should be generally , perpetually , immutably , necessarily observed , so as no other form of Government may in no case be admitted , I did not take upon me to maintain : With more to the same purpose in several places of that defence . And from hence it is acknowledged by the stoutest Champions for Episcopacy , before these late unhappy divisions , that ordination performed by Presbyters in cases of necessity is valid ; which I have already shewed doth evidently prove that Episcopal Government is not founded upon any unalterable Divine Right : For which purpose many evidences are produced from Dr. Field of the Church , lib. 3. c. 39 B. Downam , l. 3. c. 4. B. Iew●l , P. 2. p. 131. Saravia . cap. 2. p. 10. 11. B. Alley , Praelect . 3. & 6. B. Pilkinton , B. Bridges , B. Bilson , D. Nowel . B. Davenant , B. Prideaux , B. Andrews , and others : by our Reverend and learned M. Baxter in his Christian Concord , to whom may be added the late most Reverend and eminent the Bishop of Durham , Apolog. Cathol . p. 1. l. 1. c. 21. and the Primat of Armagh , whose judgement is well known as to the point of Ordination . So much may suffice to shew that both those who hold an equality among Ministers to be the Apostolical Form , and those that do hold Episcopacy to have been it , do yet both of them ag●ee at last in this ; that no one Form is setled by an unalterable Law of Christ , nor consequently founded upon Divine Right . For the former , notwithstanding their opinion of the primitive Form , do hold Episcopacy lawfull ; and the latter , who hold Episcopacy to have been the primitive Form , do not hold it perpetually and immutably necessary , but that Presbyters ( where Bishops cannot be had ) may lawfully discharge the offices belonging to Bishops ; both which Concessions do necessarily destroy the perpetual Divine Right of that Form of Government they assert : Which is the thing I have been so long in proving , and I hope made it evident to any unprejudicated mind . Having laid down this now as a sure foundation for peace and union , it were a very easie matter to improve it , in order to an Accommodation of our present differences about Church Government . I shall only lay down three general Principles deducible from hence , and leave the whole to the mature consideration of the Lovers of Truth and Peace . The first Principle , is , That Prudence must be used in setling the Government of the Church . This hath been the whole design of this Treatise , to prove that the Form of Church-government is a meer matter of prudence , regulated by the Word of God. But I need not insist on the Arguments already brought to prove it ; for , as far as I can find , although the several parties in their contentions with one another plead for Divine Right ; yet when any one of them comes to settle their own particular Form , they are fain to call in the help of Prudence , even in things supposed by the several parties , as necessary to the establishment of their own Form. The Congregational men may despair of ever finding Elective Synods , an explicite Church-Covenant , or positive signs of Grace in admission of Church-members in any Law of Christ : nay , they will not generally plead for any more for them , then general rules of Scripture , fine Similitudes , and Analogies , and evidence of natural Reason ; and what are all these at last to an express Law of Christ , without which it was pretended nothing was to be done in the Church of God ? The Presbyterians seem more generally to own the use of General Rules , and the Light of Nature , in order to the Form of Church Government , as in the subordination of Courts , Classical Assemblies ; and the more moderate sort , as to Lay elders . The Episcopal men will hardly find any evidence in Scripture , or the practice of the Apostles , for Churches consisting of many fixed Congregations for worship , under the charge of one Person ; nor in the Primitive Church , for the ordination of a Bishop without the preceding election of the Clergy , and at least consent and approbation of the people ; and neither in Scripture , nor antiquity , the least footstep of a delegation of Church-power . So that upon the matter at last , all of them make use of those things in Church Government , which have no other foundation but the Principles of Humane prudence , guided by the Scriptures ; and it were well if that were observed still . The second Principle is , That Form of Government is the best according to principles of Christian Prudence , which comes the nearest to Apostolical practice , and tends most to the advancing the peace and unity of the Church of God. What that Form is , I presume not to define and determine , but leave it to be gather'd from the evidence of Scripture and Antiquity , as to the Primitive practice ; and from the nature , state , and condition of that Church wherein it is to be setled , as to its tendency to the advancement of peace and unity in it . In order to the finding out of which , that proposal of his late most excellent Majesty of glorious memory , is most highly just and reasonable . His Majesty thinketh it well worthy the studies and endeavours of Divines of both opinions , laying aside emulation and private interests , to reduce Episcopacy and Presbyteri● into such a well-proportion'd Form of superiority and subordination , as may best resemble the Apostolical and Primitive times , so far forth as the different condition of the times , and the exigences of all considerable circumstances will admit . If this Proposal be embraced , as there is no reason why it should not ; then , all such things must be retrieved which were unquestionably of the Primitive practice , but have been grown out of use through the length and corruption of times . Such are the restoring of the Presbyteries of several Churches , as the Senate to the Bishop , with whole counsel and advice all things were done in the Primitive Church . The contracting of Dioceses into such a compass as may be fitted for the personal inspection of the Bishop , and care of himself and the Senate ; the placing of Bishops in all great Towns of resort , especially County Towns ; that according to the ancient course of the Church , its Government may be proportioned to the Civil Government . The constant preaching of the Bishop in some Churches of his charge , and residence in his Diocese ; The solemnity of Ordinations , with the consent of the people ; The observing Provincial Synods twice every year . The employing of none in judging Church matters but the Clergy . These are things unquestionably of the Primitive practice , and no argument can be drawn from the present state of things , why they are not as much , if not more necessary then ever . And therefore all who appeal to the practice of the Primitive Church , must condemn themselves , if they justifie the neglect of them . But I only touch at these things , my design being only to lay a foundation for a happy union . Lastly , What Form of Government is determined by lawfull authority in the Church of God , ought so far to be submitted to , as it contains nothing repugnant to the Word of God. So that let mens judgements be what they will concerning the Primitive Form , seeing it hath been proved , that that Form doth not bind unalterably and necessarily , it remains that the determining of the Form of Government is a matter of liberty in the Church ; and what is so may be determined by lawfull authority ; and what is so determined by that authority , doth bind men to obedience , as hath been proved by the 5. Hypothesis , in the entrance of this Treatise . I conclude all with this earnest desire , That the wise and Gracious God would send us one heart and one way , that he would be the Composer of our differences , and the repairer of our breaches , that of our strange divisions and unchristian animosities ; While we pretend to serve the Prince of peace , we may at last see , THE END Glory to God on high , on earth peace , good will towards men , Luke 2. 14. A Discourse concerning the Power of EXCOMMUNICATION in a Christian Church . The Name of Power in a Church explained . The mistake of which , the Foundation of Erastianism . The Notion of the Church opened , as it is the subject of Power . The Church proved to be a Society distinct from the Common-wealth ; by reason of its different Nature , and divine Institution ; distinct Officers , different Rights , and Ends , and peculiar Offences . The Power of the Church doth not arise from me●r confederation . The Churches Power founded on the nature of the Christian Society , and not on particular Precepts . The Power of Church-Officers not meerly Doctrinal , proved by several Arguments . Church-Power as to particular persons antecedent to confederation . The Power of the Keys relates to Baptism . The Churches Power extends to Excommunication : what it is , and what grounds it had under the Law. No exclusion from Temple-worship among the Iews . Excommunication necessary in a Christian Church , because of the conditions supposed to communion in it . Of the Incestuous person , and the Grounds of the Apostolical censure . Objections against Excommunication answered . The fundamental Rights of the Church continue after its being incorporated into the civil State. The Magistrates Power , as to Excommunication , cleared . IT is a matter of daily observation and experience in the World , how hard it is to keep the eyes of the understanding clear in its judgement of things , when it is too far engaged in the dust of Controversie . It being so very difficult to well manage an impetuous pursuit after any Opinion ; nothing being more common than to see men out-run their mark , and through the force of their speed to be carried as far beyond it , as others in their Opinion fall short of it . There is certainly a kind of ebriety of the mind , as well as of the body , which makes it so unstable and pendulous , that it oft times reels from one extream ▪ unto the quite contrary . This as it is obvious in most eager controvertists of all Ages , so especially in such , who have discovered the ●alsity of an opinion they were once confident of , which they think they can never after run far enough from : So that while they start at an apparition they so much dread , they run into those untroden paths , wherein they lose both themselves and the Truth they sought for . Thus we find it to be in the present controversie , for many out of their just zeal against the extravagancies of those who scrued up Church-Power to so high a peg , that it was thought to make perpetual discord with the Common wealth , could never think themselves free from so great an inconvenience , till they had melted down all Spiritual Power into the civil State , and dissolved the Church into the Common-wealth . But that the World way see I have not been more forward to assert the just power of the Magistrate in Ecclesiasticals , as well as Civils , than to defend the Fundamental Rights of the Church . I have taken this opportunity , more fully to explain and vindicate that part of the Churches-Power , which lies in reference to Offenders ? It being the main thing struck at by those who are the followers of that noted Physician , who handled the Church so ill , as to deprive her of her expulsive faculty of Noxious humours , and so left her under a Miserere meî . I shall therefore endeavour to give the Church her due , as well as Caesar his , by making good this following Principle or Hypothesis , upon which the whole hinge of this Controversie turns , viz. That the power of inflicting censure , upon Offenders in a Christian Church , is a fundamental Right , resu●●●●g from the constitution of the Church , as a Society by Jesus Christ ; and that the seat of this Power is in those Officers of the Church , who have derived their power Originally from the Founder of this Society , and act by vertue of the Laws of it . For the clear stating of this Controversie , it will be necessary to explain , what that Power is , which I attribute to the Church , and in what notion the Church is to be considered as it exerciseth this Power . First , concerning the proper notion of Power ; by it I cannot see any thing else to be understood , than a right of governing or ordering things which belong to a Society . And so Power implies onely a moral faculty in the person enjoying it , to take care ne quid civitas detrimenti capiat , whereby it is evident that every well constituted Society must suppose a Power within its self of ordering things belonging to its welfare , or else it were impossible , either the being , or the rights and priviledges of a Society could be long preserved . Power then in its general and abstracted notion , doth not necessarily import either meer Authority , or proper Coaction ; for these , to any impartial judgement , will appear to be rather the several modes whereby power is exercised , than any proper ingredients of the specifick Nature of it : which ; in general , imports no more then a right to govern a constituted Society ; but how that right shall be exercised , must be resolved not from the notion of Power , but from the nature and constitution of that particular Society in which it is lodged and inherent . It appears then from hence to be a great mistake and abuse of well-natured Readers , when all Power is necessarily restrained , either to that which is properly Co●rcive , or to that which is meerly Arbitrary , and onely from consent . The Original of which mistake is , the stating the Notion of Power from the use of the Word , either in ancient Roman Authours , or else in the Civil Laws , both which are freely acknowledged to be strange● to the exercise of any other Power , than that which i● meerly authoritative and perswasive , or that which is Coactive and Penal . The ground of which is , because they were ignorant of any other way of conveyance of power , besides external force , and Arbitrary consent ; the one in those called Legal Societies , or Civitates , the other Collegia and Hetaeriae . But to as that do acknowledge that God hath a right of commanding men to what Duty he please himself , and appointing a Society upon what terms best please him , and giving a Power to particular persons to govern that Society , in what way shall tend most to advance the Honour of such a Society , may easily be made appear , that there is a kind of Power neither properly Coactive , nor meerly Arbitrary , viz. such a one as immediately results from Divine Institution , and doth suppose consent to submit to it as a necessary Duty in all the members of this Society . This Power , it is evident , is not meerly Arbitrary either in the Governours or Members : for , the Governours derive their Power or right of Governing from the institution of Christ , and are to be regulated by his Laws in the execution of it ; and the Members , though their consent be necessarily supposed , yet that consent is a Duty in them , and that duty doth imply their submission to the Rulers of this Society : neither can this power be called Coactive , in the ●ense it is commonly taken : for coactive power , and external force are necessary correlates to each other , but we suppose no such thing as a power of outward force to be given to the Church as such , for that properly belongs to a Common-wealth . But the power which I suppose to be lodged in the Church , is such a power as depends upon a Law of a Superiour , giving right to Govern , to particular persons over such a Society , and making it the Duty of all Members of it to submit unto it , upon no other penalties , then the exclusion of them from the priviledges , which that Society enjoyes . So that supposing such a Society as the Church is , to be of Divine Institution , and that Christ hath appointed Officers to rule it , it necessarily follows , that those Officer● must derive their power , i. e. their right of Governing this Society , not meerly from consent and confederation of parties , but from that Divine Institution , on which the Society depends . The ●●ht of understanding the right notion of power in the sense here ●●● down , is certainly the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Erastianism , and that which hath given occasion to so many to question any such thing as Power in the Church , especially , when the more zealous then judicious defenders of it have rather chosen to hang it upon some doubtfull places of Scripture , then on the very Natur● and Constitution of the Christian Church , as a Society instituted by Iesus Christ. This being then the nature of power in general , it is I suppose clear , that an outward coactive force is not necessary in order to it ▪ for if some may have a Right to Govern and others may be obliged to obedience to those persons antecedently , to any Civil Constitution ; then such persons have a just power to inflict censures upon such as transgress the Rules of the Society , without any outward force . It is here very impertinent to dispute , what effects such censures can have upon wilful persons without a Coactive power ; If I can prove , that there is a right to inflict them in Church-Officers , and an Obligation to submit to them in all Offenders ; I am not to trouble my self with the event of such things as depend upon Divine Institutions . I know it is the great Objection of the followers of Erastus , that Church ▪ censures are inflicted upon persons unwilling to receive them , and therefore must imply external and coactive force , which is repugnant to the nature of a Church . But this admits ( according to the Principles here established ) of a very easie solution ; for I deny not , that Church Power goes upon consent , but then it 's very plain here was an antecedent consent to submit to censures in the very entrance into this Society , which is sufficient to denominate it a voluntary act of the persons undergoing it ; and my reason is this , every person entring into a Society , parts with his own freedom and liberty , as to matters concerning the governing of it , and professeth submission to the Rules and Orders of it : now a man having parted with his freedom already , cannot reassume it when he please , for , then , he is under an Obligation to stand to the Covenants made at his entrance ; and cons●quently his undergoing what shall be laid upon him by the Lawes of this Society , must be supposed to be voluntary , as depending upon his consent at first entrance , which in all Societies must be supposed to hold still , else there would follow nothing but confusion in all Societies in the World , if every man were at liberty to break his Covenants when any thing comes to lye upon him according to the Rules of the Society , which he out of some private design would be unwilling to undergo . Thus much may serve to settle aright the Notion of Power ; the want of understanding which , hath caused all the confusion of this Controversie . The next thing is , In what Notion we are to consider the Church , which is made the subject of this Power ? As to which we are to consider This Power ; either as to its right , or in actu primo ; or as to its exercise , or in actu secundo : Now if we take this Power as to the fundamental Right of it ; then it belongs to that Universal Church of ▪ Christ , which subsists as a visible Society , by vertue of that Law of Christ , which makes an owning the Profession of Christianity the Duty of all Church ▪ members If we consider this Power in the exercise of it , then ( it being impossible that the Universall Church should perform the executive part of this power relating to offences ) I suppose it lodged in that particular Society of Christians , which are united together in one body in the community of the s●me Government ; but yet , so , as that the administration of this Power , doth not belong to the body of the Society considered complexly , but to those Officers in it , whose care and charge it is , to have a peculiar oversight and inspection over the Church , and to redress all disorders in it . Thus the visive faculty is fundamentally lodged in the Soul , yet all exterior acts of sight are performed by the Eyes , which are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Overseers of the Body , as the other are of the Church , so that the exercise and administration of this power , belongs to the speciall Officers and Governours of the Church ; none else being capable of exercising this Power of the Church as such but they on whom it is settled by the Founder of the Church it 's self . This Society of the Church may be again considered ▪ either as subsisting without any influence from the Civil Power , or as it is owned by , and incorporated into a Christian State. I therefore demand , Whether it be absolutely necessary for the subsistence of this Christian Society , to be upheld by the Civil Power , or no ▪ And certainly none who consider the first and purest Ages of the Christian Church , can give any entertainment to the Affirmative , because then the Church flourished in it's greatest purity , not onely when not upheld , but when most violently opposed by the Civil Power ; If so then it 's being united with the Civil State is onely accidental as to the constitution a Church ; and if this be onely accidental ; then it must be supposed furnished with every thing requisite to it 's well ordering accidentally to any such Union , and abstractly from it . For can we imagine our Bl●ssed Saviour should institute a Society , and leave it destitute of means to uphold it's self , unless it fell into the hands of the civil Power ? or that he left every thing tending thereto , meerly to Prudence , and the Arbitrary constitutions of the persons joyning together in this Society ? Did our Saviour take care there should be a Society , and not provide for means to uphold it ? Nay , it is evident , he not onely appointed a Society , but Officers to rule it . Had those Officers then a Right to Govern it or no , by vertue of Christs institution of them ? if not , they were rather Bibuli than Caesares , Cyphers than Consuls in the Church of God. If they had a power to Govern , doth not that necessarily imply a Right to inflict censures on ▪ Offenders , unless we will suppose that either there can be no Offenders in a Christian Church , or that those Offenders do not v●olate the Laws of the Society , or there be some Prohibition for them to exercise their power over them ( which is to give power with one hand , and take it away with the other ) or that this power cannot extend so far as to exclude any from the Priviledges of the Church : which is the thing to be discussed . Having thus cleared our way , I now come to the Resolution of the Question its self , in order to which I shall endeavour to demonstrate , with what evidence the Subj●ct is capable of , these following things . First , that the Church is a peculiar Society in its own Nature , distinct from the Common-wealth . Secondly , that the power of the Church over its members doth not arise from meer confederation or consent of Parties . Thirdly , That this Power of the Church doth extend to the exclusion of offenders from the Priviledges of it . Fourthly , That the Fundamental Rights of the Church do not escheat to the Common-wealth upon ▪ their being united in a Christian State. If these Principles be established , the Churches Power will stand upon them , as on a firm and unmoveable Basis. I begin with the first . That the Church is a peculiar Society in its own Nature , distinct from the Common-wealth , which I prove by these Arguments . 1. Those Societies , which are capable of subsisting apart from each other , are really , and in their own Nature distinct from one another : but so it is with the Church and Common wealth . For there can be no greater Evidence of a Reall Distinction than Mutual Separation ; and I think the proving the possibility of the Souls existing , separate from the body , is one of the strongest Arguments to prove it to be a substance really distinct from the body , to which it is united ; although we are often fain to go the other way to work , and to prove possibility of separation from other Arguments evincing the Soul to be a distinct substance ; but the reason of that is for want of evidence as to the state of separate Souls , and thei● visible existence , which is repugnant to the immateriality of their natures . But now , as to the matter in hand , we have all evidence desirable ; for we are not put to prove possibility of separation , meerly from the different constitution of the thing● united , but we have evidence to Sense of it , that the Church hath subsisted when it hath been not onely separated from , but persecuted by all civil power . It is with many men as to the Union of Church and State , as it is with others , as to the Union of the Soul and Body : when they observe how close the Union is , and how much the Soul makes use of the Animal Spirits in most of its Operations , and how great a sympathy there is between them , that , like Hippocrates his Twins , they laugh and weep together , they are shrewdly put to it , how to fancy the Soul to be any thing else than a more vigorous mode of matter ; so these observing how close an Union and Dependence there is between the Church and State in a Christian Common-wealth , and how much the Church is beholding to the civil power in the Administration of its functions , are apt to think that the Church is nothing but a higher mode of a Common-wealth , considered as Christian. But when it is so evident that the Church hath , and may subsist , supposing it abstracted from all Civil Power , it may be a sufficient demonstration that however neer they may be when united , yet they are really , and in their own nature , distinct from each other . Which was the thing to be proved . 2. Those are distinct Societies , which have every thing distinct in their nature from each other , which belong to the Constitution or Government of them ; but this is evident , as to the Church and Common-wealth , which will appear , because their Charter is distinct , or that which gives them their being as a Society : Civil Societies are founded upon the necessity of particular mens parting with their peculiar Rights , for the preservation of themselves , which was the impulsive cause of their entring into societies , but that which actually spe●ks them to be a society is the mutual consent of the several partyes joyning together , whereby they make themselves to bee one Body ; and to have one Common Interest . So Cicero de Repub. defines Populus , to bee coe'us multitudinis , juris consensu & utilitatis communione sociatus . There is no doubt , but Gods general providence , is as evidently seen in bringing the World into societies , and making them live under Government , as in disposing all particular events which happen in those Societies ; but yet the way , which Providence useth in the constitution of these societies , is by inclining men to consent to associate for their mutual benefit and advantage : So that natural Reason consulting for the good of mankind , as to those Rights which men enjoy in common with each other , was the main foundation upon which all civil Societies were erected . Wee finde no positive Law enacti●g the beeing of Civil Societies , because Nature its self would prompt men for their own conveniencies to enter into them . But the ground and foundation of that Society , which we call a Church , is a matter which Natural Reason and common Notions can never reach to : and therefore an ●ssociating for the preserving of such , may be a Philosophical Society , but a Christian it cannot be : And they that would make a Christian Church to be nothing else but a Society of Essens , or an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Pythagoreans , do either not understand , or not consider whereon this Christian Society is founded ; for it is evident they look on it as a meerly voluntary thing , that is not at all setled by any Divine positive Law. The truth is , there is no principle more consistent with the opinion of those who deny any Church power in a Christian state , then this is , and it is that , which every one , who will make good his ground must be driven to ; for it is evident , that in matters meerly voluntary , and depending only on confederation , such things being lyable to a Magistrates power , there can be no plea from mutual consent to justifie any opposition to supream authority in a Common wealth . But , then how such persons can bee Christians , when the Magistrates would have them to bee otherwise , I cannot understand ; nor how the primitive Martyrs were any other then a company of Fools or mad-men , who would hazard their lives , for that which was a meer arbitrary thing , and which they had no necessary obligation upon them to profess . Mistake me not , I speak not here of meer acts of discipline , but of the duty of outward professing Christianity ; if this be a duty , then a Christian society is setled by a positive Law , if it be not a duty , then they are fools who suffer for it : So that this question resolved into its principles , leads us higher than we think for , and the main thing in debate must bee , Whether there be an obligation upon conscience for men to associa●e in the profession of Christianity or no ? If there be , then the Church , which is nothing else but such an association , is established upon a positive Law of Christ ; if there be not , then those inconveniences follow , which are already mentioned . Wee are told indeed by the Leviathan with confidence enough , that no precepts of the Gospel are Law , till enacted by civil authority ; but it is little wonder , that hee , who thinks an immaterial substance implyes a contradiction , should think as much of calling any thing a Law , but what hath a civil sanction . But I suppose all those who dare freely own a supream and infinite essence to have been the Creator , and to be the Ruler of the World , will acknowledge his Power to oblige conscience , without being beholding to his own creature to enact his Laws , that men might bee bound to obey them . Was the great God sain to bee be holding to the civil authority hee had over the Iewish Common wealth ( their government being a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) to make his Laws obligatory to the consciences of the Iews ? What , had not they their beings from God ? and can there be any greater ground of obligation to obedience , than from thence ? Whence comes civil power to have any Right to oblige men more , than God , considered as Governour of the World , can have ? Can there be indeed no other Laws according to the Leviathans Hypothesis , but only the Law of nature and civil Laws ? But I pray whence comes the obligation to either of these , that these are not as arbitrary , as all other agreements are ? And is it not as strong a dictate of nature as any can bee ( supposing that there is a God ) that a creature which receives its being from another , should be bound to obey him , not only in the resultancies of his own nature , but with the arbitrary constitutions of his will : Was Adam bound to obey God or no , as to that positive precept of eating the forbidden fruit , if no civil Sanction had been added to that Law ? The truth is , such Hypotheses as these are , when they are followed close home , will be sound to Kennel in that black Den , from whence they are loath to be thought to have proceeded . And now , supposing that every full Declaration of the will of Christ , as to any positive Institution , hath the force and power of a Law upon the consciences of all , to whom it is sufficiently proposed : I proceed to make appear , that such a divine positive Laew there is , for the existence of a Church , as a visible body and society in the World ; by which I am far from meaning such a conspicuous society , that must continue in a perpetual visibility in the same place ; I find not the least intimation of any such thing in Scripture ; but that there shall alwayes bee somewhere or other , in the world , a society owning and professing Christianity , may bee easily deduced from thence ; and especially on this account , that our Saviour hath required this , as one of the conditions in order to eternal felicity , that all those who believe in their hearts , that Iesus is the Christ , must likewise confess him with their mouths to the world : and therefore , as long at there are men to believe in Christ , there must be men that will not be ashamed to associate , on the account of the Doctrine he hath promulged to the world . That one Phrase in the New Testament , so frequently used by our blessed Saviour , of the Kingdome of Heaven ( importing a Gospel-state ) doth evidently declare a society , which was constituted by him , on the principles of the Gospel Covenant . Wherefore should our Saviour call Disciples , and make Apostles , and send them abroad with full commission to gather and initiate Disciples by Baptism ; did he not intend a visible society for his Church ? Had it not been enough for men to have cordially believed the truth of the Gospel , but they must bee entred in a solemn visible way , and joyn in participation of visible Symbols of bread and wine , but that our Saviour required external profession and society in the Gospel as a necessary duty , in order to obtaining the priviledges conveyed by his Magna Charta in the Gospel . I would fain know by what argument wee can prove , that any humane Legislator , did ever intend a Common wealth to be governed according to his mode , by which we cannot prove that Christ by a positive Law , did command such a society , as should be governed in a visible manner , as other societies are ? Did he not appoint officers himself in the Church , and that of many ranks and degrees ? Did he not invest those Officers with authority to rule his Church ? Is it not laid as a charge on them , to take heed to that flock , over which God had made them Over-seers ? Are there not Rules laid down for the peculiar exercise of their Government over the Church in all the parts of it ? Were not these Officers admitted into the●● function by a most solemn visible Rite of Imposition of Hands ? And are all these solemn transactions a meer piece of sacred Pageantry ? And they will appear to bee little more , if the Society of the Church bee a meer arbitrary thing , depending only upon consent and confederation , and not subsisting by vertue of any Charter from Christ , or some positive Law , requiring all Christians to joyn in Church society together . But if now from hence it appears ( as certainly it cannot but appear ) that this Society of the Church doth subsist by vertue of a Divine positive Law , then it must of necessity be distinct from a civil Society , and that on these accounts : First , because there is an antecedent obligation on conscience to associate on the account of Christianity , whether Humane Laws prohibit or command it . From whence , of necessity it follows , that the constitution of the Church is really different from that of the Commonwealth ; because whether the Common wealth be for , or against this Society , all that own it are bound to profess it openly , and declare themselves members of it . Whereas , were the Church and Commonwealth really and formally the same , all obligation to Church society would arise meerly from the Legislative Power of the Common wealth . But now there being a Divine Law , binding in conscience , whose obligation cannot bee superseded by any Humane Law , it is plain and evident , where are such vastly different obligations , there are different Powers ; and in this sense I know no incongruity , in admitting imperium in imperio , if by it wee understand no external coactive power , but an internal power laying obligation on conscience , distinct from the power lodged in a Commonwealth considered as such . An outward coactive power was alwayes disowned by Christ , but certainly not an internal Power over conscience to oblige all his Disciples to what Duties hee thought fit . Secondly . I argue from those Officers , whose rights to govern this Society are founded on that Charter , whereby the Society it self subsists . Now I would willingly know why , when our Saviour disowned all outward power in the World , yet hee should constitute a Society , and appoint Officers in it , did hee not intend a peculiar distinct Society from the other Societies of the world . And therefore the argument frequently used against Church-power , because it hath no outward force with it by the constitution of Christ , is a strong argument to me of the peculiarity of a Christian society from a Commonwealth ; because Christ so instituted it , as not to have it ruled at first by any outward force or power . When Christ saith , his Kingdome was not of this world ; he implies , that he had a Society that was governed by his Laws in the world , yet distinct from all mundane Societies : had not our Saviour intended his Church to have been a peculiar Society distinct from a Commonwealth , it is hard to conceive why our Saviour should interdict the Apostles the use of a civil coactive power : Or why instead of sending abroad Apostles to preach the Gospel , hee did not employ the Governours of Commonwealths to have inforced Christianity by Laws and temporal edicts , and the several Magistrates to have impowred several persons under them to preach the Gospel in their several Territories ? And can any thing bee more plain , by our Saviours taking a contrary course , than that hee intended a Church society to bee distinct from civil , and the power belonging to it ( as well as the Officers ) to bee of a different nature from that which is settled in a Commonwealth . I here suppose , that Christ hath by a positive Law established the Government of his Church upon Officers of his own appointment ; which I have largely prove ●●sewhere , and therefore suppose it now . Thirdly , I argu●●●om the peculiar rights belonging to these Societies : For if every one born in the Commonwealth , have not thereby a right to the priviledges of the Church ; nor every one by being of the Church , any right to the benefits of the Commonwealth , it must necessarily follow , that these are distinct from one another . If any one by being of the Common-wealth , hath right to Church-priviledges , then every one born in a Common-wealth may challenge a right to the Lords Supper without Baptism , or open professing Christianity , which I cannot think any will be very ready to grant . Now there being by Divine appointment the several rights of Baptism and the Lords Supper , as peculiar badges of the Church as a visible Society , it is evident , Christ did intend it a Society distinct from the Common wealth . Fourthly , I argue from the different ends of these societies . A Common-wealth is constituted for civil ends , and the Church for spiritual : for ends are to be judged by the primary constitution , but now it is plain , the end of civil society is for preservation of mens rights as men ( therefore Magistracy is called by St. Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) : but this Christian society doth not respect men under the connotation of men but as Christians . The answer given to this is very short and insufficient , when it is said , that every man in a Commonwealth , is to act upon spiritual accounts and ends : For there is a great deal of difference between Christianities having an influence upon mens actings in a Commonwealth , and making a society the same with a Commonwealth . To argue therefore from one to another , is a shortness of discourse I cannot but wonder at : unless it could be proved , that Christianity aymed at nothing else but regulating men in the affairs of a Commonwealth , which is a task I suppose will not be undertaken . Lastly , I argue from the peculiar offences against this society , which are , or ●ay bee distinct from those against a Commonwealth . I deny not , but most times they are the same ; but frequently they differ , and when they are the same , yet the consideration of them is different in the Church and Common wealth , for which I shall suppose the six arguments produced in the last chapter of the first part to stand good , which will strongly hold to ex●●●●unication in the Christian Church , though there produce 〈…〉 ly for the Iewish . I would fain know what is to bee done in many offences , known to bee against the Laws of Christ , and which tend to the dishonour of the Christian society , which the civil and Municipal Laws , either do not , or may not take cognizance of ? Thus much may serve , as I think to make evident , that the Church in its own nature , is a peculiar society distinct from a Commonwealth , which was the first proposition to bee proved . The second is , That the power of the Church over it's members in case of offences , doth not arise meerly from confederation and consent , though it doth suppose it . This Church power may be considered two wayes . Either , first , as it implyes the right in some of inflicting censures . Or secondly , as it implyes in others , the duty of submitting to censures inflicted ; now as to both these , I shall prove that their original is higher than meer confederation . 1. As to the right of inflicting censures on these accounts . First , What ever society doth subsist by vertue of a divine constitution , doth by vertue thereof derive all power for it's preservation , in peace , unity , and purity ; but it is plain , that a power of censuring offenders , is necessary for the Churches preservation in peace and purity ; and it is already proved , that the Church hath its Charter from Christ , and therefore from him it hath a power to inflict punishments on Offenders , suitable to the Nature of the Society they are of . I am very prone to think that the ground of all the mistakes on this subject have risen from hence , that some , imprudently enough , have fixt the original of this Power on some ambiguous places of Scripture , which may , and it may bee , ought to bee taken in a different sense ; and their adversaries , finding those places weak and insufficient proofs of such a power , have from thence rejected any such kind of power at all ; But certainly , if wee should reject every truth that is weakly proved by some who have undertaken it , I know no opinion would bid so sai● for acceptance as Scepticism , and that in reference to many weighty and important truth● ; for how weakly have some proved the existence of a Deity , the immortality of the soul , and the truth of the Scriptures , by such arguments , that if it were enough to overthro●● an opinion to bee able to answer some Arguments brought for it , Atheisme it self would become plausible . It can be then no evidence , that a thing is not true , because some Arguments will not prove it ; and truly , as to the matter in hand , I am fully of the opinion of the excellent H. Grotius , speaking of Excommunication in the Christian Church : Neque ad●am r●m peculiare praeceptum desideratur , eum Ecclestae coetu , à Christo semel constituto , omnia illa imperata censeri debent , sine quibus ejus coeiûs , puritas retineri non potest . And therefore men spend needless pains to prove an institution of this power by some positive precept , when Christs founding his Church as a peculiar Society , is sufficient proof hee hath endowed it with this fundamental Right , without which the Society , were arena sino calce , a company of persons without any common tye of union among them ; for if there bee any such union , it must depend on some conditions , to bee performed by the members of that Society , which how could they require from them , if they have not power to exclude them upon non performance ? 2. I prove the divine original of this power from the special appointment and designation of particular Officers by Iesus Christ , for the ruling of this Society . Now I say , that Law which provides there shall bee Officers to Govern , doth give them power to govern , suitably to the Nature of their society : Either then you must deny , that Christ hath by an unalterable Institution appointed a Gospel Ministry , or that this Ministry hath no Power in the Church , or that their Power extends not to excommunication . The first I have already proved , the second follows from their appointment : for by all the titles given to Church Officers in Scripture , it appears they had a Power over the Church , ( as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) All which as you well know , do import a right to Govern the Society over which they are set . And that this power should not extend to a power to exclude convict Offenders , seems very strange , when no other punishment can be more suitable to the nature of the Society than this is ; which is a debarring him from the priviledges of that Society , which the offender hath so much dishonoured . Can there be any punishment less imagined towards contumacious offenders then this is , or that carries in it less of outward and coactive force , it implying nothing but what the offender himself freely yielded to at his entrance into this Society . All that I can find replyed by any of the Adversaryes of the opinion I here assert , to the argument drawn from the Institution and Titles of the Officers of the Church , is , that all those titles which are given to the Ministers of the Gospel in the New Testament , that do import Rule and Government , are all to be taken in a Spiritual sense , as they are Christs Ministers and Ambassadors to preach his Word and declare his Will to his Church . So that all power such persons conceive to lye in those Titles , is only Doctrinal and declarative ; but how true that is , let any one judge that considers these things . 1. That there was certainly a power of Discipline then in the Churches constituted by the Apostles , which is most evident not onely from the passages relating to Offenders in Saint Pauls Epistles , especially to the Corinthians and Thessalonians , but from the continued Practice of succeeding Ages manifested by Tertullian , Cyprian , and many others . There being then a power of Discipline in Apostolical Churches , there was a necessity it should be administred by some Persons who had the care of those Churches ; and who were they but the severall Pastors of them ? It being then evident that there was such a Power , doth it not stand to common sense it should be implyed in such Titles , which in their Naturall Importance do signifie a Right to Govern , as the names of Pastors and Rulers do ? 2. There is a diversity in Scripture made between Pastors and Teachers , Ephes. 4. 11. Though this may not ( as it doth not ) imply a necessity of two distinct Offices in the Church , yet it doth a different respect and connotation in the same person , and so imports that Ruling carries in it somewhat more then meer Teaching , and so the power implyed in Pastors to be more then meerly Doctrinal , which is all I contend for , viz. A right to govern the flock committed to their charge . 3. What possible difference can be assigned between the Elders that Rule well , and those which labour in the Word and Doctrine , ( 1 Timothy 5. 17. ) if all their Ruling were meerly labouring in the Word and Doctrine ? and all their Governing nothing but Teaching ? I intend not to prove an Office of Rulers distinct from Teachers from hence ( which I know neither this place , nor any other will do ) but that the formal conception of Ruling , is different from that of Teaching . 4. I argue from the Analogy between the Primitive Churches and the Synagogues , that , as , many of the names were taken from thence where they carried a power of Discipline with them , so they must do in some proportion in the Church ; or it were not easie understanding them . It is most certain the Presbyters of the Synagogue had a power of Ruling , and can you conceive the Bishops and Presbyters of the Church had none , when the Societies were much of the same Constitution , and the Government of the one was transscribed from the other , as hath been already largely proved ? 5. The acts attributed to Pastor in Scripture , imply a power of Governing , distinct from meer Teaching ; such are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , used for a right to Govern ▪ Matth. 2. 6. Revel . 12. 5. — 19. 15. which word is attributed to Pastors of Churches in reference to their flocks , Acts 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 2. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is applyed to Ministers , when they are so frequently called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which notes praesidentiam cum potestate ; for Hesychius renders it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at Athens had certainly a power of Government in them . 6. The very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is attributed to those who have over-sight of Churches , 1 Cor. 12. 8. by which it is certainly evident , that a power more than Doctrinal is understood , as that it could not then be understood of a power meerly civil . And this I suppose may suffice to vindicate this Argument from the Titles of Church Officers , in the New Testament , that they are not insignificant things , but the persons who enjoyed them had a right to govern the Society over which the Holy Ghost hath made them Over-seers . 3. I argue that Church-Power ariseth not meerly from consent , because the Church may exercise her Power on such , who have not actually confederated with her ; which is in admitting members into the Church : For if the Church-Officers have power to judge whether persons are fit to be admitted , they have power to exclude from admission such whom they judge unfit , and so their power is exercised on those who are not confederated . To this it may be answered , That the consent to be judged , gives the Church power over the person suing for admission . I grant it doth , as to that particular person ; but the Right in generall of judging concerning Admission , doth argue an antecedent power to an actual confederation . For I will suppose that Christ should now appoint some Officers to found a Church , and gather a Society of Christians together , where there hath been none before : I now ask Whether these Officers have power to admit any into the Church or no ? This I suppose cannot be denied , for to what end else were they appointed ? If it be granted they have power to admit persons , and thereby make a Church , then they had power antecedently to any confederation ; for the Confederation was subsequent to their Admission : and therefore they who had power to admit , could not derive their power from confederation . This Argument , to me , puts the case out of dispute , that all Church-power cannot arise from meer confederation . And that which further evidenceth that the Power of the Church doth not arise from meer consent , is that Deed of Gift whereby our Blessed Saviour did confer the Power of the Keyes on the Apostle Peter , as the representative in that action of the whole Colledge of the Apostles and Governours of the Church , of which power all the Apostles were actually infeoffed , John 20. 23. By which Power of the Keyes is certainly meant some Administration in the Church , which doth respect it as a visible Society , in which Sense the Church , is so frequently called , as in that place , the Kingdome of Heaven ; and in all probability the Administration intended here by the Power of the Keyes , is that we are now discoursing of , viz. the Power of Admission into the Church of Christ , in order to the pardon of the sins of all penitent Believers , and the shutting out of such who were manifestly unworthy of so holy a communion . So that the power of the Keyes do●h not primarily respect exclusion out of the Church , and receiving into it again upon Absolution , but it chiefly respects the power of Admission into the Church , though by way of connotation and Analogy of Reason it will carry the other along with it . For if the Apostles as Governours of the Church were invested with a power of judging of mens fitness for Admission into the Church as members of it , it stands to the highest Reason that they should have thereby likewise a power conveyed to them , of excluding such as are unworthy after their Admission , to maintain communion with the Church . So that this interpr●tation of the Power of the Keyes , is far from invalidating the Power of the Church , as to its censuring Offenders ; all that it pretends to , is onely giving a more natural and genuine Sense of the Power of the Keyes , which will appear so to be , if we consider these things . 1. That this Power was given to Saint Peter before any Christian Church , was actually formed , which ( as I have elsewhere made manifest ) was not done till after Christs Resurrection ; when Christ had given the Apos●les their commission to go to Preach and baptize , &c. Matth. 28. 19. Is it not therefore farr more rational , that the Power of the Keyes here given , should respect the founding of a Church and admission into it , than ejection out of it ( before it was in being ) and receiving into it again ? And this we find likewise remarkably fulfilled in the Person of the Apostle Peter , who opened the door of admission into the Christian Church ▪ both to Iewes and Gentiles . To the Iewes by his Sermon at Pentecost , when about 3000. Souls were brought into the Church of Christ. To the Gentiles , as is most evident in the story of Corneliu● , Acts 10. 28. who was the first-fruits of the Gentiles . So that if we should yield so far to the great Inhancers of Saint Petes● Power , that something was intended peculiar to his person in the Keyes given him by our Saviour , we hereby see how rationally it may be understood without the least advantage to the extravagant pretensions of Saint Peters pretended Successours . 2. The pardon of sin in Scripture is most annexed to Baptism and Admission into the Church , and thence it seems evident , that the loosing of sin should be by admitting into the Church by Baptism , in the same Sense by which Baptism is said to save us , and it is called the washing of Regeneration ; respecting the Spiritual advantages which come by Admission into the Church of Christ ; and so they are said to have their sins bound upon them , who continue refractory in their sins , a● Simon Magus is said to be in the bond of iniquity . 3. The Metaphor of the Keyes refers most to Admission into the House , and excluding out of it , rather than ejecting any out of it , and re-admitting them . Thus when Eliakim is said to have the Keyes of the House of David , it was in regard of his Power to open and shut upon whom he pleased . And thus Cyprian , as our learned Mr. Thorndike observes , understands the power of binding and loosing in this sense , in his Epistle to Iubaianus , where speaking of the Remission of sins in Baptism , he brings these very words of our Saviour to Peter as the evidence of it ; That what he should loose on Earth , should be loosed in Heaven : and concludes with this Sentence , Unde intelligimus non nisi in Ecclesiâ praeposit is & in Evangeli●â lege ac Dominicâ ordinatione fundatis , licere baptizare , & remissam peccatorum dare ; for is autem nec ligari aliquid posse nec solvi , ubi non sit qui ligare possit aut solvere . That which I now infer from this Discourse , is , that the power of the Church do●h not arise from meer consent and confederation , both because this power doth respect those who have not actually consented to it , and because it is settled upon the Governours of the Church by Divine Institution . Thus it appears that the right of inflicting censures doth not result meerly ●●● confoederatd Disciplind , which was the thing to be proved . The l●ke evidence may be given , for the duty of submitting to penalties or Church-censures in the members of the Church : which that it ariseth , not from meer consent of parties , will appear on these accounts . 1. Every person who enters this Society is bound to consent , before he doth it , because of the Obligation lying upon Conscience to an open prof●ssion of Christianity , presently upon conviction of the understanding of the truth and certainty of Christian Religion . For when once the mind of any rational man is so far wrought upon by the influence of the Divine Spirit , as to discover the most rational and undoubted evidences , which there are of the truth of Christianity , he is presently obliged to profess Christ openly , to worship him solemnly , to assemble with others for instruction and participation of Gospel ▪ Ordinances ; and thence it follows , that there is an antecedent Obligation upon Conscience to associate with others , and consequently to consent to be governed by the Rulers of the Society which he enters into . So that this submission to the power of Church Officers in the exercise of Discipline upon Offenders , is implyed in the very conditions of Christianity , and the solemn professing and undertaking of it . 2. It were impossible any Society should be upheld , if it be not laid by the founder of the Society as the necessary Duty of all members to undergo the penalties which shall be inflicted by those who have the care of governing that Society , so they be not contrary to the Laws , Nature and Constitution of it . Else there would be no provision made for preventing divisions and confusions which will happen upon any breach made upon the Laws of the Society . Now this Obligation to submission to censures , doth speak something antecedentaly to the confederation , although the expression of it lies in the confederation its self . By this I hope we have made it evident that it is nothing else but a mistake in those otherwise Learned persons , who make the power of censures in the Christian Church to be nothing else but a Lex confederata Disciplinae , whereas this power hath been made appear to be de●ived from a higher Original than the meer Arbitrary consent of the several members of the Church associating together : And how farre the examples of the Synagogues under the Law , are from reaching that of Christian Churches in reference to this , because in these the power is conveyed by the Founder of the Society , and not left to any arbitrary constitutions , as it was among the Iews in their Synagogues . It cannot be denied but consent is supposed , and confederation necessary in order to Church power ; but that is rather in regard of the exercise , then the original of it ; For although I affirm the original of thi● power to be of Divine Institution , yet in order to the exercise of it in reference to particular persons ( who are not mentioned in the Charter of the power its self ) it is necessary that the persons on whom it is exerted , should declare their consent and submission either by words or actions , to the Rules and Orders of this Society . Having now proved that the Power of the Church doth not arise from meer consent of parties , the next grand Inquiry is concerning the extent of this power , Whether it doth reach so far as to Excommunication ? For some men who will not seem wholly to deny all power in the Church over Offenders , nor that the Church doth subsist by Divine Institution , yet do wholly deny any such power as that of Excommunication , and seem rather to say that Church-Officers may far more congr●ously to their Office inflict any other mulct upon Offenders , then exclude them from participation of Communion with others in the Ordinances and Sacraments of the Gospel : In order therefore to the clearing of this , I come to the third Proposition . That the power which Christ hath given to the Officers of his Church , doth extend to the exclusion of contumacious Offenders from the priviledges which this Society enjoyes . In these terms I rather choose to fix it , then in those crude expressions , wherein Erastus and some of his followers would state the question , and some of their imprudent adversaries have accepted it , viz. Whether Church Officers have power to exclude any from the Eucharist , ob moralem impuritatem ? And the reasons why I wave those terms , are ; 1. I must confess my self yet unsatisfied as to any convincing Argument , whereby it can be proved that any were denyed admission to the Lords Supper , who were admitted to all other parts of Church-Society , and owned as members in them . I cannot yet see any particular Reason drawn from the Nature of the Lords-Supper above all other parts of Divine worship , which should confine the censures of the Church meerly to that Ordinance ; and so to make the Eucharist bear the same Office in the Body of the Church , which our new Anatomists tell us the parenchyme of the Liver doth in the natural Body , viz. to be col●●● sanguinis , to serve as a kind of strainer to separate the more gross and faeculent parts of the Blood from the more pure and spirituous ; so the Lord's Supper to strain out the more impure members of the Church from the more Holy and Spiritual . My judgement then is , that Excommunication relates immediately to the cutting a person off from Communion with the Churches visible Society , constituted upon the ends it is ; but because Communion i● not visibly discerned but in Administration and Participation of Gospel Ordinances , therefore Exclusion doth chiefly referre to these : and because the Lords Supper is one of the highest privilledges which the Church enjoyes ; therefore it stands to reason that censures should begin there . And in that sense suspension from the Lords Supper of persons apparently unworthy , may be embraced as a prudent , lawful , and convenient abatement of the greater penalty of Excommunication , and so to stand on the same general grounds that the other doth ; for Qui p●test majus , potest etiam minus , which will hold as well in moral as natural power , i● there be no prohibition to the contrary , nor peculiar Reason as to the one more then to the o●her . 2. I dislike the terms ob moralem impuritatem , on this account , Because I suppose they were taken up by Erastus , and from him by others as the Controversie was managed concerning Excommunication among the I●wes , viz. whether it were ●meerly because of Ceremonial , or else likewise because of moral impurity . As to which I must ingenuously acknowledge Erastus hath very much the advantage of his adversaries , clearly proving that no persons under the Law were excluded the Temple Worship because of moral impurity . But then withall I think he hath gained little advantage to his cause by the great and successfull pains he hath taken in the proving of that ; My reason is , because the Temple-Worship or the sacrifices under the Law were in some sense propitiatory , as they were the adumbrations of that grand Sacrifice which was to be offered up for the appeasing of Gods wrath , viz. The Blood of Christ ; therefore to have excluded any from participation of them , had been to exclude them from the visible way of obtaining pardon of sin ( which was not to be had without shedding of Blood , as the Apostle tells us ) and from testifying their Faith towards God and Repentance from dead works . But now under the Gospel those Ordinances , which suppose admission into the Church by Baptism , do thereby suppose an all-sufficient Sacrifice offered for the expiation of sin , and consequently ▪ ●he subsequent priviledges , do not immediately Relate to the obtaining of that , but a gratefull commemoration of the Deat● of Christ , and a celebration of the infinite mercy and goodness of God in the way of Redemption found out by the death of his Son. And therefore it stands to great reason that such Persons , who by their profane and unworthy lives dishonour so Holy a profession , should not be owned to be as good and sound Members of the Society , ●ounded on so Sacred a Foundation , as the most Christian and Religious Persons . To this I know nothing can be objected , but that , first , The Passover was commemorative among the Iews ; and Secondly , That the priviledges of that people were then very great above other people , and therefore if God had intended any such thing as Excommunication among his peoplè , it would have been in use then . To these I answer . 1. I grant , the Passeover was commemorative as to the occasion of its Institution : but then it was withal Typical and annunciative of that Lamb of God who was to take away the sins ▪ of the world ; and therefore no person who desired expiation of sins , was to bee debarred from it , but the Lords-supper under the Gospel hath nothing in it propitiatory , but is intended as a Feast upon a Sacrifice and a Federal Rite , as hath been fully cleared by a very learned person in his discourse about the true notion of the Lords Supper . 2. I grant the Iews had very many priviledges above other Nations : Nay so far , that the whole body of the people were looked upon as Gods chosen , and peculiar and holy people ; and from thence I justly inferr , that whatever exclusion was among the people of the Iews from their society , will far better hold as an argument for Excommunication under the Christian Church , than if it had been a meer debarring from their Levitical Worship . And that I should far sooner insist upon , from the reason assigned , as the ground of Excommunication , then the other infirm and pro●ligated Argument ; and so the Exclusion out of the Camp of Israel and the Cerith among the Iews ( whatever we understand by it ) may à pari hold to be a ground of exclusion from the Christian Society : In imitation of which , I rather suppose that exclusion out of the Synagogues was after taken up , rather then as a meer Out lawry , when they were deprived of Civil Power . The Question then being thus clearly stated , it amounts to this , Whether under the Gospel , there be any power in the Officers of the Church by vertue of Divine Institution to exclude any Offenders out of the Christian Society , for transgressing the Laws of it ? And according to our former Propositions , I suppose it will be sufficient to prove that power to bee of Divine Institution ; if I prove it to bee fundamentally and intrinsecally resident in the Society its self . For whatever doth immediately result from the Society its self , must have the same Original which the subject hath , because this hath the nature of an inseparable property resulting from its constitution . For the clearing of which , I shall lay down my thoughts of it as clearly and methodically as I can ; and that in these following Hypotheses . 1. Where there is a power of declaring any person to bee no true member of the Society hee is in , there is a formal power of Excommunication : For this is all which I intend by it , viz. an authoritative pronouncing virtute officii , any convict Offender to have forfeited his interest in the Church as a Christian society : and to lose all the priviledges of it : So that if this power be lodged in any Church Officer , then he hath power formally to Excommunicate . 2. Where the enjoyment of the priviledges of a society is not absolute and necessary , but depends upon conditions to bee performed by every member , of which the Society is Iudge , there is a power in the Rulers of that Society to debar any person from such priviledges , upon non-performance of the conditions . As supposing the jus Civitatis to depend upon defending the Rights of the City ; upon a failing in reference to this , in any person admitted to Citizen-ship , the Rulers of the City have the same power to take that Right away , which they had at first to give i● ; because that Right was never absolutely given , but upon supposition that the person did not overthrow the ends for which it was bestowed upon him . 3. The Church is such a Society in which Communion is not absolute and necessary , but it doth depend upon the performance of some Conditions , of which the Governours of it are the competent Iudges : And that appears , 1. Because the admission into the Church , depends upon conditions to be judged by Pastors , as in case of adult persons requiring Baptism , and the children of Infidels being Baptized : in both which cases it is evident that conditions are pre-requisite , of which the Pastors are Iudges . 2. Because the priviledges of this Society do require a separation from other Societies in the world , and call for greater Holiness and purity of life ; and those very priviledges are pledges of greater benefits which belong only to persons qualified with suitable conditions ; it would therefore bee a very great dishonour to this Society , if it lay as common and open as other Societies in the World do , and no more qualifications required from the members of it . 3. Wee have instances in the sacred Records of Apostolical times , of such scandals which have been the ground of the exclusion of the persons guilty of them from the priviledges of the Christian society . And here I suppose we may ( notwithstanding all the little evasions which have been found out ▪ ) ●ix on the incestuous person in the Church of Corinth . As to which , I lay not the force of the argument upon the manner of execution of the censure then , viz. by delegation from an Apostle , or the Apostolical Rod , or delivering to Satan ; for I freely grant that these did then import an extraordinary power in the Apostles over offenders ; But I say , the ground and reason of the exercise of that power in such an extraordinary manner at that time , doth still continue , although not in that visible extraordinary effect which it then had . And whatever practice is founded upon grounds perpetual and common , that practice must continue as long as the grounds of it do , and the Churches capacity w 〈…〉 dmit ; ( which hypothesis is the only rational foundation on which Episcopal Government in the Church doth stand firm and unshaken , and which in the former Discourse I am far from undermining of , as an intelligent Reader may perceive ) ; now I say that it is evident , that the reasons of the Apostles censure of that person , are not fetched from the want of Christian Magistrates , but from such things which will hold as long as any Christian Church : which are the dishonour of the Society , 1 Corinth . 4. 1. the spreading of such corruptions further , if they pass uncensured , 1 Corinth . 5. 6. and amendment of the person , 1 Cor. 5. 5. Upon these pillars the power of censures rests it self in the Church of God , which are the main grounds of penalties in all Societies whatsoever , viz. the preservation of the honour of them , and preventing of further mischief , and doing good to the offending party . And that which seems to add a great deal o● weight to this instance , is , that the Apostle checks the Corinthians , that before the exercise of the Apostolical Rod , they were not of themselves sensible of so great a dishonour to the Church as that was , and had not used some means for the removing such a person from their Society ; And ye are puffed up , and have not rather mourned that hee that hath done this deed , may be taken away from among you , 1 Corinth . 5. 2. Therein implying , that whether there had been such a thing in the Church , or no , as the Apostolical Rod , it had been the duty of a Christian Society to have done their endeavour in order to the removing such a person from their number . But further , I cannot understand how it should bee a duty in Christians to withdraw from every brother who walketh disorderly , and Church-Officers not to have power to pronounce such a person to be withdrawn from , which amounts to excommunication . It is not to mee at all material , whether they did immediately relate to Civil or Sacred converse ( concerning which there is so much dispute ) for in which soever we place it , if Church-officers have a power to pronounce such a person to be withdrawn from , they have a power of excommunication ; so we consider this penalty as inflicted on the person in his relation to the Society as a Christian ▪ and wi●hall , how neerly conjoyned their civil and spiritual eating were together , 1 Corinth . 11. 20 , 21. and how strongly the argument will hold from Civil to Sacred , viz. à remotione unius ad remotionem alterius , not from any fancied pollution in Sacris from the company of wicked men , but from the dishonour reflecting on the Society from such unworthy persons par●aking of the h●ghest priviledges of it . Thus from these three Hypotheses this Corollary follows , that where any persons in a Church do by their open and contumacious offences , declare to the world that they are far from being the persons they were supposed to be in their admission into the Church , there is a power resident in the Pastors of the Church to debar such persons from the priviledges of it ; and consequently from Communion in the Lords Supper . 1. Because this expresseth the nearest union , and closest confederation , as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Grecians Commonwealths did . 2. Because this hath been alwayes looked on with greatest veneration in the Church of God ; and therefore it is least of all fit those persons should be admitted to the , highest priviledges of the Church , which are unworthy of the lowest of them . There remain only some few Objections which are levelled against this opinion concerning the power of excommunication , which from the Question being thus stated and proved , will be soon removed . The first is , that this excommunication is an outward punishment , and therefore belongs not to Church officers , but to the Magistrate . 2. Because it neither is , nor ever was in the power of any Church officer to debar any offending member from publick worship , because any Heathens may come to it . 3. It cannot lye as to exclusion from the Lords Supper , because Christ is offered as spiritual food , as well in the Word Preached as in the Sacrament . To these I answer ▪ 1. I do not well understand what the Objectors mean by an outward punishment ; for there can be no punishment belonging to a visible Society , ( such as the Church is here considered to be ) but it must be visible , i. e. outward , or a thing to be taken notice of in the World ; and in this sense I deny that all visible punishment belongs only to the Magistrate ; but if by outward , be mean● forcible punishment , then I grant that all coactive power belongs to the Magistrate ; but I deny that excommunication formally considered , is a forcible punishment . 1. Because every person at his entrance into this Society , is supposed to declare his submission to the rules of the Society ; and therefore whatever he after undergoes by way of penalty in this Society , doth depend upon that consent . 2. A person stands excommunicate legally and de jure , who is declared authoritatively to be no member of the Society , though he may be present at the acts of it , as a defranchised person may be at those of a Corporation . 3. A person falling into those offences which merit excommunication , is supposed in so doing , voluntarily to renounce his interest in those priviledges , the enjoyment of which doth depend upon abstaining from those offences which he wilfully falls into , especially if contumacy be joyned with them , a 〈…〉 is before excommunication ; for then nothing is done forcibly towards him ; for he first relinquisheth his right , before the Church-Governor declares him excluded the Society . So that the offender doth meritoriously excommunicate himself , the Pastor doth it formally , by declaring that he hath made himself no member by his offences and contumacy joyned with them . To the second I answer , That I do not place the formality of excommunication in exclusion from hearing the Word , but in debarring the person from hearing tanquam pars Ecclesiae , as a member of the Church , and so his hearing may be well joyned with that of Heathens and Infidels , and not of members of the Church . To the third I answer , That exclusion from the Lords Supper is not on the accounts mentioned in the Objection , but because it is one of the chiefest priviledges of the Church , as it is a visible Society . Having thus cleared and asserted the power of Excommunication in a Christian church , there remains only one enquiry more , which is , Whether this power doth remain formally in the Church , after its being incorporated into the Common wealth , or else doth it then escheate wholly into the Civil Power ? The resolution of which question mainly depends on another spoken to already ; viz. Whether this power was only a kind of Widows estate , which belonged to it only during its separation from the Civil Power , or was the Church absolutely infeoffed of it as its perpetual Right , belonging to it in all conditions whatsoever it should be in ? Now that must appear by the Tenure of it , and the grounds on which it was conveyed , which having been proved already to be perpetual and universal , it from thence appears that no accession to the Church can invalidate its former title . But then as in case of marriage , the right of disposal and well management of the estate coming by the wife , belongs to the husband ; so after the Church is married into the Common-wealth , the right of supream management of this power in an external way doth fall into the Magistrates hands . Which may consist in these following things . 1. A right of prescribing Laws for the due management of Church-censures . 2. A right of bounding the manner of proceeding in c●●●●●res , that in a se●●led Christian-state ▪ matters of so great weight bee not left to the arbitrary pleasure of any Church-Officers , nor such censures inflicted but upon an evident conviction of such great offences which tend to the dishonour of the Christian-church , and that in order to the amendment of the offenders life . 3. The right of adding temporal and civil sanctions to Church-censures , and so enforcing the spiritual weapons of the Church , with the more keen and sharp ones of the Civil State. Thus I assert the force and efficacy of all Church censures in foro humano to flow from the Civil power , and that there is no proper effect following any of them as to Civil Rights , but from the Magistrates sanction . 4 , To the Magistrate belongs the right of appeals in case of unjust censures , not that the Magistrate can repeal a just censure in the Church , as to its spiritual effect● ; but he may suspend the temporal effect of it : in which case it is the duty of Pastors to discharge their office and acquiesce ▪ But this power of the Magistrate in the supream ordering of Ecclesiastical as well as Civil Causes , I have fully asserted and cleared already . From which it follows , That as to any outward effects of the power of excommunication , the person of the Supream Magistrate must be exempted , both because the force of these censures doth flow from him in a Christian State , and that there otherwise would be a progress in infinitum , to know whether the censure of the Magistrate were just or no. I conclude then , that though the Magistrate hath the main care of ordering things in the Church , yet ( the Magistrates power in the Church being cumulative , and not privative ) the Church and her Officers retain the fundamental right of inflicting censures on offenders ▪ Which was the thing to be proved . Dedit Deus his quoque Finem . Books sold by Henry Mortlocke at the Phoenix in St. Pauls Church-yard near the little North ▪ door . A Rational Account of the grounds of Protestant Religion : being a Vindication of the Lord Arch bishop of Canterbury's Relation of a Conference , &c. from the pretended Answer , by T. C. By Edward Stilling fleet . Origines Sacrae , or , A Rational account of the grounds of Christian Faith , as to the Truth and Divine Authority of the Scriptures , and the matters therein contained , by the same Author , in 4o. Bain● upon the Ephesians . Trapp on the Proverbs , Ecclesiastes , Canticles , with the Major Prophets , being his third Volume of Annotations on the whole Bible . Greenhill upon Ezekiel . Hall upon Anos . Brooks on the Necessity , Excellency , Rarity , and Beauty of Holiness . Knowledge and Practice : or , A plain Discourse of the Chief things necessary to be Known , Believed , and Practised , in order to Salvation , by Samuel Cradock . Scheci●ah : or , A Demonstration of the Divine Presence in Places of Religious Worship . By Iohn Stillingfleet . A Treatise of Divine Meditation , by Iohn Ball , published by Mr. Simeon Ash. The Morall Philosophy of the Stoicks , turned out of French into English , by Charles Cotton Esq An Improvement of the Sea , upon the 9 Nau●icall Verses of the 107. Psalm . Wherein , among other things , you have A full and delightfull Description of all those many , various and multitudinous Objects , which are beheld ( through the Lords Creation , both on Sea , in Sea , and on Land ) , viz. All sorts and kinds of Fish , Fowl , and Beasts , whether Wild or T●me ; all sorts of Trees , and Fruits : all sorts of People , Cities , Towns , and Countreys , by Daniel Pell . Baxters Call , &c. Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A61558-e240 Hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 19. Notes for div A61558-e4330 § 1. §. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arist Ethic . l. 5. c. 6 ▪ Grot. de jure b●lli & pac . lib. 1. cap. 1. Sect. 4. L●ss . de justit . & jure l. 2. c. 2. Dub. 1. Etymol . Philol. voc . jus . Etymol . l. 5. cap. 3. Ethic. l. 5. cap. 2. Mat. 15 9. Isa. 29. 11. Tertull. de Orat. cap. 12 v. Herald . digress . lib. 2. cap. 2. in Tertull. Alex. Alensis . part . 3. q. 27. m. 3. §. 3. Rom. 4. 8. §. 4. Ethic. l. 5. cap. 10. V. Selden . de jure Nat. apud ▪ Eb●ae lib. 1. c. 7 & 8. Mol. de just & Iur. p. 1 disp . 3. Alphons . de leg . pur ▪ l. 2. c. 14. §. 5. Exercit. Eccles. advers . Ba● . exer . 16. sect . 43. S●id . de jure Nat. apud Ebr. l. 1. cap. 10. Colloq . ●um Tryph. Jud●o . Origin . lib. 16. cap. 10. V. G●ot . in Luc. 1. 6. Maimon . de fundam . legis , cap. 9. sect . 1. Abarb. de Capit. fidei . cap. 8. p. 29. Ed. Vorstii . Gal. 3. 24. §. 6. Gen. 22. Deut. 5. 15 Act 15. 29. Ora● . ●●●● . Cae●iu . §. 7. Heb. 6. 1● . Catech. Racov . cap. 4. Acts 3. 38. § 8● Matth. 11. 21. 1 John 2. 6. 1 Pe● . 2● ▪ 22. Gen. 2. 2. Matth. 16. 19. 18. 18. § 1. Hypoth . 1. Grot. de jure bell● , &c. lib 1. c●p . 1. s. 10. Pr●sat . in Cod. Canon . Eccl. A●ric . p. 14. Less . de just . & jure l. 2. c. 19. d●b . 3. n. 12. Suarez de leg . lib. 2 : cap. 9. sect . 6. Orig. lib. 3. C. Celsum . p. 154. ed. Co● . ● C. Celsum l. 5. p. 147. § 2. Covarr . c. 10. de tesi●m●n . 11● . Hobs de civ . cap. 1 ▪ s. 11. Ann. §. 3. Prop. 3. Paulus l. 1. D. de ●urtis . V●pian . lib. Post. D. de verb sig . V. Grot. de jure belli . &c. lib. 2. cap. 4 ▪ sect . 8. §. 4. Judg. 6. 18 1 Sam. 7. 1 , 4. 16. 9. 10. 3. 2 Sam. 15. 18 , &c. Exerci● ▪ in Gen. 42. Isa. 66. 3. Gen. 4 3 , 4. Heb. 1● . 4. §. 5. Isa. 49. 23. Euseb. vit : Constant. l. 4. c. 24. De Imp. sum ▪ Potest . cap. 2. l. 1. In Iud. c. 19. Panstrat . Cath. Tom. 2. l 15. cap. 6. In loc . To. 3. Ed. Ae●on . p. 189. Ed. 1607. De Episcop . Const. Magn. § 7. Aristot. Ethic. lib. 6. c. 6. Matth. 28. 18. Heb. 13. 17. V. Pe●● , Ma●tyr . in 1 Sam. 14. Whitaker , ● cont . 4. q. 7. Cameron . de Eccles. p. 386. To. 1. op . Lib. 2. c. Parmen . ●a 1 Sam. 8. Loc. Com. Class . 4. c. 5● ▪ sect . 11. Papin . l. 41 D. de poenis Hot●oman . Com. v. juris v : sanct . Cicero ad Ar●ic . l. 3. ep . 23. §. 8. Institut . l. 4. cap. 17. s. 43. & cap. 15. s. 19. Nature of Episc. chap. 5. V. Forbes . Iren. lib. 1. cap. 13. Rom 14. 23. §. 9. Grat. de jure belli & pacis . lib. 2. cap 13. sect . 7. §. 10. Gal. 5. 1. D. Sanderson . de oblig . cons. prael . 6. s. 5. Gal. 5. 2. Acts 16. 3. Gal. 4. 9 , 10 , 11. Coloss. 2. 16 , 18 , 19. Rom. 14. 3 , 6 , 21. 1 Cor. 10. 24. Controv. 4. quaest . 7. cap. 2. In 1 Sam. 14. Aug. e● . 118. ad Ianuar. §. 11. Gal. 5. 2. De rebus Eccles. cap. 14. Can. 14 in Cod. Can. in V●n . Eccles. can . 71. Salm. Not. in Tertul. de Pall o. 76. Ant. Cercocthius in Salmas . p. 11. Eus●b . lib. 6. cap. 20. Euseb. l. 5. So●rat . hist. Eccles. l. 5. c. 23. Cap. 23. l. 5. Eccles. hist. l. 10. cap. 4. Eras. in declar . ad Cens. Paris . art . 14. Cons. with Hart. chap. 8. Div. 8. De Croy 3. Conformity , part . 2 De Sacram. lib. 2. c. 29. Dr. Ham. of Superstition , sect . 39. Ep. 119. ad Ian. cap. 19. §. 12. Rom. 13. 5. §. 13. Hist. lib. 6. Spartian . in Adriano . Dan. 6. 8. §. 1. Not in Maim . de Idol c. 1. sect . 1. V Chamier : Panstrat . Cath. To. 2. l. 9. c. 9. s. 9. Amam . An. tib . Bibl. l. 2. p. 228. V. Selden . de Diis Syris Proleg . p. 28. & 44. Abodazara cap. 1. Birtram . de Polit. Iud. cap. 2. p. 12. Franz . Sch. Sacrif . disp . 2. Coppenb . Sch. Sacrif . p. 14. §. 2. Socinus prael . cap. 2. § 3. Scrutin . Scrip. part . 2. dist . 3. cap. 11. V. Porphyr . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . En●ytlop . ad ●ram Nonarii Terrig . c. 9. p. 96. Nicomach . l. 8. De Abstin . lib. 2. s. 27. Ep. ad Aug. Lib. 1. c. 1. Gen. 4. 2. V. Ainsworth , in loc . De abstin . l. 4. s. 22. V. petit . ad Log , Act. p. 3. Quaest. Grac. q. 6 Levit. 3 ▪ 13. Iliad . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 449 A●g . 1. v. 409 , &c ▪ Hist. Natur . lib. 18. c. 2. Levit. 2. 14. V. Saubertum de sacris . c. 19. Vossius de 1 ●ol , l 2. cap. 59. Gr●c . Fer. §. 4. Geogr. l. 10. Deipnosoph . lib. 9. Deipnos . l ▪ 14. cap. 10. V. Meursi● Graec. Arist. Castellon . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Hospin . de Festis . M●●h Benther de Fastis . Exercit. in Bar. 16. s. 42. sed vide Gothofred . in Tim. 3. 16. S●lmas . in hist. Aug. p. 31. 33. Suidas inv . Mithras . No●●us in Naz ▪ S●clit . p. 132. M●●rsium in Eleusi●is . Aristol . Nicom . l. 8. c. 1. Moral . advers . Colotem . Lord Bacon Essay of a King. §. 3. §. 2. Homil. 65. in Gen. ●7 . 26. Tom. 1. p. 506. Ed. Savil. Politic. lib. 1. cap. 2. Gen. 8. 20. 18. 19. ●2 . 2. 31. 54. Job 4● 8. §. 4. V. Selden . de success . ad leo . Heb. cap. 5. Origin cap. 15. p. 69. Qu. 108. in Gen. V. Isidor . Pel. lib. 2. ep . 47. & 48. ad fi● ▪ V. Selden . de success . ad Pontis . ebr . cap. 1. sed & V. eum de Syned . lib. ● . cap. 16. V. Selden de Syned . l 2. cap. 2. s. 3. §. 5. Plut. de I● . & Osi●id . Str. Geog. l 17. Quest. Rom. 110. Politic. l. 3. cap. 10. 11. l. 6. cap. 8. lib. 3. c. 4. Herod . l. 6. V. C●ag . de rep Laced . lib. 2. c. 2. Qu. Rom. 110. Strom. l. 7. ep . 121. Geog. l. 14. S●eton . in Aug. c. 31. V. Casaub. in l. & Seld. de Syned l. 1. ● . 10. § 1. Rom. 13. 1. §. 2. Mr. Smiths dis . 6. of Prophecy , chap. 4. Strom. ● . Eccl. hist. l. 5. 17 ▪ praes . in I● . Nahum . Habak . Ch●ys . in 1. Cor. Hom. 29. Epiph. haeres . 48. Ezek. 4. 14. Orig. c. Celsum , lib. 2. p. 62. l. 3. p. 124. Tertull. de an . c. 9. Dan. 10. 11. Habak 3. 16. Procop. Gaz. in 1 Reg. 1● . Ed. Meursii . Lycop●r . Alex. p. 2. Ioseph . c. App. l. 2. Euseb. Praep. l. 13. cap. 12. Tertul. Apol . c. 16. c. Notion . l. 1. c. 13. Lamprid. vit . Alex. Sever. Seneca ep . 95. Tibullus . eleg . 3. l. 1. Lucian . Pseudol . p. 893. ed. Paris . §. 4. Macrob. Saturnal . l. 1. c. 16. Servius Honor. in Virgil. Georgic . 1. Festus V. religios . Advers . l. 24. c. 13. De Re Rust. l. 1. c 29. Dei●nos . l. 1. Saturn . l. 1. c. 16. De jure Nat. apud Heb. l. 3. cap. 15. De Idolol . c. 14. §. 5. Hom. Iliad . Apoll. Argon . l. 1. Casaub. ad Th●o . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Saub de sacri . cap. 12. Paus. l. 2. Matth. 27. 24. Casaub. ad Bar. exer . 16. s. 75. ●aro● . ad An. Christi 34 M●ntacutius Orig. Eccles. 10. 1. l. 2. p. 388. Vossius Harm . Evang. l. ● . cap. 5. V. M●yerum de P●patu , Rom. l. 1. c. 32. 5 De Croy. Conf. 1. c. 33. Ov●d . Fast. lib. 2. V. Brisson . de sormulis lib. 1. p. 8. O ●●omist . c. lib. ● . c. 12. V. Leon. 5. Allatium de Marthece , vet . Eccles. p. 45 , &c. Athenaeus Deipnos . l. 8. c. 8. V. Apud Briss. de sormulis , l. 1. & apud Seld. de Syned . lib. 1. cap. 10. Suidas in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Ioh. Coch. Excerpt . Gen Saubed . cap 1. p. 146. Vostius in Pir●e Elicsest p 2. 6. Selden de Syned . l. 1. cap. 7. §. 1. §. 2. § 3. Tract of Schism , 1642. So●●at . hist. Eccles. lib. 6 , cap. 3. V. Petavii . Diotrib . de Po●est . Consa , & com . usurp . cap. 4 §. 4. Respons . ad Syllog . Quest. cap. 16. 1 Cor. 14. 34. 1 Cor. 6. 4. — 15. § 5. Theodoret. lib. 1. c. 22. Id. l , 2. cap. 24. Lib. 2. c. 17. Advers . haeres . cap. 16. Answ. to the Pref. p. 16. s. 22. §. 6. See Mr. Durham , Tract of Scandal , part . 2. ch . 12. Picus Mi - ? ra●d . Apol. p. 225. 226. Iob 1 14. Summ. 2. 2. q. 2. art . 6. Mr. Hales of Schism , p. 8. Ep. 57. De secess . ab Eccl. Rom. & pace inter Evang. const . p. 225. §. 7. §. 8. C. de decurion . lib. 10. l. nominationem Pet. Fabri . Comment . ad tit . de d●versis Reg. juris Lampridius in Alex. Severo . Politic l. 6. cap. 2. V. Grotium de jure bel . &c. lib. ● . cap. 5. sect . ●7 . V. Iac. Omphalium de usurp . Leg l. 7. c. 2 Ulp. l. 1. D. de Appel . H●ttom . com . V. Juris . Controv. 4. qu. 4. c. 2. Iust. auth . diss . epis . collat . 9. Theod. cod . de S. S. Eccl . c. omni . G●ot . de ●ure belli a● p●cis , l. 3. cap. 20. sect 46. Vellei . Paterc . hist. lib. 2. Grot. de Imp. summ . Potest .. cap. 7. s. 14 , 15 , &c. c. 8. s. 13. Chamier : To. 2. l. 13. c. 12. Whitaker Co ●tr . 3 q. 2. C●is . de Lib. Eccles. cap. 2. M●r ● . c. hist. Papa●us passim . §. 1. §. 2. Hist. Council of Trent , l. 7. p. 61● . Deut. 29. 15. Acts 2. 38. §. 3. Dib . 3. p. 142 , 143 , & 147. Tertul. Apol. c. 39 , describes exclusion to be à communicatione Orationis & conventus , & omnis sancti commercii : §. 4. P. 97 ▪ ed. Paris . 1636 : Lib. 10 ▪ e● ▪ 97 ▪ Hist. Eccl. lib. 3. cap. 33. Selden . de Sy●ed . l. 1. cap. 9. V. Heraldum in Tertul. Apologet . cap. 39. Ioseph . Hales . p. 2. cap. 12. §. 4. §. 7. §. 8. § 1. Gellius Noct. Attic. l. 6. c. 16. V. Grotium de jure belli , l. 2. c. 20. s. 6 , 7 , 8. Matth. 1. 19. § 2. §. 3. Caesar de bello Gallico . l. 6. V. Nicolaum Damascenum de moribus gentium de cercetis , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Selden de jure natur &c. l. 4. cap. 8. Excerpt . Gem. Sanh . pag. 147. Epist. Hebr. I●stitut . p. 55. V. Selden de jure nat . &c. lib. 4. cap. 8. p. 516. Shulchan . A ru●h chosen . hammischpat . s. 100. Excerpt . Gen. Sam. bed . p. 141. n. 11. 12. § , 5. p. 146. Lex Rabbinic . p. 828. Pirk. R. Elieser c. 38. p. 101. p. 226. ad 230. §. 6. Ep. institut . pag. 56. De Syned●iis lib. 1. cap. 7. §. 1. § 2. §. 3. ● ▪ 4. §. 5. §. 6. Hudson of the Church cap. 1. sect . 3. §. 1. § 2. Rev. 1. 16. Heb. 13. 7. Heb. 2. 3. Titus 1. 9. 2 Tim. 3. 1. Heb. 13. 17. 2 Tim. 4. 2. 1 Cor. 14. 1 Tim. 4. 13. Matth 28. 18. §. 3. Matthaeus Paris . hist. Angl. in Hen. 3. A. 1257. p. 939. Ed. Vatsi●i Cap. 8. apud Balaeum . App de vit . Pontif. p. 480. §. 4. 1 Joh. 4. 1. 1 Joh. 2. 20. Heb. 5. 12. Calvin . in Joel . 2. 28. Jer. 31. 31. Heb. 10. 25. Heb. 13. 7. Heb. 1. 1. §. 5. 1 Cor. 11 : 26. §. 6. Philolog . Sacr. de Hebr. N. T. cap. 2. Horae hebr . in Matth. 24. 3. p. 262. Matth. 19. 28. Acts 2. 11 §. 7. Heb. 2. ● . Lightfoot Horae . Hebr. in Matth. 12. 32. p. 173. Heb. 6. 5. 1. Cor. 4. 20. 1 Cor. 24. Isai. 9. 5. Heb. 9. 11. Heb. 10. 1. Eph. 2. 7. Matth 12. 32. D Reynolds on Hosea 14. 3. Heb 10. 26 , 27 , 28. §. 8. Eph. 4. 11 1 Cor. 12. 29 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11. Eph. 3. 5. Heb. 13. 7 , 17. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Eph. 4. 11. § 1. § 2. * B. Bilson Perpet . Govern . cap. 2. B. Andrews Form of Government in the old T. B. Usher . Original of Episc. * Herl of Indep . p. 4. Apol. Spanbem . omnes . Numb . 3. v. 30 , 34 , 35. Numb . 4. 28. 32. Numb . 4. 19. §. 3. § 5. § 5. §. 1. Heb. 1. 2 , 5 , 6. Arg. 1. Answ. 1. Isa. 9. 6. Matth 28. 18. Matth. 28. 18. 19. § 2. 1 Cor. 14. 40. 1 Cor. 14. 26. 1 Cor. 10. 32. 1 Cor. 10. 31. Rom. 14. 6 , 7. Acts 2. 38. 8. 12 , 19 , 5. §. 3. § 4. 1 Tim. 3. 1. to the 8. Titus 1. 5. to the 10. Hom. 18. in 1 Tim. To. 4. Epistol . 80. ●ad Hesych . §. 5. Acts 20. 28. 2 Tim. 4. 2. 1 Tim. 5. 21. Heb. 13. 17. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 1 Tim. 5. 19. 2 Tim. 2. 2. Titus 1. 5. §. 6. §. 7. Heb. 5. 2. Rom. 10. 14. §. 8. Ecclesiast . Polity lib. 3. sect . 11. §. 9. Parker de Polit. Eccles . lib. 2. c. 40. §. 10. ● Pet. 2. 13. Rom. 13. 1 ▪ Eph. 4. 12. §. 11. Parker ▪ Polit. Eccles. l. 2. cap. 45. s. c. §. 12. 1 Cor. 12. 28 , 29. Eph. 4. 8. Matth. 28. 19. De Ecclesia in Mat. 18. 15. Tom. 1. op . in 40. p. 27. §. 13. Rivet . Isagog . ad Script . sacr . cap. 24. s. 3. §. 1. Extravag . unum sanctum . §. 2. Matth. 28. 18. Isa. 9. 6. Matth. 2● . 18 , 19. Luk. 5. 32. Mat. 3. 23. Mat. 4. 1. John 1. 29. John 1. 37. John 2. 2. John 2. 17 , 23. John 3 ▪ 22. John 4. 1. Luke 5. 1. Matth. 4. 18 , 19. Mark 1. 16 , 17. De Consensu Evang. l. 2. cap. 17. V. Casaub. exer . in Bar. 13. s. 11. Montacut . Grig . Eccles. To. 1. p. 2. p. 41. Chemnitium Harm . Evan●c . 36. Acts 1. 21 ▪ 22. Harmon . cap. 50. Mark 3. 14 , 15. §. 3. 1 Cor. 2. 5. Psal. 84. 7. Amos 7. 14. §. 4. Suidas in v. Digest . l. 50. tir . 16. leg . 106. Cont. Ebionitas . Lib. 16. tit . 8. Exercit. 14 Sect. 4. 2 Cor. 8. 23. §. 5. Ezek. 34. 10. Matth. 10. 7 ▪ Matth. 22. ● . Mat. 10. 2. §. 6. Tom. 8. ed. Savil. p. 105. Lib. 1. c. Iovin . Hist. Ecclesiast . lib. 2. c. 14. Chrysost. in Matth. 6. 16. Hist. Rom. lib. 11. 1 Cor. 3. 12. Rev , 21. 19. John 2. 19. Gal. 2. 7. Acts 8. 14 , Gal. 2. 9. Mat. 18. 1. Mat. 9. 34. Luk. 9. 46. §. 7. Luke 10. 1. Luke ▪ 12 , 25. v. Psal. 109. Jer. 3. Numb . 23. — 32. §. 8. To. 2. l. 10. c. 5. s. 2. Beza in loc . Lev. 19. 17. De Syned . l. 1. c. 9. in Gemar . Babyl . ad tit . Rhabbath . c. 16. fo . 119. V. Grotium in Matth. 5. 22. Selden de Syned . l. 2. c. 8. Ioseph . l. 2 , cont . Appion . Gelespy Aaron's Rod , l. 3. c. 2. p. 552. l. 2. c. 9. p. 296. Thes ▪ 41 ▪ Perpetual Government . c. 4. 1 Cor. 6. 1. — 6 ▪ Matth. 5. 23 , 24. Praeterit ▪ lib. 1. p. 43. V. Rainolds Conf. with Hart. cap. 2. div . 3. Grot. in Mat. 16. §. 1. Dan. 9. 24. with Rom. 4. 15 ▪ Joh. 20. 12 Mat. 28. 16 1 Cor. 15. 6 Mark 16. 15. Mat. 18. 19 Luk. 24 52 Acts 1. 12. Luk. 14. 53 Acts 1. 13. V. L. Empor . in Cod ▪ Midd●th . c. 4. Sect. 5. Annot. in loc . Dissert . 3. c. 4. Schism . c. 4 ▪ Sect. 13. Answ. to the Cath. c. 4. s. 2. Schism disarm'd . Ans. c. 3. s. 4 Acts 8. 14. Acts 10. 5 , 32. Gal. 1. 18 , 19. Gal. 2. 1 , 9. Acts 10. 11. Gal. 2. 7 , 8 , 9. Answ. to Cathol . Gentl. chap. 4. s. 3. numb 7. Acts 9. 15. Acts 9. 20 , 22 , Acts 13. 5 , 14. Acts 19. 8. Act. 18. 19 Acts 10. 28. Matth. 16. 19. Acts 15. 7. Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 1. §. 3. V. Picherellum de Missa , cap. 1. Casaub. Exercit. 16. sect . 58. Acts 13. 2. §. 4. V. Bezam , in Acts 13. 15. in Acts 11. 30. — 6. 3 — 14. 12. — 20. 28. Apparat. ad lib. de Prim. Papae . p. 151. 220. In 1 Tim. 5. 1. v. etiam in 1 Cor. 12. 28. Aug. lib. 4. ad Boni● . cap. 4. Ep. ad Aug C. Ebion . V. Soaliger . de Emend . temp . l. 6. & Lud. Capelli vind . c. Buxtor ●ii diss . Selden . Com. in Eutychium . p. 25. Acts 17. 23 ▪ Acts 15. 21 V. Buxtorf . Synag Iud. c. 9. p. 216. V. Lud. de Dieu in Acts 13. 15 V. Cloppenb . tract ▪ de Sabb. deuteropr●to & Lud. Capelli ●p . ad Clopp . p. 74. eum resp . Clopp . p. 143. Luke 4. 17 ▪ In Thisbi v. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 1. 3. 27. Itiner . p. 114. ed. L' ▪ Emper. V. L'Emper . in Not. p. 220. V. Serrarium . Rabb . prior . cap. 32. Matth. 4. 9. Mark 1. 23 Luke 4. 17. John 6. 59. 18. 20. Acts 13 ▪ 14 ▪ 14 ▪ 1. 17. 10. 18. 4 ▪ 19. 8. Iuvenal . sat . 3. Advers . l. 1 cap. 19. Not. in Frag. Graeca p. 25. in Mat. 4 , 23. Leg. ad Ca●um . Acts 19. 9 ▪ Annot , in Acts 16 , 13 De Idol . l. 2. cap. 80. p. 715. In Fragm ▪ G● . p. 25. §. 6. D. Lightfoot Horae Hebr. in Mat. 2. 23. p. 70. De Syned . l. 2. c. 5. s. 4. 1● I●d ▪ tit : Sanhed . c. 1. sect . 5. Ad Mis● . tit . Sanhed . c. 1. sect . 6. Cod. Theod. l. 16. tit . 8. l. 13. & 14. Numb . 13. Numb . 37. 18. Gem. Babyl . ad tit . Sanhed . c. 1. s. 13. 14. Scaliger Elench . Triher . c. 10. Tzemach . David . p. 1. m l. 4. A● ▪ 880. Selden . id Eutych . p. 19. de Syned . l. 2. c. 7. s. 2. V. Light. foot Horae Hebr. in Matth. 16. 19. Dissertat . ad Lectorem & in not . 193. &c. P. 73. ed. L'Emper . Heb. Lat. P. 115. Elench . Triherc . 10 ▪ Luke 2. 46 In Appar . de Templo . Annot. in Evang. p. 32. §. 7. Lib. omnem probum liberum esse . In Luc. 4. 16 : Luke 4. 20. C. Ebeonites Synag . Iud. lib. 1● . Lex Rabb . ad verb. In Benjam , not p. 149. i Cor 1. 20● Act. 13. 15. Service of God at Rel. Ass c. 3. p , 56. De Syned . l. 2. c. 6. s. 2. Thorndike Rel. Assem . cap. 3. Mark 5. 35 Luke 8. 49 13. 14. Mark 2. 25 Annot. in Luc. 13. 14 In Caligulâ . Lampr. vit . Alex. Sever . Vopiscus in Saturn . Cod de Iud ▪ Colic . & Eam . l. 13. Cod. Iud ▪ l. 17. c. de Iudaeis . §. 8. Acts 9. 20. Acts 13. 5 , 14. 17. 10. 18. 4. 19. 8. Acts 11. 3. Act. 10. 28. Acts 15. 1. 15. 7. Euseb. hist. l. 4. c. 6. & Chronic. Hist. sacr . l. 2. p 381. ed. Horn. Acts 18. 2 , Rom. 16. 3. Annot. in vit . Petri. ap . Platin. in vit . Petri. In Claud. cap. 25. Lactant. l. 4. c. 7. Tertul. Apolog. cap. 3. V. Pet. Pithaeum Hor. subseciv . l. 2. c. 3. Donatus Dilucid . in Sueton. in Claud. c. 25. Act. 18. 15. Apud . Orig. lib. 3. cont . Cels. §. 9. Acts 16 3. Gal. 5. 2. Dr. Ham. of Schism ch . 4. sect . 6 , 7 , &c. Gal. 2. 12. Schism sect . 8. Answ. to S●his . Dis. ch 2. s. 5. Hieronym . in Gal. 1. 22. Reply to Cath. Gent. ch 4. s. 6. n. 6. Aug. ep . 8. 9 , 19. Hier. Act. 15. 23. Schism . p. 75. Act. 15. 41. 18. 18. 21. 3. §. 10. Acts 2. 42. Iust. Mart. Apol. 2 p. 98. ed. Par. Apologe● . cap. 3● . §. 11. Cod. Middoth . c. 5. s. 3. V. Selden . de succes . ad Pontif. Ebre . l. 2. c. 2 , 3 , 5 , & 6. Not in Cod. Middoth . p. 187 , 188. Isid Hisp. de Ecclesia offic . l. 2. c. 7 Ive Carnot . decret . p. 6. c. 11. Ep. 85. Dissert . 2. cap. 28. Comment . in 1. Tit. De praescrip . adv . h●ret . c. 32. Epist. lib. 6. Ep. 1. Observat. lib. 1 c. 13. §. 12. Levit. 16. 21. Ep ad Gallos ▪ ep . 154. & . 166. Ioh. Cord. & V. in Mat. 9. 19 : Gen. 48. 14 ▪ Numb . 27. 23. Acts 6. 6. Acts ● : 17. Acts 13. 3. 〈…〉 14. 〈…〉 5 ▪ ●● ▪ Titus 1. 5. V. Demost. Phil. 1. & advers . Simon . & Ulpian in Schol. V. Selden . de Syned . l. 1. cap. 14 ▪ Grot. de Imp. Sum. Potest . c. 10. s. 5. Perpet . Govern. of Christs Church . c. 7. Tract . San. cap. 4. s. 5. Ad tit . Sanhed c. 1. De Syned . l. 2. c. 7. s. ● . Hierony n. in 1. Tit. Dist. 60. c. Mull. ex urb . Pay. Dist. 95. Gloss. V. Francis Masons defence of Ordination of Presbyters . Ep. 85. ad Evagrium . V. Selden . ad E●tych . n. 22. p. 143. Dist. 6● . sect . h●r . Advers . Lucil. Origin . p. 29 , 30. B●blioth . Cod. 254. 1 Tim. 4. 14. Rosellis de po● . Imper. & Papae . p. 4. c. 18 Mich Medinas de s●● . hom . ●●rig . & contin . l. 1. cap. 5. Praes . p. 58. Dial. ad Lucifer . Ep. August . ep . 11 Hist. Apostolica . p. 7● Ep. ad Gal. ep . 162. Apol. p. 4. Exercit. ad Annal. Eccles . 15. s. 12. Hieron . ep . 20. ad Lucinum . §. 14. Misna & Gemar . tit . Sanhedr . c. ● . Tic. Sanhed . cap. 4. s 3. Arcan . Cath. Viritat . l. 4. cap. 6. De Concord . orbis p. 377 Euseb. hist. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 1. Can. 4. Hist Eccles lib. 5. c. 23. V. Iustell . not . in Canon . Universae Eccles. p. 140. Joh. 20. 21 ▪ v. 29. §. 15. Exod 3. 16. 18. 4. 29. 12. 21. 17. 5. ●8 12. &c. Dissert . de jure Epis. 3. o 6. Vind cat . cap. ● . s. 1. Theodoret. in 1 Tim. 3. 1. Tacitus hist. lib. 1. Rev. 2. 4. Advers . ●●aeres . l. 1. c , 14. §. 16. In Sentent . lib. 4. dist . 4. sect . 25. Hist. Eccles. tib . 3. c. 1. Plut. in Theseo . Hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 4. Proleg in Chron. Eusebii . Cont. 3. l. 2. c. 5. not . 18. V. Chamier . Tom. 1. l. 2. cap. 16. §. 17. * Demosth. in Midiam . Plut. in Peril . & vit . Niciae ▪ V. Meursi●m de A●chont . Athen. l. 1. c. 9. Ennium de Ep. Ath. * Paus. in Lacon ▪ Pollux . Onom . lib. 8. c. 9. Pans . Lacon V. Nic. ●ragium de Rep. L●ced . lib. 2. c. 4. Conc ▪ Chalce●o●ens . Part. 2. Act. 11. apud ●●in . Concil . Gr. La To 3. p. 410. Advers . haeres . l. 3. cap. 3. De praescript . advers . haere● . cap. 32. De Virgin. veland . c. 1. Dap. 37. de pr●scrip● . Aug. Ep. 42. Aug● Ep. 29. Exhort . ●asil . c. 7. V. Selden in Eutych . p. 28 , &c. Adver . haeres . l. 3. c. 2. Lib. 4. cap. 43. Cap. 44. E● 69. ed. Pamel s. 4. * V. Cyprian . ep . 3. à Cler ▪ Rom. ep . 62. & 65. in Mich. 2. epist. 1. Ep ▪ ad M●g . p. 33. ●d . ●s . Vossi p. 31. Vedel ▪ p. 50. Usser . p. 49. Ep. 69. P. 19. Voss● . Ep. gr . lat . p. 57. Page 54. Page 57. Pag. 69. & p. 73. p. 2 , 3. Apol ▪ p. 3● . Euseb. l. 5. cap. 3. In Eph. 4. De Eccles. Officiis l. 7. cap. 7. Conc. Hispal . secundum decret . 7. apud Bin. T. 4. p. 560. Conc. Chal. Part. 2. Act. 11. §. ●8 . Eccles. Hist. l. 5. c. 25. Socrat . l. ●5 . c. 21. Cyprian ep . 47. n. 13. Ib. n. 14. Firmil . ep . inter ep . Cyprian . 75. ● . 5. Hist. Eccl. l. 2. cap. 22. V. M●gdeburg , Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. §. 19. Cypr. Ep. 75. ● . 5. Act. 17. 34. Rom. 16 2. Par. 1. ch 6 s. 8 p. 129. P. 54. Epiph. c. Aerium . haeres . 75. p. 90● , &c. ed. Pe●av . Wal● . Messal . cap. 4. p. 224. &c. 1 Cor. 9. 16. Ep. ad Tral . C. cel sum . l. 6. c. 3. p. 1●9 . Pius ▪ ep . ad Just. Vien . Apol. c. 39. Cypri . ep . 55. s. 19. s. 21. Hi●ronym . in Is. l. 2. c. 3. Ep. ad Evag in 1 Tim. 5. Chrysost. in 4. Eph. hom . 11. De ●ure pleb●s in regim . Eccles . p. 79. &c. O●ig hom . 1. in Psal. 37. Cyprian . l. 1. ep . 11. Ep. 35. Ep. 12. Strom. l. 6. p. 667. ed. Heins . Strom. l. 7. p. 700. Concil . Hispal . 2. decret . 9. §. 20. 1 Cor. 9. 6. 2 Cor. 11. 8. 2 Cor. 11. 9. 1 Cor. 9. 14. 1 Cor. 9. 5. 1 Cor. 6. 2. 11. 21 , 22. ●6 ▪ ●● Exercit. Theol n. 26. Curcellaeus de esu sanguinis , &c. Grotius in Act. 15. 29. 1 Cor. 10. 25. Part. 1. chap. 1. s. 6. 1 Tim. 5. 9. Rom. 16. 1. Plin. ep . ● . ●0 . ep . 97. Th●od l. 3. cap. 14. Sozom. l. ● . cap. 24. Codex Theod leg . 27. tit . de Epis. Co●c . Chalc. cap. 14. Co●c . No●m●t . c. 73. Epi●h . har . 79. V. Iust●ll . No●●n Can. u●ivers . Eccles. p. 154. &c. Vossium i● Pli● . ep . 97. l. 10. Salmas . in Aparat . p 176. * De Orat. §. 1. §. 2. Euseb. l. 4. cap. 1● 〈…〉 Ignat . ep p. 13. C. Celsum . l. 3 p. 128. &c. Exhort . ad . cust . Steph. de Urbibus . Strabo Geog● . l. 8. Paus. Corinth . p. 44. 45. Plin. hist. l. 4. c. 4. Emmius de Graec. Vet. li 2. Pareus in Rom. 16. 1. V. He●ns . E●er●it . sac● . l. 5. cap 10. Ep 95. l. 10. Tertut . de Cor. Mil●ti● ad Uxo● . l. 2. c. 4. V. Vossium in Pl●n . cp . p. 45. V. Gersom . Bucer . de 〈◊〉 . Eccl . p. 2 ●0 . ● &c. V. Iustel . Not. in Cod. Can Eccles. n. p 200. & Blo●del Ap. s. 3. de Basil. origine p. ●16 . p. 243 p. 131. ed. Cl. Samas . Apol. c. 2. E●igr . ep . s. 21. Ep. 6. 10. 18 , 24 , 33 , 34 , 28. 32. Ep. 58. Apud . Bin. To. 1. Conc. p. 91. Eccles. hist. l. 6. cap. 43. Eccles. hist. l. 7. cap. 30. Apud . Nun. sub Zenoph . Consul . P. 200. Orat. p. 3. P. 34● 37 , 41. P. 29 , 42. In 1 Tim. hom . 11. Conc. Aquis . c. 5. 1. Paedag. l. 1. cap. 6. Epiph haer . 4● . Id. h●res . 57. c. 1. C. Celsum . l. 3. p. 129. A. Dom. ● 12. n. 4 , 5 , 6. in Ezek 39. 15. V. O●phrium ▪ de Episcop . ti●ul . & Div. Cardinalium . § ▪ 3. Palma Christiana cap. 4. Geogr●l . 13 ● Georg l. 13 p. 432 ●d . Is. Ca●a●b . Nat. hist. l. 5. c. 29. & 30. Sueton. in V●syas c 8. Phil. ● . ● . Elia● . I● . P. 182. Dio l. 47. S. 4 c. 11. L ● . c. 2. Lib. 47. p. 397. P●●er● . l. 2. c. 37. Geog● . l 17. hist. l. 53. V. Claudii cap. 25. H●st . l. 57 ▪ V. Pan●ir . de Magist. Municipal . cap. 8. Exerc. sacr . l. 5. c. 10. Antholog . l. 1. Hist. eccles . l. 5. c. 17. V. Berter ▪ Pithan . Dial. cap. ● . l. 2. c 12. Conc. Sard. cop . 16. Geogr. sacr . l. 8. s. 14. Exercit. 16. n. 150 Exercit. in ep . Ignat. a●●om . c. 2. Laws of the Ch●r . cap. 18. p. 164. Phil. 3. ●0 ▪ §. 4. ●Cod . Eccles. Afric . c. 33. can . 71. Apparatu● pr. 240. de primat . c. 1 p. 10. c. 11. p. 164. Beza de M●●is ▪ gr●d . c. 24. ●londel . Ap p. 94. Apol. 22 p. 97. Cap. 5 ▪ Observat. l. 1. c 8. V. Casaub. Exercit : 16. s. 33. Salmas . App p. 243 Ep. ad Honor . à Presbi● . Rom. Ep. 90. Cypr. ep . 52. Con 3. c. ● : & 5. Con. 2. c. 10 , 11. Ph●ti●● Co● 59 ▪ n. 15. §. 5. Pag. 127. De jejuni● advers . Psych . Can. Ap●st . cap. 38. Ca● 20 in ▪ Cod. C●● . 99. Do veritate Ecceles . Ep. ad Evagrun . Can. 17. Can. 39. Pag. 341 ▪ §. 6. De gestis Scot. lib. 2. cap 2. Scot. chron . l. 3. cap. 1. V. B●ondel . Apol. s 3. pag. 314. Scot. hist. lib. 6. Eclog. l. 2. cap. 5. Hist. Eccl. l 7. cap. 19. De rebus Abassin . b● 1. c. 321. Ep. 113. G●●gr . l. 5. c●p ▪ 15 Ephes. synod . 1. ad sia . Act. 7. Cyprian ep . 3. 26 , 30 , 31. Theodoret l. 4. c. 22. V●ctor l. 2. de pers . Vand. In can . 57. Laod. Thorndike right of the Ch●r . p. 62. De rebus Eccl siast . Lib. 7. c. 19 §. 7. Berteri , Pithan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diatribae . Salmas . ep . ad Am. Eucharisti ▪ adver . Sirmond , De pri●● . Pan. Iac. Gotho●● . Conjectur . Vindiciae Conjectur . Blondel de la primau●e en la ●glise , &c. Discourse of the Patriarchal Government of the ancient Chur ▪ 9. 1. In Cod. C●n. 166. Quest. ex ut●oque Test. q. 101. §. 8. Collat. 4. c. 1. Anast Bil. vit . Pelag. Prim. Dissert . in Philost . l. 2. cap. 7. Ep. 9● . c. 1. Reg. juris 67. Ep●st . 8. V. Blondel . Ap. p. 325. Apol S. 3. à 317. ad 327. §. 9. Ep 75. Hist. lib. 7. cap. 19. V. Iustel . praef●● . in Cod. Canonum Uni●ers . Eccl. §. 1. §. 2. Acts and Mon. To. 2 : p. 657. Martyrol . in To. 2. p. 658 , 659 Q. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 16. Archbish. Cranme●s answ . ex ipso ejus autographe . Answ. to the 10. Q. 11. 12. 13. 14. 16. §. 3. Pag. 3. Pag. 77. P. 81 , 82 , 83 , 84. Pag. 658. Pag 58. P. 64 , 66. Church Gov. pag. 167. De Polit. Eccles. l. 2. c. 39 , &c. c. 11. p. 66. Defens . Eccl. Angl. c. 28. s. 1● . De Polit. Eccles l. 2. c. 24. Pag. 13. Chilling . Ep. 1. ch . 6. s. 39. §. 4. Exam. Con Trid c. 2 de sacram ord can . 1. 413 , 414. Pag. 413. Cen● . 1. l. 2. cap 7. Confess . sidei cap. 25. s. 10. 11. Tom. 7. op . Miscel. Tom. 4. op . l. 1. in 4. praecept . q. ● . p. 70. &c. Episcopacy by Divine Right , s. 5. p. 20. Apol. pro Hieron . s. 2. p. 53. ●●d . q. 1. ● . 5. De secessione ab Ecclesiā Rom. Deque pace cum Evang. cons. p. 29. &c. De Imperi● summ . Potest . circa sacra , c. 11 : Lord Bacon Considerat . touching Ch. Govern : Sir Will. Morice of the Sacrament , in sect 9. Mr. Pry●'s 12 queries to the Arsembly . §. 6. Defens . Eccles . Angl. cap. 42. s. 6. Apolog. Confess . Aug. ad art . 14. Confess . August . per Chytr . p. 365. Institut . l b. 4. cap 4● sect . 1. Sect. 4. De Ministr . gradibus , cap. 23. p. 144. Cap. 21. p. 116 , 127. De Ministr . gradibus , cap. 23. p. 153. Instit. l. 4. c. 4. s. 2. De Ministr . grad . cap 24. p. 167. ● Tit. 1. 5. De Ministr ▪ grad . p. 158. Super. Mat. tit . de Ordinat . Ep. ad Co●er . A. D. 1530. Tom. 7. ad Sadoletum . & de neces . Reform . Eccl. p. 69. In loc . com . de Eccl. p. 767. Opuscul . Theol. Clas . 3. cap. 10. p. 439. Lib. 2. c. 10. De Polit. Eccles. l. 2. cap. 1. See Mr. Duree's Government of Protestant Churches beyond the Seas . §. 7. Certain brief treatises , &c. Oxford . 1641. Sect. 18. Defence of Sermon . l. 4. cap. 6. p. 139. L. 4. ch . 7. p. 146. From p. 53. to . p. 63. §. 8. His Majesters second Paper to the Ministers at Nowport . ad sin● . V. Bishop ▪ ushers reduction of Episcopacy , &c. Pur. 1. ch . ●a . s. 12. Notes for div A61558-e90590 Append. 10 c. 8. part . 1. §. 1. §. 2. §. 3. §. 4. §. 5. §. 6. §. 7. §. 8. §. 9. 10. 11. §. 1 A●ud August de Civit. de l. 2. c. 21. §. 13. §. 14. §. 15. §. 16. Iren. p. 2. c. 2. ● Iren. p. 1. c. 8. §. 17. In Luk. ● . ●2 . §. 18. §. 19. Mat. 16. 19. I●en . p. 2. ch 5. ●● . 5. p. 212. Acts 2. 41. 1 Pet. 3. 21. Tit. 3. 5. Acts 8. 33. Isa. 22 20 Cypr. Ep. 73. sect 6. § 20. ( 2. ) §. 21. 1. 2. ● Heb. 9. 23. §. 22. 2 Cor. 5. 11. 2 Thess 3. 14. §. 23. Iren. p 1. c. 2. sect . 7. 
A42757	----	Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversie concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiasticall government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlesnesse of the chief objections made against the Presbyteriall government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ... Gillespie, George, 1613-1648. 1646 Approx. 1501 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 327 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2005-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A42757 Wing G744 ESTC R177416 12922201 ocm 12922201 95406 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A42757) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 95406) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 982:39) Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversie concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiasticall government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlesnesse of the chief objections made against the Presbyteriall government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ... Gillespie, George, 1613-1648. [64], 590 p. Printed by E.G. for Richard Whitaker ..., London : 1646. Reproduction of original in Union Theological Seminary Library, New York. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Ecclesiastical law -- Great Britain. Church and state -- Great Britain. Church polity. Excommunication. 2003-04 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2003-05 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2005-03 Jonathan Blaney Sampled and proofread 2005-03 Jonathan Blaney Text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-04 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion AARONS ROD BLOSSOMING . OR , The Divine Ordinance of Church-Government VINDICATED , So as the present Erastian Controversie concerning the distinction of Civill and Ecclesiasticall Government , Excommunication , and Suspension , is fully debated and discussed , from the holy Scripture , from the Jewish and Christian Antiquities , from the consent of latter Writers , from the true nature and rights of Migistracy , and from the groundlesnesse of the chiefe Objections made against the Presbyteriall Government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power . By George Gillespie Minister at Edinburgh . For unto us a child is born , unto us a sonne is given , and the government shall be upon his shoulder . Isaiah 9. 6. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour , 1 Tim. 5. 17. And the spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets , for God is not the Author of confusion but of peace . 1 Cor. 14 32 , 33. August . lib. contra Donatistas post collationem , Cap. 4. Ne fortè aut indisciplinata patientia foveat iniquitatem , aut impatiens disciplina dissipet unitatem . Published by Authority . London , Printed by E. G. for Richard Whitaker , at the signe of the Kings Armes in Pauls Church yard . 1646. TO THE Reverend and Learned Assembly of DIVINES Convened at WESTMINSTER . Right Reverend , THough many faithfull servants of God did long agoe desire to see those things which we see , and to heare those things which we heare ; Yet it hath been one of the speciall mercies reserved for this Generation , and denied to the times of our Ancestors , that Divines of both Kingdomes within this Island , should be gathered and continued together , to consult peaceably and freely concerning a Reformation of Religion in Doctrine , Worship , Discipline , and Government . 'T is a mercy yet greater , that two Nations formerly at so great a distance in the form of publike Worship and Churchgovernment , should ( to their mutuall comfort and happines , and to the further endearing of each to other ) through the good hand of God be now agreed upon one Directory of Worship , and with a good progresse advanced , as in one Confession of Faith , so likewise in one forme of Church-government . For all which , as the other Reformed Churches , ( in regard of their common interest in the Truth and Ordinances of Christ ) so especially your Brethren in the Church of Scotland are your debters : Your name is as precious Oynment among them , and they doe esteeme you very highly in love for your workes sake . A worke , which as it is extraordinary and unparalleld , requiring a double portion of the Spirit of your Master , so You have very many Hearts and Prayers going along with you in it , that the pleasure of the Lord may prosper in your hand . As for my Reverend Colleagues and my selfe , it hath been a good part of our happinesse that we have been partakers of , and Assistants in your grave and learned Debates . Yet ( as we declared from our first comming amongst you , ) we came not hither presuming to prescribe any thing unto You , but willing to receive as well as to offer light , and to debate matters freely and fairely from the Word of God , the common Rule both to you and us . As herein You were pleased to give testimony unto us in one of your Letters to the Generall Assembly of the Church of Scotland , so the great respects which in other things and at other times you have expressed , both towards that Church from which we are entrusted , and particularly towards our selves , doe call for a returne of all possible and publique testimonies of gratitude . For which purpose , I doe for my part take hold of this opportunity . I know that I owe much more unto You , then I have either ability to pay , or Elocution to set forth . Yet although I cannot retaliate your Favours , nor render that which may be worthy of your selves ; I beseech you to accept this part of my retribution of respects . I doe offer and entitle unto You this Enucleation of the Erastian Controversie , which is Dignus vindice nodus . I hope here is a word in season concerning it . Others might have done better , but such furniture as I had , I have brought to the worke of the Tabernacle . I submit what is mine unto your greater learning and better judgement , and shall ever continue Yours to serve you , GEO. GILLESPIE . To the Candid Reader . I Have often and heartily wished that I might not be distracted by nor ingaged into polemick Writings , of which the World is too full already , and from which many more learned and idoneous have abstained ; and I did accordingly resolve that in this Controversall age I should be slow to write , swift to read and learne . Yet there are certaine preponderating reasons which have made me willing to be drawn forth into the light upon this subject . For beside the desires and sollicitations of diverse Christian friends , lovers of truth and peace , seriously calling upon me for an answer to M r Prynne his Vindication of his foure Questions concerning Excommunication and Suspension , the grand importance of the Erastian controversie , and the strong influence which it hath into the present juncture of asfaires , doth powerfully invite me . Among the many Controversies which have disquieted and molested the Church of Christ , those concerning Ecclesiasticall Government and Discipline are not the least , but among the chiefe , and often mannaged with the greatest animosity and eagernesse of spirit , whence there have growne most dangerous divisions and breaches , such as this day there are , and for the future are to be expected , unlesse there shall be ( through Gods mercy ) some further composing and healing of these Church-consuming distractions : which if we shall be so happy as once to obtaine , it will certainely contribute very much toward the accommodation of civill and State-shaking differences . And contrariwise , if no healing for the Church , no healing for the State. Let the Gallio's of this time ( who care for no intrinsecall evill in the Church ) promise to themselves what they will , surely he that shall have cause to write with Nicolaus de Clemangis , a Booke of lamentation de corrupto Ecclesiae statu , will finde also cause to write with him de lapsu & reparatione Justitiae . As the thing is of high concernment to these so much disturbed and divided Churches , so the elevation is yet higher by many dègrees ; This controversie reacheth up to the Heavens , and the top of it is above the clouds . It doth highly concerne Iesus Christ himselfe , in his glory , royall prerogative , and kingdome , which he hath and exerciseth as Mediator and Head of his Church . The Crowne of Iesus Christ , or any part , priviledge , or pendicle thereof must needs be a noble and excellent Subject . This truth that Iesus Christ is a King , and hath a Kingdome and government in his Church , distinct from the kingdomes of this World , and from the civill Government , hath this commendation and character above all other truths , that Christ himselfe suffered to the death for it , and sealed it with his blood . For it may be observed from the story of his Passion , a this was the onely point of his accusation , which was confessed and avouched by himselfe , b was most aggravated , prosecuted , and driven home by the Iewes , c was prevalent with Pilate as the cause of condemning him to die , and d was mentioned also in the superscription upon his crosse . And although in reference to God , and in respect of satisfaction to the Divine justice for our sinnes , his death was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a price of redemption , yet in reference to men who did persecute , accuse , and condemne him , his death was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a Martyrs Testimony to seale such a truth . This Kingly Office of Iesus Christ ( as well as his Propheticall ) is administred and exercised , not onely inwardly and invisibly by the working of his Spirit in the soules of particular persons , but outwardly also and visibly in the Church , as a visible politicall ministeriall body , in which he hath appointed his own proper Officers , Ambassadours , Courts , Laws , Ordinances , Censures , and all these administrations , to be in his own name , as the onely King and Head of the Church . This was the thing which Herod and Pilate did , and many Princes , Potentates , and States doe looke upon , with so much feare and jealousie , as another Government co-ordinate with the civill . But what was darke upon the one side to them , hath been light upon the other side to those servants of Iesus Christ who have stood , contended , and sometime suffered much for the Ordinance of Church-Government and Discipline , which they looked upon as a part of Christs Kingdome . So e Bucer . So f Parker . So g M. Welseh my countreyman of precious memory , who suffered much for the same truth , and was ready to seale it with his blood . Beside divers others who might be named , especially learned Didoclavius in his Altare Damascenum Cap. 1. and throughout . I am not ignorant that some have an evill eye upon all government in a Nation , distinct from civill Magistracy , and if it were in their power they would have all Anti-Erastians ( and so consequently both Presbyterians and Independents ) lookt upon as guilty of Treason , at least , as violaters of , and encroachers upon the rights and priviledges of Magistracy , in respect of a distinct Ecclesiasticall government . And indeed it is no new thing for the most faithfull Ministers of Iesus Christ to be reproached and accused as guilty of Treason , which was not onely the lot of M. Calderwood , and ( as hath been now shewed ) of M. Welsch , and those that suffered with him , h but of M. Knox before them , as likewise of many Martyrs and confessors , and i of the Apostles themselves . Yet ( if we will judge righteous judgement , and weigh things in a just ballance ) we doe not rob the Magistrate of that which is his , by giving unto Christ that which is Christs . We desire to hold up the honour and greatnesse , the power and authority of Magistracy , against Papists , Anabaptists , and all others k that despise dominion , and speake evill of dignities . We doe not l compare ( as Innocentius did ) the civill and the ecclesiasticall powers , to the two great lights , that to the Moone , this to the Sunne . We hold m it is proper to Kings , Princes and Magistrates , to be called Lords , and Dominators over their Subjects whom they governe civilly , but it is proper to Christ onely to be called Lord and Master in the Spirituall government of the Church ; and all others that beare office therein , ought not to usurpe Dominion therein , nor be called Lords , but onely Ministers , Disciples and Servants . We acknowledge and affirme n that Magistracy and civill Government in Empires , Kingdomes , Dominions , and Cities , is an Ordinance of God for his owne glory , and for the great good of mankind , so that whoever are enemies to Magistracy , they are enemies to mankind and to the revealed will of God : o That such persons as are placed in authority , are to be beloved , honoured , feared , and holden in a most reverend estimation , because they are the Lieutenants of God , in whose seat God himselfe doth sit and judge ; We teach p that not onely they are appointed for civill policy , but also for maintenance of the true Religion , and for suppressing of Idolatry and superstition whatsoever . We confesse q that such as resist the supreame power , doing that thing which appertaineth to his charge , doe resist Gods Ordinance ; and therefore cannot be guiltlesse . And further we affirme , that whosoever deny unto them their ayd , counsell and comfort , whilest the Princes and Rulers vigilantly travell in execution of their Office , that the same men deny their help , support , and counsell to God , who by the presence of his Lieutenant doth crave it of them . We know and believe , r that though we be free , we ought wholly in a true faith holily to submit our selves to the Magistrate , both with our body , and with all our goods , and endeavour of mind , also to performe faithfulnesse , and the oath which we made to him , so far forth as his government is not evidently repugnant to him for whose sake we doe reverence the Magistrate . s That we ought to yeeld unto Kings and other Magistrates in their owne stations , feare , honour , tribute , and custome , whether they be good men or evill , as likewise to obey them , in that which is not contrary to the Word of God : It being alwaies provided that in things pertaining to our soules and consciences , we obey God onely and his holy Word . We believe t that God hath delivered the Sword into the hands of the Magistrates , to wit , that offences may be repressed , not onely those which are committed against the second Table , but also against the first . We doe agree and avouch , u that all men of what dignity , condition , or state soever they be , ought to be subject to their lawfull Magistrates , and pay unto them Subsidies and Tributes , and obey them in all things which are not repugnant to the word of God. Also they must poure out their prayers for them , that God would vouchsafe to direct them in all their actions , and that we may lead a peaceable and quiet life under them , with all godlinesse and honesty . We teach x that it doth belong to the authority and duty of the Magistrate , to forbid and ( if need be ) to punish such sinnes as are committed against the ten Commandements or the Law naturall : as likewise to adde unto the Law naturall some other lawes , defining the circumstances of the naturall Law , and to keepe and maintaine the same by punishing the transgressors . We hold y that the lawes of the Realme may punish Christian men with death , for heynous and grievous offences . And that it is lawfull for Christian men , at the command of the Magistrate , to beare Arme , and to serve in just warres All these things we doe sincerely , really , constantly , faithfully , and cheerfully yeeld unto and assert in behalfe of the civill Magistrate . So that the cause which I now take in hand doth not depresse but exalt , doth not weaken but strengthen Magistracy . I doe not plead against the power of the Sword when I plead for z the power of the Keys . These two are most distinct , they ought not to be confounded , neither need they to clash or interfeere between themselves . The controversie is not about taking from the Magistrate what is his , but about giving to Christ that which is his . We hold a reciprocall subordination of persons , but a coordination of powers . a As the Ministers and others of the Ecclesiastical estate are subject to the Magistrate civill , so ought the person of the Magistrate be subject to the Church Spiritually , and in Ecclesiasticall government . And the exercise of both these jurisdictions cannot stand in one person ordinarily . Againe , b The Magistrate neither ought to preach , minister the Sacraments , nor execute the censures of the Church , nor yet prescribe any rule how it should be done , but command the Ministers to observe the rule commanded in the Word , and punish the transgressors by civill meanes . The Ministers exerce not the civill Jurisdiction , but teach the Magistrate , how it should be exercised according to the word . c The Laws and Statutes of Geneva doe at once ratifie the Ecclesiasticall Presbyteriall power of Iurisdiction or censure , and withall appoint that Ministers shall not take upon them any civill jurisdiction , but where there shall be need of compulsion or civill punishments , that this be done by the Magistrate . Yea , under a Popish Magistrate ( as in France ) and even under the Turke himselfe many Churches doe enjoy not onely the Word and Sacraments , but a free Church government and Discipline within themselves , rectio disciplinae libera , which is thought no prejudice to the civill government , they that governe the Churches having no dominion nor share of Magistracy . Vide D. Chytraei orat . de statu Ecclesiarum in Graecia &c. I know well , that there are other horrid calumnies and mis-representations of Presbyteriall Government , besides that of encroaching upon Magistracy : but they are as false as they are foule . And although we goe upon this disadvantage d which Demosthenes ( being loadened with a heavy charge and grievous aspersions by e Aeschines ) did complaine of , that though by right both parties should be heard , yet the generality of men doe with pleasure hearken to reproaches and calumnies , but take little or no pleasure to heare mens clearing of themselves or their cause ; and that his adversary had chosen that which was more pleasant , leaving to him that which was more tedious : Neverthelesse I must needs expect from all such as are conscionable and faithfull in this Cause and Covenant , that their eares shall not be open to calumnies , and shut upon more favourable informations . And however , let the worst be said which malice it selfe can devise , it shall be no small comfort to me , that our Lord and Master hath said , f Blessed are ye when men shall revile you , and persecute you , and shal say all manner of evill against you falsely for my names sake . I know also that a Government and Discipline in the Church ( the thing which I now undertake to plead for ) is a very displeasing thing g to those that would faine enjoy liberty either of pernicious errors , or grosse prophannesse . But ( as Maimonides saith well ) we must not judge of the easinesse or heavinesse of a Law according to the affections and lust of any evill man , being rash ( in judgement ) and given to the worst vices ; but according to the understanding of one who is most perfect among men , like unto whom , according to the Law , all others ought to be . More Nevochim part . 2. Cap. 39. No marvell that the licentious hate that way wherein they shall finde themselves hemmed in , if not hedged up with thornes . And that they may the more flatter themselves in their sinfull licentiousnesse , they imagine that Christs yoke is easie and his burthen light , to the flesh as well as to the Spirit , to carnall as well ▪ as to spirituall men . For my part if I have learned Christ aright , I hold it for a sure principle , that in so farre as a man is spirituall and regenerate , in as farre his flesh is under a yoake ; and in so farre as he is unregenerate , in as farre his flesh is sine jugo without a yoke . The h healing of the spirit is not without the smiting of the flesh . When I speake of this Divine Ordinance of Church Government , my meaning is not to allow , muchlesse to animate any in the too severe and over strict exercise of Ecclesiasticall discipline and censures . It was observed by i Hierome , as one of the errors of the Montanists : Illi ad omne pene delictum Ecclesiae obserant fores . They shut the Church doore , ( that is , they excommunicate and shut out of the Church ) almost at every offence . I confesse the greater part are more apt to faile in the defect , then in the excesse , and are like to come too short , rather than to goe too farre . Yet a failing there may be , and hath been both waies . The best things , whether in Church or State , have been actually abused , and may be so againe , through the error and corruption of men . The holy Scripture it selfe is abused to the greatest mischiefes in the world , though in its owne nature it serves for the greatest good in the world . The abuse of a thing which is necessary , and especially of a divine Ordinance , whether such abuse be feared or felt , ought not , may not prejudice the thing it selfe . My purpose and endeavour shall be ( wherein I beseech the ▪ Lord to help my infirmities ) to own the thing , to disowne the abuses of the thing , to point out the path of Christs Ordinance , without allowing either rigour against such as ought to be tenderly dealt with , or too much lenity towards such as must be saved with feare , and pulled out of the fire , or at all any aberration to the right or left hand . I have had much adoe to gaine so many ●…orae sub●…isivae from the works of my publique calling , as might suffice for this worke . I confesse it hath cost me much paines , and I thinke I may say without presumption , he that will goe about solidly to answer it , will finde it no easie matter . Subitane lucubrations will not doe it . But if any man shall by unanswerable contrary reasons or evidenees discover error or mistake in any of my principles , let truth have the victory , let God have the glory . Onely this favour ( I may say this justice ) I shall protest for . First , that my principles and conclusions may be rightly apprehended , and that I may not be charged with any absurd , dangerous or odious assertion , unlesse my own words be faithfully cited from which that assertion shall be gathered , yea also without concealing my explanations , qualifications , or restrictions , if any such there be . Which rule to my best observation I have not transgressed , in reference to the Opposites . Secondly , that as I have not dealt with their Nauci , but with their Nucleus , I have not scratched at their shell , but taken out their kernell ( such as it is ) I have not declined them , but encountered , yea sought them out , where their strength was greatest , where their Arguments were hardest , and their exceptions most probable : so no man may decline or dissemble the strength of my Arguments , Inferences , Authorities , Answers and Replies , nor thinke it enough to lift up an Axe against the uttermost branches , when he ought to strike at the root . Thirdly , if there be any acrimony , let it be in a reall and rationall conviction , not in the manner of expression . In which also I aske no other measure to my selfe than I have given to others . T is but in vaine for a man to help the bluntnesse of reason with the sharpnesse of passion : for thereby he loseth more than he gaineth with intelligent Readers : the simpler sort may peradventure esteem those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , those despicable nothings , to be something , but then they are delu ded , not edified . ▪ Therefore let not a man cast sorth a flood of passionate words , when his Arguments are like broken cisternes which can hold no water . If any Replyer there be of the Erastian party , who will confine himselfe within these Rules and Conditions , as I doe not challenge him , so ( if God spare me life and liberty ) I will not refuse him . But if any shall so reply as to prevaricate and doe contrary to these just and reasonable demands , I must ( to his greater shame ) call him to the Orders , and make his tergiversation to appeare . I shall detaine thee ( good Reader ) no longer . The Lord guide thee and all his people in waies of truth and peace , holinesse and righteousnesse , and grant that this Controversie may ( I trust it shall ) have a happy end to the glory of God , to the embracing and exalting of Iesus Christ in his Kingly Office , to the ordering of his House according to His owne will , to the keeping pure of the Ordinances , to the advancing of Holinesse , and shaming of prophanesse , and finally to the peace , quiet , wel-being , comfort , and happinesse of the Churches of Christ. These things ( without thoughts of provoking any either publike or private person ) the searcher of hearts knoweth to be desired and intended by him who is Thine , to please thee , for thy good to edification , GEO. GILLESPIE . THE CONTENTS . The first Booke . Of the Jewish Church Government . CHAP. I. That if the Erastians could prove what they alledge concerning the Iewish Church Government , yet in that particular the Iewish Church could not be a president to the Christian. THe Jewish Church a patterne to us in such things as were not typicall or temporall . If it could be proved , that the Jewes had no supreme Sanhodrin but one , and it such as had the power of civill Magistracy , yet there are foure reasons for which that could be no president to the Christian Church . Where the constitution , manner of proceedings , and power of the Sanhedrin , ure touched . Of their Synagoga Magna , what it was . That the Priests had great power and authority not onely in occasionall Synods , but in the civill Sanhedrin it selfe . CHAP. II. That the Iewish Church was formally distinct from the Iewish State or Commonwealth . WE are content that the Erastians appeale to the Jewish government . Seven distinctions between the Jewish Church and the Jewish State. Of the proselytes of righteousnesse , and that they were imbodied into the Jewish Church , not into the Jewish State. CHAP. III. That the Iewes had an ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin and Government distinct from the civill . DIvers Authors cited for the ecclesiastcal Sanhedrin of the Jews . The first Institution thereof , Exo. 24. That the choosing & calling forth of these 70 Elders is not coincident with the choosing of the 70 Elders mentioned Num. 11. nor yet with the choosing of Judges Exod. 18. The institution of two coordinate Governments , cleared from Deut. 17. A distinct Ecclesiasticall government setled by David , 1 Chro. 23. and 26. The same distinction of Civill and Church ▪ government revived by Iehoshaphat , 2 Chro. 19. That Text vindicated . Two distinct Courts , one Ecclesiasticall , another Civill , proved from Ierem. 26. Another argument for an Ecclesiasticall Senate from Ierem. 18. 18. Who meant by the wise men of the Jewes ? Another argument from Ezech. 7. 26. Another from 2 Kings 6. 32. and Ezech. 8. 1. Another from Psal. 107. 32. Another from Zech. 7. 1 , 2 , 3. That Ezech. 13. 9. seemeth to hold forth an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin . That the Councell of the chiefe Priests , Elders and Scribes , so often mentioned in the Gospel , and in the Acts of the Apostles , was an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin , and not a civill Court of Justice , as Erastus and M. Prynne suppose : which is at length proved . That the civill Sanhedrin which had power of life and death did remove from Hierusalem , 40 yeeres before the destruction of the Temple and City , and consequently neere three yeeres before the death of Christ. The great objection , that neither the Talmud nor Talmudicall Writers doe distinguish a civill and an ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin , answered . Finally , those who are not convinced that there was a distinct ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes , may yet by other Mediums be convinced that there was a distinct ecclesiasticall Government among the Jewes : as namely , the Priests judgement of cleannesse or uncleannesse , and so of admitting or shutting out . CHAP. IV. That there was an Ecclesiasticall Excommunication among the Iewes : and what it was . FIfteen witnesses brought for the Ecclesiasticall excommunication among the Jewes , all of them learned in the Jewish antiquities . Of the 24 causes of the Jewish excommunication , which were lookt upon formally qua scandals , not qua injuries . Of the three degrees of their excommunication , Niddui , Cherem , and Shammata . The manner and form of their Excommunication , sheweth that it was a solemne Ecclesiasticall censure . Formula anathematis . The excommunication of the Cuthites . The excommunication among the Jewes was a publique and judicial act : and that a private or extrajudicial excommunication was voyd , if not ratified by the Court. The effects of the Jewish excommunication . That such as were excommunicated by the greater excommunication were not admitted to come to the Temple . He that was excommunicated with the lesser excommunication was permitted to come , yet not as other Israelites , but as one publiquely bearing his shame . The end of their excommunication was spirituall . CHAP. V. Of the cutting of from among the people off God frequently mentioned in the Law. THe sence of the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 scanned . That the commination of cutting off a man from his people , or from the Congregation of Israel , is neither meant of eternall death , nor of dying without children , nor of capitall punishment from the hand of the Magistrate , nor yet of cutting off by the immediate hand of God for some secret sinne . Reasons brought against all these . That Excommunication was meant by that cutting off , proved by six reasons . CHAP. VI. Of the casting out of the Synagogue . THe casting out of the Synagogue is understood by Interpret●rs and others to be an excommunication from the Church assemblies , and not a civill punishment . Eight considerations to prove this . That he who was cast out of the Synagogue was shut out , not onely from the company and fellowship of men , but from the place of publique sacred assemblies . It cannot be proved , that he who was cast out of the Synagogue was free to enter into the Temple . The casting out of the Synagogue was abused by the Pharisees , as the casting out of the Church by Diotrephes . CHAP. VII . Other Scripturall arguments to prove an Excommunication in the Iewish Church . THat the separation from the Congregation , Ezra 10. 8. was Excommunication . Iosephus explained in this particular . Of the devoting of a mans substance as holy to the Lord ▪ which was joyned with the Excommunication . What meant by the cursing Neh. 13. 25. That the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or separating mentioned Luke 6. 22. was Excommunication , or a segregation not from civil fellowship onely , but from sacred or Church communion . The Ecclesiasticall use of that word touched . CHAP. VIII . Of the Iewish Exomologesis , or publike Declaration of Repentance by confession of sinne . THe Heathens had their publique Declaration of repentance from the Jewes . The Jewish Exomologesis proved from the imposition of hands upon the head of the Sacrifice . The Law Lev. 5. 5. did also appoint Confession of sinne , to be made at the offering of a Trespasse offering . Which confession was made in the Temple , and in the Priests hearing ▪ The Law of confessing sinne Num. 5 , 6 , 7. explained , and divers particulars concerning confession deduced from it . Other proofes of the Jewish Confession of sins from Ioh. 9. 24. Also from that which interveened between their Excommunication and their absolution . From Ezra 10 10 , 11. That Davids confession Psalm 51. was published in the Temple , after ministeriall conviction by Nathan . That if there be necessity of satisfying an offended brother , how much more of satisfying an offended Church ? CHAP. IX . Whether in the Iewish Church there was any suspension or exclusion of prophane , scandalous , notorious sinners , from partaking in the publique Ordinances , with the rest of the children of Israel in the Temple . THe affirmative is proved by plaine and full testimonies of Philo , and Iosephus , beside some late Writers wel acquainted with the Jewish antiquities . That the Publican Luke 18. came not into the Court of Israel , but into the Court of the Gentiles . Nor can it be proved , that he was a prophane Publican , so much as in the opinion of the Pharisees and Jews . That the Temple into which the adultresse was brought Iohn 8. was also the Court of the Gentiles : neither was she admitted into the Temple for worship , but brought thither for a publique triall and ●entence . Seven Scripturall arguments brought to prove an exclusion of the scandalous and known prophane persons , from the Temple . Somewhat de jure Zelotarum . What esteem the Hebrews had of an Hereticall or Epicurean Israelite . That the Temple of Ierusalem was a Type of Christ , ( which is instanced in ten particulars ) and had a Sacramentall holinesse in it , so that the analogy is not to be drawn to an exclusion of prophane persons from the Word preached , but from the Sacrament . CHAP. X. A debate with M. Prynne , concerning the exclusion of prophane scandalous persons from the Passeover . THe Analogy of the Law of the Passeover , as Master Prynne understandeth it , wil militat strongly against that which himselfe yeeldeth . That the uncleane might be kept backe from the Passeover longer then a moneth . That they were kept back by an authoritative restraint , and were cut off if they did eate in their uncleannesse . That some uncleane persons were not put out of the campe , nor from the company of men , but from the Tabernacle and holy things onely . That all uncleane persons were not suspended from all Ordinances . That scandalous and flagitious persons were not admitted to a trespasse offering ( which was a reconciling Ordinance ) much lesse to the Passeover ( which was a sealing Ordinance ) without a publique penitentiall Confession of their sinne . M. Prynnes replyes to this argument of min● confuted . CHAP. XI . A Confutation of the strongest arguments of Erastus , namely , those drawn from the Law of Moses . THe strength of these Arguments put together . Which is not onely e●ervated , but retorted . That the confession of sinne required Levit. 5. 5. Num. 5. 6 , 7. was a confession of the particular sin by word of mouth : and that this confession was required even in criminall and capitall cases . That morall , as well as ceremoniall uncleannesse , was a cause of sequestration from the Sanctuary , yea much more , the morall uncleannesse being more hatefull to God , more hurtfull and infective to Gods people . That the exclusion of the unclean under the Law could not so fitly signifie the exclusion from the Kingdom of Heaven , as from communion with the Church in this life . That this legall Type did certainly signifie a sequestration of scandalous or morally uncleane persons from Church-Communion under the New Testament , is proved from Esay 52. 1. 2 Cor. 6. 14 , 15 , 16 , 17. also from the exposition of Peters vision Acts 10. That among the Jewes such as attended a litigious action , or at least a capitall judgement , upon the preparation day , were thought defiled and not allowed to eate the Passeover . That it was not left to a mans free will to judge of his owne cleannesse or uncleannesse , nor to expiate his sinne when he pleased . That the universall precept for all that were circumcised to eate the Passeover , doth admit of other exceptions , beside those that were legally uncleane , or in a journey . The great difference between Sacraments and Sacrifices , which Erastus confoundeth . CHAP. XII . Fourteen arguments to prove that scandalous and presumptuous offenders against the morall Law , ( though circumcised , and not being legally uncleane ) were excluded from the Passeover . KNown presumptuous and obstinate sinners , were cut off from among their people , therefore not admitted to the Passeover . The Jewes themselves held that morall , as wel as ceremoniall uncleannesse did render them incapable of eating the Passeover . Who were esteemed Hereticall or apostat Israelites ? Who Epicurean Israelites ? That these and such like were not acknowledged to be in the communion of the Church of Israel , nor was it allowed to speake or converse with them , muchlesse that they should eate the Passeover . Grotius his argument , there was an excommunication for ceremoniall uncleannesse , therefore much more for morall uncleannesse . What God did teach his people by the purging out of leaven . If the shew-bread might not be given to Davids men , unlesse they had for some space before abstained from their wives , much lesse might known adulterers be admitted to the Passeover . Ezech. 2● . 26. discussed against Mr. Coleman . The originall words explained . Proph●ne Church members have the name of Heathens , and strangers . The qualifications of Proselytes , without which they were not admitted to Circumcision and the Passeover . That course was taken Ezra 10. that none defiled with unlawfull marriages might eate the Passeover . By Erastus his principles the most scandalous conversation was not so hatefull to God as legall uncleannesse . The Law of confessing sin , Levit. 5. Num. 5. is meant of every known sin , which was to be expiated by Sacrifice , especially the more notorious and scandalous sins . CHAP. XIII . M. Prynnes argument from 1 Cor. 10. ( which he takes to be unanswerable ) discussed and confuted . Mr Prynne in expounding that Text of the Passeover differeth both from the Apostles , and from Erastus himselfe . His argument ( if good ) wil necessarily conclude against his owne Concessions . If scandalous sinners had been suspended from the Manna , and Water of the Rocke , they had been suspended from their ordinary orporal meat and drinke . That the scandalous sins mentioned by the Apostle , were committed , not before , but after their eating of that Spirituall meate , and drinking of that Spirituall drinke . The Argument strongly retorted . The scandalous sins mentioned by the Apostle were Nationall sins , and so come not home to the present Question , which is of persons , not of Nations . An Appendix to the first Booke . THe Erastians misrepresent the Jewish Government . Their complyance with the Anabaptists in this particular . Their confounding of that which was extraordinary in the Jewish Church , with that which was the ordinary rule . Fourteen Objections answered . M. Prynne his great mistakes of Deut. 17. and 2 Chron. 19. The power and practice of the godly Kings of Iudah in the reformation of Religion cleared . The Argument from Solomon his deposing of Abiathar , and putting Zadock in his place , answered foure waies . The Priests were appointed to be as Judges in other cases , beside those of leprosie and jealousie . 2 Chro. 23. 19. further scanned . A scandalous person was an unclean person both in the Scripture phrase , and in the Jewish language . The sequestration of the uncleane from the Sanctuary , no civill punishment . Of Lawes and causes Civill and Ecclesiasticall among the Jewes . Of their Scribes and Lawyers . Some other observable passages of Maimonides concerning Excommunication . What meant by not entring into the Congregation of the Lord , Deut. 23. 1 , 2 , 3. and by separating the mixed multitude , Nehem. 13. 3. Five reasons to prove that the meaning of these places , is not in reference to civil dignities and places of government , nor yet in reference to unlawful mariages onely , but in reference to Church-membership and communion . Two Objections to the contrary answered . One from Exod. 12. 48. Another from the example of Ruth . An useful observation out of Onkelos , Exod. 12. The second Booke . Of the Christian Church Government . CHAP. I. Of the rise , growth , decay and reviving of Erastianisme . THe Erastian error not honest is parentibus natus . Erastus the Mid-wife , how engaged in the busines . The breasts that gave it sucke , prophannesse and self-interest . It s strong food , arbitrary Government . It s Tutor , Arminianisme . It s deadly decay and consumption , whence it was ? How ill it hath been harboured in all the reformed Churches ? How stiffled by Erastus himselfe ? Erastianisme confuted out of Erastus . The Divines who have appeared against this error . How the Controversie was lately revived ? CHAP. II. Some Postulata or common principles to be presupposed . THat there ought to be an exclusion of vile and prophane persons , ( knowne to be such ) from the holy things , is a principle received among the Heathens themselves . That the dishonour of God by scandalous sinnes ought to be punished , as well , yea much rather , than private injuries . That publique sinnes ought to be publiquely confessed , and the offenders put to publique shame . That there ought to be an avoyding of , and withdrawing from scandalous persons in the Church , and that by a publique order , rather then at every mans discretion . That there is a distinction of the Office and power of Magistracy a●d Ministery . That the directive judgement in any businesse doth chiefly belong to those who by their prosession and vocation are set apart to the attendance and oversight of such a thing . CHAP. III. What the Erastians yeeld unto us , and what we yeeld unto them ? THey yeeld that the Magistrate his power in Ecclesiasticis , is not arbitrary , but tied to the word . That there may be a distinct Church government under Heathen Magistrates . That the abuse takes not away the just power . They allow of Presbyteries , and that they have some jurisdiction . That the Ministery is Iure divino , and Magistracy distinct from it . We yeeld unto them ▪ That none ought to be Rulers in the Church , but such against whom there is no just exception . That Presbyteriall government is not a Dominion but a Service . That it hath for its object onely the inward man. That Presbyteriall government is not an Arbitrary government , cleared by sive considerations . That it is the most limited , and least Arbitrary government of any other , cleared by comparing ▪ it with Popery , Prelacy , Independency , and with lawfull Magistracy . That the civil Magistrate may and ought to doe much in and for Religion , ordinarily , and yet more in extraordinary cases . That the civil Sanction is a free and voluntary act of the Magistrates favour . That Ministers owe as much subjection and honour to the Magistrate as other Subjects . CHAP. IV. Of the agreement and the differences between the nature of the Civill , and of the Ecclesiasticall powers or Governments . TEn agreements between the Civil power and the Ecclesiasticall power . The differences between them opened in their causes , efficient , matter , ( where a fourfold power of the keys is touched ) for me , and ends , both supreme and subordinate , ( where it is opened , how and in what respect the Christian Magistrate intendeth the glory of Jesus Christ , and the purging of his Church ; ) Also effects , objects , adjuncts , correlations , ultimate terminations , and divided executions . CHAP. V. Of a twofold Kingdome of Iesus Christ : a generall Kingdome as he is the eternall Sonne of God , the Head of all Principalities and Powers , raigning over all creatures : and a particular Kingdome , as he is Mediator , raigning over the Church onely . HOw this controversie fals in , and how deepe it drawes . That our Opposites herein ▪ joyne issue with the Socinians . Nine Arguments to prove this distinction of a twofold Kingdom of Christ. In which , of the eternity , universality , donation , and subordination of the Kingdome of Christ. The Arguments brought to prove that Christ as Mediator raigneth over all things , and hath all government ( even civil ) put in his hands , examined and confuted . In what sence Christ is said to be over all , the heire of all things , to have all things put under his feet , to be the head of every man. A distinction between Christs Kingdome , Power , and Glory , cleared . CHAP. VI. Whether Iesus Christ , as Mediator , and Head of the Church , hath placed the Christian Magistrate , to hold and execute his office , under and for him as his Vicegerent ? The Arguments for the affirmative discussed . THe decision of this Question will doe much , ( yet not all ) in the decision of the Erastian controversie . The question rightly stated . Ten Arguments for the affirmative discussed and answered . Where divers Scriptures are debated and cleared . How we are to understand that Christ is King of Kings , and Lord of Lords . How all power in Heaven and in Earth is said to be given to him . That the Governments set in the Church , 1 Cor. 12. 28. are not civill Magistrates , fully proved , Ephes. 1. 21 , 22 , 23. and Colos. 2. 10. vindicated . CHAP. VII . Arguments for the negative of that Question formerly propounded . THe lawfull authority of the Heathen Magistrates vindicated . It can not be shewed from Scripture , that Christ as Mediator hath given any Commission of Vice-gerentship to the Christian Magistrate . That the worke of the Ministery is done in the name and authority of Jesus Christ : the worke of Magistracy not so . The power of Magistracy or civill Government , was not given to Christ as Mediator , shewed from Luke 12. 14. Iohn ●8 36. Luke 17. 20 , 21. Magistracy founded in the Law of nature and Nations . The Scripture holds forth the same origination of Heathen Magistracy , and of Christian Magistracy . CHAP. VIII . Of the power and priviledge of the Magistrate in things and causes Ecclesiasticall , what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not , and what it is ? THat no administration formally and properly Ecclesiasticall , ( and namely the dispencing of Church censures ) doth belong unto the Magistrate ▪ nor may ( according to the Word of God be assumed and exercised by him , proved by six Arguments . That Christ hath not made the Magistrate head of the Church , to receive appeales from all Ecclesiasticall Assembles . There are other sufficient remedies against abuses or Mal-administration in Church-Government Reasons against such appeales to the Magistrate . The Arguments to the contrary from the Examples of Ieren●…y and of Paul , discussed . Of the collaterality and coordination of the Civill and Ecclesiasticall powers . What is the power and right of the Magistrate in things and causes Ecclesiasticall , cleared , first generally ; next , more particularly by five distinctions . 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 belong to the civill power , but non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 2. The Magistrate may imperare that which he may not elicere . 3. Distinguish the directive power from the coercive power . 4. The Magistrates power is cumulative not privative . 5. He may doe in extraordinary cases that which he ought not to doe ordinarily . A caution concerning the Arbitrary power of Magistrates in things Ecclesiasticall . CHAP. IX . That by the Word of God there ought to be another Government besides Magistracy or civill Government , namely an Ecclesiasticall Government ( properly so called ) in the hands of Church-officers . THe Question stated , and the Affirmative proved by one and twenty Scripturall Arguments . Who meant by the Elders that rule well , 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 names of government . The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb 13. 7 , 17. examined . Of receiving an accusation against an Elder . Of rejecting an Hereticke . Of the excommunication of the Incestuous Corinthian , and the sence of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ Of the subjection of the spirits of the Prophets to the Prophets . The Angels of the Churches why reproved for having false Teachers in the Church ? Note that man , 2 Thess. 3. 14. proved to be Church-censure . Of the Ruler , Rom. 12. 8. and Governments , 1 Cor. 12. 28. A patterne in the Jewish Church for a distinct Ecclesiasticall government . What meant by cutting off , Gal. 5. 12 ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly what ? Of the Ministeriall power to revenge all disobedience , 2 Cor. 10. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 2. 8. what ? Of the visible administration of the Kingdome of Christ by his Laws , Courts , Censures . The Arguments for Excommunication , from Matth. 18. and 1 Cor. 5. briefly vindicated . That Elders are rulers of the flock . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a name of Government Ministers why called S●…ewards of the Mysteries of God. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a name of government . Church-Government exercised by the Synod of the Apostles and Elders , Acts 15. CHAP. X. Some objections made against Ecclesiasticall Government and Discipline , answered . Mr Husseys objection doth stricke as much against Paul , as against us . The fallacy of comparing Government with the word preached , in point of efficacy . Foure ends or uses of Church-government . That two coordinate Governments are not inconsistent . The objection , that Ministers have other worke to doe , answered . The feare of an ambitious ensnarement in the Ministery , so much objected , is no good Argument against Church-government . M. Husseys motion concerning Schooles of Divinity examined . Church Government is no immunity to Church-officers from Censure . Though the Erastian principles are sufficiently overthrown by asserting from Scripture the may be of Church-government , yet our Arguments prove a must be or an Institution . Six Arguments added which conclude this point . CHAP. XI . The necessity of a distinct Church-government , under Christian , as well as under Heathen Magistrates . THis acknowledged by Christian Emperours of old . Grotius for us in this particular . Christian Magistracy hath never yet punished all such offences as are Ecclesiastically censurable . Presbyteries in the primitive times did not exercise any power which did belong of right to the Magistrate . No warrant from the word , that the Ordinance of a distinct Church government , was onely for Churches under persecution : but contrariwise the Churches are charged to keep till the comming of Christ , the commandement then delivered . No just ground for the feare of the interfeering of the civill , and of the Ecclesiasticall power . The Churches liberties enlarged , ( not diminished ) under Christian Magistrats . The Covenant against this exception of the Erastians . The Christian Magistrate , if he should take upon him the whole burthen of the corrective part of Church-government , could not give an account to God of it . The Erastian principles doe involve the Magistrate into the Prelaticall guiltinesse . The reasons and grounds mentioned in Scripture , upon which Church-censures were dispenced in the Primi●ive Churches , are no other then concerne the Churches under Christian Magistr●tes . The end of Church-censures , neither intended nor attained by the administration of Christian Magistracy . The power of binding and loosing not temporary . They who restrict a distinct Church-government , to Churches under Heathen or persecuting Magistrats , give a mighty advantage to Socinians and Anabaptists . Gualther and Master Prynne for us in this Question . APPENDIX . A Collection of some testimonies out of a Declaration of King Iames , the Helvetian , Bohemian , Augustane , French , and Dutch confessions , the Ecclesiasticall Discipline of the reformed Churches in France , Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum , the Irish Articles , a Book of Melanchton , and another of L. Humfredus . The third Booke . Of Excommunication from the Church , AND Of Suspension from the Lords Table . CHAP. I. An opening of the true state of the question , and of Master Prynnes many mistakes and mis-representations of our Principles . A Transition from Church-government in generall , to Excommunication and Suspension in particular . The present controversie ten waies mis-stated by M. Prynne . That which was publiquely depending between the Parliament and Assembly , did rather concerne the practicall conclusion it selfe , then the Mediums to prove it . The strength of the Assemblies proofes for Suspension scarce touched by M. Prynne . That the power of Suspension is neither in the Minister alone , nor unlimitted . The question is practically stated by Aretius . The present controversie how different from the Prelaticall ? The power desired to Elderships , is not to judge mens hearts , but to judge of externall evidences . The distinction of converting and confirming Ordinances how necessary in this question ? Excommunication and Suspension confounded by M. Prynne ( as likewise by the Separatists ) contrary to the manner both of the Jewish Church , and of the ancient and reformed Christian Churche● ▪ M. Prynnes assertion concerning suspension , is contrary to the Ordinances of Parliament . The Question stated , as it ought to be stated . CHAP. II. Whether Matth. 18. 15 , 16 , 17. prove Excommunication . THe Erastians cannot avoyd an argument ex consequenti from this Text for Excommunication , although we should grant that the literall sence and direct intendment of the words , is not concerning Excommunication . Of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That the trespasse meant vers . 15. is sometime known to more then one at first . That the meaning is not of a civill personall injury , but of a scandalous sinne , whether there be materially a personall injury in it or not . This confirmed by six reasons . That if it were granted these words , If thy brother trespasse against thee , are understood of a personall injury , this could be no advantage to the Erastian cause , in six respects . Erastus his Argument , that the trespasse here meant is such as one brother may forgive to another , answered . That the Law of two or three witnesses belongeth to Ecclesiasticall , as well as to civill Courts . That Tell the Church here can not be , Tell the civill Sanhedrin or Court of justice among the Jewes . Of the meaning of these words Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican . M. Prynnes Argument retorted . That the Heathens might not enter into the Temple , to wit , into the Court of Israel , but into the Intermurale they might come and worship . That there is not the like reason for excluding Excommunicate persons wholly from our Churches . Of Solomons porch . That M. Prynne confoundeth the devout penitent Publican with the prophane unjust Publicans . The Objection from the Publicans going up to the Temple to pray , examined . Publicans commonly named as the worst and wickedest of men . Another objection , Let him be to thee , ( not to the whole Church ) as an Heathen , &c. discussed . CHAP. III. A further demonstration that these words Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , are not meant of avoyding Civill , but Religious or Church-fellowship . THe great disorder and confusion which M. P●…ynne his sence of this Text might introduce . That it was not unlawfull to the Jewes to have civill company or fellowship with Heathens , unlesse it were for religious respects , and in case of the danger of an idolatrous insnarement , which is cleared by a passage of Elias in Thesbyte . In what sence Peter saith Acts 10. 28. that a Jew might not keepe company or come unto one of another Nation . That the Jewes did keep civill and familiar fellowship with Ger toschav , or Gerschagnar , the proselyte indueller , or the proselyte of the gate , who yet was uncircumcised , and no member of the Jewish Church , nor an observer of the Law of Moses , but onely of the seven precepts given to the sonnes of Noah . Which cleareth the reason why the Synod of the Apostles and Elders , who would not impose circumcision nor any other of the Mosaicall ceremonies upon the believing Gentiles , did neverthelesse impose this as a necessary burthen upon them , to abstaine from blood and things strangled . Christians are permitted by Paul to eate and drinke with them that believe not . Further proofes that some uncircumcised Heathens had civill fellowship with the Jewes , and some circumcised Hebrews had not Ecclesiasticall communion with the Jewes . The Question decided out of Maimonides . That these words , Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican doe imply somewhat negative , and somewhat positive . The negative part is , that he must not be worse used in civill things , than an Heathen man or Publican : that Excommunication breaketh not naturall and morall duties : neither is any civill fellowship at all forbidden to be kept with an Excommunicate person , except under a spirituall notion and for spirituall ends , not qua civill fellowship . The positive part is , that he must be used in the same manner , as an Heathen man and a Publican in Spirituall things , and in Church-communion . Heathens five waies excluded from communion with the Jewes in the holy things . Let him be as a Publican implieth two things more then Let him be as an Heathen , but exclusion from some Ordinances was common both to Heathens and scandalous Publicans . That the Phraisees speech concerning the Publican who went up to the Temple to pray , sheweth that he was not esteemed a prophane Publican . CHAP. IV. A Confutation of Erastus and Bilson their Interpretation of Matth. 18. 15 , 16 , 17. as likewise of Dr. Sutcliffe his Glosse , differing somewhat from theirs . THe scope of this Scripture wholly spirituall , concerning the gaining of a brother from sin , not civill concerning the prosecuting of a personall injury . Rebuke for sinne a common Christian duty . Which is necessary in sinnes committed against God , rather than in injuries committed against man. That any sinne by which thou art scandalized is a trespasse against thee . The Erastian Interpretation of Matth. 18. makes it lawfull for one Christian to goe to law with another before an unbelieving Judge , and so maketh Paul contrary to Christ. The same Interpretation restricteth the latter part of the Text to those Christians onely , who live under an unbelieving Magistrate , while it is confessed that the former part belongeth to all Christians . It is contrary also to the Law of Moyses . They contradict themselves concerning the coercive power of the Sanhedrin . The gradation in the Text inconsistent with their sence . The Argument of Erastus to prove that the words as a Publican , are meant of a Publican qua Publican , and so of every Publican , examined . Their exception , Let him be TO THEE , &c. not to the whole Church , answered three waies . CHAP. V. That Tell it unto the Church hath more in it , then , Tell it unto a greater number . THe word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 never given to any lawfull assembly , simply because of majority of number . This Interpretation provideth no effectuall remedy for offences . Kahal by the Hebrews and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Grecians often used for an assembly of such as had Jurisdiction and ruling power . Whether the two or three witnesses Matth. 18. 16. be onely witnesses or assistants in the admonition , or whether the intention be that they shall prove the fact before the Church forensically , ( if need be ) and whether two or three witnesses must be taken when the offence is known to him onely that gives the first rebuke ; discussed ? This their Interpretation brings a brother under the greatest yoke of bondage . Grotius his Interpretation of the word Church , not inconsistent with ours . Divers Authors of the best note for our Interpretation , that is , that by the Church here is meant the Elders of the Church assembled . The name of the Church given to the Elders for four considerations . CHAP. VI. Of the power of binding and loosing , Matth. 18. 18. OUr Opposites extreamly difficulted and divided in this point . Binding and loosing both among Hebrews & Grecians , authoritative & forensicall words . Antiquity for us , which is proved out of Augustine , Hierome , Ambrose , Chrysostome , Isidorus Pelusiota , Hilary , Theophylact. That this power of binding and loosing belongeth neither to private persons , nor to civill Magistrates , but to Church officers , and that in reference , 1. to the bonds of sinne and iniquity . 2. To the dogmaticall decision of controversies concerning the will of Christ. That this power of binding and loosing is not meerely doctrinall but juridicall or forensicall , and meant of inflicting or taking off Ecclesiasticall censure . This cleared by the coherence and dependency between verse 17. and 18 , ( which is asserted against M. Prynne ) and further confirmed by eleven reasons . In which the agreement of two on earth verse 19. the restriction of the rule to a brother or Church-member , also Matth ▪ 16. 19. John 20. 23. Psalm 149. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. are explained . Another Interpretation of the binding and loosing , that it is not exercised about persons , but about things or Doctrines , confuted by ●ive reasons . How binding and loosing are acts of the power of the Keys , as well as shutting and opening . CHAP. VII . That 1 Cor. 5. proveth Excommunication , and ( b● a necessary consequence even from the Erastian Interpretation ) Suspension from the Sacrament of a person un excommunicated . THe weight of our proofs not laid upon the phrase of delivering to Sathan . Which phrase being set aside that Chapter will prove Excommunication , verse 8. Let us keepe the Passeover ▪ &c. applied to the Lords Supper , even by M. Prynne himselfe . Master Prynnes first exception from 1 Cor. 10. 16 , 17. & 11. 20 21. concerning the admission of all the visible members of the Church of Corinth , even drunken persons to the Sacrament , answered . His second , a reflection upon the persons of men . His third , concerning these words , No , not to eate , confuted . Hence Suspension by necessary consequence . His fourth exception taken off . His three conditions which he requireth in Arguments from the lesser to the greater , are false and doe not hold . Our Argument from this Text doth not touch upon the rock of separation . Eight considerations to prove an Ecclesiasticall censure , and namely excommunication from 1 Cor. 5. compared with 2 ▪ Cor. 2. More of that phrase , to deliver such a one to Sathan . CHAP. VIII . Whether Judas received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . THe Question between M. Prynne & me concerning Iudas , much like unto that between Papists and Protestants concerning Peter . Two things premised . 1. That Matthew and Marke mentioning Christs discourse at Table , concerning the Traytor , before the Institution and distribution of the Lords Supper , place it in its proper order , and that Luke placeth it after the Sacrament by an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or recapitulation : which is proved by ●ive reasons . 2. That the story Iohn . 13. concerning Iudas and the sop , was neither acted in Bethany two daies before the Passeover , nor yet after the Institution of the Lords Supper . The first Argument to prove that Iudas received not the Lords Supper from Ioh. 13. 30. he went out immediately after the sop . Mr Prynnes foure answers confuted . His opinion that Christ gave the Sacrament before the common supper , is against both Scripture and Antiquity . Of the word immediately . The second Argument from Christs words at the Sacrament . That which M. Prynne holds , viz. that at that time ( when Christ infallibly knew Iudas to be lost ) he meant conditionally that his body was broken and his blood shed for Iudas ; confuted by three reasons . The third Argument from the different expressions of Love to the Apostles , with an exception , while Iudas was present ; without an exception at the Sacrament . M. Prynnes Arguments from Scripture to prove that Iudas did receive the Sacrament , answered . That Iudas received the Sacrament , is no indubitable verity as Mr. Prynne cals it , but hath been much controverted both among Fathers , Papists and Protestants . That the Lutherans who are much of M. Prynnes opinion in the point of Iudas his receiving of the Lords Supper , that they may the better uphold their Doctrine of the wicked their eating of the true body of Christ , yet are much against his opinion in the point of admitting scandalous persons not Excommunicated to the Sacrament . M. Prynnes bold assertion that all the Ancients except Hilary onely , doe unanimously accord that Iudas received the Lords Supper , without one dissenting voyce ; disproved as most false , and confuted by the testimonies of Clemens , Dionysius Areopagita , Maximus , Pachymeres , Ammonius Alexandrinus , Tacianus , Innocentius 3. Rupertus Tuitiensis , yea by those very passages of Theophylact , and Victor Antiochenus , cited by himselfe . Many moderne writters also against his opinion , as of the Papists , Salmeron , Turrianus , Barradius , of Protestants , Danaeus , Kleinwitzius , Piscator , Beza , Tossanus , Musculus , Zanchius , Gomarus , Diodati , Grotius . The testimonies cited by M. Prynne for Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament ▪ examined : some of them found false , others prove not his point , others who thinke that Iudas did receive the Sacrament , are cleare against the admission of known prophane persons . The confession of Bohemia and Belgia not against us , but against Master Prynne . CHAP. IX . Whether Judas received the Sacrament of the Passeover that night in which our Lord was betrayed . THat Christ and his Apostles did eate the Passeover , not before , but after that Supper at which he did wash his Disciples feet , and give the sop to Iudas . These words before the Feast of the Passeover , Joh. 13. 1. scanned . The Jewes did eate the Passeover after meale , but they had no meale after the Paschall supper . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ioh. 13. 2. needeth not be turned , supper being ended , but may suffer two other readings . Christs sitting down with the twelve is not meant of the Paschall supper , and if it were , it proves not that Iudas did eate of that Passeover , more than 1 Cor. 15. 5. proves that Iudas did see Christ after his resurrection . A pious observation of Cartwright . Another of Chrysostome . CHAP. X. That if it could be proved that Judas received the Lords Supper , it maketh nothing against the Suspension of known wicked persons from the Sacrament . CHrists admitting of Iudas to the Sacrament when he knew him to be a divell , could no more be a president to us , then his choosing of Iudas to be an Apostle , when he knew also that he was a divell . Iudas his sinne was not scandalous but secret , at that time when it is supposed that he did receive the Sacrament . The same thing which M. Prynne makes to have been after the Sacrament , to prove that Iudas did receive the Sacrament , the very same he makes to have been before the Sacrament , to prove that Iudas was a scandalous sinner , when he was admitted to the Sacrament . He yeeldeth upon the matter that Iudas received not the Sacrament . That before Iudas went forth , none of the Apostles knew him to be the Traytor except Iohn , yea some hold that Iohn knew it not . That Christs words to Iudas , Thou hast said , did not make known to the Apostles that he was the Traitor , and if they had , yet ( by their principles who hold that Iudas received the Sacrament ) these words were not spoken before the Sacrament . Divers Authors hold that Iudas was a secret ▪ not a scandalous sinner , at that time when it is supposed he received the Sacrament , yea M. Prynne himselfe holdeth so in another place . He loseth much by proposing as a president to Ministers what Christ did to Iudas in the last Supper . Christ did upon the matter excommunicate Iudas ; which many gather from these words , That thou dost doe quickly . And if Christ had admitted him to the Sacrament , it could be no president to us . CHAP. XI . Whether it be a full discharge of duty to admonish a scandalous person of the danger of unworthy communicating ? And whether a Minister in giving him the Sacrament after such admonition , be no way guilty ? Mr Prynne doth here mistake his marke , or not hit it , whether the Question be stated in reference to the Censure of Suspension , or in reference to the personall duty of the Minister . Five duties of the Minister in this businesse beside Admonition . Admonition no Church censure , properly . Six conclusions promised by M Prynne , examined . His Syllogism concerning the true right of all visible members of the visible Church to the Sacrament discussed . Four sorts of persons , beside children and fooles , not able to examine themselves , and so not to be admitted to the Lords Supper , by that limitation which M. Prynne yeedeth . His Argument from the admission of carnall persons to Baptisme , upon a meere externall sleight profession , answered . His eleven reasons for the affirmative of this present Question answered . The Erastian Argument from 1 Cor. 11. 28. Let a man examine himselfe , not others , nor others him , faileth many waies . M. Prynne endeavours to pacifie the consciences of Ministers by perswading them to believe , that a scandalous person is outwardly fitted and prepared for the Sacrament . How dangerous a way it is to give the Sacrament to a scandalous person , upon hopes that Omnipotency can at that instant change his heart and his life . Of a mans eating and drinking judgement to himselfe . CHAP. XII . Whether the Sacrament of the Lords Supper be a converting or regenerating Ordinance . Mr Prynne in this controversie joyneth not onely with the more rigid Lutherans , but with the Papists . The testimonies of Calvin , Bullinger , Ursinus , Musculus , Bucerus , Festus Honnius , Aretius , Vossius , Pareus , the Belgicke confession , and forme of administration , the Synod of Dort , Gerhardus , Walaeus , Chamierus , Polanus , Amesius , are produced against M. Prynne , all these and many others denying the Lords Supper to be a converting Ordinance . How both Lutherans and Papists state their controversie with Calvinists ( as they call them ) concerning the efficacy of the Sacraments . M. Prynnes distinctions of two sorts of conversion , and two sorts of sealing , being duely examined , doe but the more open his errour instead of covering it . Of the words Sacrament and Seale : concerning which M. Prynne as he leaneth toward the Socinian opinion , so he greatly cals in question that truth , without the knowledge whereof the Ordinance of Parliament appointeth men to be kept backe from the Sacrament . Foure distinctions of my own premised , that the true state of the Question may be rightly apprehended . The 1. Distinction between the absolute power of God , and the revealed will of God. 2. Between the Sacrament it selfe , and other Ordinances which doe accompany it . 3. Between the first grace , and the following graces . 4. Between visible Saints and invisible Saints . CHAP. XIII . Twenty Arguments to prove that the Lords Supper is not a converting Ordinance . 1. FRom the nature of signes instituted to signifie the being or having of a thing . The significancy of Sacraments à parte ante . 2. Sacraments suppose faith and an interest had in Christ , therefore doe not give it . 3. The Lords Supper gives the new food , therefore it supposeth the new life . 4. It is a seale of the righteousnesse of faith , therefore instituted for justified persons onely . 5. From the example of Abrahams Justification before circumcision . 6. From the duty of self-examination , which an unregenerate person cannot performe . 7. From the necessity of the wedding garment . 8. Faith comes by hearing , not by seeing or receiving . 9. Neither promise nor example in Scripture of conversion by the Lords Supper . 10. Every unconverted and unworthy person , if he come ( while such ) to the Lords Table ) cannot but eate and drink unworthily , therefore ought not to come . 11. The wicked have no part in an Eucharisticall consolatory Ordinance . 12. Christ calleth none to this Feast but such as have spirituall gracious qualifications . 13. They that are visibly no Saints , ought not to partake in the Communion of Saints . 14. Baptisme it selfe ( at least when administred to persons of age ) is not a regenerating , but a sealing Ordinance . 15. From the necessity of the precedency of Baptisme before the Lords Supper . 16. From the method of the Parable of the lost sonne . 17. From the doctrinall dehorting of all impenitent unworthy persons from comming to the Sacrament , unlesse they repent , reforme , &c. ( allowed by M. Prynne himselfe ) which a Minister may not doe , if it be a converting Ordinance . 18. From the incommunicablenesse of this Ordinance to Pagans , or to excommunicated Christians for their conversion . 19. From the instrumentall causality of a converting Ordinance , which in order doth not follow , but precede conversion , and therefore is administred to men , not qua penitent , but qua impenitent , which can not be said of the Sacrament . 20. Antiquity against M. Prynne in this point . Witnesse the Sancta Sanctis . Witnesse also Dionysius Areopagita , Justin Martyr , Chrysostome , Augustine , Isidorus Pelusiot●… , Prosper , Beda , Isidorus Hispalensis , Rabanus Maurus , besides Scotus , Alensis , and other Schoolmen . CHAP. XIV . Master Prynne his twelve Arguments brought to prove that the Lords Supper is a converting Ordinance , discussed and answered . HIs first Argument answered by three distinctions . His second proveth nothing against us , but yeeldeth somewhat which is for us . His third charged with divers absurdities . His fourth concerning the greatest proximity and most immediate presence of God , and of Christ in the Sacrament retorted against himselfe , and moreover not proved nor made good by him . His fifth Argument hath both universall grace and other absurdities in it . His sixth concerning conversion by the eye , by the booke of nature , by Sacrifices , by Miracles , as well as by the eare , examined and confuted in the particulars . His seventh not proved . Nor yet his eighth , concerning conversion by afflictions without the word . His ninth concerning the rule of contraries is misapplied by him . His tenth concerning the ends of the Sacrament yeeldeth the cause and mireth himselfe . His eleventh a grosse petitio principii . His twelfth appealing to the experience of Christians , rectified in the state , and repelled for the weight . That this debate concerning the nature , end use , and effect of the Sacrament , doth clearely cast the ballance of the wholecontroversie concerning Suspension . Lucas Osiander cited by M. Prynne against us , is more against himselfe . CHAP. XV. Whether the admission of scandalous and notorious sinners to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , be a pollution and prophanation of that holy Ordinance ? And in what respects it may be so called ? THe true state of this Question cleared by five distin●ions . Nine Arguments to prove the affirmative . That the admitting of the scandalous and prophane to the Sacrament gives the lie to the word preached , and looseth those whom the word binddeth . That it is a strengthning of the hands of the wicked T is a prophanation of Baptisme to baptise a Catechumene Jew , or a Pagan , being of a known prophane life , although he were able to make confession of the true faith by word of mouth . That such as are found unable to examine themselves ( whether through naturall or sinfull disability ) or manifestly unwilling to it , ought not to be admitted to the Lords Supper . The reason for keeping backe children and fooles holds stronger for keeping back known prophane persons . Hag. 2. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14. explained . A debate upon Matth. 7. 6. Give not that which is holy to dogs , &c wherein M. Prynne is confuted from Scripture , from Antiquity , from Erastus also and Grotius . CHAP. XVI . An Argument of Erastus ( drawn from the Baptisme of John ) against the excluding of scandalous sinners from the Lords Supper , examined . THat Iohn baptised none but such as confessed their sinnes , and did outwardly appeare penitent . T is a great question whether those Pharisees who came to his Baptisme , Matth. 3. were baptised . The coincidency of that story Matth. 3. with the message of the Pharisees to Iohn Baptist , Ioh. 1. The Argument retorted . CHAP. XVII . Antiquity for the Suspension of all scandalous persons from the Sacrament , even such as were admitted to other publique Ordinances . O● the foure degrees of Penitents in the ancient Church and of the Suspension of some unexcommunicated persons from the Lords Supper who did joyn with the Church in the hearing of the word and prayer . Proved out of the ancient Canons of the Councels of Ancyra , Nice , Arles , the sixth and eighth General Councels , out of Gregorius Thaumaturgus , and Basilius Magnus , confirmed also out of Zonaras , Balsamon , Albaspin●…us . The Suspension of all sorts of scandalous sinners in the Church from the Sacrament further confirmed out of Isidorus Pelusiota , Dionysius Areopagita with his Scholiast Maximus , and his paraphrast Pachimeres . Also out of Cyprian , Justin Martyr , Chrysostome , Ambrose , Augustine , Gregorius Magnus , Walafridus Strabo . CHAP. XVIII . A discovery of the instability and loosenesse of M. Prynne his principles , even to the contradicting of himselfe in twelve particulars . AN Argument hinted by M. Prynne from the gathering together all guests to the wedding Supper , both bad and good , examined , and foure answers made to it . That M. Prynne doth professe and pretend to yeeld the thing for which his Antagonists contend with him , but indeed doth not yeeld it : his Concessions being clogged with such things as do evacuate and frustrate all Church Discipline . That M. Prynne contradicteth himselfe in twelve particulars . Foure Counter-quaerees to him . A discourse of M. Fox the Author of the Booke of Martyrs , concerning three sorts of persons who are unwilling that there should be a Discipline or power of Censures in the Church . The Names of Writers or Workes cited and made use of in this Tractate . IS . Abrabanel Melchier Adamus Ainsworth Aeschines Albaspinaeus Albinus Flaccus Alcuinus Alex. Alensis Algerus Ambrosius Ambrose the Monke Ammonius Alexandrinus Ampsin●ius Dutch Annotations English Annotations Apoll●nius Aquinas Arabick N. T. Aretius Arias Montanus Aristótle Arnobius Irish Articles of faith Augustinus Azorius B BAlsamon Io. Baptista derubcis Baronius Basilius Magnus M r Bayne Becanus Becmanus Beda Bellarmine Bertramus Beza Bilson Brentius Brochmand Brughton Mart. Bucerus Gers. Bucerus Budoeus Bulling●r Buxtorff C CAbeljavius Cajetanus Calvin I. Camero Camerarius Canons of the African Church . L. Capellus D. Carthusianus Cartwright I. Casaubon The Magdeburgian Centurists Chaldee Paraphrase Chami●rus Chemnitius Chrysostomus D. Chytraeus Is. Clarus Fr. à S. Clara Clemens Clemens Alexandrinus Nic. de Clemangis Iudocus Clichtoveus I. Cloppenburgius I. Coch M r Coleman A●gid de Coninck Barthol . Coppen Balthasar ●orderius Corpus Disciplinae M r Cotoon Tomes of Councels Richardus Cowsin Cyprian Cyrill . D DAn●us R. David Ganz . Demos●henes M. David Dickson Didoclavius Lud. de Dieu Mich. Dilherrus Di●dati The Directory of both Kingdomes Dio●yfins 〈◊〉 Syn●d of Dort Iesuits of Doway I. Drusius Du●renus Durandus Duran●s E ELias R. Eli●ser C ● Empereur Erastus Erasmus C. Espen●us Es●ius Euthymius Aben Ezra F FA●ritius M r Fox Ch. Francken Hist. of the troubles at Franckeford The Disciplin of the reformed Churches of Fran● D r Fulk● G P. Galatinus Phil. Gamachaeus Gelenius Laws and Statu●es of Genevah Genebrardus Geo. Genzius I. ●rhardus Gesnerus S●l . Glassius Godwyn Gomarus Gorranus Gregorius Magnus Gregorius Thaumaturgus Professors of Groning Grotius Gualther H HArmony of confessions Harmonia Synoder●n Belgicarum Haymo Helmichius Hemmiugius Heshusius Hesychius Hier● Hilarius M. Hildersham P. Hinkelmannus Fra● . Holy-Oke 〈◊〉 Honnius H●go de S. Uict●re Hug● Cardi●lis L. Humfredus Aegid . H●ius M. Hussey Hutterus I KIng Iames Iansen●us I'lyricus I●nocentius . 3. Iosephus Iosuae levitae Halichoth Olam . Isidorus Hisp●lensis Isidorus 〈◊〉 Iulius Caesar Fr. Iunius Iustinus Martyr K KE●erm ●nnus D r K●llet C. Kir●erus L COrn . a Lapide Lavater Laurentius de la barre M r Leigh Nieolaus Lambardus Lorinus Luthe●us Lyr● M MAccovius Maimonides Maldonat Man●sseh Ben. Israel Concilia●or Marianae Marlorat Martial M. Martinius P. Martyr Maximus Medina Meisnerus Menochius Mercerus P. Maulin Munsterus Musculus N G. Nazianzen I. Newenklaius Nonnus Novarinus O OEcumenius Origen Luc. Osiander P PAchymeres M r Paget : Pagnin Paraeus Parker Pasor Pelargus Pellicanus Pemble Philo the Iew Piscator Plato Polanus M r Prynne R RAbanus Maurus Raynolds The Remonstran●s Revius Rittangelius D. Rivetus Rupertus Tuitiensis M. Rutherfurd S EManuel Sa Salmasius Salmeron M. Sal●marsh Sanctius Saravia I. Scaliger Scapula Schindlerus Ionas Schlichtingius The Booke of Discipline of Scotland Scotus Subtilis M. Selden The 〈◊〉 ●eius F. Socin●s ●ipingius Fr. Spanbemi●t Spelman Stegmannus Strigelius Suarez Suidas Su●livius Syariac● N. T. T TAcianus The Talmud Tannerus Tertullian Theodoretus Theophylactus Tilenus Tirinus Titus Bostrorum Episcapus Toletus Tostatus Tossanus Trelcatius Triglandius Tully W WAlaeus Walafridus Strabo M r Io. Welsh Mr Iohn Wey●es of Craigton Mr Iohn Weimes of Latho●ker Westhemerus Whitgift Whittakerus Willet I. Winkelmannus Wolphius V GR. de Valentia Vatablus Uazquez Uedelius Uictor Antiochenus Gisb. V●etius Gul. Vorstius Hen. Vorstius Ger●ardus Uossius Dionysius Vossius Ursinus Z ZAnc●ius Zepperus Zon●ras Z●inglius . Aarons Rod blossoming : OR , The Divine Ordinance of Church-government VINDICATED . The first Booke . Of the Jewish Church-government . CHAP. I. That if the Erastians could prove what they alledge concerning the Iewish Church Government , yet in that particular the Iewish Church could not be a president to the Christian. OBserving that very much of Erastus his strength , and much of his followers their confidence , lie●h in the old Testament , and Jewish Church , which ( as they averre ) knew no such distinction , as Civill Government , and Church Government ; Civill Justice , and Church Discipline ; I have thought good , first of all , to remove that great stumbling-block , that our way may afterward lie fair and plain before us . I doe heartily acknowledge , that what we finde to have been an Ordinance , or an approved practice in the Jewish Church , ought to be a rule and patterne to us , such things onely excepted which were typicall , or temporall , that is , for which there were speciall reasons proper to that infancy of the Church , and not common to us . Now , if our opposites could prove that the Jewish Church was nothing but the Jewish State , and that the Jewish Church-government , was nothing but the Jewish State-government , and that the Jewes had never any supreame Sanhedrin but one onely , and that civil , and such as had the temporall coercive power of Magistracy ( which they will never be able to prove ) yet there are divers con●iderable reasons , for which that could be no president to us . First , Casaubon exerc . 13. anno 31. num . 10. proves out of Maimonides , that the Sanhedrin was to be made up ( if possible ) wholly of Priests and Levites ; and that if so many Priests and Levites could not be found , as were fit to be of the Sanhedrin , in that case some were assumed out of other Tribes . Howbeit I hold not this to be agreeable to the first institution of the Sanhedrin . But thus much is certaine , that Priests and Levites were members of the Jewish Sanhedrin , and had an authoritative decisive suffrage in making decrees , and inflicting punishments , as well as other members of the Sanhedrin . Philo the Jew de vita Mosis pag. 530. saith that he who was found gathering sticks upon the Sabbath , was brought ad principem & sacerdotum consistorium , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . that is , to the Prince or chiefe Ruler ( meaning Moses ) together with whom the Priests did sit and judge in the Sanhedrin . Jehosaphat did set of the Levites , of the Priests , and of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel , for the judgement of the Lord , &c. 2 Chro. 19. 8. Secondly , the people of Israel had Gods own Judiciall Law given by Moses , for their civill Law : and the Priests and Levites in stead of civill Lawyers . Thirdly , the Sanhedrin did punish no man , unlesse admonition had been first given to him for his amendment . Maimon . de fundam . legis cap. 5. sect . 6. ( yea saith Gul. Vorstius upon the place , though a man had killed his parents , the Sanhedrin did not punish him unlesse he were first admonished ) and when witnesses were examined , seven questions were propounded to them , one of which was , whether they had admonished the offender , as the Talmud it self tels us ad tit . Sanhedrin cap. 5. sect . 1. Fourthly , the Sanhedrin respondebat de Jure , did interpret the Law of God , and determine controversies , concerning the sence and intent thereof . Deut. 17. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11. and it was on this manner as the Ierusalem Talmud in Sanhedrin cap. 10. sect . 2. records . There were there ( in Ierusalem ) three assemblies of Iudges : one sitting at the entry to the mountaine of the Sanctuary : another sitting at the doore of the Court : the third sitting in the Conelave made of cut stone . First , addresse was made to that which sate at the ascent of the mountaine of the Sanctuary : then the Elder ( who came to represent the cause which was too hard for the Courts of the Cities ) said on ●…his manner . I have drawne this sence from the holy Scripture , my fellows have drawn that sence . I have taught thus , my f●…llows so and so . If they had learned what is to be determined in that cause , they did communicate it unto them . If not , they went forward together to the Iudges sitting at the doore of the Court : by whom they were instructed , if they ( after the laying forth of the difficulty ) knew what resolution to give . Otherwise all of them jointly had recourse to the great Sanhedrin . For from it doth the Law go forth unto all Israel . It is added in Exc. Gemar . Sanhed . cap. 10. sect . 1. that the Sanhedrin did sit in that roome of cut stone ( which was in the Temple ) from the morning to the evening daily sacrifice . The Sanhedrin did judge cases of Idolatry , apostasie , false Prophets , &c. Talm. Hieros . in Sanhed . cap. 1. sect . 5. Now all this being unquestionably true of the Jewish Sanhedrin : if we should suppose , that they had no supreme Sanhedrin but that which had the power of civill Magistracy , then I aske where is that Christian State , which was , or is , or ought to be moulded according to this patterne . Must Ministers have vote in Parliament ? Must they be civill Lawyers ? must all criminall and capitall Judgements be according to the Judiciall Law of Moses , and none otherwise ? Must there be no civill punishment , without previous admonition of the offender ? Must Parliaments sit , as it were in the Temple of God , and interpret Scripture , which sence is true , and which false , and determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience , and judge of all false doctrines ? yet all this must be , if there be a paralell made with the Jewish Sanhedrin . I know some divines hold , that the Judiciall Law of Moses , so far as concerneth the punishments of sins against the morall ●aw , Idolatry , blasphemy , Sabbath-breaking , adultery , theft , &c. ought to be a rule to the Christian Magistrate . and for my part , I wish more respect were had to it , and that it were more consulted with . This by the way . I am here only shewing , what must follow , if the Jewish Government be taken for a pr●sident , without making a dis●inction of Civil & Church government . Surely , the consequences will be such , as I am sure our opposites will never admit of , and some of which ( namely concerning the civill places or power of Ministers , and concerning the Magistrates authority to interpret Scripture ) ought not to be admitted . Certainly , if it should be granted that the Jewes had but one Sanhedrin , yet there was such an intermixture ●of Civill and Ecclesiasticall both persons and proceedings , that there must be a partition made of that power , which the Jewish Sanhedrin did exercise , which ( taken whole and entire together ) can neither sute to our Civill nor to our Ecclesiasticall Courts . Nay , while the Erastians appeale to the Jewish Sanhedrin ( suppose it now to be but one ) they doe thereby ingage themselves to grant unto Church officers a share at least ( yea a great share ) in Ecclesiasticall government : for so they had in the Supreme Sanhedrin of the Jewes . And further the Jewes had their Synagoga magna , which Grotius on Matth. 10. 17. distinguisheth from the Sanhedrin of 71. for both Prophets and others of place and power among the people praeter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , besides the members of that Sanhedrin were members of that extraordinary assembly , which was called the great Synagogue , such as that Assembly Ezra 10. which did decree forfeiture and separation from the Congregation , to be the punishment of such as would not gather themselves unto Ierusalem : in which assembly were others beside those of the Sanhedrin . Of the men of the great Synagogue I read in Tzemach David pag. 56. ●…dit . Hen. Vors . that they did receive the traditions from the Prophets ; and it is added Viri Synagogae magnae ordinarunt nobis preces nostras . The men of the great Synagogue did appoint unto us our prayers , meaning their Liturgies , which they fancy to have been so instituted . The Hebrews themselves controvert , whether all the men of the great Synagogue did live at one and the same time , or successively ; but that which is most received among them , is , that these men did flourish all at one time , as is told us in the passage last cited , where also these are named as men of the great Synagogue , Haggai , Zechariah , Malachi , Zerubbabel , Mordechai , Ezra , Jehoshua , Seria , Rehaliah , Misphar , Rechum , Nehemias . Rambam addeth , Chananiah , Mischael , and Azariah . Finally , as Prophets , Pries●s , and Scribes of the Law of God had an interest in the Synagoga magna after the Captivity , so we read of occasionall and extraordinary Ecclesiasticall Synods before the Captivity , as that assembly of the Priests and Levites under Hezekiah , 2 Chro. 29. 4. 15. and that erring Synod of the 400 Prophets , 1 Kings 22. 6. Herod also gathered together the chiefe Priests and Scribes , Matth. 2. 4. I conclude , that if it should be granted there was no Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes , distinct from the civill , yet as the necessity of a distinct Ecclesiasticall Government among us , is greater then it was among them ( in respect of the foure considerations above mentioned ) so likewise the Priests had a great deale more power and authority in the Jewish Church , ( not onely by occasionall Synods , but by their interest in Synagoga magna , and in the civill Sanhedrin it selfe ) then the Erastians are willing that Church officers should have in the Christian Church . CHAP. II. That the Iewish Church was formally distinct from the Iewish State or Common-wealth . IT hath been by some ( with much confidence and scorne of all who say otherwise ) averred that Excommunication and Church-government distinct from the Civill , hath no patterne for it in the Jewish Church . I am sure ( saith M r Coleman in his Brotherly examination re-examined , pag. 16. ) the best reformed Church that ever was went this way , I meane the Church of Israel , which had no distinction of Church government and Civill government . Hast thou appealed unto Caesar ? unto Caesar shalt thou goe . Have you appealed to the Jewish Church ? thither shall you goe . Wherefore I shall endeavour to make these five things appeare : 1. That the Jewish Church was formally 〈◊〉 from the Jewish State. 2. That there was an Eccle●iasticall Sanhedrin and Government distinct from the Civill . 3. That there was an Ecclesiasticall Excommunication , 〈◊〉 from Civill punishments . 4. That in the Jewish Church there was also a publike exomologesis or declaration of repentance , and thereupon a reception or admission againe of the offender to fellowship with the Church in the holy things . 5. That there was a suspension of the prophane from the Temple and Passeover . First , the Jewish Church was formally di●tinct from the Jewish State. I say formally , because ordinarily they were not distinct materially , the same persons being members of both . But formally they were distinct , ( as now the Church and State are distinct among us Christians . ) 1. In respect of distinct lawes ; the Ceremoniall Law was given to them in reference to their Church state , the Judiciall Law was given to them in reference to their Civill State. Is. Abrabanel de capite fidei cap. 13. putteth this difference between the Lawes given to Adam and to the sonnes of Noah , and the divine Law given by Moses : that those Laws were given for conservation of humane society and are in the classis of Judiciall or civill Laws . But the divine Law given by Moses , doth direct the soule to its last perfection and end . I doe not approve the difference which he puts between these Lawes . This onely I note , that he distinguisheth Judiciall or Civill Laws for conservation of society , ( though given by God ) from those Laws which are given to perfect the soule , and to direct it to its last end , such as he conceives the whole morall and ceremoniall Law of Moses to be ▪ Halichoth Olam tract . 5. cap. 2. tels us that such and such Rabbies were followed in the ceremoniall Lawes : other Rabbies followed in the Judiciall Lawes . 2. In respect of distinct acts : they did not worship God and offer Sacrifices in the Temple , nor call upon the name of Lord , nor give thanks , nor receive the Sacraments as that State , but as that Church . They did not punish evill doers by mulcts , imprisonment , banishment , burning , stoning , hanging , as that Church , but as that State. 3. In respect of controversi●s ; some causes and controversies did concerne the Lords matters , some the Kings matters , 2 Chro. 19. 11. To judge between blood and blood was one thing . To judge between Law and Commandement , between Statut●s and judgements ; that is , to give the true sence of the Law of God when it was controverted , was another thing . 4. In respect of Officers : the Priests and L●vites were Church-officers . Magistrates and Judges not so , but were Ministers of the State. The Priests might not take the Sword out of the hand of the Magistrates . The Magistrates might not offer Sacrifice nor exercise the Priests office . 5. In respect of continuance , when the Romans tooke away the Jewish State and civill Government , yet the Jewish Church did remaine , and the Romans did permit them the liberty of their religion . And now though the Jewes have no Jewish State , yet they have Jewish Churches . Whence it is , that when th●y tell where one did or doth live , they doe not mention the Town , but the Church : In the holy Church at Uenice , at Frankford , &c. See Buxtorf . lex . Rabin . pag. 1983. 6. In respect of variation . The constitution and Government of the Jewish State was not the same , but different , under Moses and Ioshua , under the Iudges , under the Kings , and after the Captivity . But we cannot say , that the Church was new modelld as oft as the State was . 7. In respect of members . For as a M. Selden hath very well observed concerning that sort of Proselytes , who had the name of Pr●…selyti Justitiae ; they were initiated into the Jewish religion by Circumcision , Baptisme , and Sacrifice : and they were allowed not onely to worship God apart by themselves , but also to come into the Church and Congregation of Israel , and to be called by the name of Jewes : neverthelesse they were res●rained and secluded from Dignities , Magistracies and preferments in the Jewish Republique , and from divers marriages , which were free to the Israelites : Even as strangers initiated and associated into the Church of Rome , have not therefore the priviledge of Roman Citizens . Thus M. Selden , who hath thereby made it manifest , that there was a dis●iuction of the Jewish Church and Jewish State , because those Proselytes b being imbodied into the Jewish Church as Church members , and having a right to communicate in the holy Ordinances among the rest of the people of God , yet were not properly members of the Jewish State , nor admitted to Civill priviledges : Whence it is also that the names of Jewes and Proselytes were used distinctly , Acts 2. 10. CHAP. III. That the Iewes had an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin and Government distinct from the Civill . I Come to the second point , that there was an Ecclesiasticall government , and an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jews . This distinction of the two Sanhedrins , the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall , is maintained by Zepperus de polit . eccles . l. 3. cap. 7. Iunius in Deut. 17. Piscator ibid. Wolphius in 2. Reg. 23. Gerhard Harm . de pass . cap. 8. G●…dwin Moses and Aaron lib. 5. cap. 1. Bucerus de gubern . eccl . pag. 61 , 62. Walaeus Tom. 2. pag. 9. Pelargus in Deut. 17. Sopingius ad bonam fidem Sibrandi pag. 261. et seq . The Dutch Annotations on Deut. 17. & 2 Chron. 19. Bertramus de polit . Jud. cap. 11. Ap●…llonii jus Majest . part . 1. p. 374. Strigelius in 2. Paralip . cap. 19. The professours of Groning . ( Vide Judicium facult . Theol. academiae Groninganae , apud Cabeljav . def . potest . Eccl. pag. 54. ) I remember Raynolds in the Conference with Hart is of the same opinion . Also M. Paget in his defence of Church government , pag. 41. Besides divers others . I shall onely adde the Testimony of Constantinus L'Empereur , a man singularly well acquainted with the Jewish antiquities , who hath expressed himselfe concerning this point both in his Annotations upon Bertram pag. 389. and Annot. in Cod. Middoth . pag. 187 , 188. The latter of these two passages you have here in the c Margin , expressing not only his opinion , but the ground of it . And it is no obscure footstep of the Ecclefiasticall Sanhedrin , d which is cited out of Elias , by D. Buxtorf in his Lexicon Chald. Talmud . & Rabbin . p. 1514. The first institution of an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin appeareth to me to be held forth Exod. 24. 1. where God saith to Moses , Come up unto the Lord , thou and Aaron , Nad●… and Abihu , and seventy of the Elders of Israel . It is a controversie among Interpreters who those seventy Elders were . f Tostatus maketh it cleare , that they were not the seventy Elders chosen for the government of the Common-wealth , Num 11. Nor yet the Judges chosen by the advice of Iethro , Exod. 18. Nor yet any other Judges which had before time Judged the people . These three negatives Willet upon the place holdeth with Tostatus . Not the first : for this was done at Mount Sinai , shortly after their comming out of Egypt . But on the twenty day of the second moneth , in the second yeere , they tooke their journey from Sinai to the Wildernesse of Paran , Num. 10. 11 , 12. and there pitched at Hibroth-hattaavath Num. 33. 16. where the seventy Elders were chosen to relieve Moses of the burthen of Government . So that this election of seventy Exod. 24. was before that election of seventy Num 11. Not the second : for this election of seventy Exod. 24. was before that election of Judges by Iethros advice Exod. 18. Iethro himselfe not having come to Moses till the end of the first yeere , or the beginning of the second yeere after the comming out of Egypt , and not before the giving of the Law : which Tostatus proves by this argunent , The Law was given the third day , after they came to Sinai ; but it was impossible that Iethro should in the space of three daies , heare that Moses and the people of Israel were in the wildernesse of Sinai , and come there unto them , that Moses should goe forth and meet him , and receive him , and entertaine him ; that Iethro should observe the manner of Moses his government , in litigious judgement from morning till evening , and give counsell to rectifie it ; that Moses should take course to helpe it ; how could all this be done in those three daies , which were also appointed for sanctifying the people against the receiving of the Law ? Therefore g he concludeth that the story of Iethro Exod. 18. is an anticipation . Lastly , he saith , the seventy Elders mentioned Exod. 24. could not be Judges who did judge the people before Iethro came , because Iethro did observe the whole burthen of government did lie upon Moses alone , and there were no other Judges . Now it is to be observed , that the seventy Elders chosen and called Exod. 24. were also invested with h authority in judging controversies , wherein Aaron or Hur were to preside vers . 14. They are joyned with Aaron , Nadad , and Abihu , and are called up as a Representative of the whole Church , when God was making a Covenant with his people . T is after the Judiciall lawes , Exod. 21. & 22. & 23. and that 24 Chapter is a transition to the ceremoniall lawes concerning the worship of God , and structure of the Tabernacle , which are to follow . Neither had the seventy Elders ( of which now I speake ) any share of the Supreme civill Government , to judge hard Civill causes , and to receive appeals concerning those things from the inferiour Judges ; for all this did still lie upon Moses alone , Num. 11. 14. Furthermore they saw the glory of the Lord , and were admitted to a sacred banquet , and to eat of the Sacrifices in his presence Exod. 24. 5 , 10 , 11. and were thereby confirmed in their calling . All which laid together may seem to amount to no lesse then a solemne interesting and investing of them into an Ecclesiasticall authority . The next proofe for the Ecclesiasticall Sanhed●in shall be taken from Deut. 17. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12. where observe 1. T is agreed upon both by Jewish and Christian Expositors , that this place holds forth a supreme civill Court of Judges , and the authority of the civill Sanhedrin is mainly grounded on this very Text. Now if this Text hold forth a superior civill Jurisdiction ( as is universally acknowledged ) it holds forth also a superior Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction distinct from the Civill . For the Text carrieth the authority and sentence of the Priests as high , as the authority and sentence of the Judges , and that in a disjunctive way , as two powers , ( not one ) and each of them binding , respectively , and in its proper sphere . 2. The Hebrew Doctors tell us of three kinds of causes , which being found difficult were transmitted from the inferiour Courts to those at Ierusalem . 1. capitall causes . 2. mulcts . 3. leprosie , and the judgement of clean or unclean . Now this third belonged to the cognizance and judgement of the Priests . Yea the Text it self holdeth forth two sorts of causes , and controversies , some forensicall between blood and blood : some ceremoniall between stroke and stroke ; not onely Hierome , but the Chaldee , and Greek , readeth , between leprosie and leprosie . Grotius noteth , the Hebrew word is used for leprosie , many times in one chapter , Lev. 13. Plea and plea seemeth common to both , there being difference of judgement concerning the one and the other . 3. Here are two Iudicatories distinguished by the disjunctive Or V. 12. which we have both in the Hebrew , Chaldee , Greek , and in our English Translation ; so that vers . 9. and is put for or , as Grotius noteth , expounding that verse by vers . 12. And as the Priests and Levites are put in the plurall V. 9. the like must be understood of the Iudge , whereby we must understand Iudges , and so the Chaldee readeth V. 9. even as ( saith Ainsworth ) many Captains are in the Hebrew called an head , 1 Chron. 4. 42. And so you have there , references of difficult cases from inferior Courts , to the Priests or to the Judges at Ierusalem . 4. There is also some intimation of a twofold sentence ; one concerning the meaning of the Law , according to the sentence of the Law , which they shall teach thee , V. 11. and this belonged to the Priests , Mal. 2. 7. for the Priests ( it s not said the Judges ) lips should preserve knowledge , and they should seek the Law at his mouth . Another concerning matter of fact , and according to the judgement which they shall tell thee , thou shalt do . Grotius upon the place acknowledgeth a udgement of the Priests distinct from that of the Judges : and he add●th a simile from the Roman Synod consisting of seventy Bishops which was consulted in weighty controversies . But he is of opinion that the Priests and Levites did onely end avour to satisfie and reconcile the dissenting parties , which if they did , well , if not , that then they referred the reasons of both parties to the Sanhedrin , who gave forth their decree upon the whole matter . The first part of that which he saith , helpeth me . But this last hath no ground in the Text , but is manife●ly inconsistent therewith , V. 12. The man that will doe presumptuously , and will not hearken unto the Priest , or unto the Judge , even that man shall die . Which proves , i that the judgement of both was supreme in suo genere , that is , if it was a controver●e ceremoniall , between leprosie and leprosie , or between clean and unclean , Lev. 10. 9 , 10 , 11. Ezech. 22. 26. or dogmaticall and doctrinall , concerning the sence of the Law , and answering de Jure , when the sence of the Law was controverted by the Iudges of the Cities , then he that would not stand to the sentence of the Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin , whereof the high Priest was pre●dent , was to die the death . But if the cause was criminall , as between blood and blood , wherein the nature or proofe of the fact , could not be agreed upon , by the Judges of the Cities , then he that would not submit to the decree of the civill Sanhedrin at I●…rusalem should die the death . And thus the English Divines in their late annotations , give the sence according to the disjunction , V. 12. While the Priest bringeth warrant from God for the sentenee which he passeth in the cause of man , Ezech. 44. 23 , 24. he that contumaciously disobeyeth him disobeyeth God , Luke 10. 16. Matth. 10. 14. The cause is alike if the just sentence of a competent Judge be contemned in secular effaires . In the third place , we read that David did thus divide the Levites ( at that time eight and thirty thousand ) foure and twenty thousand of them were to set forward the work of the house of the Lord , foure thousand were porters , and foure thousand praised the Lord with instruments , and six thousand of them were made some schoterim Officers , and some sch●…phtim Judges , 1 Chro. 23. 4. Some understand by Schoterim Rulers , or those who were over the charge . To speak properly schophtim were those that gave sentence ; schoterim those that lookt to the execution of the sentence , and to the keeping of the law , like the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Craecians : ( for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was one thing , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 another . ) So 1 Chro. 26. 29. Chenaniah and his sonnes were for the outward businesse over Israel , fo●… Officers ( or Rulers or over the charge ) and Judges : that is , they were not tied to attendance and service in the Temple , as the Porters and singers , and those that did service about the Sacrifices , Lights , Washings , and such like things in the Temple : but they k were to judge and give sentence concerning the law and the meaning thereof , when any such controversie should be brought before them from any of the Cities in the Land : They were not appointed to be Officers and Judges over the rest of the Levites to keepe them in order ( for which course was taken in another way ) but to be Rulers and Judges over Israel , saith the Text , in the outward businesse which came from without to Ierusalem , in judging of which peradventure they were to attend by course , or as they should be called . If any say that all those Levites who were Judges did not sit in judgement at Ierusalem , but some of them in severall Cities of the Land , that there might be the easier accesse to them ; I can easily grant it , and I verily believe it was so , and it maketh the more for a Church government in particular Cities , which was subordinate to the Ecclesiasticall Sanh d●in at Ierusalem . However the Levites had a ruling power , and Deut. 31. 28. those who are schoterim in the originall , the Septuagints call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Hierome , Doctores , because their Teachers were Officers over the charge , and had a share in Government . Now no man can imagine that there were no other Officers over the charge not Judges in Israel , except the Levites onely ; for it followeth in that same Story , ● Chro. 28. 1. And David assembled all the Princes of Israel , the Princes of the Tribes , and the Captains of the Companies that ministred to the King by course , & the Captains over the thousands , &c. Nor yet wil any man say , that the Levites were Officers over the charge , and Judges of the same kind , in the same manner , or for the same ends , with the civill Rulers and Judges , or the military Commanders ; or that there was no distinction between the ruling power of the Princes , and the ruling power of the Levites . Where then shall the difference lie , if not in this , that there was an Ecclesiasticall Government , besides the Civill and Military ? I grant those Levites did rule and judge not onely in all the businesse of the Lord , but also in the service of the King , 1 Chro. 26. 30 , 32. But the reason was , because the Jewes had no other civill Law , but Gods owne Law , which the Priests and Levites were to expound . So that it was proper for that time , and there is not the like reason that the Ministers of Jesus Christ in the New Testament should judge or rule in civill affairs : ( nay it were contrary to the rule of Christ and his Apostles for us to do so ) yet the Levites their judging and governing in all the bufines of the Lord , is a patterne left for the entrusting of Church officers in the New Testament with a power of Church government : there being no such reason for it , as to make it peculiar to the old Testament , and not common to the New. The fourth Scripture which proves l an Ecclesiasticall government and Sanhedrin , is 2 Chro. 19. 8 , 10 , 11. where Iehoshaphat restoreth the same Church government , which was first instituted by the hand of Moses , and afterward ordered and setled by David . Moreover ( saith the Text ) in Jerusalem did Jehoshaphat set of the Levites , and of the Priests , and of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel , for the judgement of the Lord , and for controversies , &c. It is not controverted whether there was a civill Sanhedrin at Ierusalem , but that which is to be proved from the place , is an Ecclesiasticall Court , which I prove thus . Where there is a Court made up of Ecclesiasticall members , judging Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall causes , for a Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall end , moderated by an Ecclesiasticall president , having power ultimately and authoritatively to determine causes and controversies brought before them by appeale or reference from inferiour Courts ; and whose sentence is put in execution by Ecclesiasticall officers ; There it must needs be granted that there was a supream Ecclesiasticall court , with power of Government . But such a Court we finde at Ierusalem in Iehoshaphats time . Ergo. The Proposition I suppose no man wil deny . For a Court so constituted , so qualified , and so authorised , is the very thing now in debate . And he that will grant us the thing which is in the assumption , shall have leave to call it by another name if he please . The assumption I prove by the parts . 1. Here are Levites and Priests in this Court , as members thereof , with power of decisive suffrage , and with them such of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel , as were joyned in the government of that Church ; Whence the Reverend and learned Assembly of Divines , and many Protestant Writers before them have drawn an argument for Ruling Elders . And this is one of the Scriptures alledged by our Divines against Bellarmin , to prove that others beside those who are commonly ( but corruptly ) called the Clergy ought to have a decisive voyce in Synods . 2. Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall causes were here judged : which are called by the name of the judgement of the Lord , V. 8. and the matters of the Lord distinguished from the Kings matters , V. 11. so V. 10. beside controversies between blood and blood , that is , concerning consanguinity and the interpreting of the Laws concerning forbidden degrees in marriage , ( it being observed by interpreters that all the lawfull or unlawfull degrees are not particularly expressed , but some onely , and the rest were to be judged of by parity of reason , and so it might fall within the cognizance of the Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin . ) Though it may be also expounded otherwise , between blood and blood , that is , Whether the murther was wilfull or casuall , ( which was matter of fact ) the cognisance whereof belonged to the civill Judge ; It is further added between Law and Commandement , Statutes and Judgements : noting seeming contradictions between one Law and another , ( such as Manasseb Ben Israel hath spoken of in his Conciliator ) or when the sence and meaning of the Law is controverted , ( which is not matter of fact , but of right ) wherein speciall use was of the Priests whose lips should preserve knowledge and the Law was to be sought at his mouth , A●…al . 2. 7. and that not onely ministerially and doctrinally , but judicially and in the Sanhedrin at Ierusalem , such controversies concerning the Law of God were brought before them , as in 2 Chro. 19. the place now in hand . Yea shall even warn them , &c. Which being spoken to the Court , must be meant of a synedricall Decree , determining those questions and controversies concerning the Law , which should come before them . As for that distinction in the Text of the Lords matters and the Kings matters , Erastus page 274. saith that by the Lords matters is meant any cause expressed in the Law , which was to be judged . Whereby he takes away the distinction which the Text makes ; for in his sence the Kings matters were the Lords matters . Which himselfe ( it seems ) perceiving , he immediately yeeldeth our interpretation , that by the Lords matters are meant things pertaining to the worship of God ; and by the Kings matters , civill things . Si per illas libet res ad cultum Dei spectantes , per haec res civiles accipere , non pugnabo . If you please ( saith he ) by those , to understand things pertaining to the worship of God , by these , civill things , I will not be against it . 3. It was for a Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall end , ye shall even warne them that they trespasse not against the Lord. It s not said against one another , but against the Lord , for two reasons . 1. Because mention had been made of the Commandements , Statutes , and Iudgements , after the generall word Law , V. 10. by which names Interpreters use to understand ( both in this and many other places of Scripture ) the Lawes morall , Ceremoniall and Judiciall . Now the case to be judged might be part of the Ceremoniall Law , having reference to God and his Ordinances ; and not part of the Judiciall law , or any injury done by a man to his neighbour . And in refer●nce to the morall Law it might ●e a trespasse against the first Table , not against the second . 2. Even in the case of a personall or civill injury , or whatso●ver the controversie was that was brought before them , they were to warn the Judges in the Cities not to trespasse against the Lord by mistaking or mis-understanding the Law , or by righting mens wrongs so as to wrong Divine right . And for that end they were to determine the Ius , and the intendment of the law , when it was controverted . 4. Whatsoever cause of their brethren that dwelt in the Cities , should come unto them , V. 10. ( whether it should come by appeale , or by reference and arbitration ) this Court at Ierusalem was to give out an ultimate and authoritative determination of it . So that what was brought from inferiour courts to them , is brought no higher to any other Court. 5. This Court had an Ecclesiasticall Prolocutor or moderator , V. 11. Amariah the chiefe Priest is over you in all matters of the Lord : Whereas Zebadiah the Ruler of the house of Iudah , was Speaker in the civill Sanhedrin for all the Kings matters . Amariah and Zebadiah were not onely with the Sanhedrin , as members , or as Councellors , but over them as Presidents . Eis summos Magistratus ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) ex amicorum numero praeposuit , Amasiam Sacerdotem , & ex Judae tribu Zebadiam , saith Iosephus antiq . l. 9. cap. 1. Erastus confesseth pag. 273. that both of them were Presidents set over the Sanhedrin . and pag. 275. Si Sacerdotem in Dei nomine , Zebadiam autem Regis praesedisse affirmetur , non refragabor . He confesseth also , that the one was more especially to take care of the Lords matters , the other of the Kings matters . What then ? He saith they were Presidents both of them to the whole Sanhedrin , not the one to one number , and the other to another . Yet in this he yeeldeth also p. 273. Quanquam non peccet forte , qui Senatores hos per officia distributos di●…at , ut alii magis haec , alii magis illa negotia tractarint . Whosoever denieth that that place proveth two distinct Courts , he may be convinced from this one reason , and I shall say to him in the words of Bildad , Jo●… 〈◊〉 . 8. Enquire I pray thee of the former age , and prepare thy selfe to the s●…arch of their fathers : and in the Prophets words , Ierem. 2. 10. Passe over the Isles of Chittim , and see , and send unto Kedar and consider diligently : and see if there be such a thing . Where was it ever heard of , that a Priest was President of a Cou●t , and that in sacred things and causes ; that a civill Magistrate was president of a Court , and that in civill causes : and yet not two Courts , but one Court ? If both Courts had materially consisted of the same members , of the same Priests , and of the same fathers of Israel , ( which yet cannot be proved ) this very diversification of the Presidents , and of the subject matter , ( if there were no more ) will prove two Courts formally distinct . Even as now among our selves the same men may be members of two , or three , or foure , or more Courts , but the distinction of Presidents , and of the subject matter , maketh the Court distinct . 6. Here were also Ecclesiasticall Officers , vers . 11. also the Levites shall be officers before you . As before 1 Chro. 23. & 26. some of the Levites were schophtim Judges to give sentence , others schoterim , officers to see that sentence put in execution , and to cause those that were refractory to obey it , ( so doe the Hebrews distinguish these two words ) so it was here also , some of the Levites appointed to judge , V. 8. some to doe the part of Officers in point of execution of Ecclesiasticall censures , for they could not , nor might not compell men by the civill Sword. The same name is given to military Officers who prosecute the commands of authority , Iosh. 1. 10. And so much of this fourth . The fifth place which I take to hold forth that distinction of Courts and Jurisdictions is Ierem. 26 , where first the Prophet is taken into the Court of the Priests and Prophets , for which the Chaldee readeth Scribes , whose office it was to be Doctors of the law , and to resolve the difficult cases , and in that capacity they were members of Ecclesiasticall councels , Matth. 2. 4. To the same sence saith Diodati , that the Prophets here spoken of , were such as were learned in the law , and had been bred in the Schooles and Colledges of the chiefe Prophets , and in Jeremiahs time were present at Ecclesiasticall judgements and assemblies , 2 Kings 23. 2. as in Christs 〈◊〉 Scribes and Doctors of the Law used to be , who were somewhat like these Prophets . Menochius and others expound it as the Chaldee doth . In this Court Ieremiah was examined and judged as a false Prophet , V. 8. 9. yet though they had judged him worthy to die , the Court of the Princes acquitteth him as a Prophet of the Lord , who had spoken to them in the name of the Lord , V. 10 , 11 , 16. That Ieremiahs cause was twice judged in two distinct Courts , and two different sentences upon it , hath been asserted by divers of the Erastian party to prove appeales from Ecclesiasticall to Civill courts : to which argument I have elsewhere spoken . Onely I take here what they grant , that there were two Courts , and two sentenc●s given , and so it was . The sentence of the Court of the Priests , ( as themselves explaine it , V. 11. ) was this , This man is worthy to die , or as the Hebrew hath it , the judgement of death is for this man. The Chaldee thus , a sinne of the judgement of death is upon this man. For ( say they ) he hath 〈◊〉 so and so ; and he that speaketh against this City , and against this holy place is worthy to die . But the sentence ●f the Court of the Princes is V. 16. This man is n●…t worthy to die , for he hath spoken to us in the name of the Lord our God. They doe not say to the Priests , Who did put any jurisdiction or authority to judge , in your hands ? but they acquit him in point of fact , whom the Court of the Priests had condemned in point of right , as if they had said to the Priests , if Ieremiah were a false Prophet , you had reason to call for justice upon him even unto death : but your judgement hath runne upon a false supposition in point of fact , which we doe not finde proved , but know to be false . Wherefore from this place , these two things may appeare : 1 ▪ That the Court of the Priests had not power of capitall punishments ; for if they had , certainly Ieremiah had been put to death , as Hierom noteth . 2. Yet they had a power to judge of a false Prophet , and judicially to pronounce him to be a false Prophet , and such a one as ought to be punished so and so , according to the Law. That they had such a power , appeareth , 1. from V. 8 , 9. where they doe not take him to lead him to the Court of the Princes , and there to ●ccuse him ; but they take him , so as to give forth their owne sentence against him , as against a false Prophet , Thou shalt surely die , say they , why hast thou prophesied in the name of the Lord , &c. Why didst thou dare to pretend the name of God , as if God had sent thee to preach against the Temple and holy City ? 2. I●…remiah doth not in all his differences alledge that the Priests and Scribes had not power to judge of a false Prophet , or to give sentence against one in such a case . Nor yet did the Princes object this , as hath been said ; yet this had been as strong an exception as could have been made against the Priests , if they had assumed a power and authority of judgement , which was without their Sphere , and did not at all belong unto them . 3. If you compare the sentence of the Priests with the sentence of the Princes , the former is in suo genere , no lesse judiciall , authoritative , and peremptory , than the later : onely that was affirmative , this was negative . Finally , let us take for a conclusion of this Argument , that which M r. Prynne himselfe in his fourth part of The Soveraigne power of Parliaments and Kingdomes , pag. 144. tels us out of vindiciae contra Tyrannos , with an approbatory and encomiastick close of his citation . Ieremy being sent by God to denounce the overthrow of the City Jerusalem , is for this first condemned ( citing in the Margin Ierem. 26. ) by the Priests and Prophets , that is , by the Ecclesiasticall Judgement or Senate : after this by all the people , that is , by the ordinary Judges of the City , to wit , by the Captains of thousands and hundreds : at last by the Princes of Judah : that is , by 71 men sitting in the new porch of the Temple ; his cause being made known , he is acquitted . The sixth place which intimateth an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin , is Ierem. 18. 18. where the adversaries of Ieremiah say among themselves , Come and let us d●…vise devices against Jeremiah , for the Law shall not perish from the Priest , nor counsell from the wise , nor the word from the Prophet . Come , and let us smite him with the tongue . The force of their argument , ( as not onely our Interpreters , but Maldonat also and Sanctius , following Aquinas and Lyra , tell us ) stands in this , those who are of greatest authority in the Church , the Priests , Prophets , and Elders , with whom are the Oracles of truth , doe contradict Ieremiah , therefore he is a false Prophet . But what was the ground of this consequence ? surely the ground was , that which Bullinger and the late English Annotations doe observe , namely , the Popish error was also their error , the Church cannot erre . But let us yet follow the argument to the bottome . How came they to thinke the Church cannot erre ? or what was that Church which they thought infallible ? No doubt they had respect to the Law of the Sanhedrin , Deut. 17. 10 , 11 , 12. And thou shalt doe according to the sentence which they of that place ( which the Lord shall ●…hoose ) shall shew thee ; and thou shalt observe to doe according to all that they enforme thee . According to the sen●…ence of the Law which they shall teach thee , and according to the judgement which they shall tell thee , thou shalt 〈◊〉 : thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall shew thee , to the right hand , or to the left ; And the man that will doe presumptuously , and will not hearken unto the Priest ( that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God ) or unto the Judge , even that man shall die . From this Scripture misapplyed they drew an argument against Ieremiah . Wherein their meaning could not be this , that the doctrine of every individuall Priest , or of every individuall Scribe , is infallible , ( for as the Law now cited did speak of the Sanhedrin , not of individuall Priests , so neither the Jewes of old nor the Papists after them , have drawn the conceited infallibility so low , as to every particular Priest. ) But they mean collectively , and point at an assembly or councell of Priests , Wise-men , and Prophets , which ( as they apprehended ) could not erre , and whose determination they preferred to the word of the Lord by Ieremiah : for the Law ( that is , saith Menochius , the interpretation of the Law ) can not perish from the Priest , nor counsell from the wise . Now this was an Ecclesiasticall , not a civill Sanhedrin , which may appeare thus : First , they doe not make mention of the Judge mentioned Deut. 17. ( where the Priest & the Judge are distinguished ) onely they mention the Priest , the Prophet , ( for which the Chaldee hath Scribe : which is all one , as to the 〈◊〉 argument for we finde both Prophets and Scribes in Ecclesiasticall assemblies , as was said before ) and the wise . By the wise are meant those that were chiefe or did excell among the Scribes or Doctors of the Law. So Grotius annot . in Matth. ●3 . 34. and it may be collected from Ierem. 8. 8 , 9. This is cert●ine , that these wise men were Church-officers ; for as they are 〈◊〉 from the Judges , Esay 3. 2. so Jesus Christ speaking of 〈◊〉 , and other Ministers of the Gospel , whom he was to send forth , expresseth himselfe by way of allusion to the Ecclesiasticall Ministers of the Jewes . Matth 23. 34. Behold I send unto you Prophets , and Wise men , and Scribes , which Luke ch . 11. V. 49. hath thus , I will send them Prophets and Apostles . Secondly , the civill Sanhedrin at this time did ( so far as we can finde ) contradict Ieremiah ; but when his cause came afterward before them , Ierem. 26. they shew much favour and friendship to him . Thirdly , that which is added , come and let us him smite with the tongue : may be three waies read , and every way it sut●th to the Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin ( whether themselves be the speakers in the Text , or whether the people be the speakers of it , as of that which they would de●ire and move the Sanhedrin to doe in the name of them all ) either thus : Let us smite him for the tongue , that is for an Ecclesiasticall cause , for false Doctrine . Or thus , Let us smite him in the tongue ( so the Septuagint , and Arias Montanus ) that is , Let us smite him with an Ecclesiasticall censure , and silence him , and discharge him to preach any more to the people . Or thus , Let us smite him with the tongue , that is , with an Ecclesiasticall sentence or declaration , smite him not with the Sword ( which belonged onely to the civill Magistrate ) but with the tongue , by declaring him to be a false Prophet , and by determining the case de jure , what ought to be done with him according to the Law. Seventhly , consider another place , Ezech. 7. 26. Then shall they seek a vision of the Prophet : but the Law shall perish from the Priest , and counsell from the ancients . Here againe , these are to be lookt upon collectively and conjunctly , ( not di●tributively and severally ) and this I prove from the Text it selfe , not onely because the counsell here sought for , was not to be given by one ancient , but by the ancients , yea i● was a principall part of the curse or judgement , that counsell could not be had from an assembly of ancients or Elders , suppose it might be had from some individuall Elders here or there : ) but also because the Antithesis in the Text intimateth a disappointment in that thing which was sought after . They shall seeke a vision from the Prophet , or ( as the Chaldee hath it ) discipline from the Scribe . This they shall not finde , and why ? because the Law shall perish from the Priest , and counsell from the Ancients . It was therefore Consistoriall or Synedricall counsell , Judgement , or Disscipline , which should be sought , but should not be found . So that though a Prophet of the Lord shall peradventure be found , who can reveale the councell of the Lord , in a time of generall defection , like Micaiah contradicting the 400 Prophets , yet an Ecclesiasticall counsell of Prophets , Scribes , Priests , and Elders , sometime Israels glory , shall turn to be Israels shame , and that assembly which did sometime respondere d●… jure , and pronounce righteous judgement , and give light in difficult cases , shall doe so no more : the very light of Israel shall be darknesse ; the law and counsell shall perish from them ; that is , they shall not finde councell , nor the understanding of the law , saith Sanctius . Polanus upon the place draweth an Argument against the infallibility of counsels , because the law and counsell did perish not onely ( saith he ) from the Priests here and there in the Cities , but also from the high Priest , and the other Priests and Elders , who were together at Ierusalem . If this Text be rightly applied by him ( and so it is by other Protestant Writers ) to prove against Papists that Councels may erre , then here was an Ecclesiasticall councell . Eightly , even without Ierusalem and I●…da there was a Senate or assembly of Elders , which did assist the Prophets in overseeing the manners of the people , censuring sin , and deliberating of the common affairs of the Church . This C. Bertramus de polit . Jud. c. 16. collecteth from 2 Kings 6. 32. But Elisha sate in his house , and the Elders sate with him . I know some think that those Elders were the Magistrates of Samaria , but this I cannot admit , for two reasons . 1. Because Iosephus Antiq. lib. 9. cap. 2. cals them Elishaes disciples : and from him Hugo Cardinalis , Carthusianus , and others doe so expound the Text. They are called Elishas Disciples , as the Apostles were Christs Disciples , by way of Excellency and eminency : all the disciples or sonnes of the Prophets were not properly Elders , but those onely who were assumed into the Assembly of Elders , or called to have a share in the mannaging of the common affaires of the Church . 2. Cajetan upon the place gives this reason from the Text it selfe , to prove that these Elders were spirituall men ( as he speaketh ) because Elisha asketh them , See ye how this sonne of a murderer hath sent to take away my head ? What expectation could there be , that they did see a thing , then secret and unheard of , unlesse they had been men familiar with God ? Now these Elders were sitting close with Elisha in his house . It was not a publike or Church assembly for worship , but for counsell , deliberation , and resolution , in some case of difficulty and publike concernment . So Tostatus and Sanctius on the place . A paralell place there is , Ezech. 8. 1. I sate in mine house , and the Elders of Iudah sate before me . Whether those Elders came to know what God had revealed to the Prophet , concerning the state of Iudah and Ierusalem , as Lavater upon the place supposeth , or for deliberation about some other thing , it is nothing like a civill Court , but very like an Ecclesiasticall senate . Now if such there was out of Ierusalem , how much more in Ierusalem , where ( as there came greater store of Ecclesiasticall causes and controversies concerning the sence of the Law , to be judged , so ) there was greater store of Ecclesiastical persons ●it for government ? whatsoever of this kind we finde elsewhere , was but a Transsumpt , the Archetype was in Ierusalem . Ninthly , that place Ze●…h . 7. 1 , 2 , 3. helpeth me much . The Jews sent Commissioners unto the Temple , there to speake unto the Priests which were in the house of the Lord of Hosts , and to the Prophets ( the Chaldee hath and to the Scribes ) saying , Should I weepe in the first moneth , &c. Here is an Ecclesiasticall assembly , which had authority to determine controversies concerning the worship of God. Grotius upon the place distinguisheth these Priests and Prophets from the civill Sanhedrin , yet he saith they were to be consulted with , in controverted cases , according to the Law , Deut. 17. 9. If so , then their sentence was authoritative and binding , so far that the man who did presumptuously disobey them , was to die the death , Deut. 17. 12. Tenthly , let it be considered what is that Moshav Zekenim consessus or Cathedra seniorum , Psal. 107. 32. ( for though every argument be not an inf●llible demonstration , yet cuncta juvant ) let them exalt him also in the Congregation ( or Church ) of the people , and praise him in the Assembly of the Elders . Compare this Text with Psalm 115. 9 , 10 , 11. as likewise with Psalm 118. 2 , 3 , 4. In all the three Texts , there are three sorts of persons distinguished , and more especially called upon to glorifie God. Oh that men would praise the Lord for his goodnesse , saith the Text in hand , Psalm 107. 31. for that you have in the other two places , Ye that feare the Lord , &c. for the congregation of the peple , you have in the other two places Israel , and the house of Israel . For the Assembly of the Elders , you have in the other Texts , the house of Aaron . I will not here build any thing upon the observation of Hugo Cardinalis on Psalm 107. 32. that the congregation of the Princes is not mentioned in this businesse , because not many mighty , not many noble , &c. One thing I am sure of , there were Elders in Israel , clearly distinct both from the Princes , Judges , and civill Magistrates , Ios. 23. 2. 2 Kings 10. 1. Ezra 10. 14. Acts 4. 5. and elsewhere . And the parallel Texts afore cited , doe couple together these Elders and the house of Aaron , as Pastors and ruling Elders now are ; and as the Priests and Elders are found conjoyned elsewhere in the old Testament , Exod. 24. 1. Deut. 27. 1. with vers . 9. Ezech. 7. 26. Ier. 19. 1. So Matth. 26. 59. The work also of giving thanks for mercies and deliverances obtained by the afflicted and such as have been in distresse ( the purpose which the Psalmist hath in hand , extended also to the deliverances of particular persons . ) is more especially commended to those who are assembled in an Ecclesiasticall capacity . Even as now among our selves , the civill Courts of Justice , or Magistrates and Rulers or Judges assembled by themselves in a politick capacity , use not to be desired to give thanks for the delivery of certain persons from a danger at Sea , or the like . But it were very proper and fit to desire thanks to be returned , 1. by those that feare God ; for as we should desire the prayers , so likewise the praises of the Saints . 2. By the Church or Congregation , of which they that have received the mercy are members . 3. By the Eldership , yea ( if therebe occasion ) by a Synod of Elders , who as they ought to watch over the City of God , and to stand upon their watch-tower for observing approaching dangers , so they ought to take speciall notice of exemplary mercies , bestowed upon the afflicted members of the Church , and be an ensample to the flocke , in giving thanks , as well as in other holy duties . The eleventh place , which seemeth to hold forth unto us an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin , is Ezech. 13. 9. where its said of the Prophets that did see vanity , and Divine lies : they shall not be in the assembly of my people , neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of Israel , neither shall they inter into the Land of Israel . Where ( as Diodati and Grotius observe , ) the speech riseth by degrees . 1. they shall not any more be admitted into the assembly or councell to have any voice there , as Prophets in those daies had saith Diodati citing Ier. 26. 7. Secondly , they shall not so much as come into the computation or numbring of the people as members of the Church of Israel . 3. Nay they shall not be permitted to dwell in the holy Land , or to returne thither from their captivity ; they shall not have so much favour as strangers had , who might come into the holy Land and sojourne there . In the first branch , the word translated assembly is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sod which properly signifieth a secret , and is used for counsell ( because counsell ought to be secret ) or for the place of counsell , or assembly of Counsellers . Pagnin in his Thesaurus p. 1761. readeth this place with Hierome , in consilio , or otherwise saith he , in concilio . Vatablus : in concilio populi mei non erunt . The Septuagints read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : that is , those Prophets shall have no hand in the Discipline of my people . The same word they render in other places by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , yea by both these put together , Prov. 20. 19. where for the Hebrew sod , the Septuagints have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . He that revealeth the secret counsels in the Sanhedrin ; and it cohereth well with the preceding Verse , where they mention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Governments . Sometime they expound the word by an Episcopall ( I mean not Prelaticall ) inspection Iob 29. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . God was an overseer of my house . So that , so far as the Septuagints authority can weigh , that place Ezek. 13. 9. must be understood of the secluding of those Prophets from the Sanhedrin , not from the Civill ( in which the Prophets were not members ) but from the Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin . In the twelfth and last place , the new Testament holds out to us an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin : Whether the civill Sanhedrin was wholy taken away by Herod , and another civill Sanhedrin not substitute in the place of that which he took away , but the Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin onely remaining , as some hold ; or whether both did then continue though not so clearely distinct , as others hold : This we finde that there was an Ecclesiasticall government in the hands of Church-officers ; for 1. there was a councell of the Priests and Elders and Scribes Matth. 2. 4. & 16. 21. & 21. 23. & 26. 57 , 59. & 27. 1. 12. Marke 14. 43. Luke 22. 66. Acts 4. 5. m The Centurists say that those Elders were joyned with the Priests in the government of the Church , with Ecclesiasticall persons in Ecclesiasticall affaires . Which hath been rightly taken for a president of our ruling Elders . 2. That Councell is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 22. 66. Acts 22. 5. the Presbytery or Eldership : the very name which Paul gives to that assembly of Church-officers , who ordained Timothy , 1 Tim. 4. 14. is it credible that the Apostle would transfer the name of a civill Court to signifie an Assembly , which was meerely Ecclesiasticall and not Civill ? The very use of the word in this sence by the Apostle , tels us that in his age the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was taken in an Ecclesiasticall notion onely . 3. This Councell did examine Iesus concerning his Disciples and his doctrine , and received witnesses against him , and pronounced him guilty of blasphemy , Matth. 27. 57. Marke 14. 53 , 55. Ioh. 18. 19. Hence Protestant writers draw an argument against Papists , to overthrow their infallibility of Councels : unto which argument Bellarmine deviseth foure answers . But it came not once into his thoughts , to reply that this councell was civill , not Ecclesiasticall , which had been his best answer , if any probability for it . It hath been supposed , both by Protestant , and Popish Writers , that it was an Ecclesiasticall Councell , such as the controversie is about : otherwise our Argument had been as impertinent , as their answer was insufficient . 4. Our opposites have no evasion here , but that which Bilson , Saravia , and others of the Prelaticall party did answer in opposition to ruling Elders ; namely , that the Jewish Elders were Judges or Magistrates ; But the reply which served then , will serve now : the Elders are plainly distinguished from Judges , Rulers , and Princes , Ios. 8. 33. & 23. 2. Deut. 5. 23. Iud. 8. 14. 2 Kings 10. 1 , 5. Ezra 10. 14. Acts 4. 5. T●…status on Deut. 21. 2. & 22. 15 , 16. observeth the same distinction of Judges and Elders . Pelargus on Deu●… . 21. 2 , 3 , 4. observeth the like . That which I say concerning the distinction of Judges and Elders may be confirmed by Halichoth Olam Tract . 1. cap 3. The Judges of Soura , M. Houna , and D. Isaac . The Iudges of Phoumbeditha M. Papa the sonne of Samuel , &c. The Elders of Soura M. Houna and M. Hisda . The Elders of Phoumbeditha Ena and Abimi the sonne of Rahba . And thus we are taught how to under and th●se Gemarick phrases , of the Judges of such a place , and the Eld●rs of such a place , that we may not mistake them as if they were one . 5. Some have also drawne a patterne for the constitution of Synods , from that Councell , Acts 4. 5 , 6. where we finde assembled together Rulers , 〈◊〉 , Elders , Scri●es , according to which patterne we have in our Synods , 1. the civill 〈◊〉 to preside in the order of proceedings , for preventing tumults , injuries , disorders , and to assist and protect the Synod . 2. Pastors of Churches . 3. Doctors from universities , answering to the Scribes or Doctors of the Law. 4. Ruling Elders who assist in the Government of the Church . 6. After that Iudaea was redacted into a Province , and the Romans having keptin their owne hands , not only the power of life and death Iohn 18. 31. but all judgement in whatsovever civill , or criminall offences , falling out among the Jews , meant by matters of wrong or wicked leudness , Acts 18. 14. And having left to the Jewes no government , nor any power of judgement , except in things pertaining to their religion onely Ib. verse 15. These six things considered , it is very unprobable ( if not unpossible ) that the Councell of the Priests , Elders , and Scribes , mentioned so often in the New Testament , should be no Ecclesiasticall Court , but a temporall and civill Magistracy . The Centurists Cent. 1. lib. 1. cap. 10. reckon that Councell for an Ecclesiasticall Court , distinct from civill Magistracy : and they propose these two to be distinctly treated of , Acta coram Pontificibus seu Magistratu Ecclesiastico , ( and here they bring in the councell of the Priests , Elders , and Scribes , ) And Actio coram Pilato seu magistratu politico . I know Erastus lib. 3. cap. 2. aud lib. 4. cap. 4. though he confesse plainly that the Jewish Sanhedrin mentioned in the Gosspell , and in the Acts of the Apostles , had onely power of judging causes belonging to Religion , and that the Romans did leave them no power to judge of civill injuries ; yet he holdeth , that in these causes of Religion , the Sanhedrin had power not onely of imprisoning , and scourging , but even of death it selfe . And so endeavours to make it a temporall or civil Magistracy , ( which M r Prynne also doth vindic . page 4 , 5. yet he speaketh dubiously of their power of capitall punishments . ) But this is confuted by the reasons which I have given . Whereunto I further adde these few animadversions . 1. The strongest proofe which Erastus brings out of Iosephus antiq . lib. 20. cap. 8. which ( as he alledgeth ) puts the thing out of all controversie , is a very weake and insufficient proof . Iosephus tels us in the close of that Chapter , that after the death of Herod and A chelaus , this was the Jewish Government , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . This he citeth page 177. and page 178. to prove that the Sanhedrin in Christs time , was a civill Magistracy , having power of the Sword. But I may with a great deale more probability argue contrariwise from these words . Iosephus tels us the Constitution and forme of the Jewish policy or Government was at that time Aristocraticall , but it was an Ecclesiasticall Aristocracy , the government was in the hands of the chiefe Priests . Or thus ( if you will ) the Jewes at that time had a bare name of an aristocracy ; they had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Optimates , Primates , or Rulers : but it was titulo tenus , all power of civill government being taken from them by the Romans , and the government that was , was Ecclesiasticall . That very Chapter gives us a better argument to prove , that the Romans did not permit to the Jewes capitall Judgements : for Iosephus there records that Ananus the high Priest taking the opportunity after the death of Festus , while Albinus the Successour of Festus , was but yet on his journey toward Iudea , did call a Councell of Judges ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) before whom he presented Iames the brother of Christ , and some others , who were ( as guilty of impiety ) condemned to be stoned . Which mightily displeased all such as did observe the Laws . Albinus at that time comming from Alexandria , being enformed of the thing , and that it was not lawfull for Ananus to doe any such thing , without the Roman Governour , wrote a chiding and threatning letter to Ananus . And further , the thing being secretly signified by some to King Agrippa , who did also beseech the King to command Ananus to doe no such thing againe , he having trespassed in this . Whereupon Agrippa was so highly offended , that he tooke away from Ananus the high Priests place , and gaue it to Iesus the sonne of Damneus . 2. Whereas Erastus argueth from the imprisoning , beating , or scourging , yea taking counsell to kill the Apostles Acts 4 , & 5. the stoning of Steven Acts 7. Pauls letters from the high Priest , for biuding and bringing to Ierusalem the Disciples of the Lord Acts 9. 1 , 2. also the imprisoning and condemning to death the Saints Acts 26. 10. Unto all this I answer out of n Iosephus , that in that degenerate age the high Priests and such as adhered to them , did use a great deale of violence , whereby they did many things for which they had no just nor lawfull power . So that the Letters and Warrants given out to Saul , and the execution of the same by a cruell and bloody persecuting of the Saints , can not prove the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the power and authority which was allowed to the Sanhedrin , but onely the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the present prevalent power of the high Priest and his faction in that confusion of affaires ; and their extreame malice against the Saints , to have been such as made them to doe things for which they had no legall power nor warrant . And this one Animadversion breakes all the strength of M r Prynnes argument vindic . page 5. that the Councell of the Jewes had power ( which no meere Ecclesiasticall consistory can doe ) to scourge , imprison , torture , and out-law offenders , if not to c●…ndemne , put to death . ( Where he citeth divers Texts , none of which proveth either torturing , or out-lawing , and the most of which , prove not so much as that the Councell of the Jewes at that time had authority to scourge or imprison , as Matth. 5. 22. & 10. 17. Mark 13. 9. Acts 6. 12 , 13 , 14. & 24. 20. & 25. 15. ) The imprisonment of the Apostles was not without the authority of the Captaine of the Temple Acts 4. 1 , 3. This captaine of the Temple , is thought by the best interpreters , to have been the Captaine of the Garrison which the Romans placed in the ca●tle Antonia hard by the Temple , and that to prevent tumults and uproares when the people came to the Temple , especially at the solemne feasts in great multitudes . But that the Captaine of the Temple was a civill Magistrate of the Jewes , or one d puted with authority and power from the Sanhedrin , will never be proved . When the Councell thought of slaying the Apostles Acts 5. 33. it was in a sudden passion , being cut to the heart at that which they heard . But Gamaliel tels them Verse 35. Ye men of Israel take heed to your selves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 warning them as Interpreters take it , of their own danger , from the Romans , if they should put any one to death . The putting of Steven to death was upon pretence of Iudicium zeli , or Ius zelotarum , as Grotius thinks d●… Jure belli a●… pacis lib. 2. cap 20. sect . 9. If so , it was an extraordinary act . I am sure it was done most tumultuously , disorderly and furiously , before either himselfe was heard speake out , or any sentence was given against him , as is manifest Acts 7. 54 , 57 , 58. 3. Erastus his glosse upon Iohn 18. 31. It is not lawfull for us to put any man to death , meaning ( saith he ) for making himselfe a King against Caesar , the cause for which they did chiefly accuse him to Pilate . So likewise Bishop Bilson ( a great follower of Erastus ) of the perpetuall government of Christs Church cap. 4. But marke the words , Then said Pilate unto them , Take ye him and judge him according to your Law ; The Jewes therefore said unto him , It is not lawfull for us to put any man to death . Pilate durst not have refused to judge a man who made himselfe a King against Caesar , nor durst he have put it over upon the Jewes to have judged one in that which concerned Caesars crowne . Nay , as soone as the Jewes objected , If thou let this man goe , thou art not Caesars friend ; for whosoever maketh himselfe a King , speaketh against Caesar. Pilate when he heard that , went in againe , and sate down on the Judgement seat Iohn 19. 12. 13. Therefore when Pilate said to the Jewes take ye him , and judge him according to your law , he spake it of matters of their Law. The Councell of the chiefe Priests , Elders and Scribes had given sentence against Christ de ju●…e , that he was guilty of blasphemy , and thereupon ( not having power to put any man to death ) they led him to Pilate , Matth. 26. 65 , 66. with Matth. 27. 1 , 2. Marke 14. 63 , 64. with Marke 15. 1. Luke 22. 71. with Luke 23. 1. Pilate unwilling to meddle against Christ , waves the businesse in the Judgement-hall , I perceive ( would he say ) that this man is accused of such things as concerne your Law and your Religion ; therefore take him and judge him according to your Law. They reply , in reference to that which Pilate did drive at , It is not lawfull for us to put any man to death . If they had meant , for causes which concerned Caesars Crown , it had been not onely an impertinent reply , but a yeelding to Pilates intention ; for he might have said , I doe not meane , that ye shall judge him for that which concerneth Caesar , but for that which concerneth your owne Law and Religion . Therefore certainely the answer which the Jewes made to Pilate , did reply , that though they had power to judge a man in that which concerned their Law and Religion , yet they had no power to put any man to death , no not for that which concerned their Law. 4. There are severall passages in the story of Paul which shew us , that though the Jewish Sanhedrin might judge a man in matters of their Law , yet they were accusers , not Judges , in civill or capitall punishments , I meane when a man was accused as worthy of bonds or of death , though it were for a matter of their Law , they had no liberty to judge , but onely to accuse . The Jewes drew Paul before the judgement seat of Gallio , even for a matter of their law . This fellow ( say they to Gallio ) perswadeth men to worship God , contrary to the Law Acts 18. 13. If they had intended onely an Ecclesiasticall censure , their recourse had been either to the Sanhedrin , or at least to the Synagogue , but because they intended a corporall temporall punishment , which neither the Sanhedrin nor the Synagogue had power to inflict , therefore they must prosecute Paul before Gallio ; whose answer was to this purpose , that if it had been a matter of wrong or wicked leudnesse , it had been proper for him to have judged it , but that since it was no such thing , he would not meddle in it , knowing also , that the Jewes had no power to doe it by themselves . Againe , Acts 23. 28 , 29. Claudius Lysias writeth to Faelix concerning Paul thus , and when I would have knowne the cause wherefore they accused him , I brought him forth into their Councell . Whom I perceived to be accused of questions of their Law , but to have nothing laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds . That which made Lysias interpose in the businesse , and rescue Paul from the hands of the Jewes , was the Jewes designe to put Paul to death , under colour of judging him according to their Law ( which was the pretence made by Tertullus Acts 24. 6. ) Now in that which was to be punished , either by death , or so much as by bonds , Lysias conceives the Jewes to be no competent Judges , therefore he brings Paul into the councell of the Jewes , not to be judged by them , but to know what accusation they had against him . For the same reason Paul himselfe did decline going to Ierusalem , to be judged there , no not of matters concerning the Religion and Law of the Jewes , that accusation being so far driven on , as to make him worthy of death . His accusers ( saith Festus to King Agrippa ) brought none accusation of such things as I supposed , but had certaine questions against him of their owne superstition , and of one Iesus which was dead , whom Paul affirmed to be alive . And because I doubted of such manner of questions ▪ I asked him whether he would goe to Ierusalem , and there be judged of these matters , Acts 25. 18 , 19 , 20. This Paul had declined vers . 10. I stand at Caesars judgement seat ( said he ) where I ought to be judged . And why ? but because his accusation was capitall , even in that which concerned the Law of the Jewes , and he knew the Jewes at that time had no power of capitall judgements . Some have alledged this example of Paul for appeales from Presbyteries or Synods to the civill Magistrate : by which argument themselves grant that the Jewish Sanhedrin then declined by Paul , was a Ecclesiasticall , not a civill Court. 5. Besides all this Erastus his opinion is strongly confuted by that which Constantinus L'Empereur Annot. in remp . Jud. pag. 404. to 407. proving that the Jewes after the thirtieth yeere of Christ , had no power of punishing with death ; for proofe hereof citeth a passage of Aboda zara , that forty yeers before the destruction of the Temple , the Sanhedrin ( which had in former times exercised capitall judgements ) did remove from Hierusalem , quum viderent se non posse judicia capitalia exercere , when they perceived that they could not exercise capitall judgements , they said let us remove out of this place , lest we be guilty : it being said Deut. 17. 10. according to the sentence which they of that place shall shew thee : whence they collected , that if they were not in that place , they were not obliged to capitall judgements : and so they removed . And if you would know whe ther he tels us out of Rosch Hasschana , they removed from Hieru salem to Iabua , thence to Ousa thence to Sc●…aphrea , &c. He that desires to have further proofes for that which hath been said , may read Buxtorf . lexic. Chald. Talmud . & rabbin . pag. 514 , 515. He proves that Iudicia criminalia , criminall judgements did cease , and were taken away from the Jewes forty yeeres before the destruction of the second Temple . This he saith is plaine in Talmud Hierosol . in lib. Sanhedrin cap. 7. in Talmud Babyl . in Sanbedrin fol. 41. 1. in Aboda z●…ru fol. 8. 2. in Schab . fol. 15. 1. in Iuchasin fol. 51. 1. Majen●…on . in Sanhedrin cap. 14. sect . 13. He cites also a passage in Berachos fol. 58. 1. concerning one who for a hainous crime even for lying with a beast ought to be adjudged to death ; but when one said that he ought to die , it was answered , that they had no power to put any man to death . And this saith D r. Bux●…orf is the very same , which the Jewes said to Pilate John 18. 31. Now this power being taken from the Jewes forty yeeres before the destruction of the Temple and City , which was in the 71 yeere of Christ , his death being in the 34. Hence he proveth that this power was taken from the Jewes neere three yeeres before the death of Christ. And I further make this inference , that since the Sanhedrin which had power of life and death , did remove from Hierusalem forty yeers before the destruction of the Temple ( for which see also Tzemach David . edit . Hen. Vorst . pag. 89. and so about three yeeres before the death of Christ ; it must needs follow that the Councell of the Priests , Elders , and Scribes , mentioned so often in , and before Christs passion , was not a civill Magistracy , nor the civill Sanhedrin , but an Ecclesiasticall San●edrin . Whence also it follows , that the Church Matth. 18. 17. unto which Christ directs his Disciples to goe with their complaints , was not the civill Court of Justice among the Jewes , ( as M r Prynne takes it ) for that civill Court of Justice had then removed from Hierusalem , and had lost its authority in executing Justice , I. Coch annot . in Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin . cap. 1. s●…ct . 13. beareth witnesse to the same story above mentioned , that forty yeeres before the destruction of the Temple , the Sanhedrin did remove from its proper seat ( where he also mentions the ten stations or degrees of their removing ) and Iam tum cessarunt judicia capitalia , saith he . Now at that time the capitall judgements did cease . Thus we have three witnesses singularly learned in the Jewish Antiquities . Unto these adde Casau●…on exerc . 16. anno 34. num . 76. He holds that though the Councell of the Jewes had cognizance of the offence ( for otherwise how could they give a reason or cause when they demanded justice ) in which respect the Councell did judge Christ to be guilty of death , Marke 14. 64. yet their Councell had then no more power of capitall punishments , which saith he , the more learned moderne writers doe demonstrate è Iuchasin , and from other Talmudicall writings ; he addeth that this power of putting any man to death was taken from the Jewes some space before this time when they said to Pilate , It is not lawfull for us to put any man to death : for this power was taken from them , saith he , forty yeeres before the destruction of the second Temple , as the Rabbinicall writers doe record . I have thus largely prosecuted my last argument , drawn from the New Testament , mentioning the Councell of the Priests , Elders , and Scribes . And I trust the twelve arguments which have been brought may give good satisfaction toward the proofe of an Ecclesiasticall Jewish Sanhedrin . The chiefe objection which ever I heard or read against this distinction of a Civill Sanhedrin and an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes , is this . That neither the Talmud nor the Talmudicall writers mention any such distinction , but speake onely of one supreme Sanhedrin of 71 , and of other two Courts , which sate the one at the doore of the Court before the Temple , the other at the gate which entereth to the mountaine of the Temple . There were also Courts in the Cities where capitall cases were judged by three and twenty , pecuniall mults by three . Answ. It must be remembred that not onely the Talmudicall Commentators , but the Talmud it selfe , is much later than the time of the Sanhedrin , and the integrity of the Jewish government . Yea later ( by some Centuries ) than the destruction of the Temple and City of Ierusalem . So that the Objection which is made is no stronger than as if one should argue thus , There is no mention of Elderships constituted of Pastors and Ruling Elders ( without any Bishop having preeminence over the rest ) neither in the Canon Law , nor decretals of Popes , nor in the Booke of the Canons of the Roman Church . Therefore when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Church of Rome , there was no such Eldership in that Church , constituted as hath been said . But if the Ecclesiasticall Government either of the Church of Rome , or of the Church of the Jewes can be proved from Scripture ( as both may ) it ought to be no prejudice against those truths , that they are not fou●d in the Writers of af●ertimes , and declining ages . Howbeit there may be seen some footsteps of a Civill and Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin , even in the Talmudicall writers , in the opinion of Constantinus L'Empereur , and in that other passage cited by D. Buxtorf out of Elias . Of which before . And so much concerning an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes . If after all this , any man shall be unsatisfied in this particular , yet in the issue , such as are not convinced that there was an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes , distinct from their civill Sanhedrin , may neverthelesse be convinced not by the former arguments , but by other Mediums , that there was an Ecclesiasticall government among the Jewes distinct from their civill government . For it belonged to the Priests , ( not to the Magistrates or Judges ) to put difference between holy and unholy , and between unclean and cleane . And the Priests ( not the Magistrates ) are challenged for not putting difference between the holy and prophane Ezech. 22. 26. And this power of the Priests was not meerly doctrinall or declarative , but decisive , binding , and juridicall , so farre as that according to their sentence men were to be admitted as cleane , or excluded as uncleane . Yea in other cases , as namely in trying and judging the scandall of a secret and unknown murther , observe what is said of the Priests , Deut. 21. 5. by their word shall every controversie and every stroke be tried . Yea themselves were Judges of controversies Ezech. 44. 24. And in controversie they shall stand in judgement , and they shall judge it according to my judgements . Where the Ministers of the Gospell are principally intended , but not without an allusion unto and parallel with the Priests of the old Testament , in this point of jurisdiction . Suppose now it were appointed by Law , that Ministers shall separate or put difference between the holy and prophane , that by their word every controversie concerning the causes of suspension or sequestration of men from the Sacrament , shall be tried ; that in controversie they shall stand in judgement , and judge according to the word of God : Would not every one looke upon this , as a power of government put into the hands of Ministers . And none readier to aggravate such government , then the Erastians . Yet all this amounts to no more , then by the plaine and undeniable Scriptures above cited , was committed to the Priests . Suppose also , that men were kept backe from the Temple and from the Passeover , not for any morall uncleannesse , but for ceremoniall uncleannesse onely ( which is to be afterwards discussed ) yet the Priests their judging and deciding of controversies concerning mens legall uncleannesse , according to which judgement and decision , men were to be admitted to , or kept backe from the Temple and Passover ( yea sometime their owne houses , as in the case of leprosie ) could not choose but entitle them to a power of government , which power was peculiar to them , and is not in all the old Testament ascribed to Magistrates or Judges . And as the exercise of this power did not agree to the Magistrate , so the commission , charge , and power given to those who did keepe backe the uncleane , was not derived from the Magistrate ; for it did belong to the intrinsecall sacerdotall authority 2 Kings 11. 18. The Priest ( Iehojada ) appointed Officers over the house of the Lord. The 70 thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . These Officers or overseers over the Temple , were appointed by Iehojada , for keeping backe the uncleane , as Grotius upon the place , following Iosephus , hath observed . Compare 2 Chro. 23. 19. And he ( Iehojada ) set the Porters at the gates of the house of the Lord , that none which was uncleane in any thing should enter in ▪ For the same end did he appoint these overseers over the Temple , 2 Kings 11. It was also appointed by the Law , that the man who should doe any thing presumptuously , contrary to the sentence of the Priests , should die the death , as well as the man who should doe any thing presumptuously , contrary to the sentence of the Judge , Deut. 17. 9 , 12. Finally , the high Priest was a ruler of the people , and to him is that law applied , Thou shalt not speake evill of the Ru●…ers of thy people Acts 23. 5. Which is not meant onely in regard that he was president of the Sanhedrin ; for there was an Ecclesiasticall ruling power , which was common with him to some other Priests , 2 Chro. 35. 8. Hilkiah the high Priest , and Zachariah and Iehiel Priests of the second order , are called Rulers of the house of God : being in that very place thus distinguished from other Priests and Levites imployed in the manuall worke of the Temple about Sacrifices and the like . CHAP. IV. That there was an Ecclesiasticall Excommunication among the Iewes : and what it was . IT hath been affirmed by some who pretend to more skill in Jewish antiquities than others , that though the Jewes had an excommunication which did exclude a man from the liberty of civill fellowship , so that he might not come within foure cubits of his neighbour , ( and so one man might and did excommunicate another ) yet no man was judicially or by sentence of a Court excommunicated , at least not from the Temple , Sacrifices , and holy assemblies . To these I shall in the first place oppose the judgement of others who have taken very much pains in searching the Jewish antiquities , and are much esteemed for their skill therein . n D. Buxtors expoundeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cherem to be a casting out of one from the holy assemblies , or an ejection from the Synagogue , and maketh it parallel to the Excommunicating of the incestuous man 1 Cor. 5. o M r Selden extendeth the Jewish Excommunication so farre , as to comprehend an exclusion from fellowship in prayer and holy assemblies , and makes it parallel to that which Tertullian tels us to have been used by the Primitive Church . M r Brughton in his exposition of the Lords prayer page 14. makes a parallel between the Jewish and the Christian Church in many particulars , and among the rest , he saith they agree in the manner of Excommunication and absolution . p Henric. Vorstius in his late animadversions upon Pirke Rabbi Eliezer , wonders how any man can imagine that an Apostate , a blasphemer , or the like was admitted into the Temple . For his part , he thinkes some excommunicate persons were absolutely excluded from the Temple , and that others for whom there were hopes of reconciliation , were admitted into it . q Drusius and r Iohannes Coch hold , that there were such excommunicate persons among the Jewes , as were removed from Church assemblies , and were not acknowledged for Church members . s Schindlerus describeth their excommunication to be a putting away of an impenitent obstinate sinner from the publique assembly of the Church , and so a cutting him off from his people . t Arias Montanus expounds their casting out of the Synagogue to be an excommunication ( such as in the Christian Church ) from religious fellowship . u So doe the Centurists plainly , where they doe purposely shew what was the Ecclesiasticall policy and Church government of the Jewes : They make it a distinct Question , whether the Jewes in Christs time had any civill Government , or Magistracy . x Cornelius Bertramus thinks that to the Jewish Niddui answereth our suspension from the Sacrament , and that to their cherem answereth our excommunication from the Church : and that the Jewes had the very same kind of excommunication , by which the incestuous Corinthian , Hymeneus and Philetus , and the Emperour Theodosius were excommunicated . Constansinus l' Empereur annot . in rempub . Jud. pag. 370. to 378. holdeth the same thing which Bertramus holdeth concerning the Jewish excommunication , and which hath now been cited . Godwyn in his Moses and Aacon , lib. 5. cap. 1 speaketh of the Ecclesiasticall Court of the Jewes , unto which ( saith he ) belonged the power of excommuication , the severall sorts of which censure he explaineth cap. 2. namely Niddui , cherem , and Shammata . After all which , he begins cap. 3. to speake of civill Courts of the Jewes , a distinct government . Grotius . annot . in Luke 6. 22. compares the Jewish excommunication with that which was exercised by the Druides in France , who did interdicere saerificiis , interdict and prohibit from their Sacrifices impious and obstinate persons . Yea those who were excommunicate by Niddui or the lesser excommunication , he likens to those penitents or mourners in the ancient Christian Church , who were said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , qui non cum caeteris orabant &c. He tels us the ancient Christians did in divers things follow the Jewish discipline , and among other things in excommunication ; He cites the same passage of Tertullian which is cited by M r Selden , concerning a shntting out , à communicatione orationis , & conventus , & omnis sancti commercii . Which is as full and high a description of the Ecclesiasticall censure of Excommunication , as any can be . So that the Jewish Excommunication being paralleld with that Excommunication which Tertullian speakes of , and which was practised in the ancient Christian Church , what more can be required in this particular ? And here I cannot but take notice , that Master Prynne doth very much mistake and misrepresent M r Selden , as if he held the Jewish excommunication to have been no more but a shutting out from civill company or fellowship , whereas he clearly holds lib. 4. de jure nat . & Gent. cap. 9. p. 522. that he who was excommunicated by the Jewish cherem , was put away and cast off from fellowship in prayer , and from all religious fellowship , even as Tertullian speaks of excommunicated persons in the Church . Lud. Capellus in Spicilegio upon Ioh. 9. 22. speaking of the common distinction of the three degrees of the Jewish Excommunication , doth plainly beare witnesse to that which I plead for , namely , y that there was a Jewish Excommunication from communion in the holy things . I confesse he understands the Cherem , and the Shammata , otherwise then I doe ; for he takes the Cherem to be nihil aliud , nothing else than the forfeiture of a mans substance for the use of the Sanctuary : ( whereas it is certaine there was a Cherem of persons as well as of things , and the formulae of the Cherem which shall be cited afterward , containe another thing than forfeiture . ) And Shammata he takes to be the devoting of men to death , and that being Shamatized they must needs die . ( And yet the Jewes did shamatize the Cuthites or Samaritans ( as we shall see afterward ) whom they had not power to put to death . ) However he speaks of the Niddui as a meere Ecclesiasticall censure , and therefore tels us it was formidable to the godly , it being a shutting out from communion in the holy things , but not formidable to wicked men ; which must be upon this reason , because wicked men did care little or nothing for any censure or punishment , except what was civill . He granteth also that Niddui was included in the other two : so that in all three there was a shutting out from the holy things . I must not forget the Testimony of my Countreyman Master Weemse in his Christian Synagogue lib. 1. cap. 6. sect . 3. paragr . 7. They had three sorts of Excommunication ; first the lesser , then the middle sort , then the greatest . The lesser was called Niddui : and in the New Testament they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , put out of the Synagogue : and they hold that Cain was excommunicated this way . The second was called Cherem or Anathema : with this sort of Excommunication was the Incestuous person censured 2 Cor. 2. The third Shammatha , they hold that Enoch instituted it , Jude v. 14. And after , these who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , put out of the Synagogue were not simply secluded from the Temple , but suffered to stand in the Gate , &c. These who were Excommunicated by the second sort of Excommunication , were not permitted to come neer the Temple . These who were Excommunicated after the third sort , were secluded out of the society of the people of God altogether . And thus I have produced fifteen witnesses for the Ecclesiasticall Excommunication of the Jewes . I might produce many more , but I have made choice of these , because all of them have taken more than ordinary paines in searching the Jewish antiquities , and divers of them are of greatest note for their skill therein . In the next place let us observe the causes , degrees , manner and rites how , the authority by which , the ends and effects of excommunication among the Jewes , and see whether all these doe not helpe to make their Excommunication a patterne for ours . For the causes , there were 24 causes , for which a man was Excommunicated among the Jewes . You may read them in Buxtorfs Lexicon Chald ▪ Talmud & Rabbin . p. 1304 , 1305. M. Selden de jure nat . & Gentium . lib. 4. cap. 8. Jo. Coch Annot. in Excerp . Gem. Sanhedrin cap. 2. pag. 147. divers of these causes did not at all concerne personall or civill injuries ( for such injuries were not accounted causes of Excommunication , but were to be punished otherwise , as shall be proved afterward ) but matters of scandall , by which God was dishonoured , and the stumbling-blocke of an evill example laid before others ; One cause was the despising of any of the preceps of the Law of Moses , or Statutes of the Scribes . Another was the selling of Land to a Gentile . Another was , a Priest not separating the gifts of the oblation . Another , he that in captivity doth not iterate or observe the second time a holy day . Another , y he that doth any servile worke upon Easter eve . Another , he that mentioneth the name of God rashly , or by a vaine oath . Another , he that enduceth , or giveth occasion to others to prophane the name of God. Another , he that makes others to ●ate holy things without the holy Temple . Another , he that maketh computation of yeeres and moneths without the Land of Israel : that is , ( as D r Buxtorf ) writeth Calendars , or ( as M. Selden ) computeth yeeres and moneths otherwise than their fathers had done . Another , he that retardeth or hindreth others from doing the Law and Commandement . Another , he that maketh the offering prophane ( as D r Buxtorf ) or offereth a sickly beast , ( as I. Coch. ) Another , a Sacrificer that doth not shew his Sacrificing Knife before a Wise man or a Rabbi , that it may be knowne to be a lawfull Knife , and not faulty . Another , he that cannot be made to know or to learne . Another , he that having put away his wife , doth thereafter converse familiarly with her . Another , a Wise man ( that is , a Rabbi or Doctor ) infamous for an evill life . The other causes had also matter of scandall in them , namely , the despising of a Wise man or Rabbi , though it were after his death . The despising of an Officer or messenger of the house of judgement . He that casteth up to his neighbour a servile condition , or cals his neighbour servant . He that contumaciously refuseth to appeare at the day appointed by the Judge . He that doth not submit himselfe to the Judiciall sentence . He that hath in his house any hurtfull thing , as a mad dogge or a weake leather . He that before Heathen Judges beareth witnesse against an Israelite . He that maketh the blind to fall . He that hath Excommunicate another without cause , when he ought not to have been Excommunicate . Thus you have the 24 causes of the Jewish Excommunication ; of which some were meere scandals : others of a mixed nature , that is , partly injuries , partly scandals ; but they were reckoned among the causes of Excommunication qua scandals , not qua 〈◊〉 . Io. Coch. Annot. in Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin . pag. 146 ▪ explaining how the wronging of a Doctor of the Law by contumelies , was a cause of Excommunication , sheweth that the Excommunication was because of the scandall . Licet tamen condonare nisi res in praputulo gesta sit . Publicum Doctoris ludibrium in legis contemptum redundat . 〈◊〉 ob causam Doctor legis honorem 〈◊〉 remittere non potest . Ubi res clam & sine scandalo gesta est , magni animi & sapientis est injuriam contemptu vindicare . If there was no scandall , the injury might be remitted by the party injured , so as the offendor was not to be Excommunicate ▪ But if the contumely was known abrond , and was scandalous , though the party wronged were willing and desirous to bury it , yet because of the scandall , the Law provided that the offender should be excommunicate . For they taught the people that he who did contend against a Rabbi did contend against the holy Ghost ( for which see Gul. Vorstius annot . in Maimon . de fundam . legis . pag. 77 , 78. ) and hence did they aggravate an Ecclesiasticall or Divine ( not a Civill ) injury . Whence it appeareth that the causes of Excommunication , were formally lookt upon as scandals . Adde that if qua injuries , then a quatenus ad omne , all personall or civill injuries had been causes of Excommunication . But all civill injuries doe not fall within these 24. causes . If it be objected , that neither doe all scandalls fall within these 24. causes . I answer they doe ; for some of the causes are generall and comprehensive , namely these two , the 5 th . He that despiseth the Statutes of the Law of Moses , or of the Scribes ; and the 18 th . He that retardeth or hindereth others from doing the Law. When I make mention of any particular heads , either of the Jewish Discipline , or of the ancient Christian discipline , let no man understand me , as if I intended the like Strictnesse of Discipline in these dayes . My meaning is onely , to prove Ecclesiasticall censures , and an Ecclesiasticall Government . And let this be remembred upon all like occasions ; though it be not everywhere expressed . And so much for the causes . The degrees of the Jewish excommunication , were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Niddui , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cherem , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schammata . Elias in Tisbite , saith plainly that there were three kinds of excommunication , Niddui , Cherem , and Schammata . Niddui is 〈◊〉 out ; but if he be not converted , they smite him with Cherem ; and if neither so he repent , they schammatize him . These three Doctor Buxtorf thus distinguisheth , not only out of Elias , the common sentence of the but Hebrew Doctors . The first and smallest excommunication is Niddui , which is a simple separation for a certain time . The greater excommunication is Cherem , which ▪ is a separation with imprecations and curses . The greatest of all is Schammata , a finall excommunication , without hope of returning to the Church . So likewise Hen. Uorstius animad . in Pirke pag. 230. And answerably hereunto some Divines have distinguished Excommunicatio Minor , Major , and Maxima . The first is suspension from the Sacrament . The second is a casting out of the Church , and a delivering over to Sathan : which yet is a medicinall excommunication for the destruction of the flesh , that the spirit may be saved . The third is Anathema Maranatha , an accursing of a man to the comimg of Christ , without hope of mercy ; which is excommunicatio exterminativa , and cannot be done , without a propheticall Spirit . Corn. Bertramus de repub . Ebraeor cap. 7. saith that our suspension from the Sacrament answereth to their Niddui : our Excommunication to their Cherem . And for their Schammata , he thinks it was an adjudging of one to eternall death ; whereunto answereth the Apostles Anathema , and the Churches devoting of Iulian the Apostate , as one to be no more prayed for , but to be prayed against . Munsterus will have Schammata to be the same with Niddui . Wherein Master Selden agreeth with him , still holding a difference between Niddui , and Cherem , as between the lesser , and the greater excommunication : de Jure nat . & Gentium , l. 4. c. 8. Of the same opinion is Io. Coch , Annot. in Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin . p. 149. But Constantinus l' Empereur annot . in rempub . Jud. tels us , that the Talmudists in divers places , do distinguish the three degrees of Excommunication , as Bertramus doth ; and that Schammata was the highest Excommunication , greater then either Niddui or Cherem , he proves not onely by the Epitheton adonai added by the Chaldee paraphrase Num. 21. 25. Et percussit eum Israel per Schammata dei ; but further from the words of Rabbi Solomon , comparing one excommunicated by Schammata , to the fat cast in the Furnace , which is wholly consumed , and which never comes out , so he that is Schammatized , is lost for ever , and without all remedy unto all eternity . He confirmeth it also , from the words of Elias above mentioned . It is not much to my present argument , to dispute whether the Jewes had three distinct degrees of excommunication or two only . However it 's agreed , that the Jews had their Excommunicatio Minor & Major . And Niddui ▪ was an Excommunication for 30. dayes , during which time if the person ( man or woman ) repent , well and good : if not , he was excommunicate , for other 30. dayes . Yea , saith Doctor Buxtorf , the time might be triplicate to 90. dayes . And if after all that time he repent not , then he was excommunicate , with the greater excommunication Cherem . And so much for the degrees . As for the manner , and rites of their excommunication , it was done most solemnly , z Doctor Buxtorf tells us , if the party was present , the sentence of Excommunication was pronounced against him by word of mouth : If he was absent , there was a writ publikely affixed , containing the sentence of Excommunication , which writ was not published , till the offence was proved , at least by two witnesses . It is certain from Pirke Rabb . Elierser cap. 38. that Cherem was not without an assembly of ten at least . And it is as certaine that Cherem was not onely in a solemn , but in a sacred manner performed , which is manifest from that Formula Anathematis , which a Doctor Buxtorf hath transcribed out of an old Hebrew Manuscript ; and from b another forme , which Hen. Vorstius taketh out of Col Bo both shewing , that it was not a civill , but a sacred businesse , done in the name and authority of the God of heaven : and the latter formula still used in most of the Jewish Synagogues as Vorstius informes us We read also in Pirke Rabb . Elieser cap. 38. c that the Cuthites ( who were also called Samaritans ) after they had been circumcised by Rabb . D●…stai , and Rabbi Zacharias , and had been taught by them out of the Book of the Law ; they were excommunicate by Ezra , Zerubbabel , and Ioshua the high Priest , 300. Priests , and 300. Disciples , and the whole Church , in the Temple ; the Trumpets sounding , and the Levites singing ; they did even by the great name of God , excommunicate the Cuthites , that there should be no fellow-ship between any man of Israel and the Cuthites , that no Proselyte should be received of the Cuthites ; and that they should have no part in the resurrection of the dead , nor in the building of the house of God , nor in Ierusalem . This passage Doctor Buxtorf , in his Rabbinicall Lexicon , p. 2464. and Master Selden de Jure nat . & Gentium . l. 4. c. 8. have observed out of Pirke ; and Doctor Buxtorf , both there and dissert de lit . Hebr. thes . 49. noteth the three words used by the Hebrews in this relation , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is , they did excommunicate them both by Niddui , Cherem , and Schammata . And so much for the manner and rites . As for the authority , by which a man was excommunicated , we see ( by that which hath been already noted ) that it was a publike and judiciall act , and it was necessary there should be at least an Assembly of ten . Those formulae before cited , make it evident , that it was an authoritative sentence of an Ecclesiasticall Assembly , ( and therefore done as it were in name of the Court of heaven , to which purpose domus Judicii superioris seu coelestis , was mentioned in the businesse , and it was a juridicall or forensicall act , and done solemnly in the Temple , in that case of the Cuthites ) Drusius de tribus Sectis Judaeorum lib. 4. Num. 237. concerning the Discipline of the Essaeans , and their Excommunicating of ungodly persons , tells us it was done by a hundreth men Assembled together . It is very true , which M r. Selden observeth , de Jure nat . & Gentium l. 4. c. 8. the Hebrews writ of a Judiciall excommunication , and of an extrajudiciall excommunication , by which one private man might excommunicate another . Yet , that extrajudiciall excommunication could not stand in force , unlesse it were ratified by the Court ; and of it selfe , it was rather optative , or imprecative , than obligative : as is manifest by the Instance , which d Io. Coch gives us ex Gem. Moed Caton . Two men having mutually excommunicated each other , it commeth to an authoritative decision . He that had excommunicated the other , for that for which he ought to have been punished by a pecuniall mulct , but not by excommunication , was himself justly excommunicate by the other , according to the last of the 24. causes of excommunication before mentioned , that is , that he who unjustly excommunicateth another , shall be himselfe excommunicated . So the excommunicating of the one man for a civill injury was declared null : and the excommunicating of the other , for his unjust act of excommunication , was ratified . Which doth not onely prove what I have said of private , or extrajudiciall excommunication : but also confirme what I asserted before , concerning the causes of excommunication , that it was not for personall or civill injuries , but for matter of scandall . And that pecuniary mulcts and excommunication , were not inflicted for the same but for different causes . And so much for the authority . The effects of excommunication were e these . He might not be admitted into an Assembly of ten persons . He might not sit within foure cubits to his neighbour . He might not shave ▪ his hair , nor wash himself . It was not lawfull to eat nor drinke with him . He that dyed in excommunication got no Funerals , nor was there any mourning made for him , but a stone was set over him , to signifie that he was worthy to be stoned , because he did not repent , and because he was separated from the Church . An excommunicate person might not make up the number of ten , where there were nine . The reason was because he might not be acknowledged for a Church Member , or one who could make up a lawfull Assembly . Drusius de tribus sectis Judaeorum lib. 3. cap. 11. draweth two consequences from that excommunication of the Cuthites before mentioned . 1. That it was not lawfull for a Jew , to eat bread with a Samaritan . 2. That the Samaritans were cut off from the Jewish Church , and that without hope of regresse , being Shammatized . It is more disputable , how farre forth Excommunication did deprive a man of the liberty of accesse into the Temple . The Talmudists hold , that of old an Excommunicate person might enter into the Temple , yet so as he might be known that he was Excommunicate . It is said in Pirke Rabb . Elieser cap. 17. that Solomon built two Gates , one for Bride-grooms , another for Mourners and Excommunicated persons ; and when the Children of Israel , sitting between these two Gates , upon the Sabbath-dayes and Holy-dayes , did see a Bride-groome come in , they knew him , and did congratulate with him : but when they saw one come in at the doore of the mourners , having his Lips covered , they knew him to be a mourner , and said , He that dwells in this house , comfort thee . But when they saw one come in at the doore of mourners , with his Lips not covered , they knew him to be Excommunicated , and spake to him on this manner . He that dwells in this house comfort thee , and put into thy minde , to hearken unto thy Neighbours . The like you have in codice Middoth cap. 2. Sect. 2. where it is said that ordinarily , all that came into the Temple , did enter upon the right hand ; and they went out upon the left hand , those excepted to whom some sad thing had befallen ; and when it was asked of such a one , why dost thou enter upon the left hand , he either answered , that he was a mourner , and then it was said to him , He that dwells in this house comfort thee , or he answered , because I am Excommunicate ( so readeth Buxtorf ) or quia ego contaminatus rejicior ( so readeth l' Empereur ) and then it was said to him , He that dwells in this house , put into thy minde , to hearken to the words of thy companions , that they may restore thee . The same thing is cited e libro Musar by Drusius praeter . lib. 4. in Jo. 9. 22. His opinion is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that were separate and excommunicate by the lesser excommunication , were admitted into the Temple , in the manner aforesaid : but that they were not admitted into the Synagogue : because it s added in libro Musar , ( which I finde also added in the fore-mentioned place of Pirke R Elies . ) that after the temple was destroyed , it was decreed , that Bride-grooms and Mourners should come into the Synagogues , and that they in the Synagogue , should congratulate with the one , & condole with the other . Behold saith Drusius , no mention here of excommunicate persons , for they did not come into the Synagogues . Peradventure every Excommunicate person , had not accesse to the Temple neither , but he that was extrajudicially , or by private persons excommunicate , as those words might seeme to intimate , He that dwells in this house put into thy mind , to hearken to thy neighbours or companions , that they may restore thee . Or if you take it to extend to judiciall excommunication , then Hen. Vorstius doth expound it , animad . in Pirke p. 169. f so , as it may be understood onely of the lesser excommunication , when there was still hope of repentance , and reconciliation . So Io. Coch. ubi supra pag. 149. thinks that an excommunicate person was not altogether cast out of the Synagogue , but was permitted to heare , and to be partaker of the Doctrine , but otherwise and in other things he was separate , and not acknowledged for a Church Member ; and this he saith of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 menudde , of him that was simply excommunicate by the lesser excommunication or Niddui . But he saith otherwise of him that was excommunicate with Cherem . Non docet , non docetur . He is neither permitted to teach , nor to be taught . Grotius on Luke 6. 22. tells us , that excommunicate persons under Niddui , came no otherwise to the Temple than Heathens did , that is , had no liberty to come into the Court of Israel . However , such as were excommunicate by Cherem were not permitted to come neere the Temple , saith Master Weemse in his Christian Synag . p. 138. An excommunicate person of the first sort , ( Niddui , ) when he came to the Temple , or Synagogue , you see ( by what hath been said ) he was there publikely bearing his shame , and looked upon as one separate from the Communion of the people of God. And so much for the effects . The end of Excommunication was spirituall , g that a sinner being by such publike shame and separation humbled , might be gained to repentance , and thereby his soule saved ; ( which is the end of Church Discipline , not of civill censures . ) The Court waited 90. dayes upon his Repentance , and did not proceed to Cherem , except in case of his continuing impenitency , when all that time he gave no signe of repentance , nor sought absolution . From all that hath been said , I hope it 's fully manifest , that the Jewish excommunication was an Ecclesiasticall censure , and not ( as ( h Master Prynne would have it ) a civill excommunication , like to an outlary at Common Law. I conclude with a passage of Drusius de Tribus Sectis Judaeorum lib. 4. cap. 22. concerning the Essaeans , who did most religiously retaine the Discipline of Excommunication . Jus dicturi inter se congregantur centum viri , qui eos quos deprehenderint reos & improbos expellunt e caetu suo . These words he citeth out of Salmanticensis . Being to Judge or give sentence among themselves , a hundreth men are gathered together , who doe expell from their Assembly those whom they find to be guilty and ungodly . He addeth this Testimony of Rufinus . Deprehensos verò in peccatis à sua congregatione depellunt . Such as are deprehended in sinnes they put away from their Congregation . Loe , an Ecclesiasticall Excommunication because of scandalous sinnes . CHAP. V. Of the cutting off from among the people of God , frequently mentioned in the Law. IT hath been much controverted , what should be the neaning of that commination , so frequently used in the Law of Moses : that soule shall be cut off from among his people . The radix 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth properly such a cutting off , as is like the cutting off a Branch from the Tree : and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cutting off , is applied to divorcement , Deut , 24. 1. a bill of divorcement , in the Hebrew , of cutting off . So Isa. 50. 1. Ier. 3. 8. It is certaine that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 carath doth not necessarily signifie to cut off by death , destruction , or a totall abolition of the very existence of him that is cut off , but any cutting off , by whatsoever losse or punishment it be . The Septuagints render it , not seldome , by such words as signifie the losse or punishment of the party , without destroying him , as by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , abscindo , amputo , succid●… , excindo , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 avello , abstraho , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , demitto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , circumcido , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , aufere , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 percutio , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verbero . Sometime they render it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contero , extero , terendo excutio : to strike out , ( sometime , to wash out , or , to wipe off spots or filth , as H. Stephanus tels us : thence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the cloth wherewith we wipe our hands when we wash them ) Numb . 19. 13. that soule shall be cut off from Israel . The Septuagints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Yea where they render it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or cutting off is sometimes meant of captivity Amos 1. 5. sometimes of the decay and dissolution of a Monarchy Ezech. 31. 12. Sometimes of the deposition or repudiating of Priests . 1 Sam. 2. 33. the man of thine whom I shall not cut off from mine Altar . Sometimes generally for a judgement or punishment , Isa. 22. 25. The English translators in some places where it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the originall and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , render it to faile , 1 Kings 2. 4. to loose 1 Kings 18. 5. Sometime they render the same originall word to hew , 1 Kings 5. 6. to hew timber , Jer. 66. Sometime simply to cut , Ezech. 16. 4 thy navell was not cut . In other places where the Septuagints have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aufero , the English hath to faile , 1 Kings 8. 25. & 9. 5. 2 Chro. 7. 18. This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the word used by the Apostle in the case of Excommunication , 1 Cor. 5. 13. There are five different opinions concerning that cutting off mentioned in the Law. First , Augustine in divers places , understands the meaning to be of the second death or eternall condemnation . But this is not sutable to the infancy of the Jewish Church ; for whiles they were bred under the paedagogy of the Law , things eternall and invisible were not immediately and nakedly propounded unto them , but under the shadows and figures of temporall and visible things . So that if eternall death were the ultimate intendment of that commination ( as I verily believe it was ) yet it must needs be acknowledged , that there was some other punishment in this life , comprehended under that phrase , to resemble in some sort , and to shadow forth that everlasting cutting of . 2. Some understand that cutting off to be when a man dieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , without children , having no off-spring or posterity behind him to preserve the memory of him ; for he that left children behind him , was esteemed to live in some sort after he was dead . But the cutting off in the Law , is privative , not negative , it is a depriving of a man of what he hath , not the deniall of what he would have . Neither was that of the preserving of ones name in the posterity , applicable to women , but to their husbands onely ; whereas their cutting off was threatned to all that were guilty , whether men or women . Finally , if that were the sence , then the cutting off did neither belong to such as choosed voluntarily to live unmarried , nor to men who being married had children to preserve their memory after their death . But all that committed such or such a sinne , were to be cut off , whether married or unmarried , whether having children or wanting children . 3. Others understand capitall punishment to be inflicted by the civill Magistrate . But if all the offences for which cutting off was threatned in the Law , had been punished by death , the Mosaicall lawes , no lesse then those of Draco , might have been said to be written in blood , saith i Gersomus Bucerus . Is it credible that all and every one , who did by any chance , eate the fat , or the blood , or did make a perfume for smell like to the holy perfume , or did touch a dead body , or a grave , or a tent wherein a man had died , or any thing which an unclean person had touched ; and had not been thereafter sprinkled with the water of separation ; were without mercy to die for any of these things ? Yet these were cut off from among their people Exod. 30. 38. Lev. 7. 15 , 17. Num. 19. 13. 20. Another reason I take from Mercerus on Gen. 17. 14. We nowhere finde either in Scripture , or in the Jewish writings , that such of the seed of Abraham , as did neglect circumcision , were punished by the Sword of the Magistrate , yet by the Law such were to be cut off . Now without all controversie such were excluded from communion with the Church of Israel , and being so excluded they were said properly to be cut off from among their people , saith Mercerus . And moreover the cutting off in the Law , is expressed by such a word , as doth not necessarily signifie that the person cut off ceaseth to have any being , but it is used to signifie a cutting off from a benefit , relation , or fellowship , when the being remains , as was noted in the beginning . 4. Many of the Hebrews whom M. Ainsworth annot . in Gen. 17. 14. Exod. 31. 14. Numb . 15. 30. followeth , understand by that cutting off , untimely death , or the shortning of life , before the naturall period . This interpretation I also dislike , upon these reasons , 1. That which is taken for a foundation of that opinion , namely , that the cutting off in the Law is meant onely as a punishment of private sinnes known to God alone , and which could not be proved by witnesses ; this ( I say ) is taken for granted which is to be proved . 2. Yea , the contrary appeareth from Levit. 17. 4 , 5. the end of that cutting off was , that the children of Israel might feare to doe that thing which they saw so punished . But how could they make this use of a Divine judgement inflicted for some private sinne , they knew not for what ? 3. The commination of Divine judgements is added in a more proper place Deut. 28. Lev. 26. and in divers places , where wrath and punishment from God is denounced against all such as would not observe his Commandements , nor keepe his Statutes and Judgements . But the cutting off is a part ( and a great part ) of the corrective or penall Mosaicall Lawes , which containe punishments to be inflicted by men , not by God ; which makes Piscator almost everywhere in his Scholia to observe , that exscindetur is put for exscinditor , that soule shall be cut off for , let that soule be cut off . 4 ▪ The cutting off was a distinguishing punishment ; they that did such and such things were to be cut off , and in being cut off , were to beare their iniquity , Lev. 18. 29. Numb . 15. 31. But we cannot say that Abijah the sonne of Ieroboam , or King Iosiah , being taken away by an untimely death , were thereby marked with a signe of Gods wrath , or that they were cut off from among their people , and did beare their iniquity . 5. And whereas they object from Levit. 17. 10. & 20. 5 , 6. that the cutting of was a worke of God , not of men , it is easily answered from that same place , it was onely so , in extraordinary cases , when men did neglect to punish the offenders . Levit. 20. 4 , 5. And if the people of the land hide their eyes from the man , when he giveth of his seed unto Molech , and kill him not : then I will set my face against that man , and against his family , and will cut him off . Which giveth light to the other place Levit. 17. 10. What I have said against the third and fourth opinion , doth militate against Erastus , for he expoundeth the cutting off these two waies , that is either of capitall punishment , or of destruction by the hand of God , yet he inclineth chiefly to the last . See lib. 3. c. 6. He toucheth this cutting off in divers places but valde jejunè . And because he is pleased to professe he had no skil of the Hebrew , he appealeth to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Of which before . There is a fifth exposition , followed by many both Popish and Protestant writers , who understand by the cutting off , excommunicating or casting out from the Church , and of this opinion are some very good Hebritians , as Schindlerus lexic. pentagl . pag. 655. Cornelius Bertramus de republica Ebraeorum . cap. 2. Godwyns Moses and Aaron lib. 3. cap. 4. The Jewish Canons of Repentance printed in Latin at Cambridge , anno 1631. where the Hebrew hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latin hath ordinarily Excommunicatio . So doe divers of our soundest writers take the cutting off in the Law to be excommunication . Synops. pur . Theol. Disp. 48. Thes. 24. 39. There are these reasons for it . 1. The cutting off had reference to an Ecclesiasticall corporation or fellowship . It is not said , that soule shall be cut off from the earth , or cut off from the Land of the living , but , cut of from his people : more plainly , from Israel , Exod. 12. 15. Num. 19. 13. but most plainly , that soule shall be cut off from the Congregation ( or Church ) of Israel , Exo. 12. 19. that soule shall be cut off from among the Congregation ( or Church ) Num. 19. 20. intimating somewhat Ecclesiasticall . So Lev. 22. 3. that soule shal be cut off from my presence . The Septuagints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from me . The Chaldee , from my face . And this was the very cutting off or excommunication of Cain from the Church , by God himselfe Genes . 4. 14. from thy face shall I be hid . and vers . 14 , and Cain went out from the presence of the Lord. It is another and much different phrase , which is used to expresse cutting off from the world , or from the land of the living Ezech. 25. 7. I will cut thee off from the people , and will cause thee to perish out off the Countreys , Jerem. 11. 19. Let us cut him off from the land of the living . Zeph. 1. 3. I will cut off man from off the Land. 2. He that in his uncleannesse did eate of an unholy thing was to be cut off Levit. 7. 20 , 21. yet for such a one was appointed confession of sinne , and a trespasse-offering , by which he was reconciled and atonement made for him , as M. Ainsworth himselfe tels us on Levit. 5. 2. whence I inferre , that the cutting off such a one was not by death inflicted , either from the hand of the Magistrate , or from the hand of God , but that the cutting off was Ecclesiasticall , as well as the reception or reconciliation . I know M. Ainsworth is of opinion that the cutting off was for defiling the Sanctuary presumptuously , or eating of an holy thing presumptuously , when a man was not cleansed from his uncleannesse : and that atonement by sacrifice was appointed for such as defiled the Sanctuary ignorantly . But that which made him thinke so , was a mistake ; for he supposeth , that for sinnes of ignorance or infirmity onely , God did appoint Sacrifices ; but that for wilfull or malicious sinnes there was no Sacrifice . See his annot . on Levit. 4. 2. Which Faustus Socinus also holdeth praelect . cap. 22. p. 144. But to me , the contrary is plaine from Levit. 6. 1. to 8. where we have atonement to be made by Trespasse offerings , for wilfull lying , perjury , fraud , robbing , or violence , which made the Septuagints , V. 2. for commit a trespasse , to read , despising despise the commandements of the Lord. And whereas M. Ainsworth confirmeth his opinion from Heb. 10. 26. for if we sinne wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth , there remaineth no more Sacrifice for sinnes ; I answer with Calvin , Beza , Hemmingius , and others upon the place , it is not meant of all sinnes done wilfully , ( which to hold were a most dangerous and despairing Doctrine , ) but of a totall defection from Christ and the truth . And now to returne , there is nothing Levit. 5. 2. to exclude a Trespasse-offering for one who should in his uncleannesse wilfully goe to the Sanctuary , or touch an holy thing : but there is this reason , why it should not be excluded , because in that very place Verse 1. he that did wilfully , for favour or malice , conceale his knowledge , being a witnesse in judgement , was yet admitted to bring his Trespasse-offering . 3. The Apostle 1 Cor. 5. gives us some light concerning the cutting off ; for as Vers. 6 , 7 , 8. most manifestly he pointeth at the purging of all the congregation of Israel from leaven ▪ Exod. 12. so Vers. 13. when he saith , therefore put away from among your selves ▪ that wicked person , he plainly alludeth to Exod. 12. 15 , 19. Whosoever eateth that which is leavened , even that soule shall be cut off from the Congregation , ( or Church ) of Israel . Theophylact on 1 Cor. 5. 13. observeth the Apostles allusion to the old Law of cutting off : and Maccovius ( otherwise no very good friend to Church-discipline and Government ) loc . com . disp . 22. proveth that Excommunication was transferred from the Jewes to us , by Christ himselfe Matth. 18. and that the cutting off mentioned in the Law , is no other thing than that which the Apostle meaneth , when he saith , put away from among your selves that wicked person . 4. The cutting off soule from among his people did typifie or resemble eternall death and condemnation ; In which respect Peter doth some way apply it to the daies of the Gospell , that every soule which will not heare Christ the great Prophet , shall be destroyed from among his people , Acts 3. 23. So Vatablus on Gen. 17. 14. that soul shall be cut off , that is , shall not be partaker of my promises , and of my benefits . So that as I. Coch. annot ▪ in Sanhedrin . cap. 9. saith well , death inflicted by the hand of God is lesse then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cutting off . Nam exterminii post mortem poena luitur . The same thing Guil. Vorstius confirmeth out of Maimonides , annot . in Maimon . de fundam . legis pag. 127. And Abrabanel de capite fidei cap. 8. saith that the greatest reward is the life of the world to come , and the greatest punishment is the cutting off of the soule . Now this could not so fitly be resembled , and shadowed forth by the cutting off from the land of the living , either by the hand of God , or by the hand of the Magistrate , as by cutting off from the Church , and from the communion of Saints , by excommunication , which is summum futuri judicii praejudicium , as Tertullian called it , and fore-sheweth that the ungodly shall not stand in the judgement , nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous , Psal. 1. 5. But Gods taking away of a man by death in the phrase of the Old Testament , is not a cutting off from , but a gathering of him unto his people ; yea k it is said of wicked Ishmael when he died , he was gathered unto his people . And as for the abbreviation of life , and the untimelinesse of death in youth , or middle age , that both is now , and was of old , one of the things which come alike to all , to the good as well as to the bad . As touching the capitall punishment of malefactors by the hand of the Magistrate , it being founded upon the very law of nature , and common to all Nations , without as well as within the Church , ( so that very often those from whom a malefactor is cut off , are not so much as by profession the Church and people of God : ) it cannot so fitly resemble the separation or casting out of a man from having part or portion of the inheritance of the Saints in light . 5. D r. Buxtorf lexic. chald . Talm. & Rahbin . page 1101. tels us that this difference was put between him that was guilty of cutting off , and him that was guilty of death . Reus ▪ mortis , ipse tantum , non semen ejus : paena excidii comprehendit ipsum & semen ejus . Now if the punishment of death was personall one● ▪ and the punishment of cutting off , comprehensive not onely of them but of their seed , how can this agree so well , to any thing else , as to Excommunication ; especially if that hold which Godwyn in his Moses and Aaron lib. 5. cap. 2. tels us , that the children of excommunicate persons were not circumcised . 6. M. Selden de jure nat . & Gent. lib. 7. cap. 10. tels us , that the Hebrew Doctors themselves doe not agree concerning that cutting off in the Law. He saith that R. Bechai and others , make three sorrs of cutting off . i. a cutting off , whereby the body onely is cut off , which they understand by that phrase Levit. 20. 6. I will cut him off from among his people : and this is untimely death Palm 55. 23. Bloudy and deceitfull men shall not live out half their daies . 2. They say there was another cutting off , which was of the soule onely , Levit. 18. 29. the souls that commit these things ●…all be cut off from among their people . By this cutting off ( they say ) the soule ceaseth to have a being , the body not being taken away by death , before the naturall period . 3. They make a third kind , whereby both soule and body is cut off , Num. 15. 31. That soule shall be utterly cut off , his iniquity shall be upon him . Whereby ( say they ) both the body is destroyed before the naturall time , and likewise the soule ceaseth to have a being . But whatsoever any of the Hebrews fancied in their declining latter times , concerning that second kinde of cutting off , ( which M. Selden doth not approve , but relate out of them ) I am confident it was onely the degenerating notion of Excommunication ; and that very fancy of theirs , is a footstep thereof ; which may make us easily believe that the more ancient Hebrews in purer times , did understand that such a cutting off was mentioned in the Law , by which a man in respect of his Spirituall being was cut off from the Church of Israel , whiles his naturall life and being was not taken ftom him . Yea Gul●…elmus Vorstius annot . in Maimon . de fundam . legis pag. 60. sheweth us , that some of the Hebrewes acknowledge nothing under the name of the cutting off , but that which is the cutting off of the soule onely . But if there be so much as some cutting off mentioned in the Law , which concerneth a mans Spirituall estate onely , it doth abundantly confirme what I plead for : and I shall not need to assert , that everywhere in the Law Excommunication must needs be understood by cutting off . Some understand the cutting off in the Judiciall or Civill lawes , to be meant of capitall punishments : and the cutting off in the ceremoniall Lawes ( which were properly Ecclesiasticall ) to be meant of Excommunication , or cutting off from the Church onely . If anywhere the cutting off be Excommunication , it sufficeth me . Or what ever it may signifie more , or be extended unto , if Excommunication be one thing which it signifieth , then they who thinke it signifieth some other thing beside Excommunication , are not against me in this question . I shall conclude with that in the Dutch Annotations upon Gen. 17. 14. that soule shall be cut off from his people . The Annotation Englished saith thus , that man shall be excommunicate from the fellowship of Gods people . This kind of expression implies also ( as some doe conceive ) a bodily punishment to be i●…sticted withall by the Magistrate . They hold determinately and positively that it signifieth Excommunication . Whether it signifie some other thing beside , they judge not to be so cleare , and therefore offer it to be considered . It is but a poore argument , whereby Bishop Bilson , of the Government of the Church , chap. 4. would prove the cutting off not to be meant of Excommunication , because it is applyed even to capitall offences , such as the Law elsewhere appointeth men to be put to death for . As if it were any absurdity to say , that one and the same offence , is to be punished sub formalitate scandali with excommunication , and sub formalitate criminis with capitall punishment . And who knoweth not that a capitall crime is a cause of excommunication , which is also sometimes the sole punishment , the Magistrate neglecting his duty . If a known blasphemer or incestuous person be not cut off by the Magistrate as he ought by the Law of God : shall he therefore not be cut off by excommunication ? If he had proved that all the causes of cutting off in the Law were capitall crimes , he had said much : but that will never be proved . CHAP. VI. Of the casting out of the Synagogue . WE read of a casting out of the Church , which was pretended to be a matter of conscience and religion , and such as did more especially concerne the glory of God , Isa. 66. 5. Your brethren that hated you , that cast you out for my names sake , said , let the Lord be glorified . Such was the casting out of the Synagogue , mentioned in the Gospell Ioh. 9. 22. & 12. 42. & 16. 2. Arias Montanus de arcano Sermone cap. 47. expounds it of excommunication from Church Assemblies . So the Magdeburgians cent . 1. lib. 1. cap. 7. and Corn. Bertramus de repub . Ebraeor . cap. 7. Godwyn in his Moses and Aaron , lib. 3. cap. 4. & lib. 5. cap. 2. Wherein the interpreters also upon the places cited doe generally agree , Erasmus , Brentius , Tossanus , Diodati , Cartwright in his harmony , Gerhard , &c. So likewise M. Leigh out of Paulus Tarnovius , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicitur ▪ ejectus e 〈◊〉 sacro Ecclesiae , excommunicatus . See Critica Sacra of the new Test. pag. 391. So doth Aretius , Theol. Probel . loc . 133. ( though cited by our Opposites againstus ) he saith , though it was abused by the Pharisees , yet it sheweth the Antient use of the the thing it self , that there was such a discipline in the Jewish Church . It is not much materiall , to dispute which of the degrees of the Jewish Excommunication , or whether all the three were meant by that casting out of the Synagogue . Drusius , and Grotius expound , Io. 9. 22. of Niddui . Gerhard expounds Io. 16. 2. of all the three Niddui , Cherem , and Shammata . It is enough for this present argument , if it was a spirituall , or Ecclesiasticall Censure , not a civill punishment . Master Prynne , Vindic. pag. 48 , 49. tels us . First , this casting ▪ out of the Synagogue , was not warranted by Gods Word , but was onely a humane invention . Secondly , as it was practiced by the Jewes , it was a diabolicall institution . Thirdly , that it was meerly a civill Excommunication , like to an Outlary , whereby the party cast out , was separate from civill conversation onely , or from all company with any man , but was not suspended from any Divine Ordinance . Fourthly , that it was inflicted by the Temporall Magistrate . Fifthly , that in the Jewish Synagogues at that time , there was neither Sacrament nor Sacrifice , but onely Reading , Expounding , Preaching , Disputing , and Prayer , so that it cannot prove suspension from the Sacrament . To the first , I answer , it was not onely warranted by the cutting off mentioned in the Law , but Erastus himselfe gives a warrant for it from Gods word . He saith , pag. 315. the casting out of the Synagogue , was vel idem vel simile quidpiam with that separating from the congregation Ez●…a . 10. 8. To the second Aretius hath answered . The best things in the world may be abused . To the third , I offer these eight considerations to prove that it was an Ecclesiasticall , not a civill Censure . First , the causes for which men were put out of the Synagogues , were matters of scandall , offences in point of Religion , and we read of none cast out of the Synagogue for a civill injury or crime ; It was for confessing Christ Io. 9. 22. & 12. 42. then counted heresie : and for Preaching of the Gospell Io. 16. 2. Secondly , The Synagogicall Assembly or Court , was Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall , as Ludoviens de Dieu noteth upon Matth 10. 17. we read of the Rulers of the Synagogue , Act. 13. 15. among whom he that did pre●de and moderate , was called the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue Act. 18. 8. 17. names never given to civill Magistates or Judges . Therefore Brughton makes this of the Rulers of the Synagogue , to be one of the paralells betweene the Jewish , and the Christian Church . Se● his exposition of the Lords Prayer pag. 14. 16. As for that Assembly of the Pharisees , which did cast out , or excommunicate the blind man , Io. 9. Tossanus upon the place calls it Senatus Ecclesiasticus ; and Brentius argueth from this example against the infallibility of Councells , because this Councell of the Pharisees call'd Christ himselfe a finner . 3 The Court of civill Judgement , was in the Gates of the City , not in the Synagogue . 4 Such as the Communion and fellowship was in the Synagogue , such was the casting out of the Synagogue . But the Communion or fellowship , which one enjoyed in the Synagogue , was a Church-Communion and Sacred fellowship , in acts of Divine worship . Therefore the casting out of the Synagogue was also Ecclesiasticall and Spirituall , not civill or temporall . 4 The end was Sacred and Spirituall , to glorifie God Is. 66. 5. to doe God good service Io. 16. 2. in that which did more immediately and neerly touch his name and his glory , Though the Pharisees did falsely pretend that end , their error was not in mistaking the nature of the Censure , but in misapplying it where they had no just cause . 5 Master Prynne himself tells us pag. 49. That this excommunication from the Synagogue was of force forty dayes ( though I beleeve he hath added ten more then enough , and if he look over his Bookes better , he will find he should have said thirty , ) yet so as that it might be shortned upon repentance . But I pray , are civill punishments shortned or lengthened according to the parties repentance ? I know Church Censures are so . But I had thought , the end of civill punishments , is not to reclaime a mans soule by repentance , and then to be taken off : but to guard the Lawes of the Land , to preserve Justice , Peace , and good order , to make others feare to doe evill , to uphold the publike good . The Magistrate must both punish and continue punishments , as long as is necessary for those ends , whether the party be penitent or not . 6 How is it credible , that the holy Ghost meaning to expresse a casting out from civill company or conversation onely , ( which was not within , but without the Synagogue ) would choose such a word as signifieth the casting out from an Ecclesiasticall or Sacred Assembly ? ( for such were the Synagogues , in which the Jewes had Reading , Expounding , Preaching and Prayer , as Master Prynne tells us ) Christ himselfe distinguisheth the Court or Judicatory , which was in the Synagogue , from civill Magistracy Luk. 12. 11. And when they bring you unto the Synagogues , and unto Magistrates and Powers . Magistrates and Powers are civill Rulers , supreame and subordinate , but the Synagogues are distinct Courts from both these . 7 Our Opposites cannot give any other rationall interpretation of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Erastus pag. 315. confesseth , it is very hard to tell what it was . He gives three conjectures . First , that it was some ignominy put upon a man : which I thinke no body denies , and it may well stand with our interpretation . Secondly , he saith not that it was a separating of the party from all company , or society with any man. ( for which Master Prynne citeth Erastus with others ) but a pulling away , or casting out of a man from some particular Towne onely ; for instance , from Nazareth . Thirdly , He saith , it seemes also to have been a refusall of the priviledges of Jewish Citizens ▪ or the esteeming of one no longer for a true Jew , but for a Proselyte . But that a Proselyte , who was free to come both to Temple and Synagogue ( for of such a Proselyte he speaketh expressely ) should be said to be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it may well weaken , it cannot strengthen his cause . 8. In Tzemach David edit . Hen. Vorst . pag , 89. We read , that when the Sanhedrin did remove from Hierusalem , 40. yeeres before the destruction of the Temple , there was a Prayer composed against the Hereticks . Hen. Vorstius in his observ . pag. 285 ▪ sheweth out of Maimon ▪ that it was a maledictory Prayer appointed to be used against the Hereticks of that time , who encreased mightily : and that R. Sol. Jarchi addeth this explanation of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Minim , the Disciples of Jesus of Nazareth . D. Buxtorf . Lexic . Chald. Talm. & rab . pag. 1201. collecteth that this maledictory Prayer was composed in Christs time , and against his Disciples . Surely it suteth no story so well , as that of the decree of casting out of the Synagogue Io. 12. 42. After all these eight considerations , this I must adde , that I doe not a little admire , how Master Prynne could cite Godwyns Jewish Antiquities lib. 5. cap. 2. for that opinion , that the casting out of the Synagogue was not an Ecclesiasticall but onely a civill censure . If he had but looked upon the page immediately preceding , he had found this distinction between the Ecclesiasticall and civill courts of the Jewes ; The office of the Ecclesiasticall Court , was to put a difference between things holy and unholy , &c. It was a representative Church . Hence is that , di●… Ecclesiae . Matt. 18. 17. Tell the Church because unto them , belonged the power of excommunication , the severall sorts of which censure follow ; and so he beginneth with the casting out of the Synagogue , as the first or lesser Excommunication o● Niddui , and tells us among other effects of it , that the male Children of one thus cast out were not circumcised . To Master Prynnes fourth exception , the Answer may be collected from what is already said . We never find the temporall Magistrate called the Ruler of the Synagogue , nor yet that he sate in Judgement in the Synagogue . The beating or scourging in the Synagogues , was a tumultuous disorderly act ; we read of no sentence given , but onely to be put out of the Synagogue , which sentence was given by the Synagogicall consistory , made up of the Priest or Priests and Jewish Elders . For the power of judging in things and causes Ecclesiasticall , did belong to the Priests and Levites , together with the Elders of Israel . 1 Chro. 23. 4. & 26. 30. 32. 2. Chro. 19. 8. And therefore what reason Master Prynne had to exclude the Priests from this corrective power , and from being Rulers of the Synagogue , I know not . Sure I am the Scriptures cited make Priests and Levites to be Judges and Rulers Ecclesiasticall ; of which before . As for the chief Ruler of the Synagogue : Archysynagogus erat primarius in Synagoga Doctor , say the Centurists Cent. 1. lib. 1. cap 7. and if so , then not a civill Magistrate . To the fifth I Answer , 1. If there was an exclusion from Reading , Expounding , Preaching , and Prayer , then much more from Sacraments , in which there is more of the communion of Saints . 2. He that was cast out of the Synagogue might not enter in the Synagogue , saith Menochius in Io. 9. 22. therefore he did not communicate in Prayer with the Congregation , nor in other acts of Divine Worship , ( which how farre it is applicable to excommunication in the Christian Church , I do not now dispute , nor are all of one opinion , concerning excommunicate persons , their admission unto some , or exclusion from all publike Ordinances , hearing of the word and all ) I know Erastus answereth the word Synagogue may signifie either the materiall house , the place of Assembling ; or the people , the congregation which did Assemble ; and some who differ in Judgement from us in this particular , hold that when we read of putting out of the Synagogue , the word Synagogue doth not signifie the house or place of publike worship ( which yet it doth signifie in other places , as Luk. 7. 5. Act. 18. 7. ) but the Church or Assembly it selfe . But I take it to signifie both joyntly ; and that it was a casting out , even from the place it selfe , such as that Io. 9. 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and they cast him out , or excommunicated him , as the English Translators adde in the Margine . Besides , I take what it is granted . It was a casting out from the Assembly , or Congregation it selfe . But how could a man be cast out from the Congregation , and yet be free to come where the Congregation was Assembled together ? O but he must keepe off foure cubites distance , from all other men . And was there so much roome to reele to and fro in the Synagogue ? I doe not understand how a man shall satisfie himselfe in that notion . But I rather thinke Bertramus speakes rationally , that he that was excommunicate by Niddui was shut out ab hominum contubernio atque ade●… ab ipsius Tabernaculi aditu . de Rep. Jud. cap. 7. which Niddui he takes to be the same with casting out of the Synagogue . He that was cast out from mens society , must needs be excluded from the publike holy Assemblies , and from the place where these Assemblies are . Whereunto agreeth that which we read in Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin cap. 3. Sect. 9. a certaine Disciple , having after two and twenty yeeres divulged that which had been said in the Schoole of R. Ammi , he was brought out of the Synagogue , and the said Rabbi caused it to be proclaimed , this is a revealer of secrets . 3 It is more then Mr. Prynne can prove that the Sacrament of Circumcision was not then administred in the Synagogues . The Jewes do administer it in their Synagogues ; and that Iohn was Circumcised in the Synagogue , some gather from Luk. 1. 59. Venerunt , they came ( to wit to the Synagogue ) to Circumcise the Child ; for my part I lay no weight upon that argument . But I see l●sse ground for Mr. Prynnes Assertion . As for that which M. Prynne addeth in the close , that those who were cast out of the Synagogue might yet resort to the Temple , he hath said nothing to prove it . I find the same thing affirmed by Sutlivius de Presbyt . pag. 25. ( though I had thought Master Prynnes Tenen●s of this kind , should never have complyed with those of Episcopall men , against the Anti-Episcopall party ) But neither doth Sutlivius prove it ; onely he holds that the casting out of the Synagogue was meerely a civill Excommunication , and his reason is that which he had to prove , that Christ and his Disciples , when they were cast out of the Synagogues , had notwithstanding a free accesse to the Temple . To my best observation , I can find no Instance of any admitted to the Temple , while cast out of the Synagogue . I turn again to Erastus pag. 314. to see whether he proves it . He gives us two instances , first of Christ himselfe who was cast out of the Synagogues , and yet came into the Temple . But how proves he that Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ? for this , he tells us onely Quis dubitat ? who makes Question of it ? I am one who make a great Question of it● , or rather put it out of Question , that Christ was not cast out of the Synagogues ; for what saith he himselfe Io. 18. 20. I ever taught in the Synagogue , and in the Temple , whether the Iewes alwayes resort . Christ was cast out of the City of Nazareth in the tumult by the people Luk. 4. but here was no consistoriall sentence , it was not the casting out of the Synagogue of which our Question is . The other Instance which Erastus gives , helps him as little . The Apostles saith he , were cast out of the Synagogue , and yet immediately went to the Temple , and taught the people Act. 4. & 5. And how many Synagogues was Paul cast out of ? 2 Cor. 11. Yet he is not reprehended for coming into the Temple . Answ. I find nothing of the Synagogue in those places which he citeth . It was the Councell , not the Synagogue which the Apostles had to doe with Act. 4. v 5. But what have they gained if they could prove that Christ or his Apostles , while knowne to be excommunicate from the Synagogues , were admitted into the Temple ? How often did they come into the Temple , when the Priests , and Elders , and Scribes , would gladly have cast them out , but they feared the people , and so were restrained ? Nay , what if they could give other Instances , that such as were cast out of the Synagogue , were permitted to come into the Temple ; what gaine they thereby ? If we understand the casting out of the Synagogue to be meant of Niddui , of the lesser Excommunication as Drusius , Bertramus , Grotius , and Godwyne understand it , we are not at all pinched or straitned . Nay , though we should also comprehend the Cherem or greater excommunication under this casting out of the Synagogue , all that will follow upon the admission of such into the Temple , will be this , that excommunicate persons when they desired to make atonement for their sinne by Sacrifice , were for that end admitted into the Temple ( which who denies ? ) but still with a marke of Ignominy upon them as long as they were excommunicated , as I have shewed before . Chap. 4. Finally whereas Master Prynne concludeth his Discourse of this point , that we may as well prove excommunication from Diotrephes 3. Io. 10 , as from the casting out of the Synagogue , I admit the paralell thus . The Pharisees did cast out from the Synagogue such as professed Christ ; Diotrephes did cast out of the Church ( as Iohn saith ) such as received the Brethren . Both clave errante : the Ecclesiasticall censure was abused and misapplyed ; yet from both it appeareth ▪ that Ecclesiasticall Censures were used in the Church . There was a casting out of the Synagogue used among the Jewes , which the Pharisees did abuse . There was a casting out of the Church used among Christians , which Diotrephes did abuse . I remember I heard Master Coleman once draw an argument against excommunication from that Text in Iohn concerning Diotrephes . Which is as if we should argue thus , the Scripture tells us it is a sinne to condemne the righteous , Ergo it is a sinne to condemne . It is a sinne to cast out of the Church godly persons who love and receive the Brethren , Ergo it is a sinne to cast out of the Church . A fallacy à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter . The weight is laid upon the application of such a Censure to such persons : An unju● Excommunication is not imitable , but a just Excommunication is imitable ▪ according to the warning given us in the words immediately added , follow not that which is evill , but that which is good . CHAP. VII . Other Scripturall Arguments to prove an Excommucation in the Iewish Church . ANother Scripture proving Excommunication in the Jewish Church ( which is also paralell to that casting out of the Synagogue as Erastus himselfe told us ) is Ezra . 10. 8. that whosoever would not come within three dayes , according to the counsell of the Princes and Elders , all his Substance should be forfeited , and himselfe separated from the Congregation ( or Church , It is Kahal in the Hebrew , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greeke ) of those that had been carryed away . This separation from the Congregation or Church is not meant of banishment , but of Excommunication , as it is interpreted by Lyra , Hugo Cardinalis , Cajetan , Nicholaus Lombardus , Mariana , Cornelius a lapide : of Protestants Pellicanus , Lavater , Diodati , the Dutch Annotations , the late English Annotations ; all upon the place . Also by Zepperus de pol. eccl . lib. 3. cap. 7. and divers others who cite that place occasionally . Ampsingius disp . advers . Anabaptist . pag. 276. doth from that place confute the Anabaptists tenent , that there was no other but a Civill Tribunall in the Jewish Church . Beda upon the place cals this Assembly a Synod , ●…nita Synodo &c. Josephus antiq . lib. 11. cap. 5. expresseth the punishment of those who would not come to Hierusalem at that time , thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A double punishment 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : the former is referred to the persons themselves , and it signifieth an abalienation of those persons from the Congregation , not a banishing or driving of them out of the Land ; for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to abalienate a person or thing , by renouncing and quitting the right , title , and interest which formerly we had in that person or thing ; so houses , lands , persons , &c. are abalienated , when ( though they and we remaine where before ) we cease to owne them as ours ; and thus the Congregation of Israel did renounce their interest in those offenders , and would not owne them as Church-members . The other punishment was the dedicating or devoting of their substance . Gelenius the Interpreter hath rightly rendered the sence of Iosephus : Et quisquis non adfuerat intra praescriptum ●…empus , ut excommunicetur , bonaque ejus sacro aerario addicantur . You will object , this separation from the Congregation is coupled together with forfeiture of a mans estate , and so seemeth rather banishment than Excommunication . This objection being taken off , I think there shall be no other difficulty to perplex our interpretation . Wherefore I answer these two things . 1. It is the opinion of divers who hold two Sanhedrins among the Jewes , one Civill , and another Ecclesiasticall ; that in causes and occasions of a mixed nature which did concerne both Church and State , both did consult conclude , and decree , in a joynt way , and by agreement together . Now Ezra 10. the Princes , Elders , Priests , and Levites , were assembled together upon an extraordinary cause , which conjuncture and concurrence of the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall power might occasion the denouncing of a double punishment upon the contumacious , forfeiture and excommunication . But 2. The objection made , doth rather confirme me , that Excommunication is intended in that place . For this forfeiture was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a making sacred , or dedicating to an holy use , as I have shewed out of Iosephus . The originall word translated forfeited is more properly translated devoted , which is the word put in the margin of our bookes . The Greek saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , anathemstizabitur which is the best rendring of the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It was not therefore that which we call forfeiture of a mans substance . Intellige saith Grotius , ita ut Deo sacra fiat . And so the excommunication of a man , and the devoting of his substance as holy to the Lord , were joyned together : and the substance had not been anathematized if the man had not been anathematized . I doe not say that Excommunication ex natura rei doth inferre and draw after it , the devoting of a mans estate as holy to the Lord. No : Excommunication can not hurt a man in his worldly estate , further than the Civill Magistrate and the Law of the Land appointeth . And there was Excommunication in the Apostolical Churches , where there was no Christian Magistrate to adde a Civill mulct . But the devoting of the substance of Excommunicated persons Ezra 10. as it had the authority of the Princes and Rulers for it , so what extraordinary warrants or instinct there was upon that extraordinary exigence , we can not tell . Finally M. Selden de Jure nat . & Gentium . lib. 4. cap. 9. p. 523. agreeth with Lud. Capellus that the separation from the Congregation Ezra 10. 8. plane ipsum est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fieri , it is the very same with casting out of the Synagogue , which confuteth further that which M. Prynne holds , that the casting out of the Synagogue was not warranted by Gods word , but was onely a humane invention . I know some have drawne another argument for the Jewish Excommunication from Nehem. 13. 25. I contended with them , and cursed them , id est , anathematizavi & excommunicavi , saith C. a lapide upon the place . So Tirinus upon the same place . Mariana expounds it , anathema dixi . Aben Ezra understands it of two kinds of Excommunication , Niddui and Cherem . For my part , I lay no weight upon this , unlesse you understand the cursing or malediction to be an act of the Ecclesiasticall power , onely authorised or countenanced by the Magistrate : Which the words may well beare ▪ for neither is it easily credible that Nehemiah did with his owne hand smite those men and plucke off their hayre , but that by his authority he tooke care to have it done by civill Officers , as the cursing by Ecclesiasticall Officers . The Dutch annotations leane this way , telling us that Nehemiah did expresse his zeale against them as persons that deserved to be banned or cut off from the people of God. Another Text proving the Jewish Excommunication is Luke 6. 22. When they shall separate you , and shall reproach you , and ●…ast out your name as evill . It was the most misapplied censure in the world , in respect of the persons thus cast out ; but yet it proves the Jewish custome of casting out such as they thought wicked and obstinate persons . This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beda upon the place understandeth of casting out of the Synagogue , Separent & Synagoga depellant &c. yet it is a more generall and comprehensive word then the casting out of the Synagogue . It comprehendeth all the three degrees of the Jewish Excommunication , as Grotius expounds the place . Which agreeth with Munsterus Dictionar . Trilingue , where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the onely Greeke word given both for the three Hebrew words Niddui , Cherem , and Shammata , and for the Latine Excommunicatio . Wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is extermino , excommunico , repudio , which is one of the usuall significations of the word given by Stephanus , and by Scapula . It is a word frequently used in the Canons of the most ancient Councels , to expresse such a separation as was a Church-censure , and namely suspension from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . For by the ancient Canons of the Councels , such offences as were punished in a Minister by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is deposition , were punished in one of the people by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is segregation or sequestration . Zonaras upon the 13 th Canon of the eighth generall Councell , observeth a double 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in the ancient Church ●ne was a totall separation or casting out of the Church which is usually called Excommunication ; another was a suspension or sequestration from the Sacrament onely . Of which I am to speak more afterward in the third Booke . I hold now at the Text in hand , which may be thus read , according to the sence and letter both , when they shall excommunicate you , &c. Howbeit the other reading when they shall separate you , holds forth the same thing which I speake of ; separate , from what ? our Translators supply from their company : but from what company of theirs ? not from their civill company onely , but from their ▪ sacred or Church assemblies , and from religious fellowship , it being a Church-censure and a part of Ecclesiasticall discipline , in which sence , as this word frequently occurreth in the Greeke fathers and ancient Canons when they speake of Church discipline , so doubtlesse it must be taken in this place . 1. Because , as Grotius tels us , that which made the Jewes the rather to separate men in this manner from their society was the want of the Civill coercive power of Magistracy , which sometime they had . And I have proved before that the civill Sanhedrin which had power of criminall and capitall judgements did remove from Ierusalem , and cease to execute such judgement , forty yeeres before the destruction of the Temple . 2. Because in all other places of the new Testament where the same word is used , it never signifieth a bare separation from civill company , but either a conscientious and religious separation by which Church members did intend to keep themselves pure from such as did walke , ( or were conceived to walke ) disorderly and scandalously , Acts 19. 9. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Gal. 2. 13. or Gods separating between the godly and the wicked , Matth 13. 49. & 25. 32. or the setting apart of men to the ministery of the Gospell , Acts 13. 2. Rom. 1. 1. Gal. 1. 15. Thirdly , a Civill separation is for a Civill injury ; but this separation is for wickednesse and impiety , whether accompanied with civill injury or no ; they shall cast out your name as evill , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or as it seemes the Syriak and Arabik interpreters did read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tanquam improborum , as of wicked and evill men . The sence is the same . Thus farre of the Jewish Church , the Jewish Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin , the Jewish Excommunication . I proceed to the Jewish Exomologesis or publike Confession of sinne . CHAP. VIII . Of the Iewish Exomologesis , or publike Declaration of Repentance by confession of sinne . AS there were some footsteps of publique Confession among the Heathens , and namely among the Lacedemonians : l who made him that was deprehended in a crime , to compasse the Altar , and there to expresse his owne shame , and to pronounce some disgracefull words against himselfe . So , I make no doubt , they had this ( as many other rites ) from an imitation of the people of God , who had their owne Exomologesis , and publique testimonies of Repentance , which may thus appeare . First , a man was to put his hand upon the head of the Sacrifice which he brought , and so it was accepted to make atonement for him , Lev. 1. 4. and this was done in the Tabernacle publiquely before the Priest. Genebrardus and Lorinus in Psalm 31. 5. tell us out of Aben Ezra and other Rabbinicall Autors , and ex libro Siphri , that when he that brought the Sacrifice , did put his hands between the hornes of the beast which was to be offered , he did distinctly commemorate that sinne for which he did then repent , professing his detestation thereof , and promising to do ▪ so no more . M r Ainsworth on Levit. 1. 4. to the same purpose citeth out of Maimeny in treat . of offering Sacrifices , cap. 3. these words . He layeth his hands between the two hornes , and confesseth upon the same offering , the iniquity of sinne , and upon the trespasse-offering , the iniquity of trespasse : and upon the burnt offering he confesseth the iniquity of doing that which he should not ▪ and not doing that he ought , &c. Now that confession of sinne was joyned with the laying on of hands upon the Sacrifice , is not onely proved by the judgement of the Hebrews , understanding the Law in that sence , but by the Law it selfe , Lev. 16. 21. where Aaron is commanded to lay his hands upon the head of the live Goat , and confesse over him all the iniquites of the children of Israel , and all their transgressions in all their sinnes , putting them upon the head of the Goat . Secondly , the Law appointeth confession to be made at the bringing of Trespasse-offerings Levit. 5. and that in three kinds of trespasses . 1 If one heare the voyce of swearing , that is , heare his neighbour swearing or cursing , which he ought to reveale : and is a witnesse whether he hath seen or known of it : ( that is , whether he himselfe hath been present at the cursing or reviling ( of God Levit. 24. 10 , 11. or of man , 2 Sam. 16. 7. ) or hath heard it by relation from others , and knowne it that way . So the Dutch Annotations and the best Interpreters ) if he doe not utter it , then he shall beare his iniquity . The meaning is when one doth for favour or malice ( So Aretius and Pareus upon the place ) dissemble the truth , and conceale his knowledge , and so make himselfe partaker of other mens sinnes . Grotius expounds it by Prov. 29. Who so is partner with a thiefe hateth his owne soule : he heareth a cursing and bewrayeth it not . In such a case a man did greatly scandalize all those ( were they more or fewer ) who knew his dissimulation , and that he did not utter his knowledge . 2 If one had touched any uncleane thing , and not being cleansed from his uncleannesse m did goe into the Sanctuary or touch an holy thing ( whether he knew himselfe to have touched the uncleane thing , when he went into the Sanctuary , but did afterward forget it , as the Hebrews understand the place ; or whether he did not know of his uncleannes when he went into the Sanctuary ) as soon as it was revealed to him by others who did take offence at it , or otherwise brought to his knowledge , he was held guilty till confession and atonement was made . It was not simply the touching of an uncleane thing , for which the confession and trespasse-offering was appointed : Seeing the Law ( saith Ainsworth ) maketh such uncleane but till evening Lev. 11. 24 , 31. when washing themselves and their clothes they were cleane , and for uncleannesse by a dead man , the sprinkling water cleansed them , Num. 19. 17 , 18 , 19. Wherefore he resolveth out of the Hebrew Doctors , that this confession of sinne , and the trespasse-offering was required in case an uncleane person in his uncleannesse came to the Sanctuary , or did eate of an holy thing . 3 If one had sworne unadvisedly , as David , 1 Sam. 25. 22. Herod , Mark 6. 23. those conspirators against Paul , Acts 23. 21. ( which are the examples given in the Dutch Annotations , and they are examples of scandals ) if the thing were hid from him , through the distemper , impetuosity , and passion of his spirit , overclouding the eye of his mind , so that when he hath sworn a scandalous oath , he scarce knowes or remembers well the thing . Or thus ; If a man had sworne an oath to doe a thing , or not to doe it , and afterward falsified his oath , either because he could not doe what he had rashly sworne , or because he was unwilling to doe it , or because he neglected to doe it : ( Aretius puts this triple case in expounding the Text : ) When a man was brought to the knowledge of the falsifying of his oath , being told , or put in mind of it by others , saith Diodati , which was also a case of scandall . In any of these three cases , a man was to confesse his ●inne , when he brought his trespasse-offering , and the offering was not accepted without confession : Lev. 5. 5. And it shall be , when he shall be guilty in one of these things , that he shall confesse that he hath sinned in that thing . And he shall bring his trespasse-offering , &c. n This confession was made in the Priests hearing , and not to God alone , as M r Prynne affirmeth Vindic. pag. 17. For , 1. It was a cereomoniall Law , concerning the externall worship of God , and a part of the Law of trespasse-offerings . He might as well have said , that the Trespasse-offering was made to God alone , without the presence of the Priest or any other ▪ 2. He himselfe doth not deny ( but intimate ) that till such confession was made , a man was not admitted to make atonement by trespasse-offerings . And so doe the Jewes understand the Law of confession , as we shall heare by and by . Now how could it be knowne , whether a man had confessed any thing at all , if it was secretly , and to God alone ? 3. The sinnes to be confessed , were oft times scandalous and knowne to others , ( as hath been cleared . ) Therefore the confession was to be knowne to others also . 4 That this confession ( not private and auricular , but publique and penitentiall ) was made in the Temple , before and in the hearing of the Priest , I prove from Philo the Jew . In his booke de sacr . Abelis & Caini , at the close , speaking of the Levites ministery , he saith , that he did execute and performe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , all those services which belong to a perfect Priesthood , and to the bringing of man to God , whether by burnt-offerings , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aut pro peccatis quorum paenitet saith Gelenius the Interpreter , meaning the trespasse-offerings . But observe further , he speaks of the penitentiall part , as a publique thing , or rather of the publique declaration of repentance . Repentance of sinnes , that is , repentance declared or professed ( which was in the confession joyned with the trespasse-offerings ) was one of the chiefe things about which the Leviticall ministery was exercised : which is the cleare sence of the place . More plainly , the same Philo lib. de victimis towards the close , where he tels that certaine parts of the trespasse-offerings were eaten by the Priests , and that these must be eaten in the Temple , he gives this reason for it , lest the penitents sinne and shame should be divulged and punished more then needs must , which intimateth that the particular offence was so confessed that it was made knowne to such as were within the Temple . The third Scripturall proofe is Num. 5. 6 , 7. When a man or a woman shall commit any sinne that men commit , to doe a trespasse against the Lord , and that person be guilty , Then they shall confesse their sinne which they have done : and he shall recompence his trespasse , &c. The Hebrews expound it thus : All the precepts in the Law , whether they command or forbid a thing , if a man transgresse against any one of them , either presumptuously or ignorantly , when he maketh repentance and turneth from his sinne , he is bound to confesse before the blessed God , as in Numb . 5. 7. This confession is with words , and it is commanded to be done . How doe they confesse ? He saith , Oh God , I have sinned , I have done perversely , I have trespassed before thee , and have done thus and thus : and loe I repent , and am ashamed of my doings : and I will never doe this thing againe . And this is the foundation of confession . And who so maketh a large confession , and is long in this thing , he is to be commended . And so the owners of sinne and trespasse-offerings , when they bring their oblations for their ignorant or for their presumptuous sinnes : atonement is not made for them by their oblation , untill they have made Repentance and Confession by word of mouth . Likewise all condemned to death by the Magistrates , or condemned to Stripes , no atonement is made for them by their death , or by their Stripes , untill they have repented and confessed . And so he that hurteth his Neighbour , or doth him dammage , though he pay him whatsoever he oweth him , atonement is not made for him , tell he confesse and turne away from doing so againe for ever , as it is written in Num. 5. 6. Any of all the sinnes of men . All this Ainsworth transcribeth out of Maimony in Misn. treat . of Repentance , Chap. 1. Sect. 1. See also the Latin Edition of the Jewish Canons of Repentance Printed at Cambridge Ann. 1631. Where beside that passage in the first Chapter , concerning the necessity of confessing by word of mouth , that sinne for which the Trespasse offering was brought , you have another plaine passage , cap. 2. for ( o ) publike confession ( not of private sinnes known to God onely , but ) of known sinnes by which others were scandalized . In which passage I nnderstand by sinnes against God , sinnes known to God onely . 1. Because its forbidden to reveale those sinnes , therefore they were secret . 2. Because otherwise those Canons shall contradict themselves , for cap. 1. it 's told us that all who brought trepasse offerings , were bound to confesse by word of mouth , the sinne which they had done , without which confession , they got not leave to make atonement by the trespasse-offering . Now trespasse offerings were for sinnes against God as well as for sinnes against man. 3. It should otherwise contradict the Law Num. 5. 6. which appointeth any sinne or trespasse against the Lord to be confessed . 4. Those trespasses were to be publikely confessed , for which in case of impenitency and obstinacy , a man was excommunicated with Cherem , or the greater Excommunication . But a man was excommunicated for divers sinnes against God , which did not at all wrong his Neighbour , setting a side the scandall . Which I have proved before . These four reasons will prove either that the meaning of that Canon must be of private sinnes , and not of publike and scandalous sinnes against the first Table : or otherwise that the Canon is contrary to and inconsistent with both Scripture , Reason , and other Rabbinnicall writings . From the Law Num. 5. thus explained , observe concerning the Confession of sinne . 1. It was for any scandalous sinne , of commission or omission against the first or second Table . 2. It was not free and voluntary to the offender . I doe not say that he w●s compelled to it by any externall Force or coercive power : but he was commanded and obliged by the Law to confesse ; Vatablus on Num. 5. 7. Fatebuntur 1. ● . t●…nebuntur fateri , they shall confesse , that is , they shall be bound to confesse : and a man was not admitted with his trespasse offering except he confessed . 3. It was done by word of mouth . 4. And publikely before the Congregation that were present . 5. p The particular trespasse was named in the Confession . 6. Sinnes both of Ignorance and Malice , when scandalous , were to be confessed . 7. The sinner was not slinted to a Prescript forme of words in Confession , but was to enlarge his confession , as his heart was enlarged . 8. In Criminall and Capitall cases , beside the civill or corporall punishment , confession was to be made , because of the scandall which had been given . Which doth further appeare from the Talmud it selfe in Sanhedrin . cap. 6. Sect. 2. for that is observed in all who are put to death , that they must confesse ; for whoever doth confesse he hath part in the world to come ; and namely it is recorded of Achan , that Joshua said to him , my Sonne give now Glory to the Lord God of Israel , and make confession unto him ; And Achan answered , Indeed , I have sinned against the Lord God of Israel , and thus and thus &c. Whence is it collected that his confession did expiate his sinne . And Joshua said , why hast thou troubled us ? God shall trouble thee this day . This day thou shalt be troubled , not in the world to come . The like you read of Achan in Pirke R. Elieser cap. 38. I know Achans confession was not in the Sanctuary , nor at a Trespasse offering . But I make mention of it because q Erastus holdeth that under the Law , confession was onely required in such cases , where the sinne was not criminall or capitall . Which is confuted by the afore-mentioned passages in Maimonides and the Talmud it selfe : proving that whether the sinne was expiated by Sacrifice or by death , it was alwayes to be confessed ; from the same example of Achan doth P. r Galatinus lib. 10. cap. 3. prove that Declaration of repentance was to be made by word of mouth , and that the sinne was to be particularly confessed , which he further proveth by another rabbinicall passage . In the fourth place , Io. 9. 24. seemeth to hold forth a judiciall publike confession of sinne to have been required of scandalous sinners . The Pharisees being upon an examination of him that was born blind , and was made to see , they labour to drive him so farre from confessing Christ , as to confesse sinne and wicked collusion , Give God the Praise say they , we know that this man is a sinner . Which is to be expounded by Ios. 7. 19. Give glory to the Lord God of Israel , and make confession . Fifthly , as the Jewes had an Excommunication , so they had an absolution , and that which interveened was Confession and Declaration of Repentance . And hence came the Arabik 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nadam , he hath repented ; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nadim a penitent , the Niddui made the nadim : for when a man was excommunicated by the lesser Excommunication , s the Consistory waited first 30. dayes , and then other 30. dayes , and as some thinke ( the third time ) 30. dayes , to see whether the offender were penitent , ( which could not be known without confession ) and would seek absolution : which if he did not , but continued obstinate & impenitent , then they proceeded to the greater excommunication . Which doth prove a publike Confession , at least in the case of the excommunicated . Sixthly , we find a publike penitentiall confession Ezra . 10. 10. 11. And Ezra the Priest stood up and said unto them , ye have transgressed and have taken strange wives to encrease the trespasse of Israel . Now therefore make confession unto the Lord God of your Fathers , and doe his pleasure , and separate your selves from the people of the land , and from the strange wives . Marke here the foresaking of the sinne could not su●fice without confessing the sinne . All Israel had sworne and covenanted to doe the thing , to put away the strange wives vers . 5. But Ezra the Priest tells them they must also make confession of their sinne ; confession of their former trespasse must be joyned with Reformation for the future : All which the people promise to doe as Ezra had said vers . 12. But what was this confession ? was it onely a private confession to God alone ? or was it onely a generall confession made by the whole congregration of Israel at a solemne Fast and humiliation ? Nay , that there was a third sort of Confession differing from both these , appeareth by vers . 13. neither is this a worke of one day or two : for we are many that have transgressed in this thing ; yea , three Moneths are spent in the businesse , vers . 16 , 17. during which space , all that had taken strange wives , came at appointed times out of every City , and were successively examined by Ezra the Priest and certaine chiefe of the Fathers and Levites , ( such of both , as were not themselves guilty ) before whom such as were found guilty did make Confession : The Sons of the Priests made Confession as well as others , yea , with the first ; and gave their hands , that they would put away their wives : and being guilty , they offerered a Ram of the Flock for their trespasse . With which trespasse offering confession was ever joyned , as hath been before shewed from the Law. Seventhly , Master Hildersham of worthy memory in his 34. Lecture upon Psal. 51. draweth a● Argument from Davids example for the publike Confession of a scandalous sinne before the Church , He made , saith he , publike Confession of his sinne to the Congregation and Church of God ; for we see in the Title of this Psalme . 1. That he committed this Psalme ( that containeth the acknowledgement of his sinne , and profession of his repentance ) to the chief musitian to be published in the Sanctuary and Temple . 2 That in this publication of his Repentance , he hideth not from the Church his sinne , nor cloketh it at all , but expresseth in particular the speciall sinne , &c. Adde hereunto , this publike Confession was made after ministeriall conviction by Nathan , who did convince David of the greatnesse of that scandalous sinne , in which he had then continued impenitent neer a yeer or thereabout . The Doctrin which Master Hildersham draweth from Davids example is this , That they whose sinnes God hath detected and brought to light , whose sinnes are publike and notorious , scandalous and offensive to the congregations where they live , ought to be willing to confesse their sins publikely , to make their Repentance as publike and notorious as their sinne is . He addeth in his explanation , when they shall be required to doe it by the Discipline of the Church . Marke one of his applications ( which is the Subject of the 37. Lecture ) The second sort that are to be reproved by this Doctrine , are such as having authority to enjoyne publike Repentance to scandalous sinners , for the satisfying of the Congregation , when they are detected and presented unto them , refuse or neglect to doe it . And here he complaineth , that the publike acknowledgement of scandalous sinnes , was grown out of use , and that though it was ordered by authority , yet it was not put in execution . The Canons of our Church ( saith he ) can . 26. straightly charge every Minister , That he shall not in any wise admit to the Communion , any of his flock which be openly known to live in sinne notorious without Repentance . And the Booke of Common Prayer in the rubrike before the Communion , commandeth , that if any be an open and notorious evill liver , so that the Congregation by him is offended , the Minister shall call him , and advertise him in any wise , not to presume to the Lords Table , till he hath openly declared himself , to have truly repented , that the Congregation may thereby be satisfied , which were afore offended . So that you may see the Lawes and Discipline of our Church , require that open and scandalous sinners should d●…e open and publike Repentance ▪ yea , give power to the Minister to repell and keepe back such from the Communion that refuse to doe it . Where it may be observed by the way , that the Power of Elder-ships for suspending scandalous persons ( not Excommunicated ) from the Sacrament , now so much contented against by Master Prynne , is but the same Power which was granted by authority to the Ministery , even in the prelaticall times . And he hath upon the matter endeavoured to bring the Consciences of a whole Elder-ship into a greater servitude under this present Reformation , then the Conscience of a single Minister was formerly brought under by Law in this particular . Eightly , Master Hildersham Ibid. Lect. 34. argueth not onely ●… pari , but ●… fortiori . If a necessity of satisfying an offended Brother , how much more a necessity of satisfying an offended Church , which will equally hold both for the old and new Testament ? His owne words are very well worth the transcribing . This is evident by those two Laws Lev. 6. 5. 6. and Num. 5. 6. 8. where God plainly taught his people , that their trespasse offering which they brought to him , to seeke pardon of any sinne , whereby they had wronged any man , should not be accepted , till they had first made satisfaction to the party to whom the wrong was done . And le●…t we should thinke those Lawes concerned the Jewes onely , our Saviour himselfe giveth this in charge Matth. 5. 23. 24. If thou bringest thy Gift to the Altar , and there remembrest that thy Brother hath ought against thee : leave there thy Gift before the Altar , and go thy way , first be reconciled to thy Brother , and then come and offer thy Gift . And if there be such necessity of making satisfaction to any one Brother that hath ought against us , before we can get assurance of our reconciliation with God , what necessity is there of making satisfaction to a whole Church and Congregation , that we have given just cause of offence unto ? In this case it is not sufficient to approve our Repentance and truth of heart to God ; we must be willing also and desirous to approve it to the Congregation and Church of God , that we may say as the two Tribes and halfe said , Josh. 22. The Lord God of Gods he knoweth , and Israel he shall know . Thus Master Hildersham . CHAP. IX . Whether in the Iewish Church , there was any Suspension or exclusion of prophane , scandalous , notorious sinners , from partaking in the publike Ordinances , with the rest of the Children of Israel in the Temple . ERastus and his followers hold , that among the Jewes none was excluded from any publike Ordinance in the Temple , for morall uncleanesse , that is , for a prophane scandalous conversation , but onely for legall or ceremoniall uncleanesse . The like Master Prynne saith of the Passeover , and of the Temple he holds that even those who were for their offences cast out of the Synagogues , were yet free to come and did come to the Temple . I shall particularly make Answer both to Erastus and to Master Prynne in this point , when they shall fall in my way afterward . I shall here , more generally endeavour to rectifie their great mistake , and to prove an exclusion from the Temple and publike Ordinances , for publike and scandalous offences in life and conversation , or for morall as well as ceremoniall uncleanesse . First , I shall prove it ex ore duorum , from the Testimonies of two of the most famous witnesses of the Jewes themselves , Philo and Iosephus . t Philo lib de Victimas offerentibus , is so full and plaine , as if he had purposely written that Booke to record the exclusion of scandalous persons from Communion with the Church of Israel in the Temple . He presseth all along the necessity of holinesse and purity in those who bring Sacrifices , and tells us that their Law did exclude from their holy Assemblies meretricious persons , despisers of God , and all that were known to be impious and prophane , as well as those who were legally uncleane . The same thing may be confirmed out of Iosephus , u who records that one Simon a Doctor of the Law , did in the absence of King Agrippa , accuse him to the people as an impure unworthy man , who ought not be suffered to enter into the Temple . Iosephus gives a good Testimony to Agrippa , that he was unjustly accused . Agrippa himselfe sends for Simon , and askes him what he had ever done which deserved such an accusation . But neither Agrippa himselfe , nor Iosephus , saith one syllable to this purpose , that the excluding of a man from the Temple for prophanenesse and impiety was a new Arbitrary censure , contrary to the law or custome of the Jewes : which ( no doubt ) they had done , if there had been any ground for them to say so . Their very pleading of innocency , and no more , tacitely confirmeth that if guilty , it had been just to exclude from the Temple . Againe de bello Jud. lib. 4. cap. 5. Iosephus records that Ananus the high Priest ( whom cap. 7. He highly commends for good government ) had an oration to the Jewes against the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the zelots , who under colour of that name , which they took to themselves , committed a great deale of injustice and violence . He said with tears , I had rather dye then see the house of God filled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with such crimes ( or criminall persons ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the forbidden and holy places to be haunted and trode with the feet of those who are polluted with murthers : speaking of those zelots . What can be more plaine ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a piacular crime , was a cause of keeping back from the Temple ( even as also among the Heathens , some were for piacular crimes interdicted the Sacrifices ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , blood-guiltinesse , defilement by murther , was also a cause of exclusion from the Temple , and to such the Temple was a place inaccessible and forbidden . I adde a Testimony of I. Scaliger Elench . Trihaeres . Nic. Terar . cap. 28. where speaking of those Essaeans who did not observe the Mosaicall rites , he saith , Itaque non mirum , si tanquam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & piaculares aditu Templi prohibebantur . The like Constantinus l'Empereur annot . in Cod. Middoth pag 44. proves from another passage in Iosephus : vi●…i autem qui non per omnia cas●…i essent ab interiori aula prohibebantur . Where l'Empereur addeth , In spacii descripti partem interiorem non admittebant quoque haereticum : which he saith may be proved out of the Talmud . Quis enim dicat ( saith Hen. Vorstius , animad . in Pirke pag. 169. ) apostatam , blasphemum , aliaque sacra capita intra Templum fuisse admissa . Of the exclusion of excommunicate persons I have before spoken , following their opinion who hold , that such as were excommunicate by the lesser Excommunication or Niddui , had liberty to come into the Temple , yet so that they were to enter in at the gate of the mourners , and were not seen in the Temple , but as penitents : but such as were excommunicated by the greater Excommunication or Cherem were not suffered to come into the Temple , nor so much as into any assembly of ten men , and they might neither teach nor be taught . x Grotius holds that such as were excommunicated by Niddui or the lesser Excommunication had power to come to the Temple , but no otherwise then Heathens , and that they might not come into the Court of Israel : which is an answer to M. Prynnes objection , that such as were cast out of the Synagogue came to the Temple . There are but two places in the new Testament , which seem at first to make much against that which I have said . One is , Luke 18. concerning the Publicans going up to the Temple to pray , as well as the Pharisee . The other is Iohn 8. concerning the woman taken in adultery , whom they brought before Christ in the Temple . I remember y Erastus objecteth them both . To the first I answer , it rather confirmeth then confuteth what I have said . For 1. The Text saith , Vers. 13. the Publican stood afarre off : the Pharisee not so . z Grotius upon the place , Verse 11. noteth , that the Pharisees fault was not in this particular , that he came further into the Temple then the Publican : for the custome was such , that the Publicans were to stand in the Court of the Gentiles , the Pharisees in the Court of Israel . Camer . myroth . in Luke 18. is also of opinion that the Publican stood in the Court of the Gentiles , or in that first Court into which Iosephus lib. 2. contra Appion . saith , that all , even Heathens , might come . 2. And though our opposites could prove , that the Publican came into the Court of Israel , ( which they will never be able to doe ) yet this place helpes them not at all , unlesse they can prove that this was a scandalous and prophane Publican . It is certaine that divers of the Publicans were religious and devout men , and that this was one of them , we may more then conjecturally know , by the Pharisees owne words , for when he hath thanked God , that he is not as other men , adulterers , unjust , extortioners , he addeth with a disjunction , or even as this Publican , thus preferring himselfe not onely to the infamous and scandalous Publicans , but even to this devout Publican . More of this place afterward , in the debate of Matth. 18. To the other objection from Iohn 8. 2 , 3. where it is said that the Pharisees brought a woman taken in adultery into the Temple , and set her before Christ ; First , I answer with a Const. l'Empereur annot . in Cod. Middoth cap. 2. pag. 45. by the Temple , in that place , we are to understand the Intermurale , the utter Court , or Court of the Gentiles , which was without the Court of Israel , which utter Court ( saith he ) both the Evangelists and Iosephus call by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Temple . Yea the whole mountaine of the Temple , even comprehending that part of it which was without the Intermurale , had the name of the Temple , as M. Selden noteth de Jure nat . & Gent. l. 3. c. 6. p. 298. And lib. 4. cap. 5. he expounds that of the Money-changers in the Temple , to be meant of the court of the Gentiles . This answer doth the better agree to Iohn 8. because V. 2. tels us , it was in the place where all the people came unto Jesus , and he taught them . Now it is certaine that both Christ and his Apostles did often teach the people in the Coutt of the Gentiles , and in Solomons porch , which was without the Court of Israel , in the Intermurale , that all might have the better occasion of hearing the Gospell , even they who were not permitted to enter into the Court of Israel . Wherefore since the Text tels us , that when the Pharisees brought the woman to Christ , he was teaching in such a place , where all the people had accesse to heare him : this agreeth better to the Intermurale , then to the Court of Israel . Secondly , I answer , that woman did not come as a priviledged person , free to come and worship ●in the Court of Israel , with the Church of Israel ; but she is brought as an accused person , that in the most publique and shamefull manner she might be sentenced and condemned , and made vile before all the people : so that it was in her paena , non privilegium . b The Sanhedrin also did sit in the Temple , so that such as were to be examined and judged , must be brought to that place where the Sanhedrin was , which sate in that part of the Temple that was called Gazith . This might be the occasion of bringing some to the Temple as parties to be judged , who were not admitted to the Ordinances of worship in the Court of Israel . Even as the prohibition of reading atheisticall or hereticall bookes , Sanhedrin cap. 11. sect . 1. was not violated by the Councels reading or searching of them for a Judiciall triall and examination : as is rightly observed by Dionysius Vossius , annot . in Maimon . de Idol . pag. 25. And now having taken off the two principall objections , we shall take notice of such Scriptures as either directly , or at least by consequence prove , that notorious and scandalous sinners were not allowed to be admitted into the Temple , and partake in all the ordinances . 1. God reproveth not onely the bringing of strangers into his Sanctuary , who were uncircumcised in the flesh , but the bringing of those who were uncircumcised in heart , that is , known to be such , for de secretis non judicat Ecclesia , Ezech. 44. 7 , 9. Such ought not to have had fellowship in the holy things . No stranger uncircumcised in flesh , shall enter into my Sanctuary , of any stranger that is among the children of Israel . It is a law concerning proselytus domicilii , such proselytes as having renounced idolatry , and professing to observe the seven precepts given to the sonnes of Noah , were thereupon permitted to dwell and converse among the children of Israel . ( Of which more elsewhere . ) Such a one ought not be admitted into the Sanctuary , or place of the holy assemblies , there to pertake in all the Ordinances with the Church , unlesse he be both circumcised in flesh , and also in regard of his profession and practice a visible Saint , or one supposed to be circumcised in heart . The disjunction Nor tels us that if he were either uncircumcised in flesh , or known to be uncircumcised in heart , God did not allow him to be admitted to cōmunion with the children of Israel in al publik ordinances . 2. There is a Law , Deut. 23. 18. forbidding to bring the hire of a whore into the house of the Lord : and that because it was the price of a whore ; how much more was it contrary to the will of God , that the whore her selfe , being knowne to be such , should be brought to the house of the Lord ? For propter quod ununiqu●…que est tale , id ipsum est magis tale . This argument is hinted by c Philo the Jew . 3. The Lord sharply contendeth with those who did steale , murther , and commit adultery , and sweare falsely , and burne Incense to Baal , and yet presumed to come and stand before him in his owne house . Is this house which is called by my name , saith the Lord , become a den of robbers in your eyes ? Ierem. 7. 9 , 10 , 11. A den of robbers is the place which receives robbers ; and ( saith Vatablus upon the place ) as robbers after their robbing come to their denne , so doe these even after their stealing , murthering , &c. come to the Temple . To the same purpose is that challenge Ezech. 23. 38 , 39. Moreover this they have done unto me , they have defiled my Sanctuary in the same day , and have prophaned my Sabbaths . For when they had slaine their children to their Idols , then they came the same day into my Sanctuary to prophane it . But God would not have the Temple to be a receptacle for such . When Christ applieth that Scripture , Ierem. 7. against those who bought and sold in the Temple , Matth. 21. 12 , 13. he makes it cleare , that the Temple was made a den of robbers , not onely as it was made a place of gaine , or a den where the robbers prey lies , but even as it was a receptacle of the robbers or theeves themselves : therefore he is not contented with the overthrowing of the Tables of money-changers , and the seats of them that sold Doves , but he did also cast out all them that sold and bought in the Temple : that is , he would neither suffer such things , nor such persons in the Temple , yea though it was onely in the utmost Court , or the Court of the Gentiles , as Grotius and M r Selden thinke : how much lesse would he have suffered such persons in the Court of Israel . d Philo the Jew doth also apply what is said in the Prophets of Gods hating the Sacrifices of the wicked , even to the excluding of prophane men from the Temple . M r. Selden de jure nat . & Gent. lib. 4. cap. 5. doth so explaiue that casting out of the buyers and sellers out of the Temple , that the argument in hand is not a little strengthned thereby . He saith truly , that those who were cast out had polluted and profaned that holy place , ideo & ipsi , ut qui tum criminis aliorum participes , tum suo infames pariter , sie Templum seu montis Templi locum illum ipsis permissum profanabant , ejiciendi . He holdeth also that this which Christ did was done ex jure patrio , to wit , ex Zelotarum jure : and that else it had been challenged by the Priests and Scribes , if it had been contrary to the law or custome . Zelots , that is , private persons zealously affected , were permitted to scourge , wound , yea kill such as they saw publiquely committing atrocious wickednesse , by which the holinesse either of the name of God , or of the Temple , or of the Nation of the Jewes was violated . So M r. Selden sheweth out of the Talmudists , Ib. cap. 4. Now ( saith he ) Zelotarum jure , our Saviour though a private person ( for so he was lookt upon by the Priests and Scribes ) did scourge and cast out the buyers and sellers . If so , then certainly such wicked and abominable persons were not allowed to come to the Temple ; and if they did , they ought to have been judicially and by authority cast out ; for that which was permitted to private persons in the executing of justice or inflicting of punishment , out of their zeale to the glory of God , was much more incumbent to such as had authority in their hands for correcting and removing the prophanation of the Temple in an authoritative , judiciall , and orderly way . 4. The Levites had a charge to let none that were uncleane in any thing enter into the Temple , 2 Chron. 23. 19. Now this is like that 1 Cor. 5. 11. with such a one no not to eate : an argument from the deniall of that which is lesse , to the deniall of that which is more . So here , it was a necessary consequence : If those that were ceremonially uncleane were to be excluded from the Temple , much more those who were morally or impiously uncleane . For , 1. the legall uncleannesse did signifie the sinfull uncleannesse ; and the exclusion of those that were known to be legally uncleane from the Temple , did signifie the excluding of those who are knowne to be grossely and notoriously uncleane in their life and conversation . Which shall be abundantly confirmed afterwards . Therefore Bertramus de Rep. Ebr. cap. 7. saith rightly that the Levites had a charge to keepe from the Temple the uncleane aut etiam alio quovis modo indignos , or those also who were any otherwaies unworthy . 2. Godwyn in his Moses and Aaron , lib. 5. cap. 2. makes a comparison betweene the three degrees of the Jewish excommunication , and the three degrees of excluding the uncleane , Numb 5. 2. which parallel if we please to make then as for any of the three sorts of uncleannesse , the touch of the dead , issue , or leprosie , a man was excluded from the campe of God or the Sanctuary ; so it will follow that even those who were cast out by the Niddui ▪ or lowest degree of Excommunication , were fo● a time suspended from communion with the Church in the Ordinances . 3. The Levites were appointed to put a difference not onely betweene the cleane and the uncleane , but betweene the holy and unholy , Levit. 10. 10. or betweene the holy and profane , Ezech. 22. 26. & 44. 23. By cleane and uncleane I understand persons or things that were ceremonially such ; by holy and prophane , persons that were morally such . 5. I prove the same point from Psalm 118. 19 , 20. open to me the gates of righteousnesse , I will goe into them , and will praise the Lord. This gate of the Lord into which the righteous shall enter . The Chaldee saith , The gate of the house of the Sanctuary of the Lord. The gates of Gods Sanctuary , are called gates of righteousness , saith Ainsworth on the place , because onely the just and cleane might enter into them . We read also that it was written over the gates of some of the Jewish Synagogues , This is the gate of the Lord , into which the righteous shall enter . * Vatablus upon this place , thinks that David speakes by way of antithesis to the former ▪ pollution of the Sanctuary by Saul , and other wicked persons , who by comming to the house of God had made it a denne of thieve● ▪ But now the righteous shall enter in it . [ The righteous ] ●…on to such ( saith Di●…dati ) and 〈◊〉 to prophane persons , it belongeth to enter in there . 6. The same thing may be proved , from Psalm 15. 1. Lord who shall abide in thy Tabernacle ? who shall dwell in thy holy hill ? He that walketh uprightly , and worketh righteousnesse , &c. I know the chiefe intendment of God in this place is to describe such a one as is a true member of the Church invisible , and shall enter into the Heavenly Ierusalem . But certainly there is an allusion to the Sanctuary , and the holy hill thereof in Ierusalem , as to the type of that which is Spiriuall and eternall , which Iansenius upon the place noteth : and the Prophet here teacheth the people so to looke upon those offences for which men were excluded from the Sanctuary , as to learne what kind of persons are true members of the Church , and who not ; who shall be allowed to commun●cate in all the Ordinances of the new Testament , and who not ; who shall be received into everlasting life , and who not ; and thus by the type he holds forth the thing tipyfied ; Gesnerus upon the place thinkes that communion with the Church in this world is meant in the first words , Lord who shall sojourne ( so the word is jagur in the Hebrew , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek ) in thy Tabernacle . ( the name of Tabernacle fitly expressing the moveable and military estate of the Church in this world : ) and that reception into the Church Triumphant , is meant in the following words : who shall dwell in thy holy hill ? which noteth a permanent and durable estate . The Chaldee Paraphrase expoundeth the whole , of such as were thought worthy to be admitted into the house of the Lord , thus , Lord who is worthy to abide in thy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and who shall be worthy to sojourne in the mountaine of the house of thy holinesse . So Psalm 24. 3. the Chald● readeth thus , Who shall be worthy to ascend unto the mountaine of the house of the Sanctuary of the Lord ? So that the thing alluded unto in both these places , is that the Priests and Levites did admit 〈◊〉 to the Sanctuary , but such as had the markes or characters there enumerated , so farre as men can ●udge of these markes , that is so fa●e as they are externall and discernable . 7. The same thing seemeth also to be alluded unto Psalm 50. 16. Unto the wicked ( the Chaldee addes , that repenteth not , and prayeth in his transgression ) God saith , what hast thou to doe to declare my Statutes , or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth . It is spoken to a scandalous prophane man , Vers. 18 , 19 , 20. who yet will needs take upon him a forme of godlinesse . e Where Philo the Jew speakes of him that blasphemed the name of the Lord , he addeth , that it was not lawfull for all men to name the name of God , no not for Honour or Religions sake , but onely for good and holy men . And this gives me occasion to adde in conclusion a further confirmation out of the Hebrew Doctors . They held that an Israelite turning an Hereticke , ( that is , denying any of their thirteen fundamentall Articles ) to be as an Heathen man , and did therefore permit a Jew to lend to him upon usury even as to an Heathen . M. Selden de Jure nat . & Gentium . lib. 6. cap. 10. They held that such a one , an hereticall Israelite , had no communion with the Church of Israel . See Tzemach David translated by Hen. Vorstius pag. 67. Abrabanel de capite fidei cap. 3. dub . 5. & Ib. cap. 6. They esteemed an hereticall Jew , more hereticall then a Christian , and did excommunicate him , even summarily and without previous admonition . See Buxtorf . lexic. Chald. Talm. & Rabbin . pag. 195. Moses Maimonides de fundam . legis . cap. 6. sect . 10. tels us that if an Epicurean Israelite had written a coppy of the booke of the Law , it was to be burnt , with the name of that Epicurean wretch , because he had not done it holily , nor in the name of God. They who did imagine the Scripture it selfe to be polluted and prophaned , when it came thorough the hands of an Epicurean , or Hereticall Israelite , no doubt , they thought the Temple polluted and prophaned , if such a one should be suffered to come and worship in it . From all which it appeareth , how much reason L'Empereur had to say , that they did not admit an Heretick into the inner part of the Intermurale , or that part of the Temple which divided between the Israelites and Heathens . If any man shall aske , what I meane to inferre from all this . Must all prophane persons be kept back from our 〈◊〉 ●s and publike Assemblies , and so from hearing the word ? I answer ; God forbid . The Analogy which I understand is to hold between the Jewish and Christian Church , is this . As prophane persons were forbidden to enter into the Temple because of the sacramentall and typicall holinesse thereof ( for the Temple was a Type of Christ ) so prophane persons are now much more to be kept back from the Sacrament of the Lord Supper , which hath more of Sacramentall signification , mystery , and holinesse in it , then the Temple of Ierusalem had , and whereby more ample Evangelicall promises are set forth and sealed unto us . And as prophane persons might of old come into the Court of the Gentiles , and there heare the word preached in Solomons Porch ( where both Christ and his Apostles did Preach Io. 10. 23. Act 3. 11. Act. 5. 12. which Porch was in the utmost Court , That is , the Court of the Gentiles : of which else-where out of Iosephus ) but might not come into the Court of Israel , nor have communion in the Sacrifices : so prophane obstinate sinners are to be excluded , for their impiety , from the Church communion of Saints , though they may heare the word , as Heathens also may doe . Now that the Temple of Ierusalem had a Typicall Sacramentall resemblance of Christ , may appear plainly in divers particulars . 1. As the glory of the Lord dwelt in the Temple within the oracle , above the Arke and the Mercy seat ; and at the dedication of the Temple , the cloud of the glory of the Lord did visibly fill the whole house ; so in Christ the fulnesse of the God-head dwells bodily , as the Apostle speakes ▪ 2. As the great God whom the heavens of heavens cannot containe , was yet pleased to dwell on earth , by putting his name in that place ; so notwithstanding of the infinite distance between God and man , yet they are brought neer each to other , to have fellow-ship together in Jesus Christ. 3. God revealed his will , that he would accept no Sacrifices from his people , but in the Temple onely , after it was built : So God hath revealed his will , that 〈◊〉 spirituall Sacrifices cannot be acceptable to him , except in ▪ Jesus Christ onely . 4. The people of God were bound to set their Faces toward the Temple of Hierusalem , when they prayed 1. Kings 8. 30. 48. Dan. 6. 10. So are we bound in Prayer to looke toward Jesus Christ with an eye of faith 5. As there was an ample promise of God to heare the Prayers which should be made in that place 2. Chro. 7. 15 , 16. so hath God promised to heare us and accept us , if we seeke unto him in and through Jesus Christ. 6. God said of the Temple , mine eyes and mine heart , shall be there perpetually . 2 Chro. 6. 16. so he said of Chri●t , This is my well beloved Son in whom I am well pleased . 7. There was but one Temple so but one Mediator between God and man , the man Jesus Christ saith Paul. 8. As the Temple was appointed to be a house of Prayer for all Nations Isa. 56. 7. and the s●ranger , as well as the Israelite , might come and pray in it 2 Chro. 6 32. So 〈◊〉 is a propitiation , not for the Jewes onely , but for the Gentiles ; and whosoever beleeves on him , ( Jew or Gentile ) shall not be confounded . 9. Because of thy Temple at Hierusalem , shall Kings bring presents unto thee , saith the Prophet , Ps. 68. 29. so because of Jesus Christ ( who hath got a name above every name , and hath received all power in heaven and earth ) shall Kings submit themselves and bow the knee . 10. Glorious things were spoken of Ierusalem the City of God , but the Temple was the glory of Ierusalem : so glorious things are spoken of the Church , But Christ is the Churches glory . Other like considerations might be added , but these may suffice . CHAP. X. A debate with Master Prynne , concerning the exclusion of prophane scandalous persons from the passeover . THat which Master Prynne in his Vindication pag. 15 , 16. pleadeth for his opinion , from the Law of the passeover , may be ( as I conceive ) with no great difficulty answered , and I shall doe it very shortly , ( being to insist further in answering Erastus , who said much more for that point , which deserveth ●n answer ) First , in answer to our argument from the keeping back of the unclean . Num. 9. he saith , that all circumcised persons whatsoever , had a right to eat the passeover , &c. being bound to eat the passeover in its season , except in cases of necessity , disability , by reason of a journey , or of legall uncleannesse onely , not spirituall , as is cleer by Exo. 12. 3. 43. to 50. Num. 9. 1. to 15. Deut. 16. 16 , 17. Ezra . 6. 19 , 20 , 21. 2 Kings 23. 21 , 27 , 2. Chron. 35. 6 , 7. 13. 17. 18. where we read that all the people and all the males that were present received the passeover , not one of them being excluded from eating it . Answ. 1. If it was so , doth not this make as much against himselfe as against us , unlesse he will say , that the Analogy must hold so farre , that all Baptized persons whatsoever , none excepted ( if it be not in cases of necessity or disability ) how scand●lous , impenitent , and obstinate soever they be , ought to be admitted to the Lords Table ? so there shall be no excommunication at all ( which yet himselfe granteth ) for if any Baptized person , ( though such as Master Prynne himselfe would have to be excommunicated ) shall be shut out from the Church and from all publike Ordinances , and so from the Lords Supper , because of his obstinacy and continuance in some foule scandall , after previous admonitions , in so doing , we shall , by his principles , doe contrary to the Law of the passeover , in the point of Analogy . 2. The Texts cited by him , prove that men were debarred for legall uncleannesse , but there is not one of them which will prove that men were debarred onely for legall uncleannesse , and no man for morall uncleannesse . Yea , one of those Texts . Ezra . 6. 21. tells us that those who were admitted to the passeover , were such as had separated themselves from the silthynesse of the heathen of the Land , to seeke the Lord God of Israel . 3. That morall uncleannesse , I meane known prophannesse or scandalous sinnes , did render men uncapable of eating the passeover I shall prove anone by divers arguments , unto which I remit Master Prynne . That which hee objecteth from 1 Cor. 10. I am to answer also distinctly by it selfe . His second reply is , that those who were legally uncleane at the day appointed for the passeover , so as they could not then receive it , were yet peremptorily enjoyned to eat it the 14. day of the second moneth , &c. Num. 9. 11. 12. he must not be suspended from it above one moneth . Answ. The Scripture cited proves no such thing , except upon supposition that they be clean the 14. day of the following moneth . And what if any of them were in the second moneth also uncleane , by the touch of a deadbody or otherwise ? Were they not kept off in the second moneth , as well as in the first ? Is it not plainly said of the second passeover vers . 12. ( the very pla●e cited by himselfe ) according to all the Ordinances of the passeover they shall keep it ? and one of those Ordinances was the keeping back the uncleane . Thirdly , he saith , that he who was legally uncleane , was kept back neither by the Priest nor Magistrate , but by those of the same Family as vers . 6 , 7. imports . And the true reason ( saith he ) in this Text why his uncleannesse did seclude him from eating the passeover , was because it quite excluded him out of the camp for a time , ( not Tabernacle or Temple ) and so by necessary consequence from the house wherein he was to eat the passeover , &c. and by like reason it debarred him from all other Ordinances . Answ. 1 The Text Num. 9 6 , 7. tells us the unclean were kept back ; but by whom they were kept back , it tells not . That it was neither left free to the unclean person to eat of the passeover , nor to the Family to admit him , but that there was an authoritative restraint , I prove by this argument . He that was uncleane and before his cleasing did eat of the flesh of the Peace-offerings was cut off from among his people Lev. 7. 20. 21 , Therefore he that in his uncleannesse , did eat the passeover , was to be cut off also . No man will say that there was any lesse punishment intended for the pollution of the passeover , than for the pollution of Peace-offerings . And if the uncleane were not permitted , under the Law , to eat of the Flesh of the Sacrifices , or if they did they were cut off ; shall not as great care be had to keep the body of Jesus Christ ( which was signified by the flesh of the sacrifices ) and the bloud of the Covenant , from being trod under Foot by Dogges and Swine ? 2. Neither is there any such reason in that Text Num. 9. as the excluding quite out of the camp , those who were uncleane by a dead body , and so by consequence from the passeover . Nay the Text rather intimateth , that they were in the camp ; for they came before Moses and Aaron on that day , when the passeover was kept , and said , We are defiled by the dead body of a man , Wherefore are we kept back . vers . 6. 7. I hope Moses and Aaron were not without the camp . I knew the Lepers and some other uncleane persons were put out of the camp ; but there is not one of the Texts cited by him which gives the least shadow of reason to prove that the uncleane by the dead body of a man were quite excluded out of the Camp , except Num. 5. 2. And if he will beleive the Hebrew Doctors , and others upon that place , there were three Camps , the Camp of Israel , the Camp of the Levites , and the Camp of Divine Majesty ; f The uncleane by the dead were free ( say they ) to be in the first two Camps , and were onely excluded from the third . However , it s agreed , that some uncleane persons were excluded from the Sanctuary , who were not excluded from the camp of the Chidren of Israel , as is observed by Tostatus in Lev. 12. Quaest. 21. Menochius in Num. 5. 2. the English Annotations on Num. 5. 2. and others . And if Master Prynne can prove , that those uncleane persons who were excluded from the Sanctuary , were not excluded from the Passeover , let him try it . That this thing may be yet better understood , let us observe with Tostatus in Levit. 22. Quest. 7. a threefold separation of the uncleane under the Law : some were separate onely from the Sanctuary and the holy things ; for he that had but touched a man or a woman , who had an issue , or had touched the Bed , Clothes , or any thing else , which had been under him or her , was not permitted to come unto the Tabernacle , till he was cleansed Lev. 15. Others were separated both from the holy things , and from the company or society of their Neighbours , yet not cast out of the camp : for this he gives the case of women having an issue of blood , who were put apart seven dayes Lev. 15. and for the same space a woman after the birth of a male Child , was uncleane , so farre as to be kept apart from human society , but she did continue uncleane three and thirty dayes longer , as to the Sanctuary and hallowed things , during which space of the three and thirty dayes , she was not separated from company and society , as in the first seven dayes , onely she was forbidden to touch any hallowed thing , or to come into the Sanctuary . There was a third sort separated not onely from the Sanctuary , and from humane society , but also cast out of the camp , which was the case of Lepers . I conclude , all uncleane persons whatsoever were excluded from the Tabernacle Lev. 15. 31. and from eating of the flesh of the Sacrifices Lev. 7. 20. 21. Neither might any of the Sonnes of Aaron having his uncleannesse upon him eat of the holy things , though it was his Food Lev. 22. v. 2. to 7. in which places cutting off is appointed to be the punishment , not for unclean persons their being in the camp , but for their coming to the Tabernacle , or for their eating of the holy things ; and accordingly it is said 2 Chro. 23. 19. that Ichojada set the Porters at the Gates of the house of the Lord , that none which was uncleane in any thing should enter in . But we never read that none which was uncleane in any thing , was permitted to enter in at the Gates of Ierusalem , or to converse among the people . 3 Whereas Master Prynne thinkes that uncleane persons were excluded from all Ordinances , as well as from the Passeover , first , what saith he to that which Erastus holdeth and ( as he thinkes ) grounded upon Scripture , namely that all uncleane persons as well as others , were admitted to the feast of expiation ? Next , what saith he to that which is observed by Master Selden and divers others , namely , that some uncleane persons might come not onely to the mountaine of the house of the Lord , but might also enter into the intermurale ? Into that utmost Court the heathens might come and pray ; & so might the Israelites that were not legally cleane saith g Arias Montanus . The fourth and fifth Answers which M r. Prynne gives that there is no such warrant for keeping back scandalous persons from the Lords Table , as there was for keeping back the uncleane from the Passeover ; and that suspension for legall uncleannesse : proves not suspension for morall uncleannesse , These I say doe but petere principium , and therefore to be passedover , because he takes for granted what is in controversie . I shall therefore proceed to that which he addeth in the next place , in answer to an argument of mine in my controversall fast Sermon , ( as he miscalleth it ) The argument as I did propound it , was this . Those scandalous sinners that were not admitted to offer a trespasse offering ( which was reconciling ordinance ) without confession of sinne , and Declaration of their Repentance for the same , were much lesse admitted to the Passeover ( which was a sealing Ordinance ) without confession of known and scandalous sins , if they had committed any such . But circumcised persons , if they were scandalous sinners , were not admitted to offer a trespasse offering ( which was a reconciling Ordinance ) without confession of sinne and Declaration of their Repentance for the same Lev. 5. 5. 6. Ergo M r Prynne answereth pag. 17. it s a meer non-sequitur . 1. Because contradicted ( as he thinks ) by 1 Cor. 10. which is a contrarious argument , and I shall answer it in the proper place . 2. He saith that examination of the Conscience , Repentance , and Confession , are no where required of such as did eate the Passeover , it being onely a commemoration of Gods mercy in passing over the Israelites first borne , when he slew the Egyptians : but there being no remission without confession , it was necessary that those who came to offer a trespasse-offering for some particular sinnes , should confesse those very sinnes , yet not to the Priest , but to God alone . Answ. 1. If examination of the Conscience , Repentance , and confession , were not required in those that did eate the Passeover , and if there might be a worthy eating of it without this ( as he plainly intimateth when he saith that this is no where required in Scripture , of such as did eat the Passeover , though all circumstances and necessaries for the worthy eating of it , he most punctually enumerated ) And if the Passeover was but onely a commemoration of Gods infinite mercy in passing over the Israelites first borne , as he saith , ( which was but a temporall mercy ) Then he must needs say , either that in the Sacrament of the Passeover , or confirmation of faith , increase of grace , nor spirituall mercy was given , or that in that Sacrament this grace ( yea , by his Principles , conversion and regeneration it selfe ) was conferred ex opere operato . And he must either say the like of the Lords Supper , or otherwise hold that the Sacraments of the new Testament differ from those of the old , specifically ; and that the Passeover did not seale the same covenant of grace for the substance , which is now sealed by the Lords Supper . 2 What was the meaning of the bitter Herbs , with which the Passeover was commanded to be eaten ? Were not the people of God thereby taught the necessity of Repentance in that very action ? And what means it that at Hezekiahs Passeover , the people are called to turne againe unto the Lord , 2 Chron. 30. 6. that the Priests and the Levites were ashamed and sanctified themselves , vers . 15. & offered Peace-offerings made confession to the Lord God of their fathers , vers . 22. where I understand confession of sinne , according to the Law , which appointed confession of sinne to be made with the Peace offerings , which confession was signified by laying hands upon the head of the offering Lev. 3. 2. 8. 13. compared with Lev. 16. 21. and so we find Repentance joyned with peace offerings . Iudg. 20. 26. finally read we not of the peoples preparing of their heart to seeke God at the Passeover 2 Chro. 30. 19. which as it could not be without Repentance and examination of their consciences , so Hezekiah mentioneth it , as that without which the peoples eating of the Passeover , could not have been in any wise accepted . 3. That it was not a private confession to God alone , but a publike penitentiall confession in the Temple , and before the Priests , I have before Chap. 8. made it to appear both out of the Text , and out of Philo the Iew. This I adde here . The Confession of the sin was made in the place of offering the trespasse offering , before the Priest , at the laying on of hands between the horns of the beast , therefore it was not made in secret to God onely : which doth further appear , by the ●awes concerning such and such Sacrifices , for such and such sinnes , Lev. 5. and by the restitution which was also joyned with the confession Num. 5. 7. And it is also cleare from the Jewish h Canones paenitentiae cap. 1. & 2. where we find confession of ●inne to be made both by word of mouth , and publikely before the congregation . 4. In stead of making my argument a non-sequitur , he makes it a clarè-sequitur : for the first part of it not being taken off , but rather granted by him , because ( as he saith truly ) without confession of sin there is no remission of it , hence the other part must needs follow : for if it was in vaine so much as to sue for pardon in a reconciling Ordinance , when the sinne was not confessed ; how much more had it been a taking in vaine of the name of God , & a prophaning of a sealing Ordinance , to seale up pardon to a scandalous sinner , who had not so much as confessed his scandalous sin , but continued in manifest impetency ? But we will trie whether his third and last answer can relieve him . It is this : That every particular communicant before he comes to receive the Sacrament , makes a publike confession of his sinnes to God with the rest of the congregation , and in words at least , voweth newnesse of life for the future , there being no communicant that ever I heard of ( saith he ) so desperatly wicked and atheisticall , as not to professe heartily sorrow for all his forepast sinnes , or to avow impenitent continuance in them when he came to the Lords Table . Behold , what a latitude ? If the vilest sinner practically persevering in a scandalous sinne , shall but joyne with , and not gainsay the publique confession of the whole congregation ( wherein the best men doe and ought to joyne ) and in words promise newnesse of life ( and who will not promise to endeavour to live better ? ) nay if he have but so much wit , as not to professe or avow impenitency : then M r. Prynne alloweth his admission to the Sacrament . But is this the confession that my argument did prove ? nothing like it . It was a particular confession of such a sinne by name , Levit. 5. 5. and it shall he when he shall be guilty in one of these things , that he shall confesse that he hath sinned in that thing : and with the confession there was a reall amendment . For instance , a recompencing of the trespasse with the principall , and the addition of a fifth part , when the case did so require , Num. 5. 7. Then they shall confesse their sinne which they have done , and he shall recompence his trespasse , &c. This is that my argument did drive at , and it still stands in force to conclude that the confession of the particular sinne which hath given publique scandall , i together with the forsaking of it externally and in practice , is so necessary , that without these the admission of a scandalous sinner is a most horrible prophanation of the Sacrament . But now finding the argument concerning the Passeover and legall uncleannesse to have been more fully prosecuted by Erastus than it is by M r. Prynne , I doe resolve to trace it hard at the heeles whithersoever it goeth . CHAP. XI . A Confutation of the strongest arguments of Erastus , namely , those drawn from the Law of Moses . AMong Erastus k his arguments against Excommunication , three of them , namely , the first , the seventh , and the sixteenth , are all one for the substance , the strength of them lying in this supposition , that the Scripture doth not restraine , nor keep off any from the Sacrifices nor any other Sacraments ( as he speaketh ) of the old Testament , because of a wicked or scandalous conversation : but contrariwise commandeth that all the males both Jewes and forreiners , being circumcised , and not being legally uncleane , nor in a journey , should compear thrice in the yeere before the Lord at Ierusalem , to keepe the three solemn feasts , of the Passeover , Weeks , and Tabernacles . Now ( saith he ) Christ hath not in this thing destroyed nor altered the Law of Moses , nor hath he made the rule straiter now then it was then : but as then all circumcised , so now all baptized persons must be acknowledged for Church members , having a right to partake of Church priviledges : and as then there was no discipline or punishment for the flagitious and wicked , except by the hand of the Magistrate ; so ought it to be in like manner in the Christian Church . This argument he trusteth very much unto . And because it is the common opinion , that the excluding and separating of the uncleane under the Law , did signifie the excluding of scandalous sinners from communion with the Church , he spendeth l a long chapter against that opinion , and laboureth to make it appeare that the legall uncleannesse did signifie the corruption of our nature and unbeliefe ; that exclusion from the Temple did signifie exclusion from the heavenly Paradice ; and that the cleansing and reception into the Temple , did tipyfie the cleansing of our souls , and the turning of us to God by the blood of Jesus Christ. Now here I shall make such animadversions , as shall not onely enervate the strength which these arguments may seem to have against Church censures : but also afford some strong reasonings against Erastus , from those very grounds rightly apprehended , from which ( upon misapprehensions ) he disputeth against the excluding of scandalous sinners . First , it is certaine that for divers sinnes against the morall Law , the sinners were appointed not onely to bring their Trespasse-offerings , but to confesse the sinne which they had committed , and to declare their repentance for the same , and till this was done , the Trespasse-offering was not accepted . Let us but have the like , that is a confession of the sinne , and declaration of repentance , and then men shall not be excluded for scandals formerly given . m Erastus himselfe acknowledgeth that in this point of the confession of sinne , the analogy must hold betwixt the old and new Testament ; onely he pleadeth , that the very act , the very desiring of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , is really a confession that he is a sinner who desireth it : and that , much more , it may suffice , if sinners being asked by the Minister , confesse themselves to be sinners , and that they have not perfectly kept the Commandements of God. But all this , say I , can not satisfie the argument drawn from that confession of sinne under the Law. For , 1. It was not a confession ipso facto , by the bringing of the Trespasse-offerings , but by word of mouth , and n thus it hath been expounded by the Hebrew Doctors . The owners of siune and Trespasse-offerings , when they bring their oblations for their ignorant or for their presumptuous sinnes , atonement is not made for them by their oblation , untill they have made repentance , and confession by word of mouth . 2. It was not a generall confession that one is a sinner , and hath not perfectly kept the Commandements of God , ( for who did ever refuse to make such a confession , that were in their right wits ? that limitation is as good as nothing , when we speake of the suspending of any from the Lords Table . ) But it was a confession of the particular individuall sinne , which had been committed , Levit. 5. 5. And it shall be when he shall be guilty in one of these things , that he shall confesse that he hath sinned in that thing . Marke , in that thing . Num. 5. 7. Then they shall confesse their sinne which they have done . o Which Law is to be understood of all like sinnes and trespasses , that is , that other sinnes which were expiated by Sacrifice , were first to be confessed . All this maketh against Erastus . Next , whereas he saith p that this confession or declaration of repentance for sinne , in the old Testament , had place onely in those sinnes for which the Law appointed no particular punishments : and that there was no confession imposed where the Magistrate was to punish the crime : This with a great deale of boldnesse and considence ( as his manner is ) he doth maintaine : Intending thereby ( it seems ) to exempt from all manner of Church-discipline whatsoever is punishable by the civill Magistrate , as adultery , perjury , and the like . But that which he affirmeth so strongly , is manifestly contrary to the expresse Law , Levit. 6. from vers . 1. to vers . 8. where wilfull lying , and perjury , robbing and violence , fraud and couzenage , all these were to be confessed and expiated by Sacrifice ; notwithstanding that they were also to be severely punished by the civill Magistrate . Nay , in that very place it is commanded that what had been violently taken away , or deceitfully gotten , or fraudulently detained , should be restored , and moreover a fifth part added thereto , for a mulct , yet this did not exempt the sinner from making confession . So Num. 5. 6 , 7 , 8. for one and the same offence the Law enjoyneth both that confession be made and expiation ; and moreover that recompence be made to the party injured or to his kinsman . Yea the Law , Num. 5. 6 , 7. speaketh universally ; When a man or woman shall commit any sinne that men commit , &c. then they shall confesse their sinne which they have done . Which made the Hebrews extend this Law to criminall and capitall cases , as M r. Ainsworth upon the place noteth out of these words of Maimony . Likewise , all condemned to death by the Magistrates , or condemned to stripes ; no atonement is made for them by their death , or by their stripes , untill they have repented and confessed . And so he that hurteth his neighbour , or doth him dammage , though he payeth him what ever he oweth him , atonement is not made for him till he confesse . Therfore Erastus is still a double loser in arguing from the Law of Moses . It proves not what he would , and it doth prove what he would not . Thirdly , men were kept from the Sanctuary of the Lord , not onely for ceremoniall , but for morall uncleannesse , I meane for publique and scandalous sinnes against the morall Law. Ezech. 44. 7 , 9. God was offended when such proselytes were brought into his Sanctuary , as were either uncircumcised in flesh , or uncircumcised in heart ; that is , whose practise or conversation did declare them to be uncircumcised in heart : else the Lord would not have challenged those who brought such proselytes into his Sanctuary , if their uncircumcision of heart had not been externally manifested , so that it might be perceived by his people ; according to that Psalm 36. 1. The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart , that there is no feare of God before his eyes . To the same purpose we read Ezra 6. 21. not that all proselytes , nor all uncircumcised , but onely all such as had seperate themselves from the filthinesse of the Heathen of the Land , to seeke the Lord God of Israel , did eate of the Passeover . Moreover we may argue by a necessary consequence from Scripture . The ceremoniall uncleannesse was a cause of exclusion from the Sanctuary , and from the holy things . Therefore much more morall uncleannesse . It was more sinfull in its selfe , and more abominable in Gods sight for those who did steale , murder , commit adultery , sweare falsely , and burne Incense to Baal , to come and tread in the Courts of the house of the Lord , and to offer Sacrisices there , as if Gods house had been a denne of robbers , Isa. 1. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14. Ierem. 7. 9 , 10 , 11. This I say was more abominable to God then if he that had touched a dead body , or had come into the tent where a man died , should have come unto the Tabernacle in his legall uncleannesse . Therefore when Christ casteth out the buyers and sellers out of the Temple , it is not for ceremoniall but morall uncleannesse , and he applieth to them the words of Ieremiah , Ye have made it a denne of theeves , Matth. 21. 13. with Ierem. 7. 11. And as it was more sinfull to the person , and more hatefull to God , so it was more hurtfull to the soules of others , who were in greater danger of infection from the morall , then from the ceremoniall uncleannesse . This q Erastus denieth indeed , but his expression is unsavoury and unholy , which I am ashamed to repeat . Sure the Apostle speaketh farre othewise Heb. 13. 15 , 16. Lest any root of bitternesse sp●…inging up trouble you , and thereby many be defiled ; lest there be any fornicator , or prophane person , as Esan . A prophane or scandalous person defileth , you see , many others : and sinne was of a defiling nature under the old Testament , as well as under the new . I meane a root of bitternesse not plucked up , a prophane person not censured , doth defile others , as well as himselfe . Both Peter and Iude have told us , that scandalous persons are spots and blemishes in the communion of Saints , 2 Pet. 2. 13. Iude vers . 12. So that as Erastus granteth , that one legally uncleane could make others legally uncleane among whom he came , and therefore was kept off from fellowship and company with the congregation of Gods people : It must likewise be granted , that scandalous persons are to be suspended from the sacred communion of the Christian Church , because if they should be admitted , the Church should be thereby sinfully defiled . For if the saying God speed to a false teacher make us partakers of his evill deeds 2 Iohn 10. how much more doth the admitting of such or the like scandalous sinners to the Lords Table make ( I say not all who communicate then and there , but ) all who consent to their admission , to be partakers of their evill deeds . Fourthly , whereas r Erastus holdeth that the exclusion of the uncleane under the Law , did onely typyfie something which is to come to passe in the life to come , that is , the shutting forth of sinners from the Heavenly Paradice , if they be not washed from their silthynesse by the blood of Jesus Christ : and therefore ought not to be unto us any argument for the exclusion of scandalous sinners . I answer , If the shutting out from Heaven was the onely thing signified , and if there be a fit analogy or proportion between the Type and the thing typified , then 1. one may be in Heaven and cast out againe , and in and out againe , as under the Law one might be many times admitted to the Temple and shut out againe . 2. It would also follow , that there is some other exclusion greater then the exclusion from Heaven , as under the Law there was a greater exclusion than the exclusion from the Sanctuary , and that was to be cast out from the company and conversation of Gods people : s for though every uncleannesse which did exclude one from the company of the Israelites , did also exclude him from the Sanctuary ; yet every uncleannesse which did exclude one from the Sanctuary , did not exclude him from the company of the Israelites . Even as now among us , suspension from the Lords Table is not the greatest and worst exclusion , but there is another greater then that . Thus you see Erastus could not make his Type agree with his Antitype . Whence it doth further appeare that the exclusion of the uncleane under the Law , did teach and hold forth somewhat in a politicall sence , touching the communion and fellowship of the Church in this life . Whatsoever it might signifie more , I will not now dispute , but this it did signifie . And this I shall so farre make good , that I shall at once both answer Erastus , and propound a strong argument for the keeping off from the holy things those that are morally aud scandalously encleane . First , let it be remembered that I have proved already from Heb. 13. 15 , 16. 2 Pet. 2. 13. Iude vers . 12. that the people of God are defiled by communion and fellowship with scandalous sinners . In the second place consider that prophecy , Isa. 52. 1. Put on thy beautifull garments , O Jesusalem , the holy City : for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised aud the uncleane . That whole Chapter is a prophecy concerning the condition of the Church in the New Testament , as is evident by six parallels at least . Vers. 5. with Rom. 2. 24. Vers. 7. with Rom. 10. 15. Vers. 10. with Luke 3. 6. the beginning of Vers. 11. with Revel . 18. 4. the following part of Vers. 11. with 2 Cor. 6. 17. Vers. 15. with Rom. 15. 21. Neither is it the Church invisible , but the Church visible , for Vers. 15. is applied to the calling of the Gentiles Rom. 15. 21. and Vers. 11. to the Churches open separation from Babylon , Revel . 18. 4. It is also the Church ministeriall Vers. 7 , 8 , 11. How beautifull upon the mountaines are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings , &c. Thy watchmen shall lift up the voyce , &c. Be ye cleane that beare the vessels of the Lord. It remaines to consider what is meant by the uncleane , Vers. 1. it cannot be meant of legall uncleannesse ( the ceremoniall Law being abolished ) nor of the hid uncleannesse of close hypocrites ( for in that sence it is onely the priviledge of the Church triumphant , that no uncleane thing , nor no hypocrite shall enter there . ) It must therefore be meant of such as are visibly or scandalously uncleane . And when it is said , there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised , and the uncleane , it must be understood respective , the uncircumcised , signifying such as are not fit to be at all Church-members : the uncleane signifying such as are not fit to have communion in the holy things : for so these two were distinguished under the Law. Thirdly , there is another place which ( to me ) puts it out of controversie , 2 Cor. 6 : 14 , 15 , 16 , 17. Where the Apostle exhorteth believers to avoyd all intime conversation or fellowship with unbelievers , by marrying with them , by going to the Idoll Temples , or the like ; he concludeth with a manifest allusion to the legall ceremony , Be ye separate , and touch not the uncleane thing , or the uncleane things as the Syriacke hath it . And what agreement hath the Temple of God with idols , Vers. 16. Where the Syriack readeth thus : And what agreement hath the Temple of God with the temple of Divels ? Remember , would the Apostle say , that as under the Law , the touching or eating of uncleane things made those that touched them , or did eate of them to be uncleane ; so doth your fellowship with unbelievers , or your eating in their Idoll temples defile you . And as then those that had touched any unclean thing were not received into the Sanctuary , so I will not receive you into fellowship with me and my people , saith the Lord , except you be separate from the sonnes of Belial . Therefore touch not the uncleane thing , and I will receive you : Which is not spoken of receiving us into Heaven , but of receiving us into the Tabernacle of God in this life , as is manifest by Levit. 26. 11 , 12. the place cited by the Apostle in the words immediately preceding . And I will set my Tabernacle among you , and my soule shall not abhorre you . And I will walke among you , and will be your God , and ye shall be my people . And in this manner , God saith he will not receive us , except we avoid fellowship with the workers of iniquity , especially in holy things . I shall adde fourthly , for further cleering of this point in hand , Peters vision , and the interpretation thereof Act 10. & 11. a passage cited by Erastus pag. 138 , 139. while he is proving , that the thing signified by the legall uncleannesse , was onely the corruption and Infidelity of nature which excludeth a sinner from heaven . The place is so farre from proving what he would , that it proveth the contrary ; for it speaketh plainly of that uncleannesse which excludeth men from fellow-ship with the Saints in this life ; from companying together , from eating together . And when Peter expoundeth the vision , he saith , ye know how that it is an unlawfull thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company , or to come unto one of another Nation : but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean , meaning for being a Gentile and not a Iew. Act. 10. 28. you see , the not eating nor touching of unclean Beasts , Birds , and creeping things ( such as Peter saw in the vision ) was understood by the people of God , as forbidding their association or fellowship in this world with Heathens , or irreligious persons , and such as walked not according to the Law. And in this sence the Law was understood , not onely by Peter , but generally by the Jews Act. 11. 3. Gal. 2. 12. Nay fifthly , the legall uncleannesse , in the sence of the Jewes , did signifie not onely such things as did exclude others from fellow-ship with them , but such as did exclude the Jewes themselves from the holy things . Therefore it is said Io. 18. 28. they themselves went not into the Judgement hall , lest they should be defiled : but that they might eat the Passeover : Intimating that if they had gone into the house of an uncircumcised man , or had upon such a day gone into the Judgement Hall about a litigious action , they had been unclean , and so might not eat the Passeover . Whether it were the coming into the house of Pilate , he being a man uncircumcised ; or t whether it were ( which I rather think ) a litigious action upon a Holy-day , which might have defiled them : this is plaine , that they thought there was a morall uncleannesse ( signified by the ceremoniall uncleanesse ) which might keep men from the Passeover . The fifth animadversion shall be this : whereas Erastus holdeth pag. 106. that under the law every one was judged cleane or uncleane , according to his owne judgement and conscience , aud not according to the Priests , the Lepers onely excepted ; Also that when a man had committed any sinne , it was in the free will of the sinner to expiate his sinne when he pleased , and he was no way compelled to it . I answer , If every uncleane person except the Leper was allowed to judge and pronounce himself cleane when he pleased , then to what purpose did u that Law serve Lev. 7. 20. 21. or that whoever was uncleane and had not purified himself , was not to be admitted to come into the Tabernacle , and if he presumed to come , he was to be cut off from the congregation Num. 19 ? By Erastus his principles no man should have been cut off , if he had pleaded himself not to be uncleane ; and how many would doe so , if that could save them from being cut off ? Is it not also plaine from Levit. 15. 15. 30. 31. that both men and women who were uncleane by their issues , ( not by Leprosie ) were to bring an offering to the Priest for their cleansing , otherwise were not to be accounted cleane , but lookt upon as defilers of the Tabernacle in their uncleannesse , whatever they might thinke of themselves . So women that were unclean after Child-Birth , had not power to pronounce themselves cleane , and were not free to come to the Sanctuary when they pleased , but they were first to bring a sinne offering , and the Priest was to make atonement for them Lev. 12. 6. 7. 8. There was a certaine number of dayes appointed for the cleansing , both of women after Child-Birth , and of men who had an issue , yea , when the dayes of the cleansing were full-filled , they were not free to come unto the Tabernacle , except they brought their offering for atonement . Lev. 12. 6. 7. & 15. v. 13. 14. 15. Philo the Jew de vita Mosis lib. 3. pag. 531. tells us there was a certaine definit time , till the expiring whereof , those that were uncleane by a dead body , were excluded from the Temple . Iosephus antiq . Iud. lib. 3. cap. 10. records the like , not onely of Lepers , but of those that had an issue , or were defiled by the dead , that till the set time was fulfilled , all these were kept back from the congregration . The other thing which Erastus saith , that it was left free to the sinner to expiate his sinne when he pleased , doth no better agree with the Word . for it was commanded that upon the very knowledge of the sinne , the trespasse offering should be brought , and the sinne confessed Levit. 4. 14. 28. & 5. 3. 4. 5. Sixthly , whereas Erastus pag. 105. urgeth the universall Law , by which all are commanded to keep the Passeover except the uncleane , and those in a journey , therefore all others ( how flagitious or scandalous soever in their lives ) were bound to keep it ; I answer . Who knows not , that many universalls in Scripture are to be restricted , and not to be understood as the words at first sound ? as Io. 2. 10. every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine , that is every Master of a feast Luk. 13. 15. doth not each one of you on the Sabbath lose his Oxe or his Asse ; that is each one that hath an Oxe or an Asse ; Io. 10. 8. all that ever came before me were Theeves and Robbers , meaning whoever before him did make himself the true doore , by which the sheep must enter in . So Ioel. 2. 28. I will poure out my spirit upon all flesh , yet not upon all and every one , but upon those onely whom he receiveth in Covenant . Rev. 13. 8. and all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him ( the Beast ) whose names are not written in the Booke of life ; yet there have been many reprobates who neither worshipped the Pope nor knew him : but it is meant of all under the power of the Beast . So when all are commanded to keep the Passeover , it must be understood of all sit persons , and such as were not to be excepted . You will say the Law excepteth none , but the unclean , and those in a journey , therefore all others not excepted were to keep it ; for where an exception is made from an universall Rule , that Rule is the more sure and certaine concerning all other particulars not excepted . To that I answer , Erastus himself addeth another exception , and that is , of the sick who could not be present . The Hebrewes make divers other exceptions , for they say , Women and Servants are not bound to appear : but all men are bound except the deaf , and the Dumb , and the Foole , and the little-Child and the Blinde , and the Lame , and the defiled , and the uncircumcised ; and the old man , and the sick , and the tender and weake which are not able to goe up on their Feet . All these eleven are discharged &c. See Ainsworth on Exo. 23. 17. And compare this with Maimonides de Idolol . ch●o . 11. Sect. 18. where he that hearkens to Sooth-sayers , Wizards , Charmers , and the like , is said to be reckoned among Fooles and Children whose reason is imperfect . Therefore these were to be excepted as well as Fools and Children , and so were other scandalous persons , which I shall prove anon . A Seventh Animadversion shall be this . Erastus in these Arguments of his from the Law , doth confound Sacraments with Sacrifices ( as I touched in the beginning ) yea , x he argueth expressely , that whoever were admitted to expiate their Sinne by Sacrifices , were thereby admitted to Sacraments , because ( saith he ) all these Sacrifices were true Sacraments . So he speaketh in other places , that he might seeme to dispute the more appositely for promiscuous admission to the Sacrament of the Lord Supper . y But Sacrifices and Sacraments are as different as Giving and Receiving . In Sacrifices man is the giver , God is the Receiver . In Sacraments God is the Giver , Man is the Receiver . In Sacrifices Peace is made with God. In Sacraments it is sealed and supposed to be made . They therefore that hold the Passeover was a Sacrifice ( an opinion partly grounded on Deut. 16. 2. and partly taken from the Jewes dispersed , who though they observe divers paschall rites , yet they doe not kill the Paschall Lambe , nor keep the Passeover according to the Law , it being to them unlawfull to offer Sacrifices , except in the Land of Canaan ) have the shorter evasion from Erastus his Argument touching the admission to the Passeover . But I have given other answers . And this much shall suffice for answer to the Erastian Arguments drawn from the Law of Moses , which some suppose to be the strongest . CHAP. XII . Fourteen Arguments , to prove that scandalous and presumptuous Offenders against the morall Law ( though circumcised and not being legally uncleane ) were excluded from the Passeover . THere is so much weight laid , both by Erastus himself , and by Master Prynne , upon the universall Law commanding all that were circumcised to eat the Passeover , except such as were legally uncleane , or were in a journey : that I am resolved , once for all , to demonstrate against them , that men were excluded from the Passeover , for scandalous and enormous Trespasses against the morall Law , as well as for legall uncleannesse . Peradventure it will seeme to some , that I undertake to prove a paradox , and to walke in an untrodden or obscure Path. Yet my Arguments are such , as I trust shall weigh much with intelligent men . The first Argument shall be this . ( which is hinted by Ursinus and Pareus Explic. catechit . Quest. 85. art . 2. ) Whosoever by Gods appointment were excluded from the priviledges of Church Members , and not to be reckoned among the Congregation of Israel , those were by Gods appointment excluded from the Passeover . But whosoever committed any scandalous sinne presumptuously , or with an high hand , were by Gods appointment excluded from the priviledges of Church Members and not to be reckoned among the Congregation of Israel . Ergo. The Proposition hath this manifest reason for it . Those all who were commanded to eat the Passeover , cannot be understood to be of a larger extent then the Church of Israel : Those therefore who were not to be acknowledged or used as Church-Members , were by Gods appointment excluded from the Passeover . The Assumption is proved from Numb 15. 30. 31. But the soule that doth ought presumptuously ( whether he be born in the land , or a stranger ) the same reproacheth the Lord , and that soule shall be cut off from among his people , Because he hath despised the word of the Lord , and hath broken his commandement , that soule shall utterly be cut off : his iniquity shall be upon him . The presumption here spoken of , is not onely the presumption of heart ( saith Cajetan ) of which God onely is Judge , but a presumption manifested in word or work , which he conceives to be intimated by the Hebrew phrase , with an high hand . Grotius understands one that either denyes that there is a God , or that the Law was given by God , or after admonition goeth on in his trespasse . But sure he mistakes the punishment , which he understands to be extrajudiciall , and that he who finds one thus sinning presumptuously , may kill him ex jure Zelotarum , as Phinehes did kill Zi●…i and Cosbi . I have spoken before of the cutting off , which I will not here resume . Onely this , such presumptuous and contumacious sinners were not to be reckoned among the people of God , nor to enjoy the priviledge of Church Members , therefore not admitted to the Passeover . Secondly , Iosephus de bello Iud. lib. 7. cap. 17. speaking of such as were permitted to eat the Passeover , in the time of Cestius , doth thus designe them , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , being all of them pure and holy , not onely pure from legall uncleannesse , but such as were also esteemed holy . But moreover , it is clear from Io. 18. 28 , they themselves ( the Jewes ) went not into the Judgement Hall lest they should be defiled : but that they might eat the Passeover : that the Jewes did so understand the Law , that morall as well as ceremoniall uncleannesse , did render them uncapable of the Passeover : for they had no such ceremoniall Law , that they who come into the Judgement Hall , should be legally or ceremonially uncleane : yet this had disabled them from eating the Passeover : for they held litigious or forensicall actions unlawfull upon a holy day as Capellus , and Casaubon ( above cited ) doe prove . Such a finfull and scandalous act had kept them back from the Passeover . Thirdly , if we consult the Chaldee paraphrase upon Exod. 12. 43. it saith thus . Every Sonne of Israel , who is an Apostate , shall not eat of it . And upon the same place Master Ainsworth proves out of Maimonides that no Apostate nor Idolater was permitted to eat of the Passeover . Yea , some Israelites who were not apostates , nor idolaters , were for a seandalous action excluded from civill , how much more from Ecclesiasticall fellow-ship ? See Maimon ; of Idolatry cap. 9. Sect. 15. With an Israelite , who hath made defection to the worship of Idolls , it is forbidden to have traffique or commerce either in his going or returning : with another Israelite going to the Markets and Faires of Heathens , we are onely forbidden to have commerce in his returning . If it was unlawfull to them , so much as to have civill commerce with an Israelite coming from the Markets of Heathens ( fearing lest he had sold some what which was dedicate to Idolatry , as the reason is there given ) although he was no Apostate nor Idolater : it is not easily ●imaginable , that such a one was freely admitted to the Passeover . Fourthly , an Israelite though circumcised , and not legally uncleane , yet if he either turned Idolater , or an Heretick , or an Epicurean , was no longer acknowledged to be in Church-Fellowship or Communion , therefore rendred uncapable of the Passeover . Is. Abrabanel in his Book de capite fidei , as he sheweth whom they esteemed Apostats or Hereticks cap. 12. so he also intimateth that such were excluded from the communion of their Law Cap. 3. dub . 5. none being acknowledged to be in the Communion of Israel , who did not beleeve the Articles of faith professed in the Jewish Church Cap. 6. yea , he tells us Cap. 24. ( which the Talmud it self saith ●…it . Sanhedrin . cap. 11. Sect. 1. ) that Hereticall or Epicurean Israelites were lookt upon as excluded from having portion in the world to come . And as Doctor Buxtorf sheweth out of their owne writers , they esteemed an Hereticall Israelite to be so abominable , that they did straight and without delay excommunicate him . Lexic . Chald. Talm. & Rabbin . pag. 195. How is it then imaginable that they admitted such a one to eat the Passeover ? Let us heare R. Moses Maimonides himself de Idololatria cap. 2. Sect. 8. An Idolatrous Israelite is as an Heathen in all things which he doth &c. So also Israelites who are Epicures are not esteemed to be Israelites in any action of theirs &c. Now they are Epicures who aske counsell from the thoughts of their own mind , being Ignorant of those things we have spoken of , untill having transgressed the chief heads of the Law , they offend by contumacy and presumption , and say there is no sinne in this thing . But it is forbidden to speake with them or to answer them ; for it is said , come not neer the door of her house Prov. 5. 8. Therefore the whorish woman that Solomon speakes of , was ( in the opinion of Maimonides ) such a one as was not to be esteemed as an Israelite , nay nor such as was to be spoken with , much lesse to be admitted to the Passeover . yea , Maimonides de Idal . cap. 10. Sect. 2. saith yet more . But those Israelites which forsake their religion , or become Epicures we are bidden kill them and persecute them even unto hell . How could they then admit to the passeover those whom they thought themselves obliged to persecute even unto hell ? Fifthly , those Arguments which prove an exclusion of known prophane persons from the Temple , will also prove an exclusion of known prophane persons from the Passeover : for none might eat of the Passeover , who might not also come into the Temple . That scandalous prophane persons might not come into the Temple , hath been proved already . Sixthly , I argue from the lesser to the greater . If men were to be kept back for legall uncleannesse , much more for morall uncleannesse , this being more hatefull to God and more hurtfull to men then the other . This just consequence Grotius annot . in Luk. 6. 22. doth admit . If by the Law saith he , one that was leprous or had a filthy scab , was separated from mens company , lest he should infect others , it was no ill consequence . that ( if no heavier thing ) this at least should be imposed on flagitious & wicked persons , who did by the contagion of their sinfull example hurt others , & bring a reproach upon the whole congregation from which the congregation could not be made free , but by some publik detestation of that wickednes ▪ thus Groti : Seventhly , the purging out of leven from the Congregation of Israel , was a significant teaching Ceremony ▪ holding forth this duty , that the Church ought to put away wicked persons from among them ; for so doth the Apostle expound it 1. Cor. 5. vers . 6. 7. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe ? purge out therefore the old leaven . Which relateth not onely to the purging of their own hearts , but to the purging of the Church , and the putting away of that wicked person , this being the scope of the whole Chapter . Now the morall signification of that ceremony of purging out the leaven , did concerne the Church of Israel as well as the Christian Church ; even as the divers washings under the Law did teach and hold forth the duty of sanctification and purity to the people of God at that time , as well as typifie the sanctification of the Christian Church . Eighthly , though the hallowed bread might in case of necessity be lawfully given to David and his men , ( the Ceremonials of the first Table yeelding to the Substantials of the second ) yet Abimelech the Priest would not adventure to give it , till he understood that the young men had then kept themselves at least from women , 1 Sam. 21. 4 , 5 , 6. this being a part of that sanctification which was required in those who did partake of holy things , not onely among the Hebrews , but among other Nations , as Hugo Grotius noteth upon the place , and upon Exod. 19. 15. Now the Shew-bread , or the twelve loaves which did shew or present the people to God , can not be supposed to be holier then the Paschall Lambe which did shew or present Christ to the people , and was a Sacrament or Seale of the covenant of grace . David also and his men in that danger of their lives had as good right to eate the Shew-bread , as any Israelite could pretend to for his eating the Passeover : yea that was a substantiall duty of the second Table , which Christ himselfe justifieth : this was a ceremoniall duty of the first Table , and grounded on a positive law . This therefore doth afford me an argument with manifold advantages . For if the Shew-bread might not be given to David and his men in their extreame necessity , unlesse they had for a certaine space before abstained from the use of their wives , otherwise lawfull : how much lesse might the Passeover be given as an holy Ordinance ( which did not concern the saving of mens lives in extreame necessity ) to scandalous persons living in known whordome and adultery ? Ninthly , I argue from that place , Ezech ▪ 22. 26. Her Priests have violated my law and have prophaned mine holy things : they have put no difference between the holy and prophane . Will any man say , that they were to put a difference between the holy and prophane in other Ordinances , and not in the Passeover ? and why not in the Passeover , as well as in other Ordinances ? If such difference was to be put in the Passeover , then how shall one imagine that no man was kept backe from the Passeover because of known prophanesse or morall uncleannesse ? for what difference was put between the holy and prophane , when the prophane were received as well as the holy ? M r Coleman held that this Text reacheth not to the keeping pure of the Ordinances by any act of government , but onely that the Priests did prophane the holy things in their owne practice , by eating in their uncleannesse , and also in their ministery because they taught not the children of Israel to put a difference between the cleane and the uncleane . Maledicis pag. 11. But the Text gives not the least ground to restraine this fault of the Priests here reproved , either to their personall actions , or to their doctrinall ministery . Nay the Text will reach to an act of government neglected ; for the word here used to expresse the distinguishing or putting of a difference between the holy and prophane is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is often used in Scripture to expresse an act of government or authority , whereby one person is separated or distinguished from another person , or one thing from another thing , as Ezra 8. 24. Then I separated twelve of the chiefe of the Priests , &c. Ezra 10. 8. all his substance should be forfeited , and himselfe separated from the congregation . Here it signifieth such a separation , as was a publique censure : why not also Ezech. 22. 26 ? The same word is used in the story of the division of the Land by Ioshua , Iosh. 16. 9. And the separate Cities for the children of Ephraim . It is used also to expresse Gods dividing of light from darknesse , Genes . 1. 4. also his separating of Israel from all other Nations , Levit. 20. 24. And whereas M r Coleman did take hold of the following words in that place of Ezechiel , neither have they shewed difference between the uncleane and the cleane , as being meerly doctrinall . First , ( if it were so ) how will it appeare that these words are exegeticall to the former , and that the putting of difference between the holy and prophane , mentioned in the former words , was onely meant of shewing the difference doctrinally ? or why may we not rather understand , that the Priests are charged with neglect of duty both in Doctrine and Government . Secondly , even that latter word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fecerunt scire , the Septuagints render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : and they use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Synonymous with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : by all these ( signifying to separate or to divide ) they render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea the Septuagints expresse a forensicall censure or judiciall separation by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Ezra 108. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So that when they retalne the same word in rendering 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this Text of Ezekiel , they doe thereby intimate that the latter word will reach a power which was more then doctrinall , as well as the former . Which I doe the rather assert , because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken by the Septuagints ( not seldome ) as agreeing in signification with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de voluntate sua certiorem reddidit , constituit , decrevit : so that it will reach the making of others to know a thing , not onely doctrinally , but by rules , Canons , Statutes , and Government . Yea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will reach the teaching or making men to know by censures or punishments inflicted , as Iudg. 8. 16. Gedeon tooke briars and thornes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pagnin , & confregit . and he brake with these the men of Succoth . Hierome , & contrivit . The Septuagints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comminui●… . The English Translation , and with these be taught ( in the Margent made to know ) the men of Succoth . For this signification of the word , namely conterere , Arias Montanus in his Hebrew Lexicon citeth Isa. 53. 3. Ezech. 19. 7. So conteri Psalm 74. 5. Prov. 10. 9. Upon this last place Mercerus tels us that the Hebrews doe not onely admit this sence of that Text , but in other places also take the same word pro confringi . So that without the least violence to the Text in Ezekiel it may be thus read ; They have not separated ( or put difference ) between the holy and prophane , neither have they broken ( or divided ) between the uncleane and the cleane . The latter part seemeth to charge the Priests with the admission of such as were legally uncleane ; the former part , with the admission of such as were morally uncleane or prophane , to such ordinances as were appointed onely for the holy and cleane . Tenthly , Heathens or strangers who were not Proselytes of the covenant or of righteousnessè , were not permitted to eate of the Passeover . Now one that is by profession a Church member , but living in prophanesse and scandalous wickednesse , ought to be esteemed as an Heathen , Matth. 18. 17. yea as worse than an Infidell , 1 Tim. 5. 8. Hence was it that the word Heathen was used for an irreligious or wicked man , as is observed by Mathias Martinius in lexic. philol . pag. 717. 718. and as a discriminating name from believers ; so Zonaras in Cone . Carthag . Can. 24. When David speaks of his persecuting wicked enemies , though Israelites , he cals them strangers and heathen , Psal. 54. 3. Psal. 59. 5. How then can it be supposed , that those who were esteemed as heathens , were admitted to all Church priviledges , as well as the best Israelites ? Eleventhly , that which was among the Jewes a sufficient cause to deny circumcision to him who desired to be admitted and received into the Jewish Church as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ger ben berith , a proselyte , sonne of the covenant , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ger tsedeck , a proselyte of righteousnesse , was also a sufficient cause to deny the Passeover to a proselyte who desired to eate it . Even as now that for which we may and ought to refuse Baptisme to one that desireth it , must needs be also a cause and reason to refuse the Lords Supper to him that desireth to receive it ; for he that is not fit to be baptized , is much lesse fit to receive the Lords Supper . But prophanesse or a scandalous conversation was among the Jewes a sufficient cause and reason to refuse Circumcision . Yea as D r Buxtorf tels us in Lexic . Chald. Talm. & Rabbin . pag. 408. before the Jewes would circumcise or baptize a proselyte ( for after circumcision they did baptize him ) they did first examine him exactly , and prove him narrowly , whether he desired to be a proselyte , from covetousnesse , ambition , feare , the love of an Israelitish virgin , or the like sinister end . If upon examination it did appeare that he was not moved by any worldly consideration , but by affection to Religion and the glory of God , then they proceeded to set before his eyes the strictnesse of the law , and how strait and narrow a path he must walke in , telling him also of the persecutions and tribulations of Israel . If after all this triall they found him stedfast in his desires and resolutions , then they received him , he being first instructed in the Articles of their faith , and in the Commandements of the Law. How much lesse would they have circumcised a scandalous person , being so farre from any hopefull signes of sincerity , that he had the blacke markes of a worker of iniquity ? And if they would not receive such a scandalous flagitious person to circumcision , how could they receive such a one ( being circumcised ) to the Passeover ? Twelfthly , compare Ezra 6. 21. with Ezra 10. 16 , 17. First it is marked Ezra 6. 21. that such proselytes did eate the Passeover with the children of Israel , as had separated themselves unto them from the silthinesse of the Heathen of the Land , to seeke the Lord God of Israel . If those who did eate were thus qualified , it is not obscurely intimated , that those who were not thus qualified did not eate . And if no proselyte who did not separate himselfe from the filthinesse of the Heathen , was allowed to eat the Passeover , then muchlesse was an Israelite who did not separate himselfe from the silthynesse of the Heathen , allowed to eat it . I like well Beda his observation upon Ezra 10. 16 , 17. Israel was purged from unlawfull marriages , and the strange wives put away ; and this worke was ended against the beginning of the first moneth , to the intent that none defiled with unlawfull mariages might eate the Passeover , Ut ante initium mensis primi consummarentur omnes qui prophano erant connubio maculati , id est a tali scelere purgarentur , quatenus ipsum mensem primum in quo erat pascha faciendum , mundi intrarent , mundi paschalia festa peragerent &c. Thirteenthly , I argue from the signification of the legall or ceremoniall uncleannesse , and from that which was signified by the exclusion of those that were legally uncleane . Without all controversie the keeping backe of such , was a significant ceremony . For all the legall ceremonies concerning cleannesse or uncleannesse were teaching ceremonies , and are therefore called Doctrines , Matth. 15. 9. Col. 22. 2. What was taught and signified thereby , I have before shewed , namely , that prophane ones be not admitted to fellowship with Gods people in their holy things . Yea , was not prophannesse and open wickednesse more hatefull to God than legall uncleannesse ? yes saith Erastus pag. 144. because God appointed greater punishments for the former then for the latter : the greater crimes were punished by fire and sword , stoning , hanging ; the smaller by mulcts , and stripes . But yet ( say I ) by his grounds the legall uncleannesse was more hatefull to God than prophanesse and wickednesse , in reference to fellowship in the holy things , ( for that is the point ) He holds that the most flagitious and prophane were commanded of God to eate the Passeover , and yet those that were onely Iegally uncleane were forbidden : though the Scripture say , Prov. 15. 8. & 21. 27. that the Sacrifice of the wicked is abomination to the Lord , and the oblations of those whose hands were full of blood , his soule hated , and he could not away with them ▪ Isa. 1. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14. and when they came to his house , he told them , When ye come to appeare before me , who hath requird this at your hands , to tread my courts ? I shall not need to insist here , upon the excluding of bond servants , and those that were bought with money , from the Passeover , and the admitting onely of those that were free . Which z some of the Zurik Divines themselves have interpreted to signifie the exclusion of those who are servants of sinne , and of those who seeke onely the things of the earth . But there is one argument more ( it shall be the last ) which doth convince me , that others besides the uncircumcised , and they that were legally uncleane , even those that had scandalously transgressed the morall Law , were excluded from the Passeover . The ground of my argument is that whereof I have spoken before , the law for confession of sinne and declaration of repentance ; without which the Trespasse-offering was not accepted Levit. 5. 5 , 6. which Law is extended to every knowne sinne that was to be expiated by Sacrifice , Numb . 5. 6 , 7. When a man or woman shall commit any sinne that men commit , to doe a trespasse against the Lord ( the 70 read , and despising he despise ; to note rebellion or co●macy ) and that person be guilty ( that is be found guilty , or when the sinne shall be known , so the phrase of being guilty is explained , Levit. 4. 13 , 14. ) Then they shall confesse their sinne which they have done . After which followes restitution to the party wronged , and atonement made by the Priest. Whence I argue thus . If the scandalous persons were not admited to the Trespasse offering ( which was a reconciling Ordinance ) without confession of their sinne , which was knowne to have been committed by them , much lesse were they admitted to the Passeover ( which was a sealing Ordinance ) without such confession of their sinne . But scandalous persons were not admitted to the Trespasse-offering , ( which was a reconciling Ordinance ) without confession of their sinne which was known to have been committed by them . Therefore much lesse were they admitted to the Passeover , ( which was a sealing Ordinance ) without such comession . This argument I did before Chap. 10. vindicate from M r. Prynne . I will here further strengthen it , and vindicate it from another exception , which peradventure will be made against it . The proposition is certaine : for some are called to make their peace with God , who can not have any assurance sealed unto them , that their peace is made with God ; But if God will not be reconciled , he will farre lesse seale reconciliation . There is no peace to the wicked saith God , how much lesse can their peace be sealed to them ? The assumption is manifest from the Scriptures last cited . And if any shall say that the Law , Levit. 5. is meant onely of private sinnes , and those of ignorance , which so soon as they come to knowledge , are to be confessed : I answer . 1. It s more then can be proved , that onely private sinnes and those of ignorance are there meant of . Of this I have spoken elsewhere . But be it so . If some private sinnes , yea sinnes of ignorance were to be publiquely confessed when they were known , how much more were publique and scandalous sins to be publiquely confessed ? 2. The Hebrews understand the Law of confession to be extended to all sinnes whatsoever that were expiated by Sacrifice , and that before atonement could be made , the sinner must make confession and say , O God I have sinned , and done perversely , I have trespassed before thee , and have done thus and thus : and lo I repent and am ashamed of my doings , and I will never doe this thing againe . 3. In all Sacrifices for atonement or expiation a man laid his hand upon the head of his offering , Levit. 1. 4. Exod. 29. 10 , 15 , 19. This laying on of hands was the rite used in confession of sinne , whereby a man did professe that he was worthy to be destroyed for his sinne , and that he laid his sinne upon the beast which was killed in his stead , thereby figuring that upon Christ are laid the iniquities of us all . And with the laying on of hands upon the Sacrifice , confession of sinne was made by word of mouth ; which as it is the judgement of a Interpreters , so it is easily proved from Levit. 16. 21. And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live Goat , and confesse over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel , and all their transgressions in all their sinnes , putting them upon the head of the Goat . Whereupon I conclude , that any sinne which was expiated by Sacrifice , whether a publique or secret offence , was confessed before it was expiated . 4. The Law Numb . 5. 6. extends confession to any sinne that men commit , as hath been before observed . 5. Philippus Gamachaeus a learned Doctor of Sorbon , comment . in tertiam partem Thomae , de Paenitentiae Sacramento cap. 13. doth ingenuously acknowledge , that the foresaid law of Moses , concering confession of sinne , is no warrant for their private auricular , and Sacramentall confession , b because the Jewes were not by that Law bound to confesse any other sinnes , but sinfull actions or externall transgressions , nor all such , but chiefly the notorious and scandalous sinnes . If he had perceived the least colour of an argument , from that Mosaicall Law , for the necessity of confessing private sinnes to the Priest , surely he had taken hold of it , and had not quit it . CHAP. XIII . Master Prynnes Argument from 1 Cor. 10. ( which he takes to be unanswerable ) discussed and confuted . MAster Prynne in the 15. page of his Vindication endeavoureth to prove , that spirituall pollution by reason of grosse and scandalous sinnes , did not debaree them that were circumcised from the Passeover . as Paul ( saith he ) expressely determines 1 Cor. 10. 1. to 10. ( an unanswerable Text to this purpose ) moreover Brethren I would not that ye should be ignorant that : ( the Text saith how that ) all our Fathers were under the Cloud , and all passed through the Sea , & were all Baptized unto Moses in the Cloud & in the Sea ; and did all eat the same spirituall meat ( to wit the Passeover and Manna ) and did : all drinke of the same spirituall drinke , for they dranke of the Rock that followed them , and that Rock was Christ. But perhaps all these Communicants were visible Saints , free from any legall pollution , at least not Tainted with any scandalous sinne : The Apostle to take off this evasion , subjoynes , in the very next words . But with many of them , God was not well pleased , &c. So that the Israelites being once circumcised , were all admitted to eat the Passeover , though some of them were Idolaters , others lusters after evill things ; others fornicators , others tempters of Christ ; others murmurers against God and Moses . The same argument he hinteth pag. 9. to prove the like under the Gospell . It 's one of Erastus his argments , Confirm . Thes. pag. 118. 119. and as colourable as any other , yet not unanswerable as Master Prynne holds . For 1. though he saith the Apostle cleerly determines , that those who were tainted with grosse and scandalous sinnes , were admitted to the Passeover ; yet I finde nothing of the Passeover , neither in the Text , nor in the sence of any Interpreter which I have looked upon . Nay , it did not so much as fall in the thoughts of Erastus himself ; for Beza having objected to him that he ought to have compared our Sacraments with the purely sacred Feasts in the old Testament rather than with the manna , and with the water of the Rock , which were for corporall nourishment ; Erastus replyeth nothing concerning the Passeover ( which had been his best answer if he had seen any probability for it , ) onely he saith that he compareth our Sacraments with the manna and the water of the Rock , as the Apostle doth before him . 2. The Text it self seemeth rather to determine clearly , that the Passeover is not there intended for all the other particulars there mentioned did agree to all the Israelites , men , women , and Children : all these were under the Cloud , and all these passed through the Sea , and all these drank of the water of the Rock ; and why shall we not understand , that all these did also eat of the same spirituall meat , that is of the Manna , not of the Passeover , of which women and Children under 13 yeares of age did not eat : neither did all the males above 13 yeares eat of it ▪ for the unclean were excluded by the Law : those that were in a journey did not eat of it nor the hired Servant : the sick saith Erastus did not eat of it : the Jewes exclude also the Dumbe and the Deaf . If it be said , that vers . 1. speaketh onely of the Fathers , and that therefore the Text is not to be understood of women and Children also . I answer , This is as inconsequent , as if one would argue , Paul saith Men , Brethren , and Fathers , therefore no women were among that multitude of the people Act. 21. 35. 36. 39. 40. or thus , the Apostle saith Brethren pray for us , therefore he desires not beleeving Sisters to pray for him . In this same Text in hand , the Apostle speakes to the whole Church of Corinth , to make them afraid of Gods judgements if they sinne as the Israelites did . If he had argued onely from the sinne and judgement of the men , and not also of the women in the wildernesse , the women in Corinth had so much the lesse applyed it to themselves . But if I should grant ( which will never be proved ) that by the Fathers are understood the men onely , yet it cannot be said that as all the men of Israel were Baptized in the Cloud and Sea , and all of them drank of the same spirituall drink which came out of the Rock , so all of them did eat the Passeover ▪ for even of the males divers were excluded from the Passeover , as the unclean , the hired Servant , the Child , the sick , &c. so that this would make the Apostles argumentation running upon a five-fold all to hang ill together . I had not insisted at all upon this , but to shew the weak grounds of M r. Prynnes strong confidence . 3. If this argument of his hold good , he must grant by Analogy that all Baptized persons must be admitted to the Lords Table , though they be Idolaters , fornicators , &c. which as it is contrary to the Ordinance of Parliament , so to his own professed Tenents , for he professeth otherwhere , he is not for the admission of scandalous persons to the Sacrament , and that he would have them in case of obstinacy , not onely suspended from the Sacrament , but excommunicated from all other Ordinances , till publike satisfaction given for the scandall , and till externall symptomes of repentance appear . So the Antidote animadverted tells us and his owne vindication pag. 50. If this be his minde , then it is incumbent to him to loose his owne knot , all circumcised persons though Tainted with grosse scandalous sinnes , as Idolatry , and Fornication , were admitted to the Passeover , and so it ought to be under the Gospell . If he say that those scandalous sinners in the wildernesse had not been admonished , were not obstinate , or that they professed repentance , and promised amendment , and did not in the meane while persevere in their wickednesse , but satisfied for the scandall : first how proves he that ? next , in so saying he will answer for us as well as for himself , and his argument ( if all granted ) cannot prove that such scandalous sinners as have manifest symptoms of impenitency , or doe not confesse and forsake their sinne , may be admitted to the Lords Table . 4. The Manna and the water out of the Rock , though they had a spirituall and evangelicall signification , and di● typifie Jesus Christ , yet they were also the ordinary Food and Drink of the people in the wildernesse : so that if scandalous sinners had been excluded from partaking of these , they had been deprived of their ordinary daily corporall nourishment ; which makes a vast difference between their case in the wildernesse , and ours at the Lords Table . 5. The Apostle speakes of those scandalous sinnes , as committed , not before , but after the eating of that spirituall meat , and drinking of that spirituall drink ; first this is cleer of their Baptisme in the Cloud and in the Sea , which was at their passing through the Red Sea , Exod. 14. before any of the grosse and scandalous sinnes there mentioned were committed ; and therefore was not pertinent to be objected . Immediately thereafter they did eat of the spirituall meat , that is of the manna Exo. 16. and drank of the spirituall drink , that is of the Water out of the Rock which followed them Exod. 17. to give drink to my people , my chosen saith the Lord Isa. 43. 20. Now after those men had eaten of the spirituall meat , and drunk of the spirituall drink , they did fall into Idolatry , Fornication , &c. and this is all which the Apostle saith , thereby warning the Corinthians not to presume upon their partaking in the Ordinances , nor to think all well with themselves , because they were Baptized , and had eaten and drunk at the Lords Table ; for after all this they had need to take heed , lest they fall in foule sinnes , and lust after evill things , and so draw upon themselves the heavier judgements . That which Master Prynne takes for granted ( upon a marvellous mistake of the Apostles words ) he hath yet to prove , that is , that after some of them had fallen into Idolatry , others into fornication , others into murmuring against God , those who were known to have committed those grosse and scandalous sinnes , were allowed and admitted , as before , to eat of the spirituall meat , and drink of the spirituall drink . I mean not onely the Passeover , ( which is not at all meant in this Text ) but even from the Manna and the water of the Rock those scandalous sinners were cut off by death , except such of them as did repent and turn , for whom atonement was made to God. As soon as Moses came into the camp , he gave a charge to slay every man his Brother , and every man his companion which had committed the sinne of Idolatry : and for the rest who survived Moses made atonement , and got an answer of Peace from God , concerning them . Exo. 32. & 33. We read also that the Lord plagued the people , because of their Idolatry Exo. 32. 35. and the people did mourn and humble themselves and cast off their Ornaments Exo. 33. 4. So that ( I am sure ) the first case mentioned by the Apostle maketh much against our Opposites . The second example is the matter of Peor , where they did fall both into Idolatry and Fornication together ; but what came of it ? Moses gave a charge to the Judges of Israel , to slay every one his men that were joyned to Baal Peor Numb . 25. 5. and there died also of the Plague 24000. v. 9. But what was the peoples part in Repenting ? vers . 6. tells us , that all the congregation of the Children of Israel were weeping before the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation ; and for those that remained alive , Phinehes made atonement , and the Lord smelled a savour of rest vers . 11. 13. As for the third case , instanced by the Apostle , which is the tempting of Christ , much people of Israel dyed for it , and the remnant did repent , and confesse that particular sinne that they had spoken against the Lord and against Moses , and therefore did desire Moses , to pray unto the Lord for them . Num. 21. 6. 7. Lastly , for that of murmuring , those that had the chiefe hand in it died of the Plague , Num. 14. 37. and the people mourned greatly , and confessed , We have sinned vers . 34. 40. And thus by searching for an Answer to our Opposites argument , we have found this argument against them . If God himself did execute such Discipline upon those who were tainted with the grosse and scandalous sinnes of Idolatry , Fornication , &c. That he would not permit them to enjoy their former liberty of eating of the Manna , and drinking of the Water of the Rock , ( being spirituall meat , and spirituall drink , as Typifying Christ , though appointed of God also for ordinary daily food and drink to his people ) untill they mourned , repented , confessed , and atonement was made for them : It is much lesse the will of God , that such scandalous sinners , as are manifestly impenitent and manifestly not reconciled to God , should be admitted and received to the Lords Supper , which is an Ordinance purely spirituall . But the former part is true . Therefore so is the latter . 6. Another Answer I shall adde , ( though I need adde no more ) Those sinnes mentioned by the Apostle were not scandals given by a few persons , nor yet by a few Families , nor by a Tribe , but they were common nationall sinnes ; and so fall not within the verge of our Controversie , which is not concerning the suspending of a scandalous Nation from the Sacrament , for some nationall sinne ; but concerning the suspension of scandalons persons for their personall publike offences . If it be objected unto me , that the Apostle saith , that some of them were Idolaters , and some of them did commit Fornication , &c. I answer , when he saith some , he saith so in reference to the All which had gone before , that is , all the Israelites who did eat of the Manna and drink of the water of the Rock , during the 40 yeers in the wildernesse , successively : so that he makes a distribution of Israel in the wildernesse , comparing one passage with another , not distributing those that lived together at one and the same time . And that it must needs be so understood I prove from Exo. 32. where we find all the people falling into Idolatry , so Num. 14. 2. And all the Children of Israel murmured against Moses and against Aaron . The other two are also called the sinnes of the people , and of Israel , and the people were punished , and for one of them all the Heads of the people commanded to be hanged . Num. 21. 5. 6. & 25. 3. 4. Peradventure every one did not act in each of these sinnes , but yet they were nationall ( as we call nationall ) sinnes , the generality of the Children of Israel , either acting or partaking therein . In such a case Augustine thought fit to suspend the exercising of Excommunication for the sinne of drunkennesse rather than to excommunicate all Africa . These are my six answers to Master Prynnes unanswerable argument . The end of the first Book . AN APPENDIX To the First Booke : Containing an additionall debate concerning the Jewish Church-Government and Censures . I Have said enough ( as I suppose ) of a Church-Government and Church-Censures distinct from Magistracy and civill Justice among the Jewes , whereby the seeming Old Testament strength of the Erastians , is sufficiently yea abundantly broken ; And now it appeareth how ill grounded that Assertion is which did lately come abroad in the Discourse entituled , The difference about Church-government ended Pag. 8. Moses was first the sole Ruler , &c. Afterwards when Kings reigned in Israel , King Solomon put Abiathar the high Priest from his Office , setting up Zadok , and David distinguished the courses of the Priests , and other godly Kings from time to time ruled in things Ecclesiasticall , and Priests never ; till that after their returne from the Babylonish captivity , &c. And no better grounded are the first five questions in M r Prynne his Diotrephes catechised , in which he doth intimate that there was no distinct Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction among the Jewes , and that all scandalous sinnes and offences now pretended to be of Ecclesiasticall cognisance , were by Gods owne institution throughout the old Testament , inquireable , examinable , determinable , and punishable onely by the temporall Magistrates or ●ivill powers , not by any Ecclesiasticall persons or Officers . But when he should prove that there was no Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction distinct from the civill , he brings many Scriptures to prove that there was a civill jurisdiction and civill or temporall punishments in the Old Testament . How cold the consequence from hence will be , against Church-Government , the intelligent Reader cannot but perceive . The most of that strength which doth militate against these Erastian Principles , is presented and drawn up in this preceding Booke . That which I now intend is onely an additionall debate . And first of all it is to be observed that the same point of Controversie is debated a with the Anabaptists , they holding as the Erastians doe , that in the old Testament , there was but one kind of government , one kind of jurisdiction , one kind of punishment , and that it was Civill or Temporall ; but an Ecclesiasticall Judicature or censure in the old Testament they deny . Wherein they are contradicted by those that writ against them . Secondly , we must distinguish with great caution , and ( as they say ) cum grano salis , between that which was ordinary and that which was extraordinary in the Jewish Government . We can not , from extraordinary cases collect and conclude that which was the fixed , setled , ordinary rule . The examples which have been alledged for the administration of Church-Government , the purging away of scandals , the ordering of the Ministery in the old Testament , by the Temporall Magistrate or civill powers onely , and by their owne immediate authority , how truly alledged or how rightly apprehended shall appeare by and by : this I say for the present , diverse of them were extraordinary cases , and are recorded as presidents for godly Magistrates their duty and authority , b not in a reformed and constituted Church , but in a Church which is full of disorders , and wholly out of course , needing reformation . So that the Erastian Arguments drawn from those examples , for investing the Magistrate with the whole and sole power of Government and jurisdiction in Ecclesiasticall affaires , are no whit better than the Popish and Prelaticall Arguments , for the lawfulnesse of the civill power and places of Clergymen ( as they called them ) drawne from some extraordinary examples of Aaron his joyning with Moses , and Eleazer with Ioshua , in civill businesse of greatest consequence ; of the administration and Government of the Commonwealth by Eli the Priest , and by Samuel the Prophet ; of the anointing of Iehu to be King by Elisha ; of the killing of Athaliah , and the making of Ioash King by the authority of Iebojada the Priest ; of the withstanding and thrusting out of King Uzziah , by fourscore valiant men of the Priests , and such like cases . Master Prynne himself in his Diotrephes catechised pag. 4. noteth that Ezra the Priest received a speciall commission from Artaxerxes , to set Magistrates and Judges which might judge all the people Ezra 7. 11 , 25. from all which it appeareth that as Priests did extraordinary some things which ordinarily belonged to Magistracy , so Magistrats did extraordinarily that which ordinarily did not belong to their administration . I conclude this point with a passage in the second book of the Discipline of the Church of Scotland Chap. 10. And although Kings and Princes that be godly , sometimes by their own authority , when the Church is corrupted , and all things out of order , place Ministers , and restore the true service of the Lord , after the example of some godly Kings of Judah and divers godly Emperours and Kings also in the light of the new Testament : yet where the Ministery of the Church is once lawfully constituted , and they that are placed doe their Office faithfully , all godly Princes and Magistrates ought to beare and obey their voyce , and reverence the Majesty of the Sonne of God speaking in them . In the third place , let us take a particular survey of such Objections , from which the Erastians doe conclude that the power of Church-gov●rnment in the old Testament was onely in the hand of the Magistrate . And first concerning Moses , it is objected that he being the supreme Magistrate did give Lawes and Ordinances for ordering the Church in things pertaining to God. Answ. This he did as a Prophet from the mouth of the Lord , yea as a type of Jesus Chri●t the great Prophet , Deut. 18. 15. 18. not as civill Magistrate . 2. Object . We read not of an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin adjoyned with Moses , but onely of a civill Sanhedrin Num. 11. Neither doth the Talmud mention any supreme Sanhedrin but one . Answ. 1. If those 70 Elders , Num. 11. be understood onely of the civill Sanhedrin , ( which some doe not admit , though for my part I doe not gainsay it ) yet we read of the con●itution of another Sanhedrin or Assembly of 70 before them . Which I have before proved from Exod. 24. 1. 2. And if there had been no dis●inct Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin in Moses his time , yet by the Law , Deut. 17. when the people came into the Land of promise , they were to have two distinct Courts in the place which the Lord should choose . Of which also before . And whereas M r Prynne in his Diotrephes catechised quaest . 2. intimateth , that by the Law Deut. 17. the Priests were onely ●oyntly and together with the temporall Judges , to resolve hard civill cases or controversies : this sence can neither agree with the dis●unction in the Text verse 12. the man that will not hearken unto the Priest , or unto the Judge : nor yet with the received interpretation of those words between stroke and stroke , that is , between leprosie and leprosie , the decision whereof , is no where in Scripture found to be either committed unto or assumed by the civill Judge . As for the Talmud , that of Babylon was not begun to be compiled before the yeere of 〈◊〉 367 , nor finished before the yeere of Christ 500. The Ierusalem Talmud can pretend to no greater antiquity than the yeere of Christ 230. So that both were collected long after the dissolution of the Sanhedrin and government of the Jewes . No marvell therefore , if these declining times did weare out the memory of some part of their former government . 3. Object . The King was by Gods appointment entrusted with the custody of the booke of the Law , Deut. 17. 18. 2 King. 11. 12. Answ. 1. The principall charge of the custody of the Law was committed to the Priests and Levites , Deut. 31. 9 , 24 , 25 26. Of the King it is onely said Deut. 17. 18. That he shall write him a coppy of this law in a Booke , out of that which is before the Priests and Levites . 2. I heartily yeeld that a lawfull Magistrate , whether Christian or Heathen , ought to be a keeper or guardian of both Tables , and as Gods V●cegerent hath authority to punish haynous sinnes against either Table , by civill or corporall punishments which proves nothing against a 〈◊〉 Church-government for keeping pure the Ordinances of Christ. 4. Object . King David did appoint the Offices of the Levites and divided their courses 1 Chr●… . 23. So likewise did Solomon appoint the courses and charges of the Priests , Levites and Porters in the Temple . Answ. David did not this thing as a King , but as a Prophet , 2 〈◊〉 . 8. 14. For so bad David the man of God commanded ; the same thing being also commanded by other Prophets of the Lord , 2 hro . 29. 25. According to the commandement of David , and of G●…d the Kings seer , and Nathan the Prophet , for so was the commandement of the Lord by his Prophets . Which cleareth also Solomons part , for ( beside that himselfe also was a Prophet ) he received from David the man of God , a patterne of that which he was to doe in the worke of the house of the Lord , and directions concerning the courses of the Levites , 1 Chro. 28. 11 , 12 , 13. 2 Chro. 8. 14. 5 Object . King Solomon deposed Abiathar from his Priesthood , and did put 〈◊〉 in his place . Answ. Abiathar was guilty of high treason for assis●ing and ayding Adonijah , against Solomon , whom not onely his father David but God himselfe had designed to the Crowne . So that the crime was of civill cognizance , and Abiathar deserved to die for it . That which Solomon did was an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a moderation of the punishment , as Strigelius cals it ; when Solomon might justly have put him to death , he onely banisheth him from Hierusalem to Anathoth , there to enjoy his owne inheritance , to live a private life , and no more to intermeddle in State affaires . Wherefore this example doth belong to the case of a capitall crime committed by a Minister , but not to the case of scandall or mal-administration in his Ministery . 2. Neither did Solomon directly or intentionally put Abiathar from the Priesthood for that offence , but by consequence it followed upon his banishment from Hierusalem , the place where the high Priest was to exercise his calling , 1 King. 2. 27. So ( that is , in respect of banishment from Ierusalem mentioned in the verse immediately preceding ) Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest unto the Lord. A Minister now banished is not thereby thrust out from all exercise of his Ministery , for he may exercise it in another place ; but Abiathar being thrust out from Hierusalem was eo ipso thrust from the calling of the high Priest , which was necessarily to be exercised in that place . 3. Solomon being a Prophet , who knowes what warrants he had more then ordinary for that which he did to Abiathar ? that it was not without an extrordinary divine instinct , some collect from the next words ; that he ( Solomon ) might fulfill the word of the Lord which he spake cencerning the house of Eli in Shilo . 4. As for the investing of Zadok with the place and authority of the high Priest , it doth not prove that the Magistrate hath a constitutive power to make or authorize Church officers : for Zadok had been formerly chosen by the congregation of Israel , and anointed to be high Priest , 1 Chro. 29. 22. yea he did fall to the place Iure divino : for the high Priesthood was given to Eleazar the eldest sonne of Aaron , and was to remaine in the family of Eleazar , from whom Zadok had lineally descended : Whereas Abiathar was not of the family of Eleazar , but of the family of I●…hamar . 6. Object . Hezekiah did apply his regall power to the reformation of the Levites and to the purging of the Temple , 2 Chr. 29. 5. and did also appoint the courses of the Priests and Levites every man according to his service , 2 Chro. 31. So likewise did King Iosiah , 2 Chro. 35. Answ. Hezekiah in exhorting the Levites to sanctifie themselves and to cleanse the Temple , doth require no other thing than the Law of God did require , Num. 8. 6. 11. 15. & 18. 32. which Hezekiah himselfe pointeth at , 2 Chro. 29. 11. And why should not the Magistrate command Ministers to do the duties of their calling according to the Word of God ? As for his appointing of the courses of the P●iests and Levites , he did nothing therein , but what the Lord had commanded by his Prophets , 2 Chro. 29. 25. The like I answer concerning King Iosiah , for it is recorded , that what hee did , was after the writing of David and Solomon , 2 Chro. 35. 4. and according to the Commandement of David and Asaph , and Heman , and Jeduthun , the Kings seer , Verse 15. as it is written in the booke of Moses , v. 12. 7. Object . King Ioash while hee yet did right in the dayes of Iebojada the Priest , sent the Priests and Levites to gather from all Israel , a collection for repairing the house of the Lord , and when they dealt negligently in this businesse he discharged them to receive any more money so collected . Ans. Joash did impose no other collections , but those quae divino jure debebantur , which were due by divine right , saith Wolphius , in 2 Kings 12. The thing was expressely commanded in the Law of Moses , compare 2 Chro. 24. 6. Exo. 30 , 12 , 13 , 14. As for the Kings prohibition afterwards laid upon the Priests , 1. the Priests had still neglected the worke till the three and twentieth yeare of his raigne was come , 2. The Priests themselves consented to receive no more money , 3. The high Priest had still a chiefe hand in the managing of that businesse , in which also the Priests that kept the doore had an interest . All which is plaine from 2 Kings 12. 6. 8 , 9 , 10. And beside all this , it was a money matter , concerning the hyring and paying of workemen , and so did belong to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to the extrinsecall , not to the intrinsecall things of the Church . 8. Object . The Kings of the Jewes have purged the Land from Idolatry and Superstition , have broken downe Altars , cut down Groves , destroyed high places , and such like Idolatrous Monuments . Ans. This was nothing but what was commanded in the Law of Moses , whereunto also the secular coercivepower was necessary . Let it be remembled concerning those godly reforming Kings of 〈◊〉 1. The case was extraordinary , no matter of ordinary Government . 2 Their reformation was Iure divino . The Law of God was the rule , and Ius Divinum was not then startled at , but embraced . 3. Sometime also the reformation was not without an assembly of the Prophets , Priests and Elders , as 2 Kings 23. 1. 9. Object . Mr. Prynne in his Diotrephes Catechised , Quest. 2. 〈◊〉 another objection from 2 Chr. 19. asking , whether it be not clearly meant , that as King Josiah himselfe ( he should have said Iehoshaphat ) did by his owne regall authority , appoint Iudges in the Land and in Jerusalem , in the preceeding 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. & 10. Verses , to d●…termine all controversies and punish all offences whatsoever , acco●…ding to the Lawes of God and that Kingdome , so hee did by the selfe same regall authority appoint Amariah then chiefe Priest , over the Priests and Levites onely . ( implyed in the word you , not over the people of the Land ) in all matters of the Lord , that is , to Order , direct the Priests and Levites , under him in their severall courses , and all matters whatsoever concerning the Worship , &c. Ans. 1. Mr. Prynne will never prove from that Text , That Iehoshaphat by his regall authority did appoint , or set Amariah the chiefe Priest to be over the rest ; The English translators expresse the sence by interlacing the word is Verse 11. And behold Amariah the chiefe Priest is over you in all matters of the Lord. 2. To restrict the word you to the Priests and Levites onely , is an intolerable wresting of the Text ; for all these relatives , Verse 9 , 10 , 11. them , ye , you , must needs repeat the antecedent Verse 8. and so relate to the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel , as well as to the Priests and Levites . So that these words , Amariah the chiefe Priest is over you , are spoken to the Sanhedrin ; and the plaine meaning is , that Amariah the chiefe Priest was at that time the Nasi , or princeps Senatus , the Prince or chiefe Ruler of the Senat , as Grotius expounds it . 3. That the high Priest was a Ruler of the People , as well as of the Priests and Levites , is manifest from , Acts 23. 5. where Paul applieth to the high Priest , that Law , Thou shalt not speake evill of the Ruler of thy people . 4. Wherefore to retort the Objection , Mr. Prynne doth here acknowledge upon the matter two distinct Governments to have beene at that time , one civill , another Ecclesiasticall : distinct I say both objectively , and subjectively : objectively , for hee expounds the Lords matters to be meant of the sacrifices and other services in the Temple , The Kings matters hee takes to be the Kings Househould , Lands , Revenues : Subjectively also , for hee yeeldeth upon the matter both Amariah and Zebadiah to have had a certaine ruling or governing power in ordering and directing these over whom they were set , which well agreeth both with the version of the 70 ( giving the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both to the one and to the other ) and with the Originall ; for he that is over the Sanhedrin it selfe must needs be a Ruler . 10. Object . The causes of Leprosy , Lev. 13. & 14. and jealousie Num. 5. are the onely cases wherein the Priests were appointed to be as Judges in the Old Testament . So Mr. Prynne in his Diotrephes catechised quest . 3. Ans. 1. If the Priests were Judges in these cases , then ( so farre at least ) there was a judging , decisive , binding sentence of the Priests , distinct from and not subordinate unto the civill Magistracy . 2. But that these two were the onely cases wherein the Priests were appointed to be as Judges , is easily confuted , being an assertion contrary to diverse Texts of Scripture , as first Deut. 21. 5. in the triall of secret murther the Law appointeth thus : And the Priests the sonnes of Levi shall come neare , &c. and by their word shall every controversy and every stroke bee tried , that is , every controversy which was to be ended by purgations or purifications , Oathes or confession , as Pelargus noteth upon the place . There is also a generall comprehensive expression concerning the Priests their judging and deciding of controversies forensically , Ezech. 44. 24. And in controversy they shall stand in judgement , and they shall judge it according to my judgements . Likewise Deut. 17. 8 , 9 , 12. the Priest as well as the Judge hath authority to give forth a binding decree concerning hard matters , brought from inferior Courts to Ierusalem . Againe 2 Chron. 23. 19. the Porters of the Temple ( that is , the Priests that kept the doore as they are designed 2 Kings 12. 9. of whom also it is said , that I●…hojadah the high Priest , appointed Officers over the house of the Lord , 2 Kings 11. 18. which Text Grotius following Iosephus doth parallell wi●h 2 Chro. 23. 19. ) had this charge , that none which was unclean in any thing should enter in . 11. Object . If the Priests power of judging reached further than the cases of Leprosie , and Jealousie , the most was to judge of such as were uncleane in any thing , and that according to their sentence the uncleane were to be excluded . Ans. Not to insist now upon these Texts , Deut. 17. 9. 12. & 21. 5. Ez●… . 44. 24. which hold forth the juridicall power of the Priests more generally and comprehensively , without restricting it to cases of cleane and uncleane only ; nor yet to repeat diverse other answers before given , in answer to Erastus and M. Prynne , concerning legall and morall uncleannesse ; I shal here only give this one answer out of that Text 2 Chro. 23. 19. none which was unclean in any thing . What cogent argument can now restrict this Text concerning the exclusion of uncleane persons from the Temple , to such only who were legally or ceremonially unclean ? If we should suppose and grant that it is meant onely of the legall uncleannesse , yet both by Analogy and à fortiori , that Text affoordeth an argument against the Erastians , and I have accordingly made use of it before ; Yet neverthelesse I believe it will puzle them to prove that this Text doth not comprehend those also that were morally uncleane , that is , scandalous prophane persons . For my part I doe believe that it is meant of keeping back those that were morally unclean , as well as those that were ceremonially such . And my reasons are these , 1. The Text saith generally , none which was uncleane in any thing , or as the 70 have it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , such as were uncleane in every or any word , or ( if you will ) against any word , that is , against any Commandement of the Law , 2. Because impiety , profannesse , and wickednesse hath the name of uncleannesse , even in the old Testament ; & such as commit sin and ungodlinesse are called unclean , and are said to defile themselves , as wel as those that were legally uncleane . I shall not neede to expound , Lev. 5. 3. if he touch the uncleannesse of man , whatsoever uncleannesse it be that a man shall be defiled withall ; as if it were meant of fellowship with scandalous sinners ; which is Origens Interpretation , Hom. 3. in Levit. who also taketh a commentary to that Text from , 1 Cor. 5. 11. It will have more weight in it , to observe Targum Onkel●…s , Deut. 23. 2. Where the Law concerning Mamzer a bastard or whoores son , is thus explained , A bastard shall not be clean that he may enter into the Congregation of the Lord : even unto the tenth Generation his sons shall not be clean that they may enter into the Congregation of the Lord. But I will give yet surer warrants for what I say . Iob. 36. 14. their life is among the uncleane , that is , ( as Pagnin following the Chaldee paraphrase expresseth it ) inter scortatores ; Hierome , inter effaeminatos : others , inter impudicos ; the same word is rendered Sodomites , 1 Kings 14. 24. It commeth from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or per Antiphrasin signifieth to be impure or unclean , and it is used of the legall uncleannesse , Deut. 22. 9. lest the fruit of thy Vineyard be defiled . So Hag. 2. 13 , 14. both he that touched a dead body , and he that trespassed against the morall Law , is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 uncleane ; for after the resolution concerning that which was legally uncleane , it is added , So is this people , and so is this nation before me saith the Lord , and so is every w●…rke of their hands , and that which they offer there is unclean . The same name is given to an ungodly person , Eccle. 9. 2. where the godly person is called the cleane , the notorious scandalous prophane person is called the unclean . So wickednesse is frequently called uncleannesse as , Ezra . 9. 11. Ezec. 36. 25. Zech. 13. 1. I wil here adde a Testimony of Maimonides in More Nevochim part 3. cap. 47. Hence also the transgression of the Commandement is called uncleannesse or pollution , and it is said of the principall and fundamentall Commandements , of Idolatry , of uncovering the nakednesse , of the shedding of bloud . Of Idolatry it is said c : Because he hath given of his seed unto Molech , to defile my Sanctuary , and to prophane my holy Name . Of the uncovering of the nakednesse ; d defile not your selves in any of these things . Of the shedding of bloud , e defile not therefore the Land wherein ye dwell . Wherefore this word uncleannesse or defilement is said of three sorts of things , first of a mans qualities and of his transgressions of the Commandements , whether theoricall or practicall ( that is , which concerne either Doctrine , or his conversation . ) Secondly of externall filthinesse and defilements , &c. Thirdly , of these imaginary things , that is , the touching or carrying upon the shoulders some uncleane thing , &c. Adde hereunto the observation of Drusius de tribus sect . Judaeor . lib. 2. num . 82. 83. 84. The Pharisees did account sinners and prophane persons to be uncleane , and thought themselves polluted by the company of such persons , for which reason also they used to wash when they came from the mercate . Though there was a superstition in this Ceremony , yet the opinion that prophane persons are uncleane persons , and to be avoided for uncleannesse , had come from the purest antiquities of the Jewes , even from Moses and the Prophets . Since therefore both in the old Testament phrase , and in the usuall language of the Jewes themselves , a scandalous prophane person was called an unclean person , it is to me more then probable that where I read , none which was uncleane in any thing should enter in it is meant of those that were morally uncleane by a scandalous wicked conversation , no lesse yea much more than of those that were onely ceremonially uncleane . 3. Especially considering that the Sanctuary was prophaned and polluted by the morall uncleannesse of sinne , and by prophane persons their entring into it , as is manifest from Lev. 20. 3. Eze. 23. 39. How can it then be imagined that those Priests whose charge it was to keepe back those that were uncleane in any thing , would admit and receive such as were not onely unclean persons in the language of Scripture and of the Jewes themselves , but were also by expresse Scriptures declared to be defilers or polluters of the Sanctuary ? 4. It is said of the high Priest , Lev 16. 16. and he shall make atonement for the holy place , because of the uncleannesse of the children of Israel , and because of their transgressions in all their sins : or from their uncleannesse and from their transgressions , as the Chaldee and the LXX have it : the sence is the same : and it sheweth that the holy place was made uncleane by the transgressions and sinnes of the children of Israel : which uncleannesse of transgression , if it were visible , publik and notorious , then the Priests had failed in admitting such to the holy place . 12. Object . Throughout the old Testament we read onely of temporall punishments , as burning , hanging , stoning , fines , stripes , and the like , but never of Excommunication or any Church censure . Neither did the Jewes know the distinction of Lawes Ecclesiasticall and Lawes civill , causes Ecclesiasticall and causes civill , for the Church of the Jewes was th●ir Common-Wealth , and their Common-Wealth was their Church , and the Government of Church and State among them was one and the same . Their civill Lawyers were also Expositors or Doctors of the Law of God. Ans. That in the Jewish Church , there was an Ecclesiasticall censure or punishment distinct from the civill , I have proved in this preceeding booke , both from Scripture and from the Jewish antiquities . And if there were no more but the sequestration or separation from the Temple or from the passeover , for such legall uncleannesse as did not separat a man from his house , nor from all company of men , even that alone proves a kinde of censure distinct from all civill punishment : neither did it belong to the Magistrate or civill Judge , but to the Priests to examine , judge , and determine concerning cleannesse or uncleannesse , and consequently concerning admission to or separation from the Temple , Passeover , and sacrifices . That the Jewish Church and the Jewish State were formally distinct , see before Chap. 2. Where it hath beene observed that some Proselytes had the full priviledges of the Jewish Church , though none of them had the full priviledges of the Jewish common-wealth . The like I have read of the Spaniards , who admit the Moores or inhabitants of Morisco to turne Christians , and receive them into Ecclesiasticall Membership and Communion , but by no meanes into their civill liberties . That the causes of Excommunication among them were lookt upon as scandalls , and not as civill in●uries , see Chap. 4. This onely I adde that More Nevochim part . 2. Chap. 40. doth distinguish civill Lawes from sacred Lawes , even among the people of God , making the scope of the civill Lawes to be the good safety and prosperity of the Common-wealth ; the Sacred or Divine Lawes to concerne properly Religion and mens soules . He that will compare the civill Lawes and panall Statutes of the Jewes mentioned in Baba Kama , with their ceremoniall Lawes concerning the holy Ordinances of God , and who should have communion therein , who not , cannot but looke upon their Church and 〈◊〉 Lawes , as formally distinct from their State and civill Lawes . Again , he that will consider who were the viri synagogae magnae , the men of the great synagogue , and what their power and acts were , ( as Dr. Buxtorf describeth the same in his Tyberi●…t Cap. 10 , 11. ) and their authoritative determinations , concerning the right writing , reading , and expounding of the holy Scripture , &c. must needs acknowledge that it was Senatus ecclesiasticus magnus ( as Buxtorf cals it ) and that such power and acts were incompetent to the civill Magistrate . As for their Doctors of Law and Scribes , they were of the sons of Aaron , yet some way diversified in their administrations . Scaliger in elench . Trihaeres . Nic. Serar . cap. 11. distinguisheth between the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , f that the former were the wisemen or chief of the Scribes who did interpret the Law , and declare the sence of it ; the latter did attend civill forensicall matters . Drusius de tribus sect . Jud. lib. 2. cap. 13. noteth from Luke . 11. 45. 46. that there was some distinction between the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , between the Scribes and the Lawyers , for when Christ had spoken of the Scribes and Pharises , then answered one of the Lawyers and said unto him , Master , thus saying thou reproachest us also . And he said , Wo unto you also ye Lawyers : This will be more plaine by that other distinction observed by Lud. de dieu . in Mat. 22. 35. and diverse others , between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , between the Scribes of the Law of God who did interpret the Law , such as Ezra the Priest ; and the Scribes of the people who were Actuarii publici , publick Notaries or Clerks . Whence it appeareth that the Offices of Scribes and Lawyers ( although the persons themselves were of the Tribe of Levi ) were so ordered , as that civill and sacred affaires might not be confounded . Yea , the Scriveners or Notaries were of two sorts ; for besides those which did attend civill Courts of Justice , &c. There was a chiefe Scribe who waited upon the King and wrote unto him a coppy of the Book of the Law , according to that Deut. 17. 18. Such a Scribe was Sheva , 2 Sam. 20. 25. Shaphan 2 Kings 22. 3. 8. Baruch Jer. 36. Such a Scribe had Joash 2 Kings 12. 10. There were divers other Scribes for the house of the Lord and for the people , whose office it was to write and to read the Law , 1 Chro. 2. 55 , Psal. 45. 1. Ier. 8. 8. 13. Object . But neither in the old Testament nor in the Talmudists can there be found any Ecclesiasticall Excommunication properly so called . Answ. I deny both , yea I have disproved both . Moreover , as touching the Excommunication used in the Jewish Church I shall adde here these following Testimonies of M●…imonides . In libro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tract . Talmud Torah Cap. 6. sect . 10. He that revileth a wiseman , though after his death , shall be excommunicated by the Sanhedrin , by whom also after repentance he shall be absolved . Ib. sect . 11. He who is excommunicated in his own Town , ought also to be esteemed in all other Cities and Towns , as a person excommunicated . Answerable hereunto were the ancient Canons , which did appoint that a person excommunicated in his own Church should not be received to communion in another Church . The 24. causes of excommunication ( above mentioned ) he there reckoneth forth from sect . 13. to the end of that Chapter . Again , Cap. 7. sect . 2. What is the manner of a simple excommunication or Niddui ? He that doth excommunicate saith : Let that person N. be in ( or under ) an excommunication or separation . If the person excommunicated be present , they who doe excommunicate say unto him , Let this person N. be separated or excommunicated . And when Cherem or the greater excommunication is inflicted , what is the manner ? They say , Let N. be devoted and accursed , let an execration , adjuration and separation be upon him . But how doe they loose the person excommunicated , and how doe they free him from the separation or the curse ? they say , Be thou loosed , be thou pardoned . If the guilty party be absent , they say . Let N. be loosed , and let him be pardoned . In the same Chapter sect . 8. Neither is there any certain space of time predetermined , before which the bond of the excommunication inflicted may not be loosed . For immediately and at the same time when excommunication is inflicted , it may be loosed if the guilty party doe immediately repe●…t , and come to himselfe . Which doth further set forth the great difference between the nature and scope of Excommunication , and the nature and scope of corporall or civill punishments . For how soon soever an excommunicat person giveth good signes of true repentance , he is to be loosed from the bond of excommunication . But he that is punished in his body or estate for any crime , is not freed from the punishment , because he is known to be penitent ; The repentance of a criminall person is no supersedeas to civill Justice . Thereafter Maimonides proceedeth thus . Yet if it seem good to the Sanhedrin that any man shall be left in the state of excommunication , for how many yeeres shall be be left in excommunication ? The Sanhedrin will determine the number of yeers and space of time , according to the haynousnesse of the trespasse . So likewise if the Sanhedrin will , it may devote and subject to a curse , first the party himself who is guilty of the crime , and then also every other person whosoever eateth or drinketh with him , or sitteth neere unto him unlesse at foure cubits distance : that so by this means the heavier correction may fall upon the sinner , and there may be as it were a hedge put about the law , which may restrain wicked men from transgressing it . Whence observe 1. It was from the Jewish Church , that the ancient Councels of the Christian Church , took a pattern for determining and fixing a certaine number of yeeres to the separation of some haynous offenders from the Sacrament , and sometimes from other Ordinances also . Though I doe not approve this thing , either in the Jewish or Christian Church ; for at what time soever a scandalous sinner doth give evident signes of repentance , the Church ought to receive him againe into her bosome and fellowship . 2. From the Jewish Church also was the patterne taken , for that ancient Discipline in the Christian Church , that he who keepeth company and communion with an excommunicated person , should fall under the same censure of excommunication . Which thing must be well explained and qualified before it can be approved . 3. Compare also this passage of Maimonides with 1 Cor. 5. 11. with such a one no not to eate , 2 Thes. 3. 14. have no company with him , that he may be ashamed . Which Texts doe fitly answer to that which the Hebrew writers say of a person excommunicated . 4. The excommunication of an offender among the Jewes , was intended not onely for the offenders humiliation and amendment , but for an ensample to others , that they might heare and feare and do no more any such thing : it was therefore a publique and exemplary censure . And so much of Sect. 8. In the 9. and 10. Sections Maimonides sheweth us , that though a wise man was allowed to prosecute unto the sentence of excommunication one that did revile or calumniat him , yet it was more praise-worthy and more agreeable to the example of the holy men of God to passe in silence and to endure patiently such injuries . Then followeth Sect. 11. These things which have been said , are to be understood of such reproaches and contumelies as are clandestine . For if railers doe put a publike infamy upon a wise man , it is not lawfull to him to use indulgence or to neglect his honour : and if he shall pardon ( as to the punishment ) him who hath hurt his fame , he himselfe is to be punished , because that is a contempt of the law . He shall therefore avenge the contumely , & not suffer himselfe to be satisfied , before the guilty party hath craved merey . Here is the true object , or ( if you will ) the procuring and meritorious cause of Excommunication , viz. not a private personall or civill injury , which a man may passe by or pardon if he will , but a scandalous sinne the scandall whereof must be removed and healed , by some Testimony or Declaration of the sinners repentance , otherwise he must fall under the censure and publique shame . These Testimonies of Maimonides , and the observations made thereupon , beside all that hath been said in this preceding Book , will make it manifest that the Spirituall censure of excommunication was translated and taken from the Jewish Church into the Christian Church . Furthermore , beside all the Scriptural proofs already brought , I shall desire another Text , Nehem. 13. 1 , 3. to be wel weighed . After the reading of the law ( Deut. 23. 3. ) that the Amm●…nite and the Moabite should not come into the congregation of God for ever , it came to passe , saith the Text , when they heard the law , that they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude . I conceive that this separation was a casting out of the Church of Israel , and is not meant here of a civill separation from honours and priviledges , nor yet onely in reference to the dissolution of unlawfull marriages . I understand also by the prohibition of entring into the congregation of the Lord Deut. 23. 1 , 2 , 3. that such were not to be received into Church communion . Ostendit autem qui a caetibus fidelium debeant excludi . He sheweth who ought to be excluded from the assemblies of the faithfull , saith Aretius upon Deut. 23. 1. Hic dicitur Ecclesia Dei atrium mundorum , quod non debebant tales ingredi . Here that Court of the Temple which was appointed only for the clean , is called the Congregation of God , whereunto such persons ought not to enter , saith Hugo Cardinalis upon the same place . Audita lege de duabus inimicis gentibus anathematizandis , &c. Having heard the law concerning the two hostile Nations , to be anathematized or accursed , saith Beda on Nehem. 13. thereupon they separated the mixed multitude . Pelargus on Deut. 23. citeth Theodoret , Procpius , and Rabanus , besides the Canonills , for this sence , that the not entring into the Congregation of the Lord , is meant of refusing Ecclesiasticall not civill priviledges . I know that divers others understand Deut. 23. 1 , 2 , 3. of not admitting unto , and Nehem. 13. 3. of separating from marriages with the Jewes , and civill dignities or places of Magistrates or Rulers in that Commonwealth , such a one shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord , that is , shall not be received into the Assembly or Court of Judges . But there are some reasons which diswade me from this and incline me to the other interpretation . First , the Law Deut. 23. being read to the people Nebem . 13. 3. upon the hearing of that law they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude . It is not to be imagined that all this mixed multitude was married to Jewes , muchlesse that they were all Magistrats , Rulers , or members of Courts and Judicatures in Israel . But by the mixed multitude are meant all such as were in Israel but not of Israel , or such as conversed and dwelt among the Jewes and had civill fellowship with them , but had no part nor portion ( by right ) in Church-membership and Communion : in which sence also the mixed multitude is mentioned Exod. 12. 38. Num. 11. 4. Secondly , that this separation from Israel is to be understood in a spirituall and ecclesiasticall sence , it appeareth by the instance and application immediately added Neb. 13. 4. to vers . 10. And before this , that is , before this separation , Eliashih the Priest being allied unto Tobiah had prepared for him a chamber in the Courts of the house of God , but now when the separation of the mixed multitude was made ; Nehemiah did east out the stuffe of Tobiah , and commanded to cleanse the chambers of the Temple which had been defiled by Tobiah . Behold an instance of the separation in reference to the Temple or holy place , not to any civill Court. Thirdly , the Chaldee paraphrase helpeth me Deut. 23. 1 , 2 , 3. for instead of these words , shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord , Onkelos readeth shall not be clean to enter into the congregation of the Lord ; having respect to the law which did forbid uncleane persons to enter into the Temple . Ita isti mundi reputabantur ; so likewise were these ( Ammonites , Moabites , bastards , &c. ) esteemed as unclean , saith Tostatus in Deut. 23. quaest . 1. Fourthly , Edomites and Egytians might enter into the congregregation of the Lord in the third generation Deut. 22. 7 , 8. Was the meaning , that Edomites and Egyptians should in the third generation marry with the Jewes , or be Magistrates in Israel , members of the Sanhedrin , or Judges ? He that will thinke so , will hardly prove that it was so . To me it is not at all probable , that God would allow his people either to marry with the Edomites and Egyptians , or to prefer them to be Magistrates and Judges in Israel , no not in the third generation . But it is very probable , that when an Edomite or Egyptian came to dwell in the Land of Israel , as a proselyte indweller , ob erving the seven precepts given to the sonnes of Noah , the children of that Egyptian or Edomite in the third generation , mi●ht enter into the congregation of the Lord , that is , might upon their desire and submission to the whole law of Moses , be received as proselytes of righteousnesse or of the Covenant , and so free to come to the Court of Israel , and in all Church relations to be as one of the Israelites themselves . Fifthly , Philo the Jew lib. de victimas offerentibus towards the end , tels us that their Law did prohibit all unworthy persons from their sacred Assemblies , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . From the same sacred Assemblies of the Church , he saith that their law did also exclude Eunuohs , and bastards , or such as were borne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( the word used by the LXX in Deut. 23. 2. ) where Philo most certainly hath respect to that Law , Deut. 23. understanding by the congregation of the Lord in that pla●e , neither a civill Court nor liberty of marriage , but the sacred or Church Assembly . There are but two objections which I finde brought against that which I have been now proving . One is from Exod. 12. 48. a law which admitteth strangers to the Church and Passeover of the Jewes , provided they were willing to be circumcised . The other objection is from the example of Ruth the Moabitesse , who was a member of the Church of Israel . To the first I answer , that Exod. 12. 48. will not prove that every stranger who desired to be circumcised , and to eate the Passeover , was to be immediately admitted upon that desire , without any more adoe : onely it proves that before any stranger should eate of the Passeover , he must first be circumcised . A stranger might not be Gertsedek , a proselyte of righteousnesse , when he pleased , but he was first to be so and so qualified . Besides this , it may be justly doubted whether Deut. 23. 3. be not an exception from the rule Exod. 12. 48. for all strangers were not to be alike soon and readily received to be proselytes of righteousnesse : but a great difference there was between those Nations which God had expressely and particularly devoted and accursed , and others not so accursed . To the other objection concerning Ruth , Rabanus cited by Pelargus on Deut. 23. answereth that the tenth generation of the Moabites was past , before Ruth did enter into the congregation of the Lord. And if it had not , yet the case was extraordinary , and one Swallow makes not Summer . 14. Object . But is there any patterne or president in the Jewish Church , for keeping backe scandalous sinners from the Sacrament ? Ans. There is ; for I have proved a keeping back of notorious sinners both from the Passeover , and from the Temple it selfe which had a Sacramentall signification and was a Type of Christ and Communion with him . It is worthy of observation that by the Chaldee paraphrase , Exod. 12. 43. Any Israelite who was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an apostate , might not eate of the Passeover . Againe , verse 48. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & omnis prophanus . So the Latine Interpreter of Onkelos : And no prophane person shall eate of it . The word is used not onely of a Heathen , but of any prophane person , as Prov. 2. 16. where the Chaldee expresseth the whorish woman ( though a Jewesse ) by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It commeth from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be prophaned , è sancto prophanum fieri . Surely Onkelos had not thus paraphrased upon Exod. 12. if it had not been the Law of the Jewes , that notorious prophane persons should be kept backe from the Passeover . The second Book OF THE CHRISTIAN Church-Goverment . CHAP. I. Of the Rise , Growth , Decay , and Reviving of Erastianisme . DIverse Learned men have ( to very good purpose ) discovered the origination , occasion , first authors , fomenters , rise and growth of Errors , both Popish , and others : I shall after their example make known briefly , what I find concerning the rise and growth the planting and watering of the Erastian Error , I cannot say of it , that it is honest is parentibus natus , it is not borne and descended of honest parents . The Father of it is the old Serpent , who finding his Kingdom very much impaired , weakned and resisted by the vigor of the true Ecclesiastical discipline , which separateth between the precious and the vile , the holy & prophane ; and so contributeth much to the shaming away of the unfruitful works of darknesse ; thereupon he hath cunningly gone about to draw men , first into a jealousie , and then into a dislike of the Ecclesiastical discipline , by Gods mercy restored in the Reformed Churches . The Mother of it , is the enmity of nature against the Kingdom of Iesus Christ ; which he , as Mediator , doth exercise in the goverment of the Church : Which enmity is naturally in all mens hearts , but is unmortified and strongly prevalent in some , who have said in their hearts , We will not have this man to raigne over us . Luke 19. Let us break their bonds asunder , and cast away their cords from us . Psal. 2. 3. The Midwife which brought this unhappy brood into the light of the world , was Thomas Erastus Doctor of Medicine at Heidelberg of whom I shall say no more , then what is apparant by his owne Preface to the Reader , namely , that as he was once of opinion , that excommunication is commanded in the Word of God , so he came off to the contrary opinion , not without a male-contented humour , and a resentment of some things which he lookt upon as provocations and personal reflections , though its like enough they were not really such , but in his apprehensions they were . One of these was a publick dispute at Heydelberg in the year 1568. upon certain Theses concerning the necessity of Church Government , and the power of Presbyteries to excommunicate : Which Theses were exhibited by M. George Withers an Englishman , who left England because of the Ceremonies , and was at that time made Doctor of Divinity at Heydelberg . And the learned dispute had thereupon , you may find epitomized ( as it was taken the day following from the mouth of Dr. Vrsinus ) in the close of the second part of Dr. Pareus his explication of the Heidelberg Catechisme . The Erastian error being borne , the breasts which gave it suck were prophanesse and self-interest . The sons of Belial were very much for it , expecting that the eye of the civil Magistrate shall not be so vigilant over them , nor his hand so much against them for a scandalous and dissolute conversation , as Church-discipline would be . Germanorum bibere est vivere , in practice as well as in pronunciation . What great marvel if many among them ( for I do not speak of all ) did comply with the Erastian Tenent ? And it is as little to be marvelled at , if those , whether Magistrates , Lawyers , or others , who conceived themselves to be so far losers , as Ecclesiastical Courts were interested in Government , and to be greater gainers by the abolition of the Ecclesiastical interest in government ; were by assed that way : Both these you may find among the causes ( mentioned by Aretius 〈◊〉 . probl . loc . 133. ) for which there was so much un willingnes to admit the discipline of Excomunication . Magistratus jugum non admittuxt , timent honoribus , licentiam amant , &c. The Magistrates do not admit a yoke , are jealous of their honours , love licentiousnesse . Vulgus quoque & plebs dissolutior : major pars corruptissima est , &c. The Communaltic also and people are more dissolute : the greater part is most vicious . After that this unlucky child had been nursed upon so bad milk , it came at last to eat strong food , and that was Arbitrary Government , under the name of Royall Prerogative . Mr. Iohn Wemys ( sometime Senator of the Colledge of Justice in Scotland ) as great a Royalist as any of his time , in his book de Regis primatu , lib. 1. cap. 7. doth utterly dissent from and argue against the distinction of Civil and Ecclesiasticall lawes , and against the Synodical power of censures ; holding that both the power of making Ecclesiastical lawes , and the corrective power to censure Transgressors , is proper to the Magistrate . The Tutor which bred up the Erastian error , was Arminianisme ; for the Arminians finding their plants pluckt up , and their poison antidoted by Classes and Synods , thereupon they began to cry down Synodical authority , and to appeal to the Magistrates power in things Ecclesiastical , hoping for more favour and lesse opposition that way . They will have Synods onely to examine , dispute , discusse , to impose nothing under pain of Ecclesiastical censure , but to leave all men free , to do as they list . See their exam . cens . cap. 25. and Vindic. lib. 2. cap. 6. pag. 131. 133. And for the Magistrate they have endeavoured to make him head of the Church , as the Pope was ; yea so far , that they are not ashamed to ascribe unto the Magistrate that Jurisdiction over the Churches , Synods , and Ecclesiastical proceedings ' which the Pope did formerly usurpe : For which see Apollonius in his Ius Maj●…statis circa sacra . But the Erastian Error being thus borne , nursed , fed , and educated , did fall into a most deadly decay and consumption : the procuring causes whereof were these three . First , the best and most ( and in some respect all ) of the Reformed Churches refused to receive , harbour , or entertain it , and so left it exposed to hunger and cold , shame and nakednesse . Some harbour it had in Switzerland , but that was lookt upon as comming onely through injury of time , which could not be helped ; the Theological and Scriptural principles of the Divines of those Churches , being Anti-Erastian , and Presbyteriall , as I have * else-where shewed against Mr. Coleman . So that Erastianisme could not get warmth and strength enough , no not in Zurick it self . Yea Dr. Ursi●…us in his Iudicium de Disciplinâ Ecclesiasticâ , & excommunicatione , exhibited to the Prince Elector Palatine Frederick the third ( who had required him to give his judgement concerning Erastus his Theses ) doth a once and again observe , that all the Reformed Churches and Divines , as well those that did not practice excommunication , as those that did practise it , agree notwithstanding in this principle , that excommunication ought to be in the Church . Which is a mighty advantage against Erastianisme . The second cause was a mis-accident from the Mid-wife , who did half stisle it in the birth , from which did accrue a most dangerous infirmity , of which it could never recover . b Read the preface of Erastus before the Confirmation of his Theses ; also the close of his sixth Book ; put these together , you will find him yeeld , that all ought not to be admitted promiseuously to the Sacrament , but that such admission be according to the custome and rule observed in the Church of Heidelberg ( and what that was , you may find in the Heidelberg Catechisme Quaest. 82. & 87. namely a suspension of prophane scandalous persons from the Sacrament , and in case of their obstinacy and continuing in their offences , an excommunicating of them . ) He yeelds also that these seven sorts of persons ought not to be esteemed as members of the Church , and that if any such be found in the visible Church , they ought to be cast out . 1. Idolaters . 2. Apostates . 3. Such as do not understand the true Doctrine , that is , Ignorant Persons . 4. Such as doe not approve and embrace the true Doctrine , that is , Hereticks and Sectaries . 5. Such as desire to receive the Sacrament otherwise then in the right manner , and according to Christs Institution . 6. Such as defend or justifie their wickednes . 7. Such as doe not confesse and acknowledge their sins , and professe sorrow and repentance for them , and a hatred or detestation of them . And thus you see as Erastianisme pleadeth for no favour to Sectaries , or whosoever dissent in doctrine , or whose Tenents concerning Christs Institution , or manner of Administration , are contrary to that which is received in the Church where they live : ( for c it is content that all such , were they never so peaceable and godly , be cast out of the Church by excommunication . All the favour and forbearance which it pleadeth for , is to the loose and prophane ) So neither doth it altogether exempt the prophane , but such onely as do neither deny nor defend their wickednesse , but confesse their sins , and professe sorrow for them . Let the Erastians of this time observe what their great Master hath yeelded touching the Ecclesiastical Censure of prophane ones . Which though it is not satisfactory to us , for reasons elsewhere given , yet it can be as little satisfactory to them . But whereas Erastus together with those his Concessions ( that hee may seem to have said somewhat ) falls a quarrelling with Presbyteries for presuming to judge of the sincerity of that repentance professed by a scandalous sinner , and their not resting satisfied with a mans owne profession of his repentance . If his followers will now be pleased to reduce the controversie within that narrow circle , Whether a Presbyterie may excommunicate from the Church , or at least suspend from the Sacrament , any Church-member , as an impenitent scandalous sinner , who yet doth not defend nor denie his sin by which he hath given scandall , but confesseth it , and professeth sincere and hearty repentance for it : ( which is the point that Erasius is faine to hold at in the issue ) Then I hope we shall be quickly agreed , and the controversie buried ; for we do rest satisfied with the offender his confession of his sinne , and profession of his repentance , unlesse his owne known words or actions give the lye to his profession of repentance ; that is , if he be known to justifie and defend his sin in his ordinary discourse , or to continue in the practice of the sin , which he professeth to the Presbyterie he repents of ; if these or such like sure signes of his impenitency be known , must the Presbyterie notwithstanding rest satisfied with his verbal profession of repentance ? All that fear God ( I think ) would cry shame , shame , upon such an assertion . And moreover , let us take it in the case of an Idolater , Heretick , Apostate ( for Erastus is content that such be excluded from the Sacrament . ) Suppose such a one doth confesse his sin , and professeth repentance , in the mean while is known to be a writer or spreader of books in defence of that Idolatry or Heresie , or to be a perswader and enticer of others secretly to that way , or if there be any other known infallible signe of his impenitency , must his verbal profession to the Presbyterie in such cases be trusted and taken as satisfactory ? I am confident Erastus himself would not have said so . Wherefore as in the case of an Heretick , so in the case of a prophane person , or one of a scandalous conversation , there is a necessity that the Presbyterie examine the real signes of repentance , and the offenders verbal profession is not all . The third cause which helped forward the deadly malady and consumption of Erastianisme ; was the grief , shame , confusion and losse which it sustained by the learning and labour of some Divines in the Reformed Churches , who had to very good purpose taken pains to discover to the world the curled nature of that unlucky brood , being of the seed of the Amalekites , which ought not to enter into the Congregation of the Lord. The Divines who have more especially and particularly appeared against it , are ( to my observation ) these . Beza de Excommunicatione , & Presbyterio contra Erastum : Which was not printed till Erastus his Reply unto it was first printed . Whereunto as Beza in a large Preface layeth the foundation of a duply , so he had prepared and perfected his duply , had he not been hindred by the great troubl●s of Geneva , at that time besieged by the Duke of Savoy ; Beza himself being also at that time 71. yeares old ; howbeit for all this , he did not lay aside the resolution and thought of that duply , if he should have opportunity , and see it requisite or calld for ; all which is manifest from that preface . Next to him , I reckon Zacharias Ursinus a most solid judicious Divine , who did ( as I touched before ) exhibite to the Prince Elector Palatine Frederick the third , Iudicium de disciplina Ecclesiastica & Excommunicatione ( which you may find in the end of his third Tome ) wherein he doth soundly confute the Theses of Erastus , neither hath any reply been made thereto , that ever I could learn of ● Also in his Catecheticall explications , Quaest , 85. He plainly disputes against the Erastian principles . The more strange it is that Mr. Hussey in his Epistle to the Parliament would make them beleeve that Ursinus is his , and not ours , in this controversie . After these , there did others , more lately , come upon the Stage against the Erastian Principles , as Casparus Brochmand a Lutheran , in System . Theol. Tom. 2. Artic. De disciplina Ecclesiastica , where he examineth the most substantiall Arguments of Erastus : Antonius Walaeus de munere ministrorum Ecclesiae & inspectione Magistratus circa illud . Et in loc●… com . de clavivibus & potestate Ecclesiastica . Et Tom , 2. Disp. de disciplina Ecclesiastica . Helmichius de vocatione Pastorum & institutione Consistoriorum . D. Triglandius in differtatione de potestate civili & Ecclesiastica . D. Revius in examine libelli de Episcopatu Constantini magni . D. Apollonij 〈◊〉 Majestatis circa sacra . D. Cabeliavius de libertate Ecclesiae in exercenda disciplina spirituali . Dr. Voqtius in his Politica Ecclesiastica , especially his Disputations de potestate & Politia Ecclesiarum . Beside Acronius , Thysius , Ludov. a Renesse , who were Champions against that unhappy error revived in the Low-Countries by W●…enbogard a Proselyte of the Arminians . But now , while E●…astianisme did thus lye a dying , and like to breath its last , is there no Physitian who will undertake the cure , and endeavour to raise it up from the gates of death to life ? Yes , Mr. Coleman was the man , who ( to that purpose ) first appeared publikely ; First by a Sermon to the Parliament ; Next , by debating the Controversie with my selfe in writing ; and lastly , By engaging in a publike debate in the Reverend Assembly of Divines , against this Proposition : Iesus Christ as King and Head of His Church , hath appointed a Governement in the Church , in the hands of Church-Officers , distinct from the Civil Governement . After he had some dayes argued against this proposition ( having full liberty both to argue and reply as much as he pleased ) it pleased God to visit him with sicknesse , during which , the Assembly ( upon intimation from himself , that he wished them to lay aside that Proposition for a time , that if God should give him health again , he might proceed in his debate ) did goe upon other matter , and lay this aside for that season . The Lord was pleased to remove him by death , before he could do what he intended in this , and other particulars . One of his intentions was to translate and publish in English the Book of Erastus against Excommunication . But through Gods mercy , before the poison was ready , there was one Antidote ready , I mean Mr. Rutherford his answer to Erastus . But though Mr. Coleman was the first man he was not the onely man that hath appeared in this present Controversie in England . Others ( and those of divers professions ) are come upon the Stage . I shall leave every man to his Judge , and shall judge nothing before the time . Onely I shall wish every man to consider sadly and seriously , by what Spirit and Principles he is led , and whether he be seeking the things of Christ , or his owne things ; whether he be pleasing men , or pleasing Christ ; whether sin be more shamed , and holinesse more advanced , this way , or that way ; Which way is most agreeable to the Word of God , to the example of the best Reformed Churches ; and so to the sol●mne League and Cov●nant . The Controversie is now hot : every faithfull servant of Christ , will be carefull to deliver his owne soule by his faithfulnesse , and let the lord do what seemeth him good . The cause is not ours , but Christs ; it stands him upon his Honour , his Crowne , his Lawes , his Kingdom . Our eyes are towards the Lord , and we will wait for a divine decision of the businesse : For the Lord is our Judge , the Lord is our Law-giver , The Lord is our King , he will save us . CHAP. II. Some Postulata or common Principles to be presupposed . FOr a foundation to the following discourse , I shall premise the particulars following , which I hope shall be condescended upon , and acknowledged , as so many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. There must be a most conscientious and speciall care had , that there be not a promiscuous admission of all sorts of persons ( that please or desire ) to partake in all the publike Ordinances of God : but a distinction is to be made of the precious and the vile , the clean and the unclean ; I mean those who are apparantly and visibly such . This was a principle and rule among the Heathens themselves , therefore d when they came to doe sacrifice , the prophane were bidden be gone , and e Caesar tells us , that of old the Druides ( the Heathnish French Priests ) did interdict the flagitious from their sacrifices and holy things . These Druides France had from England , if the observation of Francis Holy-Oke out of Tacitus , hold . 2. That censures and punishments ought to be appointed and inflicted , as for personal and private injuries between man and man , so much more for publike and scandalous sins , whereby God is very much dishonoured , and the Church dangerously scandalized . Tyberius his slighting maxime , Deorum injurias Dijs curae esse , may be entertained among Atheists , but is exploded among all true Christians . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is the Christian maxime . Care is to be first taken of things pertaining to God. 3. It is requisite and necessary , that he who hath given publick scandall and offence to the Church , and hath openly dishonoured God by a grosse notorious sin , should honour God , edifie others , and ( so far as in him lyeth ) remove the offence by a publike confession of the sin , and declaration of his sorrow and repentance for the sa●ne ; and of his resolution ( through the grace of Christ ) to do so no more : As many of the Beleevers at Ephesus did publikely confesse and shew their deeds : Act. 19. 18. The Syriack addeth their offences . A patterne of this confession we have in the Law of Moses , and Jewish policie ( whereof else-where ) as likewise in the Baptisme of Iohn , Matth. 3. 6. Of this publike Confession of sin , see Festus Honnius disp . 51. Thes , 2. Mr. Hildersham on Psal. 51. Lect. 34. & 37. and diverse others . Both the Word of God , and the example of the best Reformed Churches , leadeth us this way . The Centurists Cent. 1. lib. 2. cap. 4. observe four kinds of confession in the New-Testament : First , a Confession of sin to God alone . 1 Iohn 1. 9. Secondly , a confession coram Ecclesia , before the Church , when men acknowledge publikcly their wicked and scandalous deeds , and do professe their repenting and lothing of the same : And for this they cite Act. 19. 18. Thirdly , a confession one to another of particular private injuries and offences , chiefly recommended to those who are at variance , and have wronged one another . Iam. 5. 16. Fourthly , the confession or profession of the true Faith. 1 Iohn 4. 2. 4. That publick shame put upon a scandalous sinner , and the separating or casting out of such an one , as the vlle from the precious , is the fittest and most eff●ctual means which the Church can use to humble him , to break his heart , and to bring him to the acknowledgement of his offence . 5. That there may be and often are such persons in the Church , whom f we must avoid , Rom. 16. 17. Withdraw from them . 1 Tim 6. 5. 2 Tim. 3. 5. 2 Thes. 3. 6. Have no company with them . 2 Thes. 3. 14. Not eat with them . 1 Cor. 5. 11. Nor bid them God speed . 2 Epist. John , vers . 10. 11. 6. That since there must be a withdrawing from a brother that walketh disorderly and scandalously , it s more agreeable to the glory of God , and to the Churches peace , that this be done by a publick authoritative Ecclesiastical judgement and sentence , than wholly and solely to trust it to the piety and prudence of each particular Christian , to esteem as heathens and publicans , whom , and when , and for what he shall think good , and accordingly to withdraw and separate from them . 7. That there is a distinction between Magistracy and Ministery , even Iure Divino . That the civil Magistrate hath not power to abolish or continue the Ministery in abstracto at his pleasure ; nor yet to make or unmake Ministers in concreto , that is , to ordain or depose Ministers , as he thinks fit . 8. As the Offices are distinct g so is the power ; Magistrates may do what Ministers may not doe : and Ministers may doe what Magistrates may not do . 9. It is Iuris Communis , a principle of common equity and naturall reason , that the directive Judgement in any matter doth chiefly belong to such as ( by their profession and vocation ) are devoted and set apart to the study and knowledge of such matters , and ( in that respect ) supposed to be ablest and fittest to give Judgement thereof . A consultation of Physitians is called for , when the Magistrate desires to know the nature , symptomes , or cure of some dangerous disease . A consultation of Lawyers , in Legal questions . A Councell of War in military expeditions . If the Magistrate be in a ship at Sea , he takes not on him the directive part of Navigation , which belongs to the master , with the mates and pilot . Neither doth the master of the ship ( if it come to a Sea-fight ) take on him the directive part in the fighting , which belongs to the Captain . And so in all other cases , Artifici in sua arte credendum . Wherefore though the Judgement of Christian prudence and discretion belongs to every Christian , and to the Magistrate in his Station ; and though the Magistrate may be , and sometime is learned in the Scriptures , and well acquainted with the principles of true Divinity , yet ut plurimum , and ordinarily , especially in a rightly Reformed and well constituted Church , Ministers are to be supposed to be fittest and ablest to give a directive Judgement in things and causes Spiritual and Ecclesiastical : with whom also other ruling Church . Officers do assist and joyne , who are more experimentally and practically ( they ought also , and diverse times are more Theoretically ) acquainted with the right way and rules of Church-government and censures ; then the civil Magistrate ( when he is no ruling Elder in the Church , which is but accidentall ) can be rationally or ordinarily supposed to be . 10. There is some power of Governement , in the Church given to the Ministery by Christ : else why are they said to be set over us in the Lord , and called Rulers and Governours , as we shall see afterwards ? CHAP. III. What the Erastians yeeld unto Vs , and what We yeeld unto them . FOr better stating of the controversie , We shall first of all take notice of such particulars as are the Opposites concessions to us , or our concessions to them . Their concessions are these . 1. h That the Christian Magistrate in ordering and disposing of Ecclesiastical causes and matters of Religion , is tyed to keep close to the Rule of the Word of God ; and that as he may not assume an Arbitrary Government of the State , so far lesse of the Church . 2. That Church-Officers may exercise Church-government , and authority in matters of Religion , where the Magistrate doth not professe and defend the true Religion : In such a case two Governments are allowed to stand together , one civil , another Ecclesiastical . This i Erastus granteth , as it were by constraint , and it seems by way of compliance with the Divines of Zurik ( who hold excommunication by Church-Officers under an infidel Magistrate , and that Iure Divino ) to move them to comply the more with him in other particulars . 3. That the abuse of Church-governement is no good argument against the thing it self : There being no authority so good , so necessary in Church or State , but by reason of their corruptions who manage it , may be abused to tyranny and opression . These are Mr. Prinnes words , Vindic. of the 4. Questions pag. 2. 4. That some Jurisdiction belongs to Presbyteries by Divine Right . Mr. Prynne in his Epistle Dedicatory before the vindication of his four questions , saith , that his scope is , not to take from our new Presbyteries , all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction due by Divine Right to them , but to confine it within certain definite limits , to prevent all exorbitant abuses of it . 5. That the Christian Magistrate ought not , may not preach the Word , nor minister the Sacraments . Mr. Coleman in his Brotherly examination re-examined pag. 14. I never had it in my thoughts that the Parliament had power of dispensing the Word and Sacraments : Then so far there is a distinction of Magistracy and Ministery Iure Divino : Yet in this he did not so well agree with k Erastus . 6. That the ministery is Iure Divino , and Ministers have their power and authority of preaching the Word derived to them from Christ , not from the Magistrate . So Mr. Hussey in his Epistle to my self . We preach the Word with all authority from Christ , derived to us by those of our Brethren that were in Commission before us . Magistrates may drive away false Teachers , but not the Preachers of the Gospel but at their utmost peril . 7. They admit and allow of Presbyteries , so that they doe not exercise Government and Jurisdiction . Erast. lib. 4. cap. 1. Our Concessions to our Opposites , are these . 1. That all are not to be admitted promiscuously either to be governours or members in the Ecclesiastical Republick , that is , in a visible political Church . None are to governe l nor to be abmitted members of Presbyteries or Synods , except such as both for abilities and conversation , are qualified according to that which the Apostle Paul requireth a Bishop or Elder to be . Scandalous or prophane Church-Officers are the worst of dogs and swine , and to be first cast out . And as all are not to governe , so all are not to be governed Ecclesiastically ; but onely Church-Members , 1 Cor. 5. 12. Therefore what hath been objected concerning many both Pastors and People in England , who are still branches of the old stock , doth not strike against what we hold . All are not sit for a Church-government . Therefore those that are fit shall not have a Church-Government . So they must argue ; Or thus , a Popish people are not fit to be governed Presbyterially , and Episcopal Ministers are not fit to governe ; therefore the rest of the Nation shall want a Government . 2. Presbyteriall Government is not despotical , but ministerial , it is not a Dominion , but a Service . We are not Lords over Gods heritage : 1 Pet. 5. 3. but we are the servants both of Christ and of his Church . We preach not our selves , saith the Apostle , but Christ Jesus the Lord , and our selves your servants for Jesus sake . 2 Cor. 4. 5. 3. That power of Government with which Pastors and Elders are invested , hath for the object of it , not the external man , but the inward man. It is not , nor ought not to be exercised in any compulsive , coercive , corporal , or civil punishments . When there is need of coertion or compulsion , it belongs to the Magistrate , not to the Minister , though the question be of a matter of Religion ; of Persons or things Ecclesiastical . Which as it is rightly observed by m Salmasius , so he further asserteth against the Popish Writers , that all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction hath for the object of it , onely the inward man ; for consider the end of Church-censures , saith he , even when one is ex communicated or suspended from the Sacrament , it is but to reduce him and restore him by repentance , that he may again partake of the Sacrament rightly and comfortably : which repentance is in the soule or inward man , though the signes of it appear externally . 4. Presbyterial Government is not an arbitrary Government ; for clearing whereof take these five Considerations . 1. We can do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth : and the power which the Lord hath given u● , is to edification and not to destruction 2 Cor. 13 8 10. All Presbyterial proceedings must be levelled to this end , and squared by this rule . 2. Presbyters and Presbyteries are 〈◊〉 to the Law of the Land , and to the corrective power of the Magistrate ; Quatenus Ecclesia est in Republica , & Reipub. pars , non Respublica Ecclesiae : In so far as the Church is in the Common-wealth , and a part of the Common-wealth ; not the Common-wealth a part of the Church , saith Salmasius appar . ad lib. de Primatu pag. 292. for which , pag. 300. he cites , Optatus Milivitanus lib. 3. Non enim Respullica est in Ecclesia , sed Ecclesia in Republica . Ministers and Elders are Subjects and Members of the Common-wealth , and in that respect punishable by the Magistrate , if they transgresse the Law of the Land. 3. Yea also as Church-Officers , they are to be kept within the limits of their calling , and compelled ( if need be ) by the Magistrate to do those Duties which by the clear Word of God and received principles of Christian Religion , or by the received Ecclesiastical Constitutions of that Church , they ought to do . 4. And in corrupto Ecclesiae statu , I mean , if it shall ever happen ( which the Lord forbid , and I trust shall never be ) that Presbyteries , or Synods shall make defection from the Truth to Errour , from Holinesse to Prophanesse , from Moderation to Tyranny and Persecution , censuring the innocent and absolving the guilty , as Popery and Prelacy did , and there being no hopes of redressing such enormities in the ordinary way by intrinsecal Ecclesiastical remedies , that is , by well-constituted Synods , or Assemblies of Orthodox , holy , moderate Presbyters : In such an extraordinary exigence , the Christian Magistrate may and ought to interpose his Authority to do diverse things which in an ordinary course of Government he ought not to do ; for in such a case , Magistracy ( without expecting the proper intrinsecal remedy of better Ecclesiasticall Assemblies ) may immediately , by it self , and in the most effectual manner , suppresse and restrain such defection , exorbitancy , and tyranny , and not suffer the unjust , heretical , tyrannical Sentences of Presbyteries or Synods to be put in execution . Howbeit in Ecclesia bene constituta , in a well constituted and Reformed Church , it is not to be supposed , that the condition of affairs will be such as I have now said . We heartily acknowledge with Mr. Cartwright annot . on Mat. 22. Sect. 3. That it belongeth to the Magistrate , to reforme things in the Church , as often as the Ecclesiastical persons shall either through ignorance , or disorder of the affection of covetuousnesse or ambition , d●…file the Lords Sanctuary . For saith Iunius Animad . in Bell. contr . 4. lib. 1. cap. 12. & 18. Both the Church when the concurrence of the Magistrate faileth , may extraordinarily doe something which ordinarily she cannot : and again when the Church faileth of her duty , the Magistrate may extraordinarily procure , that the Church return to her duty . 5. I dare confidently say , that if comparisons be rightly made , Presbyterial Government is the most limitted and the least Arbitrary Government of any other in the world . I should have thought it very unnecessary and superfluous , to have once named here the Papal Government , or yet the Prelatical , but that Mr. Prynn in his preface to his four grand Questions , puts the Reverend Assembly of Divines in mind , that they should beware of usurping that which hath been even by themselves disclaimed against , and quite taken away from the Pope and Prelats . Mr. Coleman also in his Sermon brought objections from the usurpations of Pope Paul the fift , and of the Archhbishop of Canterbury : Well , if we must needs make a comparison , come on . The Papal usurpations are many . 1. The Pope takes upon him to determine what belongs to the Canon of Scripture , what not ? 2. That he onely can determine what is the sence of Scripture . 3. He addeth unwritten Traditions . 4. He makes himself Judge of all controversies . 5. He dispenseth with the Law of God it self . 6. He makes himself above General Councels . 7. His government is Monarchical . 8. He receiveth appeals from all the Nations in the world . 9. He claimeth Infallibility at least ex Cathedra . 10. He maketh Lawes absolutely binding the Conscience , even in things indifferent . 11. He claimeth a Temporal Dominion over all the Kingdoms in the world . 12. He saith he may depose Kings , and absolve Subjects from their oath of allegiance . 13. He persecuteth all with fire and sword and Anathema's , who do not subject themselves to him . 14. He claimeth the sole power of convocating general Councels . 15. And of presiding or moderating therein by Himself or his Legates . What Conscience or ingenuity can there now be , in making any parallel between Papall and Presbyteriall Governement ? As little there is in making the comparison with Prelacy , the power whereof was indeed arbitrary and impatient of those limitations and rules which Presbyteries and Synods in the Reformed Churches walkby . For 1. The Prelate was but one , yet he claimed the power of ordination and jurisdiction as proper to himself in his owne Diocesse . We give the power of ordination and Church censures not uni , but unitati , not to one , but to an Assembly gathered into one . 2. The Prelate assumed a perpetual precedency and a constant priviledge of moderating Synods , Which Presbyterial Government denyeth to any one man. 3. The Prelate did not tye himself either to aske or to receive advice from his fellow Presbyters , except when he himself pleased . But there is no Presbyteriall nor Synodicall sentence , which is not concluded by the major part of voices . 4. The Prelate made himself Pastor to the whole Diocesse ( consisting it may be of some hundreds of Congregations ) holding that the Ministers of particular Congregations did preach the Word and minister the Sacraments , in his name by vertue of authority and order from him , and because he could not act by himself in every Congregation . The Presbyteriall Government acknowledgeth no Pastorall charge of preaching the Word and ministring the Sacraments to more Congregations then one ; and doth acknowledge the Pastors of particular Churches , being lawfully called , to have power and authority for preaching the Word and ministring the Sacraments in the name of Christ , and not in the name of the Presbyterie . 5. The Prelates as they denyed the power and authority of Pastors , so they utterly denyed the very offices of ruling Elders , and Deacons for taking more especiall care of the poor , in particular Congregations . 6. They did not acknowledge Congregationall Elderships , nor any power of discipline in particular Congregations which the Presbyteriall Government doth . 7. They intruded Pastors oft times against the consent of the Congregation , and reclamante Ecclesiâ , which the Presbyteriall Government doth not . 8. They ordained Ministers without any particular charge , which the Presbyterial Government doth not . 9 In Synods they did not allow any but the Clergie alone ( as they kept up the name ) to have decisive suffrage . The Presbyterial Government gives decisive voices to ruling Elders as well as to Pastors . 10. The Prelates declined to be accountable to and censurable by either Chapters , Diocesan or Nationall Synods . In Presbyteriall Government all ( in whatsoever Ecclesiasticall administration ) are called to an account in Presbyteries , Provinciall and Nationall Assemblies respectively , and none are exempted from Synodicall censures in case of scandall and obstinacy . 11. The Prelates power was not meerly Ecclesiasticall , they were Lords of Parliament , they held Civil places in the State , which the Presbyterial Government condemneth . 12. The Prelats were not chosen by the Church , Presbyters are . 13. The Prelates did presume to make Lawes binding the Conscience , even in things indifferent , and did persecute , imprison , fine , depose , excommunicate men for certain Rites and Ceremonies acknowledged by themselves to be indifferent ( setting aside the will and authority of the Law makers ) This the Presbyteriall Government abhorreth . 14. They did excommunicate for money matters , for trifles . Which the Presbyteriall Government condemneth . 15. The Prelates did not allow men to examine by the Judgement of Christian and private discretion , their Decrees and Canons , so as to search the Scriptures and look at the Warrants , but would needs have men think it enough to know the things to be commanded by them that are in place and power . Presbyteriall Government doth not lord it over mens consciences , but admitteth ( yea commendeth ) the searching of the Scriptures , whether these things which it holds forth be not so , and doth not presse mens Consciences with Sic volo , sic jubeo , but desireth they may doe in faith what they do . 16. The Prelates held up pluralities , non-residencies &c. Which the Presbyteriall Government doth not 17. As many of the Prelates did themselves neglect to preach the Gospel , so they kept up in diverse places a reading non-preaching Ministery : Which the Presbyteriall Goverment suffereth not . 18. They opened the door of the Ministery to diverse scandalous , Arminianized , and popishly affected men , and locked the door upon many worthy to be admitted . The Presbyteriall Government herein is as contrary to theirs , as theirs was to the right . 19. Their Official Courts , Commissaries , &c. did serve themselves H●ires to the sons of Eli , Nay , but thou shalt give it me now , and if not , I will take it by force . The Presbyterial Government 〈◊〉 such proceedings . 20. The Prelates and their High-Commission Court did assume pot●…statem utriusque gladij , the power both of the Temporall and Civil Sword. The Presbyteriall Government medleth with no Civil nor Temporall punishments . I do not intend to enumerate all the differences between the Papal and Prelatical Government on the one side , and the Presbyterial Government on the other side ; in this point of unlimitednesse or arbitrarynesse . These differences which I have given , may serve for a consciencious caution to intelligent and moderate men , to beware of such odiou● and unjust comparisons , as have been used by some , and among others by Mr. Sal●…marsh in his Parallel between the Prelacy and Presbyterie : Which as it cannot strike against us , nor any of the Reformed Churches ( who acknowledge no such Presbyterie as he describeth ) and in some particulars , striketh at the Ordinance of Parliament ( as namely in point of the Directory ) so he that hath a mind to a Recrimination , might with more truth lay diverse of those imputations upon those , whom ( I beleeve ) he is most unwilling they should be laid upon . In the third place , The Presbyterian Government is more limited and lesse arbitrary than the Independent Government of single Congregations , which exempting themselves from the Presbyterial subordination , and from being accountable to , and censurable by Classes or Synods , must needs be supposed to exercise a much more unlimited or arbitrary power , than the Presbyterial Churches do : especially when this shall be compared and laid together with one of their three grand Principles , which disclaimeth the binding of themselves for the future unto their present judgement and practice , and avoucheth the keeping of this reserve to alter and retract . See their Apologetical narration , pag. 10 , 11. By which it appeareth that their way will not suffer them to be so far moulded into an Uniformity , or bounded within certain particular rules ( I say not with others , but even among themselves ) as the Presbyterian way will ad●it of . Finally , The Presbyterial Government hath no such liberty nor arbitrarinesse , as Civil or Military Government hath : there being in all civil or temporal affairs a great deal of latitude 〈◊〉 to those who manage the same , so that they command nor act nothing against the Word of God. But Presbyterial Government is tyed up to the rules of Scripture , in all such particulars as are properly spiritual and proper to the Church ; Though in other particular , occasional circumstances of times , places , accommodations , and the like , the same light of nature and reason guideth both Church and State ; yet in things properly Spiritual and Ecclesiastical , there is not near somuch latitude left to the Presbytery , as there is in civil affairs to the Magistrate . And thus I have made good what I said , That Presbyterial Government is the most limited and least arbitrary Government of any other . All which Vindication and clearing of the Presbyterial Government , doth overthrow ( as to this Point ) Master Hussey's Observation , pag. 9. of the irregularity and arbitrarinesse of Church-government . And so much of my fourth Conc●ssion . The fifth shall be this : 'T is far from our meaning , that the Christian Magistrate should not meddle with matters of Religion , or things and causes Ecclesiastical , and that he is to take care of the Common-wealth , but not of the Church . Certainly there is much power and Authority which by the Word of God , and by the Confessions of Faith of the Reformed Churches , doth belong to the Christian Magistrate in matters of Religion . Which I do but now touch by the way , so far as is necessary to wipe off the aspersion cast upon Presbyterial Government . The particulars I refer to Chapter 8. Our sixth Concession is , That in extraordinary cases , when Church-government doth degenerate into tyranny , ambition , and avarice ; and they who have the managing of the Ecclesiastical power , make defection and fall into manifest Heresy , Impiety , or Injustice , ( as under Popery and Prelacy it was for the most part : ) then , and in such cases ( which we pray and hope we shall never see again ) the Christian Magistrate may and ought to do diverse things in and for Religion , and interpose his Authority diverse wayes , so as doth not properly belong to his cognizance , decision , and administration , ordinarily , and in a Reformed and well constituted Church . For extraordinary diseases must have extraordinary remedies . More of this before . A seventh Concession is this : The Civil Sanction added to Church-government and Discipline , is a free and voluntary Act of the Magistrate . That is , Church-government doth not ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , necessitate the Magistrate to aid , assist , or corroborate the same , by adding the strength of a Law. But the Magistrate is free in this , to do or not to do , to do more or to do lesse , as he will answer to God and his conscience : it is a cumulative Act of favour done by the Magistrate . My meaning is not , that it is free to the Magistrate ▪ in genere moris ; but in genere entis . The Magistrate ought to adde the Civil Sanction hic & nunc , or he ought not to do it . It is either a duty , or a sin ; it is not indifferent . But my meaning is , The Magistrate is free herein from all coaction , yea from all necessity and obligation ; other then ariseth from the Word of God , binding his conscience . There is no power on Earth , Civil or Spiritual , to constrain him . The Magistrate himself is his own Judge on Earth , how far he is to do any cumulative Act of favour to the Church . Which takes off that calumny , that Presbyterial Government doth force or compel the conscience of the Magistrate . I pray God we may never have cause to state the Question otherwise , I mean , concerning the Magistrate his forbidding what Christ hath commanded , or commanding what Christ hath forbidden : in which case we must serve Christ and our consciences , rather then obey Laws contrary to the Word of God and our Covenant : whereas in the other case , of the Magistrate his not adding of the Civil Sanction , we may both serve Christ , and do it without the least appearance of disobedience to the Magistrate . Eighthly , We grant that Pastors and Elders , whether they be considered distributively , or collectively in Presbyteries and Synods , being Subjects and Members of the Common-wealth , ought to be subject and obedient in the Lord to the Magistrate and to the Law of the Land ; and as in all other duties , so in Civil subjection and obedience they ought to be ensamples to the Flock ; and their trespasses against Law are punishable , as much , yea , more then the trespasses of other Subjects . Of this also before . Ninthly , If the Magistrate be offended , at the sentence given , or censure inflicted by a Presbytery or a Synod , they ought to be ready in all humility and respect , to give him an account and reason of such their proceedings , and by all means to endeavour the satisfaction of the Magistrate his conscience : or otherwise to be warned and rectified , if themselves have erred . CHAP. IV. Of the agreements and differences between the nature of the Civil and of the Ecclesiastical Powers or Governments . HAving now observed what ▪ our opposites yeeld to us , or we to them , I shall for further unfolding of what I plead for , or against , adde here the chief agreements and differences between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers , so far as I apprehend them . They both agree in these things : 1. They are both from God ; both the Magistrate , and the Minister is authorized from God , both are the Ministers of God , and shall give account of their administrations to God. 2. Both are tyed to observe the Law and Commandments of God : and both have certain directions from the Word of God to guide them in their administration . 3. Both Civil Magistrates and Church Officers are Fathers ▪ and ought to be honoured and obeyed according to the fifth Commandment : Utrumque scilicet dominium , saith Luther , Tom. 1. fol. 139. both Governments , the Civil and the Ecclesiastical , do pertain to that Commandment . 4 ▪ Both Magistracy and Ministery are appointed for the glory of God as Supreme , and for the good of men as the subordinate end . 5. They are both of them mutually aiding and auxiliary , each to other . Magistracy strengthens the Ministery , and the Ministery strengthens Magistracy . 6. They agree in their general kinde ; they are both Powers and Governments . 7. Both of them require singular qualifications , eminent gifts and endowments ▪ and of both it holds true , Quis ad haec idoneus ? 8. Both of them have degrees of censures and correction according to the degrees of offences . 9. Neither the one nor the other may give out sentence against one who is not convict , or whose offence is not proved . 10. Both of them have a certain kind of Jurisdiction in foro exteriori . For though the Ecclesiastical power be spiritual , and exercised about such things as belong to the inward man onely ; yet as Dr. Rivet upon the Decalogue , pag. 260. 261. saith truly , there is a two-fold power of external jurisdiction which is exercised in foro exteriori : one by Church-Censures , Excommunication , lesser and greater ▪ which is not committed to the Magistrate , but to Church-Officers : Another , which is Civil and coercive , and that is the Magistrates . But Mr. Coleman told us , he was perswaded it will trouble the whole World to bound Ecclesiastical and Civil Jurisdiction , the one from the other ; Maledicis pag. 7. Well : I have given ten agreements . I will now give ten differences . The difference between them is great ; they differ in their causes , effects , objects , adjuncts , correlations , executions , and ultimate terminations . 1. In the efficient cause . The King of Nations hath instituted the Civil power ; The King of Saints hath instituted the Ecclesiastical power . I mean the most high God , possessor of Heaven and Earth , who exerciseth Soverainty over the workmanship of his own hands , and so over all mankind , hath instituted Magistrates to be in his stead , as gods upon Earth . But Iesus Christ as Mediator and King of the Church , whom his Father hath set upon his holy Hill of Zion , Psal. 2. 6. to reigne over the House of Jacob for ever , Luke 1. 33. who hath the key of the House of David laid upon his shoulder , Isa. 22. 22. hath instituted an Ecclesiastical power and goverment in the hands of Church-Officers , whom in his name he sendeth forth . 2. In the matter , Magistracy or Civil power hath for the matter of it the earthly Scepter and the Temporal Sword : that is , it is Monarchical and Legislative : it is also punitive or coercive of those that do evil ; understand , upon the like reason , remunerative of those that do well . n The Ecclesiastical power hath for the matter of it , the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven . 1. The key of knowledge or doctrine , and that to be administred , not onely severally by each Minister concionaliter , but also Consistorially and Synodically in determining controversies of Faith , and that according to the rule of holy Scripture onely : which is clavis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 2. The key of order and decency , so to speak : by which the circumstances of Gods Worship and all such particulars in Ecclesiastical affairs , as are not determined in Scripture , are determined by the Ministers and ruling Officers of the Church , so as may best agree to the generall rules of the word concerning order and decency , avoyding of scandall , doing all to the glory of God , and to the edifying of one another . And this is clavis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 3. The key of corrective discipline or censures to be exercised upon the scandalous and obstinate : which is clavis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 4. Adde also the key of Ordination or mission of Church-Officers , which I may call clavis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the authorizing or power giving key , others call it missio potestativa . 3. They differ in their formes . The power of Magistracy is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It is an authority or dominion exercised in the particulars above mentioned , and that in an immediate subordination to God : for which reason Magistrates are called gods . The Ecclesiastical power is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely . It is meerly Ministeriall and Steward-like , and exercised in an immediate subordination to Iesus Christ , as King of the Church , and in his name and authority . 4. They differ in their ends . The supreme end of Magistracy is onely the glory of God , as King of Nations , and as exercising dominion over the inhabitants of the earth : And in that respect the Magistrate is appointed to keep his Subjects within the bounds of external obedience to the moral Law , the obligation where of lyeth upon all Nations , and all men . The supreme end of the Ecclesiastical power , is either proximus or remotus . The neerest and immediate end is the glory of Iesus Christ , as Mediator and King of the Church . The more remote end is the glory of God , as having all power and authority in heaven and earth . You will say , Must not then the Christian Magistrate intend the glory of Iesus Christ , and to be subservient to him as he is Mediator and King of the Church ? Certainly he ought and must ; and God forbid but that he should do so . But how ? not qua Magistrate , but qua Christian. If you say to me again , Must not the Christian Magistrate intend to be otherwise subservient to the Kingdom of Iesus Christ as Mediator , then by personal or private Christian duties , which are incumbent to every Christian ? I answer , no doubt he ought to intend more , even to glorifie Iesus Christ in the administration of Magistracy . Which that you may rightly apprehend , and that I be not misunderstood , take this distinction . It is altogether incumbent to the ruling Officers of the Church , to intend the glory of Christ as Mediator , even ex natura rei , in regard of the very nature of Ecclesiasticall power and government which hath no other end and use for which it was intended and instituted , but to be subservient to the Kingly office of Iesus Christ in the governing of his Church upon earth ( and therefore sublata Ecclesiâ perit regimen Ecclesiasticum , take away the Church out of a Nation , and you take away all Ecclesiasticall power of government , which makes another difference from Magistracy , as we shall see anon . ) But the Magistrate though Christian and godly , doth not ex natura rei , in regard of the nature of his particular vocation ▪ intend the glory of Iesus Christ as Mediator , and King of the Church : but in regard of the common principles of Christian Religion , which do oblige every Christian in his particular vocation and station ( and so the Magistrate in his ) to intend that end . All Christians are commanded that whatever they do in word or deed , they do all in the name of the Lord Iesus , Col. 3. 17. that is , according to the will of Christ , and for the glory of Christ : And so a Marchant , a Mariner , a Tradesman , a School-master , a Captain , a Souldier , a Printer , and in a word , every Christian in his own place and station ought to intend the glory of Christ , and the good of his Church and Kingdom . Upon which ground and principle , if the Magistrate be Christian , it is incumbent to him so to administer that high and eminent vocation of his , that Christ may be glorified as King of the Church , and that this Kingdom of Christ may flourish in his Dominions , ( which would God every Magistrate called Christian did really intend . ) So then the glory of Christ as Mediator and King of the Church , is to the Ministery both finis operis , and finis operantis . To the Magistrate , though Christian , it is onely finis operantis ; That is , it is the end of the godly Magistrate , but not the end of Magistracy : whereas it is not onely the end of the godly Minister , but the end of the Ministery it self . The Ministers intendment of this end , flowes from the nature of their particular vocation . The Magistrates intendment of the same end , flowes from the nature of their general vocation of Christianity , acting , guiding , and having influence into their particular vocation . So much of the supreme ends . Now the subordinate end of all Ecclesiastical power , is , that all who are of the Church , whether Officers or members , may live godly , righteously , and soberly in this present world , be kept within the bounds of obedience to the Gospel , void of all known offence toward God , and toward man , and be made to walk according to the rules delivered to us by Christ and his Apostles . The subordinate end of the Civil power is , that all publike sins committed presumptuously against the moral Law , may be exemplarly punished , and that peace , justice , and good order may be preserved and maintained in the Common-wealth , which doth greatly redound to the comfort and good of the Church , and to the promoting of the course of the Gospel ▪ For this end the Apostle bids us pray for Kings , and all who are in Authority ( though they be Pagans , much more if they be Christians ) that we may live under them a peaceable and quiet life , in all Godlinesse and Honesty : 1 ▪ Tim. 2. 2. He saith not simply , that we may live in Godlinesse and Honesty , but that we may both live peaceably and quietly , and also live godly and honestly : which is the very same that we commonly say of the Magistrate , that he is Custos utriusque Tabulae . He is to take speciall care that all his Subjects be made to observe the Law of God , and live not onely in moral honesty , but in Godlinesse , and that so living , they may also enjoy peace and quietnesse . More particularly ; the end of Church censures is , that men may be ashamed , humbled , reduced to repentance , that their spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. The end of civil punishments inflicted by the Magistrate is , That justice may be done according to Law , and that peace and good order may be maintained in the Common-wealth , as hath been said . The end of delivering Hymeneus and Alexander to Satan , was , that they may learn not to blaspheme , 1 Tim. 1. 20. Erastus yeelds to Beza , pag. 239. that the Apostle doth not say Ut non possint blasphemare , that henceforth they may not be able to sin as they did before ( which yet he acknowledgeth to be the end of civil punishments , ) but that they may learn not to blaspheme . Wherefore when he expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to no other sence but this , That the Apostle had delivered those two to be killed by Satan , Ut non possint , that they may not be able to blaspheme so any more ; just as a Mastgirate delivers a theef from the gallows , that he may not be able to steal any more , and ( as he tels us some speak ) that he may learn to steal no more : He is herein confuted , not onely out of the Text , but out of himself . So then , the end of Church-censures is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that the offenders may learn or be instructed to do so no more ; which belongeth to the inward man or soul. The end of civil punishments is , Ut non possint ( as Erastus tels us ) that the offenders may not be able or at least ( being alive and some way free ) may not dare to do the like , the sword being appointed for a terrour to them who do evil , to restrain them from publike and punishable offences , not to work upon the spirit of their mindes , nor to effect the destroying of the flesh by mortification , that the spirit may be safe in the day of the Lord. The fifth difference between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers , is in respect of the effects . The effects of the Civil power are Civil Laws , Civil punishments , Civil rewards . The effects of the Ecclesiastical power , are Determinations of Controversies of Faith , Canons concerning Order and Decency in the Church , Ordination or Deposition of Church-Officers , Suspension from the Sacrament , and Excommunication . The powers being distinct in their nature and causes , the effects must needs be distinct , which flow from the actuating and putting in execution of the powers . I do not here speak of the effects of the Ecclesiastical power of Order , the dispensing of the Word and Sacraments ; but of the effects of the power of Jurisdiction or Government , of which onely the Controversic is . Sixthly : The Civil power hath for the object of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the things of this life , matters of Peace , War , Justice , the Kings matters , and the Countrey-matters , those things that belong to the external man : But the Ecclesiastical power hath for the object of it , things pertaining to God , the Lords matters , as they are distinct from Civil matters , and things belonging to the inward man , distinct from the things belonging to the outward man. This difference Protestant Writers do put between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers . Fr. Junius Ecclesiast . lib. 3. cap. 4. saith thus : We have put into our definition humane things to be the subject of Civil administration : but the subject of Ecclesiastical administration , we have taught to be things Divine and Sacred . Things Divine and Sacred we call both those which God commandeth for the sanctification of our minde and conscience , as things necessary ; and also those which the decency and order of the Church requireth to be ordained and observed , for the profitable and convenient use of the things which are necessary : For example , Prayers , the administration of the Word and Sacraments , Ecclsiastical censure , are things necessary and essentially belonging to the Communion of Saints : but set dayes , set hours , set places , fasts ▪ and the like , belong to the decency and order of the Church &c. But humane things we call such as touch the life , the body ▪ goods and good name , as they are expounded in the second Table of the Decalogue ; for these are the things in which the whole Civil administration standeth . Tilen , Synt. part . 2. disp . 32. tels us to the same purpose , That Civil Government or Magistracy versatur circa res terrenas & hominem externum . Magistratus , saith Danaui Pol. Christ. lib. 6. cap. 1. instituti sunt à Deo rerum humanarum quae hominum societati necessariae sunt , respectu , & ad earum curam . If it be objected , How can these things agree with that which hath been before by us acknowledged , that the Civil Magistrate ought to take special care of Religion , of the conservation and purgation thereof , of the abolishing idolatry and superstition ; and ought to be Custos utriusque Tabulae , of the first , as well as second Table ? I answer , That Magistrates are appointed , not onely for Civil Policy , but for the conservation and purgation of Religion ▪ as is expressed in the Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland , before cited , we firmly beleeve , as a most undoubted truth . But when Divines make the object of Magistracy to be onely such things as belong to this life and to humane society , they do not mean the object of the Magistrates Care ( as if he were not to take care of Religion ; ) but the object of his Operation . The Magistrate himself may not assume the administration of the keys , nor the dispensing of Church-censures ; he can but punish the external man with external punishments . Of which more afterwards . The seventh difference stands in the Adjuncts : For 1. the Ecclesiastical power in Presbyterial or Synodical Assemblies , ought not to be exercised without prayer and calling upon the Name of the Lord , Matth. 18. 19. There is no such obligation upon the Civil power , as that there may be no Civil Court of Justice without prayer . 2. In divers cases Civil Jurisdiction hath been and is in the person of one man : But no Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction is committed to one man , but to an Assembly in which two at least must agree in the thing , as is gathered from the Text last cited . 3. No private or secret offence ought to be brought before an Ecclesiastical Court , except in the case of contumacy and impenitency , after previous admonitions : This is the ordinary rule , not to dispute now extraordinary exceptions from that rule . But the Civil power is not bound up by any such ordinary rule : For I suppose , our opposites will hardly say ( at least hardly make it good ) that no Civil injury or breach of Law and Justice , being privately committed , may be brought before a Civil Court , except first there be previous admonitions , and the party admonished prove obstinate and impenitent . The eighth difference stands in their correlations . The Correlatum of Magistracy is people embodied in a Common-wealth , or a Civil corporation . The Correlatum of the Ecclesiastical power is people embodied in a Church , or Spiritual corporation . The Common-wealth is not in the Church , but the Church is in the Common-wealth , that is , One is not therefore in or of the Church , because he is in or of the Common-wealth , of which the Church is a part ; but yet every one that is a Member of the Church , is also a Member of the Common-wealth , of which that Church is a part . The Apostle distinguisheth those that are without , and those that are within in reference to the Church , who were notwithstanding both sorts within in reference to the Common-wealth , 1 Cor. 5. 12 , 13. The Correlatum of the Ecclesiastical power may be quite taken away by persecution , or by defection , when the Correlatum of the civil power may remain . And therefore the Ecclesiastical and the civil power do not se mutuò ponere & tollere . Ninthly : There is a great difference in the ultimate termination . The Ecclesiastical power can go no further then Excommunication , or ( in case of extraordinary warrants , and when one is known to have blasphemed against the holy Ghost ) to Auathema Maranatha . If one be not humbled and reduced by Excommunication , the Church can do no more , but leave him to the Judgement of God , who hath promised to ratifie in Heaven , what his Servants in his Name , and according to his Will , do upon Earth . Salmasius spends a whole chapter in confuting the Point of the coactive and Magistratical Jurisdiction of Bishops . See Walo Messal . cap. 6. He acknowledgeth in that very place , pag. 455 , 456 , 459 , 462 ▪ that the Elders of the Church have in common the power of Ecclesiastical Discipline , to suspend from the Sacrament and to excommunicate , and to receive the offender again upon the evidence of his repentance . But the Point he asserteth is , That Bishops or Elders have no such power as the Magistrate hath , and that if he that is excommunicate do not care for it , nor submit himself , the Elders cannot compel him . But the termination or Quo usque of the civil power , is most different from this . It is unto death , or to banishment , or to confiscation of goods , or to imprisonment . Ezra 7. 26. Tenthly : They differ in a divided execution . That is , the Ecclesiastical power ought to censure sometime one whom the Magistrate thinks not fit to punish with temporal or civil punishments : And again , the Magistrate ought to punish with the temporal Sword , one whom the Church ought not to cut off by the Spiritual Sword. This difference Pareus gives , Explic . Catech. quaest . 85. art . 4. and it cannot be denied : For those that plead most for Liberty of conscience ▪ and argue against all civil or temporal punishments of Hereticks , do notwithstanding acknowledge , that the Church whereof they are Members ought to censure and excommunicate them , and doth not her duty except she do so . The Church may have reason to esteem one as an Heathen and a Publican that is no Church-Member , whom yet the Magistrate in prudence and policy doth permit to live in the Common-wealth . Again , the most notorious and scandalous sinners , blasphemers , murtherers , adulterers , incestuous persons , robbers , &c. when God gives them repentance , and the signes thereof do appear , the Church doth not binde but loose them , doth not retain but remit their sins ; I mean ministerially and declaratively . Notwithstanding the Magistrate may and ought to do Justice according to Law , even upon those penitent sinners . CHAP. V. Of a twofold Kingdom of Iesus Christ : a general Kingdom , as he is the eternal Son of God , the Head of all Principalities and Powers , raigning over all creatures : and a particular Kingdom , as he is Mediator , raigning over the Church onely . THe Controversie which hath been moved concerning the civil Magistrate his Vicegerentship , and the holding of his Office ▪ of and under and for Jesus Christ as he is Mediator , hath a necessary coherence with , and dependance upon another Controversie concerning a twofold Kingdom of Jesus Christ ; one , as he is the eternal Son of God , raigning together with the Father and the holy Ghost over all things ; and so the Magistrate is his Vicegerent , and holds his Office of and under him : another as Mediator and Head of the Church , and so the Magistrate doth not hold his Office of and under Christ as his Vicegerent . Wherefore before I come to that Question concerning the origination and tenure of the Magistrate's Office , I have thought good here to premise the enodation of the Question concerning the twofold Kingdom of Jesus Christ. It is a distinction which Master Hussey cannot endure ▪ and no marvel ; for it overturneth the foundation of his opinion . He looks upon it as an absurd assertion , pag. 25. Shall he have one Kingdom as Mediator , and another as God ? He quarrelleth all that I said of the twofold Kingdom of Christ , and will not admit that Christ as Mediator is King of the Church onely , pag. 25 , 26 , 27 , 35 , 36 , 37. The Controversie draweth deeper then he is aware of : for Socinians and Photinians finding themselves puzzled with those arguments which ( to prove the eternal Godhead of Jesus Christ ) were drawn from such Scriptures as call him God , Lord , the Son of God ; also from such Scriptures as ascribe Worship and Adoration to him ; and from the Texts which ascribe to him a Supreme Lordship , Dominion , and Kingdom over all things : ( For this hath been used as one Argument for the Godhead of Jesus Christ and his consubstantiality with the Father . The Father raigns , the Son raigns , the holy Ghost raigns . Vide lib. Isaaci Clari Hispani adversus Varimadum Arianum : ) Thereupon they devised this answer ▪ That Jesus Christ in respect of his Kingly Office , and as Mediator , is called God , and Lord , and the Son of God , ( of which see Fest. Honnij Specimen Controv. Belgic . pag. 24. Ionas Schlichtingius contra Meisnerum pag. 436. ) and that in the same respect he is worshipped , that in the same respect he is King , and that the Kingdom which the Scripture ascribeth to Jesus Christ , is onely as Mediator and Head of the Church , and that he hath no such Universal Dominion over all things as can prove him to be the eternal Son of God. This gave occasion to Orthodox-Protestant-Writters , more fully and distinctly to assert the great difference between that which the Scripture saith of Christ , as he is the eternal Son of God ; and that which it saith of him , as he is Mediator : and particularly to assert a twofold Kingdom of Jesus Christ , and to prove from Scripture , that besides that Kingdom which Christ hath as Mediator , he hath another Kingdom over all things which belongs to him onely as he is the eternal Son of God. This the Socinians to this day do contradict , and stisly hold that Christ hath but one Kingdom , which he exerciseth as Mediator over the Church , and in some respect over all things ; but by no means they admit that Christ as God raigneth over all things : But our Writters still hold up against them the distinction of that twofold Kingdom of Jesus Christ. See Stagmanni Photinianismus Disp. 27. quaest . 6. The same distinction of the twofold Kingdom of Christ , as God , and as Mediator , is frequently to be found in Protestant Writers . See Synops. pur . Theol. Disp. 26. thes . 53. Gomarus in Obad. vers . ult . The late English Annotations on 1 Cor. 15. 24. and many others . Let o Polanus speak for the rest . See also the same distinction cleared and asserted by Master Apollonius in his Ius Majestatis circa sacra , part . 1. pag. 33. & seq . The Arguments to prove that distinction of the twofold Kingdom of Christ , are these : First , Those Kingdoms of which the one is accessory and adventitions to the Son of God , and which , if it were not , the want of it could not prove him not to be God : the other necessarily floweth from his Godhead , so that without it he were not God ; are most different and distinct Kingdoms . But the Kingdom of Christ as Mediator , and the Kingdom of Christ as he is the eternal Son of God , are such . Ergo : If the Son of God had never received the Office of Mediator , and so should not have raigned as Mediator , yet he had been the natural Son of God ; for this could not be a necessary consequence , He is the natural Son of God , Therefore he is Mediator ; for he had been the natural Son of God , though he had not been Mediator , and though man had not been redeemed . But if you suppose that the Son of God raigns not as God with the Father and the holy Ghost , from everlasting to everlasting , then you must needs suppose that he is not the natural and eternal Son of God. Secondly , Those Kingdoms of which the one is proper and personal to Jesus Christ God-man ; the other is not proper and personal , but common to the Father and the holy Ghost , are most different and distinct Kingdoms . But the Kingdom of Jesus Christ as Mediator , and his Kingdom as he is the eternal Son of God , are such . Ergo : That Kingdom which Christ hath as Mediator , by special dispensation of God committed to him , is his alone properly and personally : for we cannot say that the Father raigns as Mediator , or that the holy Ghost raigns as Mediator . But that Kingdom which Christ hath , as he is the eternal Son of God , is the very same consubstantially with that Kingdom whereby God the Father and God the holy Ghost do raign . Thirdly , He that hath a Kingdom which shall be continued and exercised for ever , and a Kingdom which shall not be continued and exercised for ever , hath two distinct Kingdoms . But Jesus Christ hath a Kingdom which shall be continued and exercised for ever , namely , the Kingdom which he hath as the eternal Son of God ; and another Kingdom which shall not be continued and exercised for ever , namely , the Kingdom which he hath as Mediator . Ergo : The eternity of the one Kingdom is not doubted of : But that the other Kingdom shall not be for ever exercised , that is , p that Christ shall not for ever raign as Mediator , is proved from 1 Cor. 15. 24 , 25. Master Hussey pag. 35 , 36 , 37. goeth about to answer this Argument , which he confesseth to say something : and indeed it saith so much , that though he maketh an extravagant exception , ( Doth it appear , saith he , that the Kingdom that he shall lay down to God his Father , is not over all the world ? ) yet he plainly yeelds the Point , which I was then proving . Christ , saith he , in the day of Judgement shall lay down all the Office of Mediatorship . I hope he will not say that Christ shall lay down at the day of Judgement that Kingdom which he hath as the eternal Son of God. So then I have what I was seeking , that Christ hath one Kingdom as Mediator , another as the eternal Son of God. And whereas Master Hussey holdeth that Christ as Mediator raigns over all things as the Vicar of his Father , we shall see anon the weaknesse of his Arguments brought to prove it . Mean while , I ask , What then is that Kingdom which belongs to Christ as the eternal Son of God , and which shall not be laid down , but continued for ever ? Let him think on this Argument , Whatsoever belongs to that Kingdom which shall be continued for ever , and shall not be laid down at the day of Judgement , doth belong to Christ , not as Mediator , but as the eternal Son of God. But the general Power and Dominion , by which Jesus Christ exerciseth Soveraignty over all creatures without exception , doing to them and fulfilling upon them all the good pleasure of his Will , belongs to that Kingdom which shall be continued for ever , and shall not be laid down at the day of Judgement . Ergo : That general Power and Dominion by which Jesus Christ exerciseth Soveraignty over all creatures without exception , doing to them and fulfilling upon them all the good pleasure of his Will ; doth belong to Christ , not as Mediator , but as the eternal Son of God. And thus I make a transition to another Argument . Fourthly , He that hath a Kingdom administred by and in Evangelical Ordinances , and a Kingdom administred by his Divine Power , without Evangelical Ordinances , hath two different and distinct Kingdoms . But Jesus Christ hath a Kingdom administred by and in Evangelical Ordinances , and a Kingdom administred by his Divine power , without Evangelical Ordinances . Ergo : Doth not Jesus Christ raign over the Devils and damned Spirits by his Divine Power , reserving them in chains of darknesse to the Judgement of the great day ? But will Master Hussey say that Christ raigns over the Divels and damned Spirits as Mediator or by the same Kingdom by which he raigns in his Church by and in his Ordinances ? Therefore we must needs say , That Christ hath one Kingdom as the eternal Son of God , another as Mediator . Fifthly , He that hath a Kingdom in subordination to God the Father , and as his Vicegerent ; and another Kingdom wherein he is not subordinate unto , but equal with God the Father , hath two most different Kingdoms . But Jesus Christ hath a Kingdom in subordination to God the Father , and another Kingdom wherein he is not subordinate unto , but equal with God the Father . Ergo : The Kingdom which Christ hath as Mediator doth ( in regard of the Office of Mediatorship ) constitute him in a subordination to his Father , whose Commandments he executeth , and to whom he gives an account of his Ministration . So that though he that is Mediator , being the eternal Son of God , is equal with the Father ; yet as Mediator , he is not equal with the Father , but subordinate to the Father , which our Divines prove from these Scriptures , Isai. 42. 1. Behold my servant . Jo. 14. 28. My Father is greater then I. 1 Cor. 11. 3. The Head of Christ is God : In the same consideration as Christ is our Head , God is Christs Head , namely , as Christ is Mediator . But that Kingdom which Christ hath as he is the eternal Son of God , he holds it not in a subordination to God the Father ; but as being consubstantial with his Father , and thinking it no robbery to be called equal with God : So that in this consideration , the Father is not greater then he . Master Hussey pag. 37. saith of Christ , in respect of the Government which he hath as Mediator , He is as it were the Vicar of his Father . I hope he will not say so of that Government which Christ hath as the eternal Son of God. And pag. 27. he holds that Christ as Mediator is subject to God ; But in the consideration that Christ is the second person of Trinity , so he is not inferior to God the Father . So that he himself cannot but yeeld my Argument . Sixthly , If Christ hath a Kingdom in time dispensed and delegate to him , and unto which he was anointed , and hath another Kingdom which is not delegate nor in time dispensed , nor he anointed to it ; but doth necessarily and naturally accompany the communication of the Divine nature to him by eternal generation : then he hath two most different Kingdoms , one as he is Mediator ; another as he is the eternal Son of God. But Christ hath a Kingdom in time dispensed and delegate &c. If you speak of Christ as Mediator , God hath made him both Lord and Christ , Act. 2. 36. but as he is the eternal Son of God he is not Dominus factus ; he is not made Lord and King , no more then he is made the natural Son of God. When the Psalmist speaketh of that Kingdom which Christ hath as Mediator , he tels us of the anointing of Christ. Ps. 45. 6. The Scepter of thy Kingdom is a right Scepter : vers . 7. Thy God hath anointed thee with the oyle of gladnesse . But we cannot say that Christ was anointed to that Kingdom , which he hath as the eternal Son of God. Seventhly , If the Scripture holds forth a Kingdom which Christ hath over all creatures , and another Kingdom which he hath over the Church onely ▪ then it holds forth the twofold Kingdom which I plead for , and which Master Hussey denieth . But the Scripture holds forth &c. Christ as he is God over all , blessed for ever , Rom. 9. 5. exerciseth Soveraignty and Dominion over all things , even as his Father doth , Psal. 115. 3. Dan. 4 34 , 35. for his Father and he are one . But as he is Mediator , his Kingdom is his Church onely , and he is over his own House , Heb. 3. 6. You will say the word onely is not in Scripture . I answer : When we say that Faith onely justifieth , the word onely is not in Scripture , but the thing is . Just so here : For , first , David , Solomon , and Eliakim were types of Christ the King. Now David and Solomon did raign onely over Gods people as their Subjects , though they had other people tributaries and subdued : So doth Christ raign over the House of Iacob onely , Luk. 1. 32 , 33. The Lord shall give unto him the Throne of his Father David , and he shall raign over the house of Jacob for ever . Isai. 9. 7. Of the encrease of his Government and Peace there shall be no end , upon the Throne of David and upon his Kingdom to order it . Isa. 21. 22. I will commit the Government into his hand , and he shall be a Father to the Inhabitants of Jerusalem , and to the house of Judah , and the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder . 2. It was foretold and applied to the Church and people of God as a proper and peculiar comfort to the Church , that Christ was to come and raign as a King : Isai. 9. 6. Unto us a Child is born , unto us a Son is given , and the Government shall be upon his shoulder . Zech. 9. 9. Rejoyce greatly O Daughter of Zion : Shout O Daughter of Jerusalem : Behold THY KING cometh unto thee . Matth. 2. 6. Out of thee shall come a Governour that shall rule my people Israel . 3. The Iews did generally understand it so , That the Messias was to be the Churches King onely , which made Pilate say to them , Shall I crucifie your King ? And hence it was also , that the wise men who came to enquire for Christ , said , Where is he that is born King of the Jews ? Matt. 2. 2. Eighthly , That very place Eph. 1. 21 , 22 , 23. from which Master Coleman drew an Argument against us , doth plainly hold forth a two-fold supremacy of Iesus Christ , one over all things , another in reference to the Church onely which is his body , his fulnesse , and to whom alone he is head , according to that Text : Of which more afterwards . Ninthly , The Apostle Col. 1. doth also distinguish this two-fold preeminence , supremacy , and Kingdom of Iesus Christ : one , which is universal , and over all things , and which belongeth to him as he is the eternal Son of God , vers . 15. 16. 17. Who is the Image of the Invisible God , the first born of every creature : For by him were all things created that are in Heaven , and that are in earth , visible and invisible , whether they be Thrones , or Dominions , or Principalities , or Powers : all things were created by him and for him . And he is before all things , and by him all things consist . q Another which is oeconomicall and particular in and over the Church , and this he hath as Mediator : vers . 18. And he is the head of the body the Church : who is the beginning , the first born from the dead , that in all things he might have the preeminence . That vers . 18. he speaketh of Christ as Mediator , is not controverted . But Mr. Hussey pag. 35. would fain make it out ( if he could ) that Christ as Mediator is spoken of , vers . 15. 16. 17. The Apostle indeed in that which went before did speak of Christ as Mediator . But the scope of these three verses is to prove the God-head of Iesus Christ. Yea , Mr. Hussey himself yeeldeth , that as God and not as Mediator he did create the world . How can he then contend that the Apostle speaketh here of Christ as Mediator ? and why doth he find fault with my exposition that the Apostle speaketh here of Christ as God ? Do not our Writers urge Col. 1. 16. 17. against the Socinians and Photinians , to prove the eternal God-head of Iesus Christ , because by him all things were created , and he is before all things . See Stegmanni Photinianismus disp . 5. Quaest. 12. Becmanus Exercit. 4. and Exerc. 8. Where you may see , that the Adversaries contend ( as Mr. Hussey doth ) that the Apostle vers . 15. 16. 17. doth not speak of the person of Iesus Christ , proving him to be true God ; but that he speaks of Christ as Mediator or in respect of his Office , and of that dominion which Christ hath as Mediator ( So Ionas Schlichtingius contra Meisner . pag. 469. ) and that vers . 15. 16. 17. ascribeth no more to Christ , than vers . 18. But Becmanus answering Iulius , distinguisheth the Text as I do : for which Analysis I did formerly cite Beza , Zanchius , Gualther , Bullinger , Tossanus , M. Bayne , beside diverse others . But I have found none that understands the Text as Mr. Hussey doth , except the Socinians and Photinians , who do not acknowledge that Christ hath such an universall dominion and Lordship over all things , as God the Father , but onely that he ruleth over all things , as Mediator . Now for answer to that which Mr. Hussey pag. 26. 27. alledgeth , to prove that Christ as Mediator reigneth over all things , First , he tells us out of Diodati that Christ is head of the Church , and King of the Universe , and out of Calvin , that the Kingdom of Christ is over all , and filleth heaven and earth : But who denieth this ? That which he had to prove , is , that Christ as Mediator , is King of the Universe , and as Mediator his Kingdom is spread over all : and when he hath proved that , he hath another thing to prove , that the universality of Christs Kingdom as he is Mediator , is to be understood not onely in an Ecclesiastical notion , that is , so far as all Nations are or shall be brought under the obedience of the Gospel ; but also in the notion of Civil Government , that is , that Christ reignes as Mediator over all creatures , whether under or without the Gospel : and that all Civil Power , Principality , and Government whatsoever in this World , is put in Christs hand as Mediator . If therefore he will argue , let him argue so , as to conclude the point . The next objection he maketh , is from Heb. 1. 2. Christ as Mediator is made Heir of all things . But I answer , Christ is Heir of all things . 1. as the eternall Son of God , in the same respect as it is said of Christ in the next words of the same verse , that he made the world : and thus he may be called Heir of all things by nature , even as Col. 1. 15. he is called the first borne of every creature . 2. He is heir of all things as Mediator , for the Heathen and all the ends of the earth are given him for an inheritance , Psal. 2. 8. but that is onely Church-wise , he shall have a Catholique Church gathered out of all Nations , and all kings and people , and tongues , and languages shall be made to serve him . Moreover Mr. Hussey objecteth from Heb. 2. 8. and 1 Cor. 15. 28. that God hath put all things under Christs feet as he is Mediator . Answ. As this is not perfectly fulfilled in this World , but will then be fulfilled when Christ shall have put down all rule and all authority , and power : so in the measure and degree wherein it is fulfilled in this World , it concerneth not men onely , but all the works of Gods hands , Heb. 2. 7. Thou crownedst him with glory and honour , and didst set him over the works of thy hands . Which is taken out of the eighth Psalme , vers . 6. 7. Thou hast put all things under his feet , all sheep and oxen &c. Now how is it that the Apostle applyeth all this to Christ ? How doth Christ rule over the beasts , fowles , fishes ? Calvin in 1 Cor. 15. 27. 28. answereth , dominatur ergo , ut omnia serviant ejus gloriae . He ruleth , so as all things may serve for his glory . So then , all things are put under Christs feet as he is Mediator , both in regard of his excellency , dignity , and glory unto which he is exalted far above all the glory of any creature ; and in respect of his power and over-ruling providence whereby he can dispose of all things so as may make most for his glory . But it is a third thing which Mr. Hussey hath to prove , namely , that Christ as Mediator exerciseth his office and government over all men as his Subjects , and over all Magistrates as his Deputies , yea over all things , even over the reasonlesse creatures ; for by his arguing , he will have Christ as Mediator to governe the sheep , oxen , fowles , and fishes : all things as well as all persons being put under Christs feet . But in the handling of this very argument Mr. Hussey yeelds the cause . God is said to put all things under him , saith he , whereby it is implyed that all things were not under him , before they were put under him ; but as the second Person in Trinity , so nothing could be said to be put under him , because they were in that respect alwaies under him . Is not this all one for substance with that distinction formerly cited out of Polanus , of a two-fold Kingdom of Christ , one natural ; as he is the second Person in the Trinity , another donative , as he is Mediator ? Lastly , Mr. Hussey argueth from Phil. 2. 8. 9. 10. Christ as Mediator is exalted to have a name above every name , that at the name of Iesus every knee may bow . Answ. Here is indeed a dignity , glory , and power , as Diodati saith , above all things , but yet not a government or kingdom , as Mediator : for those who must bow the knee to Christ , are not onely things in heaven , that is , Angels , and things in earth , that is , men , but also things under the earth , that is , divells , yet divells are none of the Subjects of Christs kingdom as he is Mediator . Therefore this Text proves not a Head-ship or Government over all , ( which Mr. Hussey contends for ) but a power over all . I will here anticipate another objection , which is not moved by Mr. Hussey . It may be objected from 1 Cor. 11. 3. that the head of every man is Christ. I answer , 1. Some understand this of Christ as God , and as the Creator of man. And if it be said that the latter clause the head of Christ is God , is meant of Christ as Mediator , and not as God : yet Martyr tells us out of Chrysostome , that all these comparisons and subordinations in this Text , are not to be taken in one and the same sence . 2. I grant also that Christ may be called the head of every man , not onely in respect of his God-head , but as Mediator , that is , the head of every man in the Church , not of every man in the World : for the Apostle speaks , de ordine divinitus sancito in Ecclesiae corpore mystico , as Mr. David Dicksone ( an Interpreter who hath taken very good pains in the Textuall study of Scripture ) saith upon the place . I shall clear it by the like formes of speech . Ier. 30 6. Wherefore do I see every man with his hands on his loyns ? Luke 16. 16. The Kingdom of God is preached , and every man presseth unto it . 1 Cor. 12. 7. The manifestaetion of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withall . Heb. 2. 9. Iesus did taste death for every man. Yet none of these places are meant of every man in the World. 3. Yea in some sence Christ , as Mediator , may be called the head of every man in the World , that is , in respect of dignity , excellency , glory , eminence of place , quia in hoc sexu ille supra omnes eminet , saith Gualther , or because no man hath parity or equality of honour with Christ : So Martyr and Hunnius . The English annotations say , that Christ is the Head of every man , in as much as he is the first begotten among many brtheren . Which best agreeth with my second answer . But for taking off all these , and for preventing of other objections , that one distinction will suffice , which I first gave in examining Mr. Colemans Sermon . In the Mediator Iesus Christ there is , 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , dignity , excellency , honour , glory , splendor . 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , his mighty power , by which he is able to do in heaven and earth whatsoever he will. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his Kingdom , and Kingly-office or government . Which three as they are distinguished in God ▪ Thine is the Kingdom , and the power , and the glory : Why not in the Mediator also ? In the first two respects , Christ as Mediator is over all things , and so over all men , and so over all Magistrates , and all they in subjection to him . But in the third respect the relation is onely between Christ and his Church , as between King and Kingdom . So that the thing in difference , is that which Mr. Hussey hath not proved , namely , that Christ as Mediator doth not onely excell all things in glory , and exercise a supreme power and providence over all things , for his own glory , and his Churches good ( neither of which is denied ) but that he also is as Mediator , King , Head , and Governor of the Universe , and hath not onely the government of his Church , but all Civil government put in his hand . When Mr. Hussey pag. 28. saith that I denyed pag. 43. what this distinction yeeldeth , namely , that Christ as Mediator exerciseth acts of divine power in the behalf and for the good of his Church , it is a calumny : for that which I denied pag. 43. was concerning the Kingdom , not the power : my words were these . But as Mediator he is onely the Churches King , Head , and Governour , and hath no other Kingdom . Yea himsef , pag. 26. speaking to these words of mine , noteth that I did not say , that as Mediator he hath no such power . How commeth it to passe that he chargeth me with the denying of that , which himself but two pages before had observed that I denie it not ? Well , but pag. 43 , he desires from me a further clearing of my distinction , Kingdom , power , and glory , and that I will shew from Scripture , how it agreeth to Christ. I shall obey his desire : though it was before easie to be understood , if he had been willing enough to understand . Solomon did excell all the Kings of the earth in wisedom , riches , glory , and honour , 2 Chron. 1. 12. and herein he was a type of Christ , Psal. 89. 27. I will make him my first born , higher then the Kings of the earth : But as Solomon was onely King of Israel , and was not by office or authority of Government , a Catholique King over all the Kingdomes of the World , nor all other Kings Solomons Vicegerents , or Deputies : So Iesus Christ as Mediator is onely the Churches King , and is not King or Governour of the whole World , nor Civil Magistrates his Vicegerents , though he excell them all in dignity , glory , and honour . Again , David did subdue by power diverse States , Provinces , and Kingdoms , and make them tributary . But was David King of the Philistines , and King of the Moabites , and King of the Syrians , and King of the Edomites , because he smote them and subdued them , 2. Sam. 8. Nay it is added , in that very place vers . 15. And David reigned over all Israel , and David executed justice and judgement unto all his people . ( And this is one argument to prove that those subdued and tributrary Territories , were not properly under the government of Israel , because Israel was not bound to extirpate Idolaters out of those lands , but onely out of the holy land . See Maimonides de Idolol . cap. 7. sect . 1. with the annotation of Dionysius Vossius . ) So Christ who was set upon the throne of David , doth as Mediator , put forth his divine and irresistible power in subduing all his Churches enemies , according to that Psal. 2 9. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron , thou shalt dash them in peeces like a Potters vessel . Rev. 17. 14. The Lamb shall overcome them , for he is Lord of lords , and King of kings . But this vis major , this restraining subduing power makes not Christ , as Mediator , to be King and Governour , not onely of his Church , but of the whole World beside . Yea the power of Christ is over all things , as well as all persons , over all beasts , fowles , and fishes ; Heb. 2. 7. 8. compared with Psal. 8. 7. 8. Yea his power is over divells , meant by things under the earth , Phil. 2. 10. Wherefore it cannot be said , that Christ as Mediator , is King , Head , and Governour of all those whom he excelleth in glory , or whom he hath under his power , to do with them what he will. It is a strange mistake when Mr , Hussey pag. 43. objecteth against this distinction , that a Kingdom without power and glory , is a nominall empty thing . Surely there may be a Kingly right and authority to governe , where there is little either power or glory . But this is nothing to my distinction , which doth not suppose a Kingdom without power and glory , nor yet power and glory without a Kingdom , but onely that the Kingdom and Government is not to be extended to all those whom the King excelleth in glory ( for then one King that hath but little glory , shall be subject to a King that hath much glory : ) or over whom the King exerciseth acts of power , ( for then the King shall be King to his and his Kingdomes enemies ) I verily beleeve that this distinction rightly apprehended , will discover the great mistakes of that supposed universall Kingdom of Christ , as Mediator , reigning over all things , and the Civil Magistrate as his Vicegerent ▪ CHAP. VI. Whether Jesus Christ , as Mediator and head of the Church , hath laced the Christian Magistrate to hold and execute his Office under and fo him , as his Vicegerent . The Arguments for the 〈◊〉 discussed . MR. Hussey is very angry at my distinctions and arguments which I brought against Mr. Col●…mans fourth rule , insomuch that in his Reply to me , he spendeth very near two parts of three upon this matter , from pag. 16. to 44. having past over sicco ped much of what I had said of other points in difference . Come now therefore and let us try ▪ his strength in this great point . He holds that Christ as Mediator hath placed the Christian Magistrate under him , and as his Vicegerent , and hath given him commission to govern the Church , which if he or any man can prove from the Word of God , it will go far in the decision of the Erastian controversie : though this is not all which is incumbent to the Erastians to prove , for as I first replied to Mr. Colemans fourth rule , the Question is , whether there be not some other government instituted and appointed by Iesus Christ to be in his Church beside the Civil Government : and if it should be granted that Christ even as Mediator hath committed , delegated and instituted Civil Government in his Church , yet they must further prove , that Christ hath committed the whole and sole power of Church-Government to the Magistrate , and so hath left no share of Government to the Ministery . But I can by no means yeeld that so much contended for Vicegerentship of the Christian Magistrate , and his holding of his Office of and under Christ as he is Mediator . Mr. Coleman in his re-examination pag. 19. was fearfull to set his foot upon so slippery ground . He was loth to adventure upon this a●sertion , that Magistracy is derived from Christ as Mediator by a Commission of Deputation and Vicegerentship ( which yet did necessarily follow upon the fourth rule which he had delivered in his Sermon ) Wherefore he made a retreat and held him at this , That Magistracy is given to Christ to be serviceable in his Kingdom . But out steps Mr. Hussey and boldly 〈◊〉 a great deal more : I much mistake if he shall not be made either to make a retreat as Mr. Coleman did , or to do worse . First of all , this part of our Controversie is to be rightly stated . The Question is not . 1. Whether the Magistrate be Gods Deputy or Vicegerent , and as God upon earth ; for who denies that ? Nor 2. Whether the Magistrate be Christs Deputy as Christ is God , and as he exerciseth an universall dominion over all things , as the Father and the holy Ghost doth . Here likewise I hold the affirmative . Nor 3. Whether the Christian Magistrate be usefull and subservient to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ , even as he is Mediator and King of the Church ; for in this also I hold the affirmative , that is , that as every man in his owne calling , parents , masters , servants , marchants , souldiers &c. being Christians , so the Magistrate in his eminent station , being a Christian , is obliged to endeavour the propagation of the Gospel , and the good and benefit of the Church of Christ. But the Question is , Whether the Christian Magistrate be a Governour in the Church Vice Christi , in the room and stead of Jesus Christ as he is Mediator . Or ( which is all one ) Whether the rise , derivation , and tenure of Christian Magistracy be from Jesus Christ under this formall consideration , as he is Mediator and head of the Church . Or ( which is also the same ) whether Jesus Christ by vertue of that authority and power of Government which as Mediator , and as God-man , he received of the Father , hath substituted and given commission to the Christian Magistrate to govern the Church in subordination to him , as he governeth it in subordination to his Father . In all these Mr. Hussey is for the affirmative , I am for the negative . Let us hear his reasons . First pag. 16. He argueth from my concession . A Christian Magistrate is a Governour in the Church , said Mr. Coleman , This understood sano sensu I admitted . Now saith Mr. Hussey , If the Church be Christs Kingdom , surely such as govern in it , must receive commission from him . Which commission saith he , must be in this forme . Christ the Mediator , King of his Church , doth appoint Kings and Civil Magistrates to govern under him . Let him find this commission in Scripture , and I shall confesse he hath done much . Neither doth any such thing follow upon my Concession . For 1. It is one thing to govern in the Church ▪ another thing to govern the Church : Christian parents , masters of Colledges , and the like , are Governours in the Church , that is , being within , not without the Church , yet as Parents or masters they are not Church-Governours . 2. I can also admit that the Christian Magistrate governeth the Church ; and if this had been the concession , which is more then the other , it could not have helped him . For how doth the Magistrate govern the Church ? not qua a Church , but qua a part of the Common-Wealth , as learned Salmafiu●… distinguisheth , Appar . ad lib. de primat . pag. 292. 300. For the Common-wealth is not in the Church , but the Church in the Common-wealth , according to that Rev , 2. The Church in Smyrna , the Church in Pergamus , the Church in Thyatira . And suppose all that are members of the Common-wealth to be also Church-members , yet in an universall spread of the Gospel , the Church is governed by the Magistrate as it is a Common-wealth , not as it is a Church . Every soule must be subject to the higher powers , Church-Officers , Church-members and all , but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qua tale , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : quo ad , is not any Ecclesiastical or spiritual , but a humane and civil relation . But whereas Mr ▪ Hussey addeth that the Gospel is the Law by which Christ will judge all the world : if all the world be under the Law of Christ , th●…n the Kingdom of Christ must needs reach over all the World : his proofes are meer mistakes : he cites 2. Thess. 1. 7. 8. Christ shall come in slaming fire , to take vengeance on all them that know not God , and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ : but in that place they that obey not the Gospel , are those disobedient persons to whom the Gospel was preached : He cites also Rom. 2. 16. Iudge all the world according to my Gospel : but the Text saith not so ; it saith , the secrets of men , not all the World. Wherefore as the Apostle there saith of the Law vers . 12. so say I of the Gospel , as many as have sinned without the Gospel , shall also perish without the Gospel ; and as many as have sinned under the Gospel , shall be judged by the Gospel . Secondly , He draweth an argument the strength whereof is taken from Psal. 2. 8. Ask of me and I shall give thee the Heathen for thine inheritance , and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession : and from 1 Tim. 6. 15. our Lord Jesus Christ is said to be King of kings , and Lord of lords : Jesus , Christ , being names that agree to him onely as Mediator . Answ. Christ as Mediator hath right to the whole earth , and all the kingdoms of the World , not as if all government ( even civil ) were given to Christ ( for in this kind he governeth not so much as any part of the earth as he is Mediator ) which was the thing he had to prove : but it is meant onely of his spiritual kingdom , which is not of this world , and in this respect alone it is , that Christ as Mediator hath right to the government of all Nations , he hath jus ad rem , though not in re . As for that title King of kings , and Lord of Lords , it may be understood two wayes . First , as Christ is the eternal and natural Son of God , the eternal wisdom of God , by whom Kings reigne , and Princes decree justice , Prov. 8. 15. 16. which is spoken of Christ , as he was the Fathers delight , and as one brought up with him before the foundation of the World : Ibid. vers . 22. to 30. Neither can the names of Jesus and Christ prove that what is said there must needs be meant of him as Mediator , mark how well grounded Mr. Husseys arguments are . Iesus sate at meat in Simon the Pharisees house . Luke 7. 37. Iesus wept for Lazarus because he loved him . Iohn 11. 35. 36. Must we needs therefore say , that as Mediator he sate at meat in the Pharisees house , and as Mediator he wept for Lazarus ? Christ is the Son of David , Matth. 22. 42. Must we therefore say that as Mediator he is the Son of David ? Christ is God over all , blessed for ever . Rom. 9. 5. Must we therefore say that this is meant of Christ onely as Mediator ? What is more ordinary then to use the names of Jesus and Christ when the thing which is said is meant in reference to one of the natures ? Secondly , Christ is King of kings , and Lord of lords , even as Mediator : not in Mr. Husseys sence , as if Kings had their commission from Christ , and did reigne in his stead , as he is Mediator ; but in the sence of the Hebraisme , Vanity of vanities , that is , most vain ; holy of holies , that is , most holy ; so King of kings , and Lord of lords , that is , the most excellent glorious King of all others : the excellency , splendor , dignity , and majesty of Kings may be compared without any subordination . Drusius Pr●…terit . lib. 8. upon this very place which Mr. Hussey objecteth , saith that this forme of speech , King of kings , and Lord of lords , was taken from the Persians and Assyrians , who called a great King , King of kings , and Lord of lords . Thirdly , The Kingdom of Christ saith Mr. Hussey , is a●… ample as his Prophecy ; but the Prophecie of Christ is extended to all Nations , as may appear by the commission , G●… teach all Nations . But 1. I throw back the argument ; Christs Kingdom and his Prophecie are commensurable : therefore as his prophecie is not actually extended to all Nations , except successively , as the Gospel commeth among them , so his Kingdom , as he is Mediator , is extended no further then the Church , not to all Nations . 2. His argument therefore is a miserable fallacy à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter . Christs prophecy is extended to all Nations successively , and when the Gospel comes among them , therefore his Kingdom is simply extended to all Nations ▪ and is not bounded within the Church onely . Fourthly , He tells us pag. 17. if kings may be called holy , if their Offices may be accounted holy Offices , or not sinful , they must be held off and under Christ. Answ. If he mean holy in opposition to civil , humane , worldly , secular , I denie the office of kings to be holy ; if he mean holy in opposition to sinful , unlawful , unholy ( as it seems he doth ) then I confesse the office of Kings is lawful not sinful , and themselves are holy when sanctified : but this proves not that they hold their office of and under Christ , more then carters or coblers hold their office of and under Christ : I am far from making a paralel between the Magistrate and these : but this I say , Mr. Husseys plea for the Magistrate is no other than agreeth to these . And where he addeth out of Calvin , Kings have place in the Church , and flock of Christ , and are not spoiled of their Crown and Sword that they may be admitted into the Church ; this in reference to the conclusion he driveth at , is no more than if he had argued thus , carters and coblers have place in the Church and flock of Christ , and are not necessitated to quit their secular calling that they may be admitted into the Church of Christ , therefore they hold their offices of and under Christ. Fifthly , He argueth thus , That Office which Christ hath declared to be of God , and bounded and limited in his Gospel , that Office is held under Christ as Mediator : But the Civil Magistrate is so , Rom. 13. 4. Answ. 1. His proposition is most false , and will never be proved . 2. If this argument hold good , then the Pagan Magistrate holds his office under Christ as Mediator ( for of such Magistrates then in being , the Apostle meaneth , Rom. 13. ) So that either he must recall what he saith here , or what he saith afterward , that the office of the Pagan Magistrate is sinful and unlawful . 3 , By Mr. Husseys medium , one might prove that servants hold their office under Christ as Mediator , because he hath declared their office to be of God , and hath bounded and limited the same in his Gospel . Eph. 6. 5 ▪ 6 , 7 , 8. Sixthly , He saith they be the same persons that are under Christ , and under the Magistrate , and further , Christs ends and the Kings ends are both one , 1 Tim. 2. 2. that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty . Now either the office of the Mediators Kingdom is superior , or inferior , or co-ordinate , in reference to the Magistrates office . Answ. 1. Very often they are not the same persons that are under Christ , and under the Magistrate . For 1 Cor. 5. 11 , 12. the Apostle distinguisheth those that were within , or those that were called brethren , from those that were without , both were under the Magistrate , both were not under Christ ; and now the Jews in diverse places are under the Christian Magistrate , not under Christ. 2. The ●nd of 〈◊〉 kingly office , and the end of Magistracy are so different , that to say they are the same , i● to offer indignity and dishonour to Jesus Christ. Kings are indeed appointed , that we may live under them a quiet and peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty : But herein he hath answered himself pag. 29. the civil Magistrate may require of the people , that they will attend upon the means , out of natural Principles , Deum esse & colendum . More of the ends of Magistracy I have spoken before , whether I remit him . The ends of Christs Kingly Office are quite another thing ; namely , to destroy all our soules enemies , Satan , the flesh , the wicked world , death , to put all his enemies under his feet ; to send out his officers and ministers for the perfecting of the Saints , for the work of the ministery , for the edifying of the body of Christ , to govern his people by his Word and Spirit , and to keep them by the power of God through faith unto salvation . 3. The comparison between Christs Kingly office as Mediator , and the Magistrates office , is neither to be drawn from superiority and inferiority , nor co-ordination ; for they are disparata , and differ toto genere . And now I shall proceed for methods sake to examine other four Arguments from Scripture , upon which Mr. Hussey ( though he doth not joyn them to the former six ) afterward layeth no small weight for upholding that opinion , that the Magistrate holds his office of and under Christ , as he is Mediator . The seventh argument therefore shall be that which he draweth from Matth. 28. 18. pag. 25. Whereunto I have two answers , according to two different applications of that Text. When Christ said All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth , it may be understood either as he is Mediator , or as he is the second person in the blessed Trinity , the eternall Sonne of God. So when the Ubiquitaries would prove from that place the reall communication of Divine omnipotency to the humane nature of Christ , our Divines answer , the Text may be understood either of Christs person , God-man , or as he is the natural Son of God. See Gomarus upon the place . Now take the Text either way , it proves not what Mr. Hussey would . Let it be understood of Christ as God-man , and as Mediator , ( which is the most promising sence for him ) yet it cannot prove that all power without exception , and all government as well without as within the Church , as well secular as Ecclesiastical , is put in Christs hand as he is Mediator , and that the civil Magistrate holds his office of and under Christ : but the sence must be r All power which belongs to the Mediator , and all authority which belongs to the gathering and governing of the Church is given to me : for we must needs expound his meaning as himself hath taught us : Iohn 18. 36. Luke 12. 14. We must not say that any such power is given to him , as himself denieth to be given to him , namely , civil power and Magistracy . Wherefore Martin Bucer in his Scripta Anglicana , pag. 273. doth rightly referre these words , All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth , to the head de Ecclesiae oeconomia , and makes this Text paralel to Iohn 20. 21 , 22 , 23. As my Father hath sent me , even so send I you , &c. Whose soever sins ye remit , &c. and to Matth. 16. 19. I will give unto thee the keyes of the kingdom of Heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth , shall be bound in heaven , and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth , shall be loosed in heaven . And this is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all authority or power in heaven and in earth , which is meant Matth. 28. 18. Which is further confirmed by the Syriack , which readeth thus verse 18. All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth : but as my Father hath sent me ▪ even so send I you . Vers. 19. Goe therefore teach all Nations : So restricting the sence to be in reference to the Church onely , and excluding civil government and Magistracy , from which Christ had before excluded his Apostles . Medina in tertiam Partem , quaest . 59. art . 4. holds the same thing , that the context and cohesion of vers . 18. and vers . 19. proves the Kingdom of Christ to be meerly spirituall . But 2. The Text will suffer yet a further restriction , namely that all power in heaven and in earth is said to given unto Jesus Christ , as he is the eternal Sonne of God , and that both in respect of the eternal generation by which the God-head , and so all Divine properties ( of which omnipotency is one ) was from all eternity communicated from the Father to the Son : and in respect of the declaration or manifestation of him to be the Son of God with power , when God raised him from the dead . Mr. Hussey saith he is astonished to hear that any thing should be given to Christ , as God ; Where first of all I observe how miserably he mangleth and maimeth my words as in other places , so here ; He citeth these words as mine , That Christ as he is eternal God , doth with the Father and the holy Ghost reigne over the Kingdoms of the earth , &c. and this power was given &c. It is not fair nor just dealing to change a mans words in a citation , especially when the change is materiall . Now here are divers changes in this passage . This one onely I take notice of , I said not as he is eternal God , but as he is the eternal Sonne of God , and all along in that Question I spake of the Son of God , not essentially , but personally , as he is the Sonne of God , or second person in the Trinity , and so the God head and all the attributes and properties thereof , are communicated to him from the Father by the eternal Generation ; and as the Nicene Creed said he is Deus de Deo , Lumen de Lumine , God of God , Light of Light. I ask therefore Mr. Hussey , What do you mutter here ? Speak it out , Doe you hold that Jesus Christ is not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not onely essentially , but personally 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that he is not onely ex seipso Deus , but ex seipso filius ? If this be the thing you hold , then you oppose me indeed , but so as you fall into a blasphemous heresie , that Christ as he is the eternall Sonne of God , hath not all power in in Heaven and in Earth , but onely as he is Mediator , because that power is given to him , and nothing can be given to Christ as he is the eternall Sonne of God , but onely as he is Mediator , by your principles : But if your meaning be no more then this , that Christ considered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in respect of the very nature and essence of the God-head , is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not God of God , but God of himself , and that so nothing can be said to be given to him : then why have you dealt so uncharitably as to suppose me to be herein opposite unto you ; when I plainly spake of the eternal Son of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in respect of the personality or relation of filiation , or as he is the eternall Son of God , in which sence I yet averre confidently , that all power in heaven and earth may be said to be given to Jesus Christ , as he is the eternal Son of God by eternal generation . I added , that all power in heaven and earth may be said to be given to Christ as he is the eternal Son of God , in another respect , namely in respect of the declaration thereof at his resurrection . To this Mr. Hussey replieth , that to hold any thing should be given him that should concern his God-head at the time of his resurrection , is more monstrous . Then hath Gomarus and others given a monstrous answer to the Ubiquitaries , yet they clear it by Augustines rule , aliquid dicitur fieri quando incipit patesieri . Is it any more strange then to say that Christ was begotten that day when he was raised from the dead Act. 13. 33. The Son of God had in obedience to his Fathers will , laid aside and relinquished his divine dominion and power when he took upon him the forme of a servant ( which I said before , but it seems was not considered by Mr. Hussey ) now at his resurrection the Father restoreth with advantage that formerly relinquished Soveraignty . But he addeth , that if Matt. 28. 18. be not understood of Christ as Mediator , then he had no authority as Mediator to send his Apostles : for it followeth Go ye therefore and preach : from this authority here spoken of , is the authority to preach the Gospel . Answ. Not to stand upon the want of the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore , in diverse Greek coppies : I admit of the cohesion and dependance of the words , thus . Christ being to give a commission to the Apostles to go and preach the Gospel to all Nations , he first anticipateth a great objection , which might arise in the Apostles minds ; They might think , how shall we be able to carry the Gospel through the Nations ? We shall have all the powers of the world against us . To remove this fear , he said , All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth , as if he had said , Do you beleeve that I who send you out , a● the Son of the living God ? T●en know assuredly , that my divine power and soveraignty shall be for you , and I will so over-rule all the Kings and Potentates and States of the World , as may be most for my glory and your good ; fear not therefore , but go and preach to all Nations . And so much of that Text Matth. 28. 18. Salmeron upon the place draws from it Christs dominion even in temporall things ( as Mr. Hussey doth ) and thence he deriveth the temporall power of the Pope as Christs Vicar over the Kings and Kingdoms of the World. So Suarez in tertiam partem Thomae disp . 48. sect . 2. Gamachaeus in tertiam partem Thomae , Quaest. 22. yet some of the Papists themselves are ashamed to defend Christs dominion in temporall things ( except as God onely ) it appearin to them so far contrary to other Scriptures . Bellarmine himself lib. 5. de Pont. Rom. cap. 4. confesseth that Christ as he did not execute any Temporall dominion , so he neither had nor received such power and authority : thereupon he inferreth that the Pope whom he calleth Christs Vicar and Representee on earth , hath not any Temporal dominion directly , but indirectly , and in ordine ad spiritualia . I appeal also to Salmeron in another place where he speaks more soundly Tom. 4. part ▪ 3. Tract . 4. pag. 413. he proves from Iohn 18. 36. and Luke 12. 14. that Christ had not nor received not any temporall power , and thence inferreth , Cum ergo Christus hujusmodi potestatem non habuerit , nec Petro illam tradidit . The eigth argument shall be that which Mr. Coleman did draw from 1 Cor. 12. 28. to prove that Christ hath placed in his Church Magistrates or civil Governments . Hereunto I had made four answers . Mr. Hussey passeth two of them , which he is pleased to esteem trifles not worth answer . Now the Gamaliel speaks è cathedra . The other two he offereth to confute , pag. 28 , 29 , 30 31. First , whereas I said that if by Governments in that place be understood civil Magistrates , yet the Text saith not that Christ hath placed them . Then saith Mr. Hussey à fortiori you disclaim by that means any Government in this place as Officers under Christ. No Sir , this reasoning is à baculo ad angulum . I hold Church-Officers and Church-government to be under Christ , and under him as Mediator , and K●ng of the Church , and am ready to prove it against any that will denie it : But upon supposition , that civil Government is meant in that Text , ( which I utterly deny ) I had reason to call the affirmer to his proper task , to prove from that Text , that Christ as Mediator hath placed civil Government or Magistracie in his Church . This was the point it was brought for , and still I call to make good that proof , for I denie it . It seemes Mr. Hussey finds himself puzzled to make it out , and therefore he saith , if Mr. Coleman will be ruled by me . so as Mr. Gilespie will not urge this for constitution of Church-Governments , he shall 〈◊〉 it goe . But if it be a truth , Sir you ought to buy it , and not sell it : For my part I dare make no bargain of Scripture . My next answer was , that the Apostle speaks of such Governours , as the Church had at that time ; but at that time the Church had no Godly nor Christian Magistrates . Mr. Hussey answereth that it cannot be proved that the Apostle speaketh of such Officers as were in the Church in his time onely . He addeth , I shall urge some few argaments to the contrary . To the contrary of what ? I did not say that the Apostle speaketh of such Officers as were in the Church in his time onely : but that the Church at that time had all those Officers whom the Apostle speaketh of . One would think that he who censureth others so much for want of skill in disputations , should not so far mistake his mark . But we know what he would have said though he hath not hit it . Let us hear his arguments . First , he tells us that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will signifie proposuit or decrevit , so that where we read God hath set in the Church , it may be read God hath appointed to his Church , so to take in those Governments which should afterward by Gods appointment come to the Church . He clears it by Iohn 15. 16. Act. 19. 21. Answ. Then the Apostle saith no more to the Corinthians , then might have been said to the old world before the flood , for if the meaning be that God hath ordained and purposed , all this Text had been true , if delivered in terminis terminantibus , to the old World , God hath set some in the Church , first Apostles , &c. 2. The context sheweth that the Apostle speaketh onely of such administrations , as the Church had at that time , for all this is spoken in reference to the preventing of a Schisme in the Church of Corinth , and that every member of that body might discharge its owne proper function without usurping anothers . 3. He confuteth himself , for he addeth , This cannot be a Catalogue of such Officers as are at all times necessary to the Church , for th●…n Apostles might not be mentioned . Therefore it must be said , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is posuit or collocavit ( according to the more usuall signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) and doth relate to that present time , as well as Act. 20. 28. The holy Ghost hath made or set you overseers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : In like manner here God hath set ( or placed ) in the Church , and so it will agree both to ordinary and extraordinary officers . But if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be decrevit , then it will referre the Apostles , Prophets , Evangelists , miracles , to the future estate of the Church , as if they were ordinary Officers to continue in the Church . 4. When 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth decrevit , then the thing is not mentioned , as having an actuall present existence , but a futurition ; so that when he takes him to the decrevit , he quits the posuit , and by that means one cannot prove from that Text , that the Church at that time had any of these Officers there enumerated : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relates to all that follows , and either it must be posuit to them all , or to none of them . 5. If he had intended to expresse Gods decree or purpose to give unto his Church certain Officers , he would not have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and God hath decreed some in the Church . Which could make no perfect sence except some other thing were added . Mr. Hussey might as well expound Act. 5. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , thus , and they decreed them in the common prison . Mr. Hussey would render the Text thus , he hath appointed to his Church : If the Text had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he might have rendred it so , but when the Text saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he must not render it ●…o the Church , but in the Church , as Act. 19. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Paul purposed in the spirit : the purpose was not to the Spirit , but in the Spirit . The second Argument whereby he 〈◊〉 that which I said , is this , at tha●… time there were workers of miracl●…s which did supply the defect of civil Magistrates . And here he insisteth a while to tell us that thus much a National Covenant and 〈◊〉 Magistrate may require of the people , that they will attend upon the means out of natural principles , which at that time miracles caused men to attend upon . But quid haec ad Rhombum ? How comes this home to that which he undertook to prove ? And if it did , I must say that the civil Magistrate is but little , and a National Covenant far lesse beholding to him . And if the workers of miracles did at that time supply the defect of civil Magistrates ( I suppose he should have said Christian Magistrates ) then he must draw Christian Magistracy to come in succession not so much to the civil Magistracy in the Apostles times ( which yet was true Magistracy ) as to the miracles mentioned in the Text , and so bring in the Christian Magistrate upon the ceasing of miracles . A fine plea indeed for Christian Magistracie . His third Argument goeth thus , We have in the Text first , second , and third ; when the Apostle speaks of these which might be liable to present view , but then he breaks off with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , after that miracles , which lasted somewhat longer then the Apostles and Prophets ; and last we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and these may be ordinary gifts , and this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relates to helps , Governments : that Calvin thinks the helps were some Officers the Church hath lost : But being put both in one case without any conjunction copulative , why they may not ( I beleeve he would have said , why may they not ? for the sence can be no other ) belong both to one thing , and this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may not have some influence upon the times and after age . Answ. If this be his manner , we shall not much fear the dint of his Arguments , when it comes to the Schooles , which he calls for . What a great matter is made of meer nothing ? First , he offereth violence to the Text , because if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 note posteriority of time , and ordinary gifts , then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is compounded from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must much rather note the same thing , and so we shall have not onely gifts of healing , but miracles too , ordinary and continuing administrations in the Church . Next he offereth violence to the Greek language : for when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie posteriority , not onely in the enumeration , but in the time of existence , then the one must needs signifie a pre-existence , and the other a post-existence , they cannot be contemporary from their beginnings ; yet Mr. Hussey will needs have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before miracles , and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 efore gifts of healing and diversities of tongues , to signifie posteriority of time , though he cannot say that gifts of healing and diversities of tongues were not contemporary but posterior in time to miracles , And further observe that when the Text runs in this order , first Apostles , secondarily Prophets , thirdly teachers , after that miracles , then gifts of healings , &c. Mr. Hussey will make this the sence , that there were Apostles before prophets , there were Prophets before teachers , there were Teachers before miracles , there were miracles before gifts of healings , &c. and vice versa , there were no gifts of healings till after there had been miracles , no miracles till after there had been Teachers in the Church , &c. even as Mark. 4. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first the blad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then the ear , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after that the ful corn in the ear : the blade hath an existence before the eare , the eare before the full corne . So that taking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his sence , he must either make out distinctly the order of time , or else confesse he would make the Apostle speak as never Grecian in the world spake , or lastly be content to understand the Apostles words of the order of enumeration . If the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had been in the Text ▪ that had indeed carried it to posteriority of time as Heb. 12. 17. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( though sometime it signifieth posteriority of time , yet ) in this place having reference to such antecedents and consequents cannot bear his sence . I see it were no ill sport to examine his quint Arguments if a man had but so much leisure . Thirdly , He offereth violence to Calvin , for s Calvin saith that these helps mentioned 1 Cor. 12. 28. were either an ancient gift and office unknown to us now , or it belongs to Deaconship , that is , the care of the poor . And this second ( saith he ) rather pleaseth me . Qua fide then , could Mr. Hussey affirm that Calvin thinks they were some Officers that the Church hath lost . Fourthly , Whereas he thinks helps , governments , to belong both to one thing , there was some such thing once foisted into the English Bibles : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , was read thus , helps in Governments : but afterwards the Prelats themselves were ashamed of it , and so it was printed according to the Greek distinctly , helps , Govirnments . The Syriack addeth a copulative , and readeth thus , and helpers , and Governors , so making them distinct officers in the Church . Neither is it any unusual thing in the Greek , to put together Nouns in the same case without any conjunction copulative , when the things themselves so expressed are most different , as Matth. 15 , 19. Gal. 5. 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23. Rom. 1. 29 , 30. 31. The next thing he brings against me , is from Ephes. 4. 11. where there is no ordinary or standing Officer left to us , but the Teacher of the Word : here is neither help nor government but this poor Teacher left alone to edifie the body of Christ , and to perfect the Saints . Answ. What Argument is there here ? ruling Elders are not mentioned Ephes. 4. therefore the Governments mentioned 1 Cor ▪ 12. are such as the Church had not at that time . There are diverse passages of Christs doctrine , life , and sufferings , which are not mentioned by Matthew , yet they are mentioned by Iohn or some of the other Evangelists . So if we take the primitive platform right , we must set the whole before us , that which is not in one place is in another place . The Apostle Eph. 4. intendeth onely to speak of preaching officers who are appointed for this work of the Ministery , to bring us to unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God , that we be not carried about with every wind of Doctrine , v 12 13 , 14. And if the Apostle had intended to enumerate all Church-officers in that place , which were then in the Church , how comes it he doth not mention Deacons which he distinguisheth from Bishops or Elders ? 1 Tim. 3. His last Argument is , that in this very place 1 Cor. 12. the Apostle , when he doth again enumerate the particulars vers . 29. 30. he leaveth out helps , Governments , for which , he saith , he knows no reason , but because there were none such at that time , and the Apostle in that induction was to deal with their experience . This ( as many other things which he hath ) was before answered to Mr. Coleman . I give this plain reason for the omission of these two . The Apostle speaketh to those , who were not well satisfied nor contented with their owne station in the Church , but were aspiring to more eminent gifts and administrations , are all Apostles ? saith he , are all Prophets ? &c. and so he reckoneth out onely those rare and singular gifts , which men did most covet : and for that cause it was neither necessary , nor had it been agreeable to the scope of the Apostle to have added , are all helps ? are all Governments ? But now he purposely leaveth out these , thereby intimating to the ruling Elders and Deacons of the Church of Corinth , that they ought to be contented with their owne station , though they be neither Apostles , nor Prophets . &c. It remaineth therefore that the Governments in the Church mentioned 1 Cor. 12. 28. were such Governments as were in the Church at that time , and therefore not to be understood of Christian Magistracy : but of Church ▪ Government distinct from the civil . The ninth Argument brought to prove that all Government is given to Christ as Mediator , and that the Christian Magistrate holds his office of and under Christ , as the head of Magistracy and Principality , is from Eph. 1. 21 , 22 , 23. This Argument first propounded by Mr. Coleman , is prosecuted by Mr. Hussey pag. 32 , 33. &c. He demurres upon that which I said , that this place maketh more against him then for him ; the meaning whereof was no more then this , that this place doth rather afford us an Argument against him , then him against us . Come we to the particulars . My first Reply was , The Apostle saith not that Christ is given to the Church , as the head of all Principalities and Powers . The Brother saith so , and in saying so he makes Christ a head to those that are not of his body . This exception Mr. Hussey quarrelleth , but when he hath endeavoured to prove from that Text that Christ is the head of Principalities : because he that is head of all things , is also head of Principalities : though he will never be able to make it out from that Text , that Christ ( as Mediator ) is head of all things , but onely , that he who is the Churches head is over all things ; and gave him to be the head over ( not of ) all things to the Church , saith the Text , which as I told before , the Syriack readeth more plainly thus , and him who is over all , he gave to be the head to the Church . ) At last he fairly gives over the proof . It is true saith he , disputations do require men to keep close to termes , but in Col. 2. 10. ye have the very words , head of all Principality and Power . In Col. 2. 10. Christ as he is the eternall Son of God , is called head of all Principality and power : as we shall see anon : but Ephes. 1. where the Apostle speaketh of Christs headship , in reference to the Church , and as Mediator , he is not called the head of all Principality and Power . So that I had reason to except against Mr. Colemans argument which made that Text Ephes. 1. to say what it saith not . Now what saith he to the reason I added , can Christ be a head to them that are not of his body ? He tells me the visible Church is not the body of Christ , but onely the faithfull . He might have observed the visible Church consisting of visible Saints , plainly spoken of , as the body of Christ , 1 Cor. 10. 16 , 17. 1 Cor. 12 , 12. 14 27. I know the visible Church is not all one with the invisible and mystical body of Christ ; but he who denyeth the visible Church to ●e the visible , political , ministerial body of Christ , must also deny the visible Church to be the visible Church ; for if a Church , then certainly the body of Christ , at least visibly . The next thing which I did replie , was in explanation of the Text , which was to this sence . He that is the Churches head , is over all , both as he is the Sonne of God , or as the Apostle saith Rom. 9. 5. God over all , blessed for ever , yea even as man he is over or above all creatures , being exalted to a higher degree of glory , majesty , and dignity , then man or Angel ever was , or shall be : but neither his divine omnipotency , nor the height of glory and honour which as man he is exalted to , nor both these together in the Mediator and Head of the Church , omnipotency and exaltation to glory , can prove that ( as Mediator ) he exerciseth his Kingly office over all Principalities and Powers , and that they hold of and under him as Mediator . Mr. Hussey replieth that the Text makes Christ over or above Principalities and Powers , not onely in dignity and honour , but as King or Head of them , and that thus we must understand the comparison , that he is above Principality in Principality , Power in Power , Might in Might , Dominion in Dominion . This is nothing but a begging of what is in Question : That the Power and Dominion of the civil Magistrate , is eminently in Christ as Mediator , and from him ( so considered ) derived to the Magistrate , is that which I deny can be proved from that Text ; and lo when he comes to the point of probation , he supposeth what he had to prove . My exposition of the Text made good sence ; For as an earthly King is exalted to have more power and more glory , then those not onely of his Subjects , but of another State or Kingdom to whom he is not King ; so the Mediator and King of the Church is exalted to power and glory far above all Principality and Power , but is not therefore Head or King or Governor to all Principality and Power , as Mediator . And as me exposition makes good sence of the Text , his makes very bad sence of it . For if Christ as Mediator be head and King of all Principalities , powers , and Dominions , then he is , as Mediator , head and King of Heathenish and Turkish Principality , Power , might , and Dominion ; and when the Apostle wrote this to the Ephesians , it must be granted ( according to Mr. Husseys glosse ) that Christ as Mediator was head and King of the Romane Emperour , and that Caesar held his office of and under Christ as Mediator : for if head of all Principality , how shall they except any ? I further brought severall reasons from the Text it self . The first was this , The honour and dignity of Jesus Christ there spoken of , hath place not onely in this world , but in that which is to come ( vers . 21 ) But the Kingdom and Government which is given to Christ as Mediator , shall not continue in the World to come . Mr. Hussey answereth pag. 41. this is Ignoratio el nehi , it followeth not , that which belongeth to him in reference to the World to come , belongeth not to him as Mediator , therefore that Government that is given to him in reference to this World , is not given to him as Mediator . But still he beggs what is in Question , and divideth asunder what the Text coupleth together , not onely in this World , but also in that which is to come : here is a rising and heightning , but no contradistinction , nothing here of one exaltation in reference to the World to come , another in reference to this World : but that exaltation of Christ above every name that is named , ( which this Text speaks of ) beginnes in this World , and shall continue in the World to come . Calvin . in Eph. 1. 21. Seculi autem futuri disertam facit mentionem , ut significet non temporalem esse Christi excellentiam , sed aeternam . He makes expresse mention of the World to come , that he may signifie Christs excellency not to be temporal , but eternal . This doth well agree to the dignity , excellency , glory , and honour of Christ , but it cannot be said that Christ shall for ever continue in his Kingly Office as Mediator . The second reason which I fetcht from the Text , was from vers . 22. He hath put all things under his feet ; that is , all things except the Church , saith Zanchius . But all things are not yet put under his feet , except in respect of Gods decree ; It is not yet done actually . Heb. 2. 8. Now Christ reignes as Mediator before all things be put under his feet , not after all things are put under his feet , which is clear 1 Cor. 15. 25. Act. 2. 34 , 35. Mr. Husseys reply pag. 41. 42. saith , that the Church is not here to be excepted , but Church and all is here put under Christs feet , which he proveth by Heb. 2. 8. He left nothing that is not put under him . But this cannot be understood to be actually done ; for the next words say , But now we see not yet all things put under him : and if not done actually , but in respect of Gods decree and fore-knowledge , ( according to the sence I gave out of Hierome on Eph. 1. 22. ) how can it strengthen him in this particular ? We see not yet . This yet shall not expire till the end , when Christ shall put down all authority and power . And now when it is said He hath put all things under his feet . Ephes. 1. 22. that the Church is not meant to be comprehended , but to be excepted in that place as Zanchius saith , may thus appear ; the Apostle distinguisheth the all things from the Church , and calls the Church the body of Christ , and him the head to that body , but the all things are put under Christs feet ( his body is not under his feet , but under the head ) and he over all things : for so runs the Text , and hath put all things under his feet , and gave him to be the head over all things to the Church , which is his body . And whereas Mr. Hussey distinguisheth between Christs putting all his enemies under his feet , 1 Cor. 15. 25. and the Fathers putting all things under his feet , Ibid. vers . 27. and maketh this latter to be an actual putting under him of friends , foes , Church and all , whence it seems he would have it to follow , that Christ reignes as Mediator , even after all things are put under his feet . He is herein easily confuted from Heb. 2. ● . Where God the Father his putting all things under Christs feet , is plainly declared to be a thing to come , and not yet actually done . The next reason which I gave out of the Text was from those words , And gave him to be the head over all thiags to the Church ; Christs headship and his Government as Mediator , are commensurable . Christ is a head to none but to his Church . These words of mine Mr. Hussey changeth thus : he is head over none saith Mr. Gilespie , but his Church , and then he addeth , Is this to argue out of Scripture , or rather to deny and outface the Scripture ? the Scripture saith , he is over all . See what unconscionable impudent boldnesse this is , to cite my words ( yea in a different character too , that his Reader may beleeve it the better ) and yet to change not onely my words , but my meaning . I purposely kept my self to the Text , that Christ is a head to none but to his Church , yet he that is the Churches head is over all things . And since Mr. Hussey will needs hold that Christ as Mediator is head of all things ( which the Text saith not ) what were the consequence hereof ? The Text saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over all things , not over all persons onely : So Heb. 2 7 , 8. compared with Psal. 8. 6 , 7. Whence it followes by Mr. Husseys principles ( which I tremble to mention ) that Christ as Mediator is Head and King not onely of men , but of sheep , oxen , fowles , and fishes . Behold how dangerous it is for men to be wise above that which is written . The last reason which I brought from the last verse , was this , The Church is there called Christs fulnesse in reference to his Headship . This Mr. Hussey saith , seemeth to come tolerably from the Text ; but the next words , that which makes him full and compleat so farre as he is a Head or King : he calls a fallacy , How commeth this word King in here ? saith he ; First here he yeelds that the Church makes Christ full and compleat so farre as he is a Head , whence it followeth that as Mediator he is onely the Churches head , and there is no other body of Christ but the Church ; for if the Church be his fulnesse , his compleat body , there can be no other body of Christ. Doth not this destroy what he hath been arguing for , that Christ as Mediator is head of all Principality and Power ? And for the word King , it may well come in where Head commeth : for is not Christs Kingdom as Mediator , commensurable with his Headship as Mediator ? Is he as Mediator King to any to whom he is not Head ? Surely this very answer as it is his last , so it really yeeldeth the cause . The tenth objection is that which I my self moved to prevent my Antagonists . Christ is called the Head of all Principality and Power , Col. 2. 10. To this I answered out of Bullinger , Gualther , and Tossanus ; the scope and meaning of the Apostle , is to shew that Christ is true God , and therefore we must not understand the Apostle to speak of Christs headship as he is Mediator , but as he is the natural and eternal Sonne of God. Mr. Hussey pag. 34. thinks it is no good consequence , the Apostle speaks not of Christ as Mediator , because he speaks of him as true God , Is not Christ saith he , true God as Mediator ? I answer , As Mediator he is God-man . But he must remember the Argument is urged to prove the subordination of all Principality and power to Jesus Christ as Mediator . Now let him prove that the Apostle speaketh there of Christ as Mediator ; I say he speaketh of Christ as God ; He cannot conclude against what I said , except he argue thus , that which Christ is as God , he is as Mediator ; which is false , as I have made it appear else-where . Well : but Mr. Hussey proves from the Text that Christ is there spoken of as Mediator . vers . 9 , 10. For in him dwelleth the fulnesse of the God-head bodily , and ye are compleat in him which is the head of all Principality and power . But he draweth no argument from the words . Neither is there any thing in them which maketh against me . The Apostle shews them , that the man Jesus Christ is also true God , equal and consubstantial with the Father ; for the very fulnesse of the God-head is in him , that is , he is fully and compleatly God , so that saith Calvin , they who desire something more then Christ , must desire something more then God. Wherefore our Writers make the right use of this place when they bring it against the Socinians , to prove the God-head of Christ. See Christian. Becman . exercit . 9. This fulnesse of the God-head is in Christ bodily , that is , either personally , to distinguish him from the holy men of God , who were inspired by the holy Ghost ; or substantially , as others take the Word , in opposition to the Tabernacle and Temple in which the God-head was typically . Ye are compleat in him , saith the Apostle , meaning because he is compleatly God , so that we need not invocate or worship Angels , as if we were not compleat in Christ. Mr. Hussey admitteth what I said concerning the scope of the place , to teach the Colossians not to worship Angels , because servants : But saith he , may they not worship Christ as Mediator ? yes doubtlesse they may . No doubt he that is Mediator must be worshipped , because he is God ; Christ God-man is the object of divine adoration , and his God-head is the cause of that adoration ; but whether he is to be worshipped because he is Mediator , or under this formall consideration as Mediator ; and whether the Mediator ought to be therefore adored with divine adoration , because he is Mediator , is res altioris indaginis . If Mr. Hussey please to read and consider what divers School ▪ men have said upon that point , as Aquinas tertia part . quaest . 25. art . 1. & 2. Alex. Alensis Sum. Theol. part ▪ 3. quaest . 30. membr . 2. Suarez in tertiam part . Thomae Disp. 53. sect . 1. Valentia Comment . in Tho. Tom. 4. Disp. 1. quaest . 24. punct . 1. Tannerus Theol. Scholast . Tom. 4. Disp. 1. quaest . 7. Dub. 7. But much more if he please to read Disputatio de adoratione Christi , habita inter Faustum Socinum & Christianum Francken : and above all Dr. Voetius select . disput . ex poster . part . Theol. Disp. 14. An Christus qua Mediator sit adorandus ? Then I beleeve he will be more wary and cautious what he holds concerning that Question . But I must not be ledd out of my way to multiply Questions unnecessarily : All that I said was , that the Apostle teacheth the Colossians , not to worship Angels , because they are servants , but Christ the Son of the living God , who is the Head and Lord of Angels ; and in that place the Apostle speaketh of the honour which is due to Christ as God ; and if we would know in what sence the Apostle calls Christ the Head of all Principality and Power , see how he expounds himsel Coloss. 1. 15 , 16 , 17. speaking of the God-head of Jesus Christ. Finally , If Mr. Hussey will prove any thing from Coloss. 2. 10. against us , he must prove that those words which is the head of all Principality and power , are meant in reference not onely to the Angels , but to Civil Magistrates ; and next , that they are meant of Christ , not onely as God , but as Mediator . Both which he hath to prove , for they are not yet proved . CHAP. VII . Arguments for the Negative of that Question formerly propounded . MY Arguments against the derivation of Magistracy from Jesus Christ as Mediator , and against the Magistrates holding of his office of and under Christ as Mediator , are these . First , This Doctrine doth evacuate and nullifie the civil Authority and Government of all Heathen or Pagan Magistrat● ; for which way was the authority of Government derived from Christ , and from him as Mediator , to a Pagan Magistrate or Emperour ? If he hath not his power from Christ as Mediator , then he is but an usurper , and hath no just title to reign , according to their Principles which hold that all government , even civil , is given to C rist , and to him as Mediator . Mr. Hussey forsooth doth learnedly yeeld the argument , and answereth pag. 20. that not onely it is a sin to be a Heathen , but the government of a Heathen is sinfull and unlawfull , for which he gives this reason , Whatsoever is not of faith is sin . He might as well conclude , in that sence , that the best vertues of the Heathen were sin , because not of faith , that is , accidentally sin , in respect of the end , or manner of doing , not materially , or in their own nature . Vpon the same reason he must conclude , that the government of a Christian Magistrate is unlawfull , if it be not of faith , as oftimes it is not , through the blindnesse and corruption of mens hearts who govern . But whether is the government of a Heathen Magistrate per se , simpliciter , & ex natura sua , unlawful and sinful ? Whether hath he any just right or title to Government and Magistracy ? If his title to civil Magistracie be just , and if his government be in it self materially and substantially lawful ▪ then he must have a Commission from Christ , and from him as Mediator : This I suppose cannot be Mr. Husseys sence , for he hath not answered one syllable to the argument , tending that way . But if the Government of an Heathen Magistrate be in it self materially , substantially , and in the nature of the tenure , sinfull and unlawfull , so that as long as he remains an Heathen , he hath no reall right , nor true title to Government , but onely a pretended and usurped title ( which must needs be Mr. Husseys sence , if he hath answered any thing at all to my Argument ) then he goeth crosse not onely to the holy men of God in the old Testament who honoured Heathen Princes , and were subject to them as to lawful Magistrates ; but also to the doctrine of Jesus Christ , who taught his Disciples to give unto Caesar what is Caesars ; and of the Apostles who in their time exhorted the Churches to be subject even to Heathen Magistrates ( for they had no other at that time ) to obey them , to pray for them . Rom. 13. Titus 3. 1. 1 Tim. 2. 1 , 2. 1 Pet. 2. 13 , 14. 17. It is justly condemned as one of the errors of the Anabaptists , that an heathen Magistrate is not to be acknowledged as a lawfull Magistrate , or as being from God. See Gerhard loc . com . Tom. 6. Pag. 498 499 P. Hinkelmannus de Anabaptismo disp . 13. cap. 1. The Scriptures now cited are so clear , that when Mr. Hussey saith of the heathen Magistrate , Let Baal plead for himself , he might as well have said , that Christ and his Apostles pleaded for Baal . They that plead for the authority of an heathen Magistrate do not plead for Baal , but for God , and for his ordinance : for the powers that be , are ordained of God , saith Paul speaking even of the heathen Magistrates , Rom. 13. 1. But what will Mr. Hussey say , if his great master Erastus be found a pleader for Baal , as much as I am ? Confirm . Thes. lib. 3. cap. 2. pag. 184. speaking of the heathen and unbeleeving Magistrates , before whom the Corinthians went to law one against another , he saith , An non est impius quoque Magistratus à Deo praepositus , ut subjectes quoslibet ab injuria & vi tueatur ? Is not the ungodly Magistrate also preferred by God , that he may defend any of his Subjects from injury and violence . Yea the Scriptures afore touched are so clear in this point , that Gamachaeus in primam secunda Quaest. 4. & 5. cap. 33. though he hold that by humane and Ecclesiastical right , Pagan Princes lose their dominion and authority over their Subjects , when their Subjects turne Christians ; yet he acknowledgeth that they still retain their former Jurisdiction over those Subjects , by the Law of God and nature . Surely one might as well say , that heathen Parents are unlawful , and heathen masters are unlawful , and heathen husbands are unlawful ; ( all which were contrary to the Word of God ) as to say that heathen Magistrates are unlawful . Take the instance in Parents , for all lawful Magistrates are fathers by the fifth Commandement . Doth the paternity of a heathen father differre specie , from the paternity of a Christian father ? are they not both lawful parents , being made such by God and nature ? are not their children bound to honour them , and be subject to them , and obey them in things lawful ? The paternity is the same in se , but different modaliter that I may borrow a distinction from Mr. Hussey . The Christian father is sanctified , and qualified to do service to Jesus Christ , as a father , in educating his children Christianly , which an heathen father can not do . So the heathen Magistrate , and the Christian Magistrate are both lawful Magistrates , being made such by God and nature , or by election of people : they are both of them to be honoured , submitted unto , and obeyed , they are both of them the ministers of God for good to their people : their power is the same in actu signato , though not in actu exercito . The heathen Magistrate may do and ought to do what the Christian Magistrate doth ; but the Christian Magistrate is fitted , qualified , enabled , and sanctified to glorifie and serve Jesus Christ , as a Magistrate , which the heathen Magistrate is not . Secondly , They that hold the derivation of Magistracy to be from Jesus Christ , and that it is held of and under him as Mediator , must either shew from Scripture that Jesus Christ as Mediator hath given a commission of Vicegerentship or Deputyship to the Christian Magistrate , or otherwise acknowledge , that they have given the most dangerous and deadly wound , even to Christian Magistracy it self , which ever before it received . Mr. Hussey pag. 20 answereth , I conceive he ( the Christian Magistrate ) hath a Commission from Christ : but when he should prove it ( which my argument calld for ) here he is at a losse . He citeth Psal. 72 ▪ 11. All Kings shall fall downe before him , all Nations shall serve him . Isa. 60. 12. That Nation and Kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish . I hope indeed there is a time comming when all Kings shall fall down before Jesus Christ , and all Nations shall serve him , and that will make an end of the Erastian controversie . But I pray , do all that serve Jesus Christ , hold their office of and under Christ , as Mediator , and as his Vicegerents ? then the poorest servant that fears God shall be a Vicegerent of Jesus Christ , as Mediator , and shall have a commission from Christ to that effect , for every godly servant doth not serve his master onely , but Christ , Eph. 6. 5 , 6 , 7. Again , if those who shall perish because they serve not Christ , be his Deputies and Vicegerents ; then the wickedest persecuters in the World shall have a commission of Vicegerentship from Jesus Christ. Well , let the Christian Magistrate animadvert , whether these men have done any thank-worthy service to Magistracy , who will needs have it to hold of and un●er Christ as Mediator , and by a commission of Vicegerentship from him ; and when they are put to it , to produce that commission , they prove no more then agreeth either to the meanest Christian , or to the wickedest persecuter . The Ministery hath a clear undeniable commission from Christ as Mediator ( even our opposites themselves being Judges ) Matth. 16. 19. and 28. 19. 20. Iohn 20. 21 , 22 ▪ 23. 2 Cor. 5. 19 , 20. Eph. 4. 11 , 12. Act. 20. 28. Tit. 1. 5. I say therefore again ▪ let them also shew from Scripture a commission from Jesus Christ constituting Christian Magistrates to be his Vicegerents as he is Mediator , and to hold their office of and under him as Mediator : which if they cannot shew , they have done a greater disservice to the Christian Magistrate , then they can easily repair or amend : We are sure the lawful Magistrate ( whether Heathen or Christian ) is Gods Vicegerent ▪ and that is a safe holding of his office . But our opposites shall never prove , that any civil Magistrate ( though Christian and godly ) is the Vicegerent of Jesus Christ as Mediator . And in seeking to prove it , I am perswaded they shall but discover their own weaknesse , and shall also weaken the Magistrates authority more then they can strengthen it . Thirdly , The Scripture intimateth this difference between Ministery and Magistracy ; that the work of the Ministery and the administrations thereof are performed in the name of Jesus Christ as Mediator and King of the Church : the work of Magistracy not so , except we adde to the Word of God ; they who will do any thing in the Name of Jesus Christ as Mediator , and cannot find any Scripture which can warrant their so doing , are lyars , and the truth is not in them . Now let our opposites shew ( if they can ) where they find in Scripture , that the Christian Magistrate is to rule in the name of Christ , to judge in the name of Christ , to make laws in the name of Christ , to make war or peace in the name of Christ , to punish evil doers with the Temporal Sword in the name of Christ. Of the Ministery I did shew , that in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ we do assemble our selves together , Matth. 18. 20. in his name doe we preach , Luk. 24. 47. Act. 4. 17 , 18. and 5. 28. 44. and 9. 27. In his name do we baptize , Act. 2. 38. and 8. 16. and 19. 5. In his name do we excommunicate , 1 Cor. 5. 5. These my proofs from Scripture Mr. Hussey pag. 21. professeth he will examine according to laws of disputation . I know none transgresseth those laws more than himself , and even in this very place where he professeth to keep close to lawes of disputation : my first proof from Matth. 18. 20. he quarrelleth upon a meer mistake of his owne . He saith I brought it to prove the institution of Church-officers , and that to prove it , I do appropriate the meeting in the name of hCrist to Church-Officers , and thereupon he tells us the Text saith not , that none shall gather together in my name but Church-Officers . Are these Mr. Husseys lawes of disputation ? He had need to be a better disputer who calls others to School . I did not speak here of the Institution of Church-Officers , and far lesse did I exclude all others from meeting in the name of Christ ; Church-officers assemble in the name of Christ with the Church ; and when they assemble in the name of Christ apart , and without the multitude , will it follow that because they meet in the name of Christ , therefore none but they meet in the name of Christ. Well , let Mr. Hussey try all his Logick in this consequence , it will not do . The sixth general Councell , Actione 17. apply unto their owne oecumenicall Assembly , that promise of Christ Matth. 18. 20. Where two or three are gathered together in my Name , &c. Protestant Writers both in their Commentaries , and Polemick Writings , do usually apply the same Text to Synods and Councells : For instance , Calvin . Instit. lib. 4. cap. 9. sect 1. & 2. holds that the authority of Councells dependeth upon that promise of Christ , Where two or three are met together in my name , &c. That which went before , carries it to Assemblies for acts of discipline , as being principally intended in that place . The promise ver . 20. is general , belonging to all Church Assemblies : yet in that place it is applyed to Assemblies of Church-Officers for discipline . But neither need I go so far in this present argument ; for when Church-Officers meet with the Church for the Word , Sacraments ▪ and other parts of Worship , this is in the name of Jesus Christ , without all controversie , and this is enough to justifie all that I brought that Text for ; especially there being herein a difference between sacred and civil Assemblies : there is no such promise made to Magistrates Courts of Justice , as to Church Assemblies . That which he citeth out of Dr. Whittaker and Bishop Mortoun makes nothing against me , neither doth he quote the places , peradventure because he found something in those passages which made against him . Whittakers sence is plainly of sacred , and not of civil Assemblies . And for that so much controverted Text Matth. 18. 17. Tell the Church . Whittaker expoundeth it as we do against the Erastians , Tell the Pastors and Rulers of the Church . Whittak . de Eccles. quaest . 1. cap. 2. Dic Ecclesiae , hoc est Pastoribus & Praefectis Ecclesiae . As for preaching , Mr. Hussey saith , it is out of question that we preach in the name of Christ. Well : then let him shew such another thing of the Magistrate , as is without controversie done by him in the name of Christ. But where I added , that in the name of Jesus Christ we baptize , though I said no more then the Scripture saith , yet he is pleased to object against me . These places he citeth saith he , to prove that we baptize in the Name of Jesus , as exclusively to Father and holy Ghost , ( leaving out the words of the commission : Matth. 28. Baptize in the name of the Father , Son , and holy Ghost ) for so the state of his question doth require ; for he distinguisheth acutely and acurately between Christ as Mediator and second person ( he should have said as second Person ) in Trinity , in all this Argument . And so he concludes that which I had said to be contrary to the words of the Commission and the practice of all Churches . What doth he drive at ? I cited plain Texts to prove that baptisme is administred in the name of Christ : Either Mr. Hussey denyeth that this is done in the name of Christ as Mediator : or he denyeth it not . If he denie it , let him speak it out , and he shall not want an answer . Mean while let him remember that himself pag. 25. saith , that Christ as Mediator did give that commission to the Apostles , Go Preach and baptize . If he denie it not , then let him give the like instance for Magistracy and civil Government , to prove it to be managed in the name of Jesus Christ as Mediator , else he must not plead that Magistracy is of the same tenure from Christ as the Ministery . Again , either he admitteth a distinction between Christ as Mediator , and as second person in Trinity , or not . If he doe not , he will infallibly wind himself into a grosse heresie ; as namely these two . 1. He must denie that principle which according to the Word of God , all Orthodox Divines hold against the Arrians and Antitrinitarians , that t Christ as Mediator is subordinate unto , and lesser then the Father ; but as second person in the Trinity he is not subordinate unto nor lesser then the Father , nor the Father greater then he , but as such he is equal with the Father in greatnesse , glory , and honour . 2. As opera Trinitatis ad extra sunt indivisa , he must also hold that whatsoever Christ as Mediator doth , that also the Father and the holy Ghost doth : but Christ as Mediator did humble himself to the death , offer himself in a sacrifice for sin , maketh intercession for us , Ergo , he must conclude the Father doth the same . But if he do admit the distinction as Mediator , and as second person in Trinity , then why doth he so often quarrell it ? And in this very place his Argument must drive against that distinction , or against nothing . But how doth the baptizing in the name of Christ as Mediator , agree with the commission to baptize in the name of the Father ▪ Son , and holy Ghost ? Though this belong not to my Argument , yet I will by the way speak to it . First I say , the Question is of things or actions , not of words . Mr. Hussey ( it seems ) did apprehend my meaning , as if I had intended an expression to be made in the act of baptizing , thus , I baptize thee in the name of Iesus Christ. But I spake of the action , not of the expression , even as in the other instance I gave ; our assembling together is in the name of Christ , though we do not say in terminis , We are now assembled in the name of Christ. In baptisme Christ doth not command us to say , either these words , I baptize thee in the Name of Christ ; or these words , I baptize thee in the Name of the Father , Son , and holy Ghost : but we are commanded to do the thing , both in the name of Christ as Mediator , and in the name of the Father , Son , and holy Ghost : But in different respects . A minister of Christ doth both preach and baptize in the name of Christ as Mediator , that is vice Christi ▪ in Christs stead , and having authority for that effect from Christ as Mediator ; for Christ as Mediator gave us our commission to preach and baptize by Mr. Husseys confession . So that to preach and baptize 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( which we find both of preaching , Luk. 24 47. and of baptizing , Act. 2. 38. ) comprehendeth a formall commission , power and authority given and derived from Christ , I say not that it comprehendeth no more , but this it doth comprehend . But when Christ biddeth us baptise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto , or into , or in the name of the Father , Son , and holy Ghost , Mat. 28. 19. this doth relate to the end and effect of baptisme , or the good of the baptized ( if we understand the words properly ) not the authority of the baptizer , as if a formall commission were there given him from the Father , Son , and holy Ghost . So that to baptize one in or unto the name of the Father , Son , and holy Ghost , is properly meant both of sealing the parties right and title to the enjoyment of God himself , as their God by covenant , and their interest in the love of God , the grace of Christ , and the communion of the holy Ghost ; and of dedicating the party to the knowledge , profession , saith , love , and obedience of God , the Father , Son , and holy Ghost . I return , The next branch of my Argument was that we excommunicate in the name of Christ 1 Cor. 5 5. Mr. Hussey pag. 22. saith I make great hast here , deliver to Sathan saith he is not to excommunicate , &c. But grant that it were excommunication , &c. the decree was Pauls , and not the Corinthians . What is meant by delivering to Sathan , belongs to another debate . Call it an Apostolicall act , or call it an Ecclesiasticall act , or both , yet it was done in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ ; the like whereof we find not in Scripture of any act of the civil Magistrate . Why doth he not attend to the drift of the Argument ? And as to his exceptions u they are no other then Prelats , Papists , and Socinians have made before him , and which are answered long agoe . That the Apostle commandeth to excommunicate the incestuous man , is acknowledged by Mr. Prynne . That he who is excommunicated may be truly said to be delivered to Sathan , is undeniable ; for he that is cast out of the Church , whose sins are retained , on whom the Kingdom of heaven is shut and locked , whom neither Christ nor his Church doth owne , is delivered to Sathan , who reignes without the Church . That this censure or punishment of excommunication was a Church act , and not an Apostolicall act onely , may thus appear . 1. The Apostle blameth the Corinthians , that it was not sooner done ; he would not have blamed them , that a miracle was not wrought . 2. He writeth to them , to do it when they were gathered together , not to declare or witnesse what the Apostle had done , but to joyne with him in the authoritative doing of it , vers . 4. 5. again he saith to them vers . 7. Purge out therfore the old leaven . vers . 12. Doe not ye judge them that are within ? vers . 13. Put away from among your selves that wicked person . 3. It was a censure inflicted by many , 2. Cor. 2. 6 not by the Apostle alone , but by many . 4. The Apostle doth not absolve the man , but writeth to them to forgive him , 2 Cor. 2. 7. Lastly , the Syriack maketh for us , which runneth thus , vers . 4. That in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ , you all may be gathered together , and I with you in the Spirit , with the power of our Lord Iesus Christ , vers . 5. That you may deliver him to Sathan . &c. But now at last Mr. Hussey comes home , and gives this answer to my third Argument . A thing may be said to be done in the name of Christ or of God , when men do any thing in confidence that God will assist us : so Psal. 20 5. In the name of our God will we set up our banners in confidence God will assist us : Thus I hope the Parliament and other Christians may undertake the businesse in the name of Christ , &c. Secondly , In the name of Christ a thing is said to be done , that is done in the authority , room , and place of Christ , &c. So he pag. 24. seeking a knot in the rush . In the first part of his distinction , he saith nothing to my Argument , neither saith he any more of the Parliament then agreeth to all Christians , the poorest and meanest ; for every Christian servant , every Christian Artificer is bound to do whatsoever he doth , in the name of Christ , Colos. 3. 17. But what is that to the Argument ? Come to the other member of his distinction . The Ministers of Christ do act in the name of Christ : that is , in the authority , room and place of Christ ; We are Ambassadors for Christ , and we preach in Christs stead , 2 Cor. 5. 20. This he doth not nor cannot denie : ( which makes good my Argument ; ) Why did he not shew us the like concerning Magistracy ? I suppose he would , if he could : this is the very point which he had to speak to , but hath not done it . My fourth Argument against the Magistrates holding of his office of , and under , and for Christ , that is , in Christs room and stead as Mediator , shall be that which was drawn from Luk. 12. 14. The Jewes were of the same opinion , which Mr. Coleman and Mr. Hussey have followed , namely , that civil government should be put in the hands of Christ , which they collected from Ier. 23. 5. He shall execute justice and judgement in the earth ; and such other Prophecies by them mis-understood . And hence it was that one said to Christ , Master , Speak to my brother that he divide the inheritance with me . Our Lords answer was , Man who made me a Judge or a divider over you . Whatsoever act of authority is done by a Deputy or Vicegerent , as representing his Master and Soveraigne , may be done by the King himself when personally present : If therefore the Magistrate judge civil causes , and divide inheritances , as the Vicegerent of Christ , and of Christ as Mediator , then Christ himself , when present in the dayes of his flesh , had power as Mediator to judge such causes . But this Christ himself plainly denyeth . Let us hear Mr. Husseys answer , pag. 24. ( It is the very same with that which Azorius Instit. mor. part . 2. lib. 4. cap. 19. ( pleading for the Popes Temporall Dominion ) answereth concerning the point now in hand ) It doth not follow that because Christ was not a Iudge actu exercito , therefore the originall right of Government was not in him : And this Objection may be answered thus , Christ doth not say he was not a Iudge , but who made me a Iudge ? how dost thou know that I am a Iudge ? And thus Christ in the time of his humiliation did often hide the manifestation of his power . x What greater violence could be offered to the Text ? For the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constituit is purposely used to deny the power or right , as well as the exercise ; and proveth that he was not a Judge actu signato , having no such power nor authority given him , it is the same phrase which is used Act. 7. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Who made thee a Ruler and a Judge ? Moses was then beginning to do the part of a Ruler and a Judge , actu exercito ; but they refuse him as having no warrant , power , nor authority , Act. 6. 3. the Apostles bid choose seven Deacons , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whom we may appoint say they over this businesse , Tit. 1. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : and ordain Elders in every City : yet neither can that of the Deacons , nor this of the Elders , be understood otherwise , then of the right , power , and authority given them . See the like Heb. 7. 28. Luk. 12. 42. Matth. 24. 47. The scope therefore of Christs answer was this ( as Aretius upon the place ) non debeo aliena munia invadere . I ought not to invade such Offices as belong to others , not to me . Some of the Jesuits ( as forward as they are to defend the Temporal Power of the Pope as Christs Vicar on earth , yet ) cannot shut their eies against the light of this Text , who made me a Judge or a divider over you ? But they are forced to acknowledge y that Christ denies that he had any right or authority to be a civil Judge . For how can he who is authorized to be a Judge say , Who made me a Judge ? The fifth Argument I take from Iohn 18. 36. My Kingdom is not of this World. The great jealousie and fear which both Herod and Pilate had of Christ ; was , that they understood he was a King. Christ clears himself in this point , his Kingdom was such as they needed not be afraid of , for though it be in the World , it is not of the World ; though it be here , it is not from hence , it is heterogeneous to Temporal monarchy and civil Government . Mr. Hussey pag. 24. tells us , he knows not how those Governments that should be executed by Church-Officers ▪ should savour lesse of the World then the civil Government . For this I remit him to those many and great differences , which I have shewed between the civil and the Ecclesiastical Power . In the mean while my argument stands in force ; For if all civil Government were put in Christs hand as he is Mediator , and he to depute and substitute others whom he will under him ; then what is there in that answer of his to Pilate , which could convincingly answer those mistakes and misapprehensions of the nature of his Kingdom . That which is now taught by Master Hussey , is the very thing which Herod and Pilate were afraid of : but Christ denyeth that which they were afraid of : and vers . 36. is an answer to the Question asked , vers . 33. Art thou the King of the Jews ? My Kingdom is not of this World , saith he . To the same sence ( as Grotius upon the place noteth out of Eusebius ) Christs kinsmen when they were asked concerning his Kingdome , did answer to Domitian , z that his Kingdom was not worldly ; but heavenly . Sixthly , I prove the point from Luke 17. 20 , 21. And when he was demanded of the Pharisees when the Kingdom of God should come ; he answered them and said , The Kingdom of God commeth not with observation . Neither shall they say loe here , or lo there ; For behold the Kingdom of God is within you . By the Kingdom of God is meant in this place the kingdom of the Messiah , as Interpreters do unanimously agree . Both Iohn Baptist and Chrst himself had preached , that the Kingdom of God was at hand ; and the Jews themselves were in expectation of the Messiah to make them free from the Roman yoke , and to restore a temporal or earthly monarchy to Israel . Hereupon they aske when this Kingdom should come . His answer is ▪ The Kingdom of God commeth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with observation , or outward shew and pomp , but it is within you , it is spiritual , it belongs to the inward man. But if the Magistrate be Christs Vicegerent , and hold his office of and under Christ as Mediator , and if Christ as Mediator reigne in , through and by the Magistrate , then the Kingdom of the Messiah doth come with observation and pomp , with a crown , a scepter , a sword , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , with princely splendor , riches , triumph , such as the Pharisees then , and the Jews now do expect : which saith Grotius is the thing that Christ here denieth ; For all the outward pomp , observation , splendor , majesty , power , and authority , which a Vicegerent hath , doth principally redound unto his Master and Soveraign : So that by our opposites principles , the Kingdom of Christ must come with observation , because the dominion of the Magistrate ( whom they hold to be his Vicegerent ) commeth with observation . Seventhly , That Government and authority which hath a foundation in the law of nature and Nations ( yea might and should have had place and been of use , though man had not sinned ) cannot be held of and under and managed for Christ as he is Mediator . But Magistracy or civil Government hath a foundation in the law of Nature and Nations ( yea might and should have had place and been of use though man had not sinned ) Ergo. The reason of the proposition , is because the law of nature and nations , and the law which was written in mans heart in his first creation , doth not flow from Christ as Mediator , but from God as Creator : neither can it be said that Christ as Mediator ruleth and governeth all nations by the law of nature and nations , or that Christ should have reigned as Mediator , though man had not sinned . The Assumption is proved by Gerhard loc . com . Tom. 6. pag. 459. 460. 474 In the state of innocency there had been no such use of Magistracy as now there is ; for there had been no evil doers to be punished , no unruly persons to be restrained ; yet as the wife had been subject to the husband , and the son to the Father , so no doubt there had been an union of diverse families under one head , man being naturally 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Aristotle calls him , he is for society and policy , and how can it be imagined that mankind multiplying upon the earth should have been without headship , superiority , order , society , govenment ? And what wonder that the law of nature teach all Nations some government : a Hicrome observeth , that nature guideth the very reasonlesse creatures to a kind of Magistracy . Eightly , If the Scripture hold forth the same derivation or origination of Magistracy in the Christian Magistrate and in the heathen Magistrate , then it is not safe to us to hold that the Christian Magistrate holds his office of and under Christ as Mediator . But the Scripture doth hold forth the same derivation or origination of Magistracy in the Christian Magistrate , and in the Heathen Magistrate . Ergo , The proposition hath this reason for it , because the Heathen Magistrate doth not hold his office of and under Christ as Mediator ; neither doth Mr. Hussey herein contradict me : onely he holds the heathen Magistrate and his Government to be unlawful : wherein he is Anabaptistical , and is confuted by my first Argument . As for the Assumption , it is proved from divers Scriptures , and namely these , Rom. 13. 1. the powers that be , are ordained of God , which is spoken of heathen Magistrates . Dan. 2. 37. Thou O King art a King of Kings , for the God of heaven hath given thee a Kingdom , Power , and Strength , and Glory . So saith Daniel to Nebuchadnezzar an Idolatrous and heathen King. See the like Ier. 27. 6. Isa. 45. 1. God sent his servant the Prophet to anoint Hazael King over Syria ; 1 Kings 19. 15. Read to this purpose Augustine de civit . Dei , lib. 5. cap. 21. Where he saith b that the same God gave a Kingdom and authority both to the Romans , Assyrians , Persians , Hebrews ; and that he who gave the Kingdom to the best Emperors , gave it also to the worst ▪ Emperors ; yea he that gave it to Constantine a Christian ▪ did also give it saith he , to Iulian the apostate . Tertullian Apol. cap. 30. speaking of the heathen Emperors of that time , saith that they were from God , à quo sunt secundi , post quem primi ante omnes , that he who had made them men , did also make them Emperors , and give them their power . Ibid. cap. 33. Ut meritò dixerim noster est magis Caesar , ut a nostro Deo constitutus : so that I may justly say , Caesar is rather ours , as being placed by our God : saith he , speaking to the Pagans in the behalf of Christians . Wherefore though there be huge and vast differences between the Christian Magistrate and the heathen Magistrate , the former excelling the latter , as much as light doth darknesse , yet in this point of the derivation and tenure of Magistracy ; they both are equally interested , and the Scripture sheweth no difference , as to that point . CHAP. VIII . Of the Power and Priviledge of the Magistrate in things and causes Ecclesiastical ; what it is not , and what it is . THe new notion that the Christian Magistrate is a Church-officer , and Magistracy an Ecclesiastical as well as a civil administration , calls to mind that of the Wise-man ; Is there any thing whereof it may be said , See this is new ? it hath been already of old time which was before us . Plato in his Politicus ( a little after the middle of that book ) tells me , that the Kings of Egypt were also Priests , and that in many Cities of the Grecians , the supream Magistrate had the administration of the holy things . Notwithstanding even in this particular there still appeareth some new thing under the Sun. For Plato tells me again Epist. 8. that those supreme Magistrates who were Priests , might not be present nor joyne in criminall nor capitall judgements , lest they ( being Priests ) should be defiled . If you look after some other President for the union of civil and ecclesiastical Government , secular and spirituall administrations ▪ in one and the same person or persons , perhaps it were not hard to find such presidents , as our opposites will be ashamed to owne . I am sure Heathens themselves have known the difference between the office of Priests and the office of Magistrates . Aristotle de Repub. lib. 4. cap. 15. speaking of Priests saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . For this is another thing then civil Magistrates . He had said before , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For a civil society hath need of many Rulers : but every 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who is made by election or lot , is not a civil Magistrate : and the first instance he giveth is that of the Priests : and so Aristotle would have the Priest to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Ruler , but not a civil Magistrate . So de Repub. lib. 7. cap. 8. he distingu sheth between the Priests and the Judges in a Citty . But to the matter . I will here endeavour to make these two things appear . 1. That no administration formally and properly Ecclesiasticall ( and namely the dispencing of Church censures ) doth belong unto the Magistrate , nor may ( according to the word of God ) be assumed and exercised by him , 2. That Christ hath not made the Magistrate head of the Church , to receive appeals ( properly so called ) from all Ecclesiasticall Assemblies . Touching the first of these , it is no other than is held forth in the Irish Articles of Faith ( famous among Orthodox and Learned men in these Kingdoms ) which do plainly exclude the Magistrate from the administration of the Word and Sacraments , and from the power of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven . It is the unhappinesse of this time that this and other truths formerly out of controversie , should be so much stuck at and doubted of by some . Now that the corrective part of Church-Government , or the censure of scandalous persons in reference to the purging of the Church , and keeping pure of the ordinances , is no part of the Magistrates office , but is a distinct charge belonging of right to Ministers and Elders ; as it may fully appear by the Arguments brought afterwards to prove a government in the Church distinct from Magistracy : ( which Arguments will necessarily carry the power of Church censures and the administration of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven into other hands then the Magistrates ; ) so I shall here strengthen it by these confirmations . First , Church-censures must needs be dispensed by Ministers and Elders , because they are heterogeneous to Magistracy : For first , the Magistrate by the power which is in his hand , ought to punish any of his Subjects that doe evil , and he ought to punish like si●s with like punishments . But if the power of Church-censures be in the Magistrates hands , he cannot walk by that rule ; For Church-censures are onely for Church-members , not for all Subjects : 1 Cor. 5. 10. 12. Secondly , Church-censures are to be executed in the name of Christ , Matth. 18. 20. with vers . 17 , 18. 1 Cor. 5. 4. and this cannot be done in his name , by any other but such as have commission from him to bind and loose , forgive and retain sins . But where is any such commission given to the civil Magistrate , Christian more then Heathen ? Thirdly , Church-censures are for impenitent contumacious offenders : but the Magistrate doth and must punish offenders ( when the course of Justice and law so requireth ) whether they appear penitent or impenitent . Fourthly , The Magistrates power of punishing offenders , is bounded by the law of the land . What then shall become of such scandalls as are not crimes punishable by the law of the land ? such as obscene rotten talking , adulterous and vile behaviour , or the most scandalous conversing and companying together ( though the crime of adultery cannot be proved by witnesses ) living in known malice and envie , refusing to be reconciled , and thereupon lying off ( it may be for a long time ) from the Sacrament , and the like , which are not proper to be taken notice of by the civil Judge . So that in this case , either there must be Church-censures and discipline exercised by Church-officers , or the Magistrate must go beyond his limits : Or lastly . Scandalls shall spread in the Church , and no remedy against them . Far be it from the thoughts of Christian Magistrates , that scandalls of this kind shall be tolerated , to the dishonour of God , the laying of the stumbling blocks of bad examples before others , and to the violation and pollution of the Ordinances of Jesus Christ , who hath commanded to keep his ordinances pure . A second Argument may be this , In the old Testament God did not command the Magistrates , but the Priests to put a difference betwixt the prophane and the holy , the unclean and the clean : Levit. 10. 10. Ezech. 22. 26. Ezech. 44. 23 , 24. Deut. 21. 5. 2 Chron. 23. 18 , 19. And in the new Testament , the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven are given to the Ministers of the Church : Matth. 16. 19. and 18. 18. Iohn 20. 23. but no where to the civil Magistrate . It belongeth to Church-officers to censure false doctrine . Revel . 2. 2. 14. 15. to decide controversies , Acts 16. 4. and to examine and censure scandalls , Ezech. 44 23 , 24. which is a Prophecy concerning the ministery of the New Testament . And Elders judge an Elder , 1 Tim. 5. 19. or any other Church-member . 1 Cor. 5. 12. Thirdly , The Scripture holdeth forth the civil and Ecclesiastical power as most distinct ; insomuch that it condemneth the Spiritualizing of the civil Power , aswell as the Secularizing of the Ecclesiastical power ; State Papacy , aswell as Papal-State : Church-officers may not take the civil sword , nor judg civil causes : Luke 12. 13 , 14 , and 22. 25. Matth. 26. 52. 2 Cor. 10. 4. 2 Tim. 2. 4. So Uzzah might not touch the Ark : nor Saul offer burnt offerings : nor Uzziah burn incense : I wish we may not have cause to revive the proverb which was used in Ambrose his time . That Emperors did more covet the Priesthood , then the Priests did covet the Empire . Shall it be a sin to Church-officers to exercise any act of civil government ? and shal it be no sin to the civil Magistrate to ingrosse the whole and sole power of Church-Government ? Are not the two powers formally and specifically distinct ? Of which before ▪ Chap. 4. It is to be well noted that Maccovius and Vedelius who ascribe a sort of Papal power to the civil Magistrate , to the great scandall of the Reformed Church ; do notwithstanding acknowledge that Christ hath appointed Church discipline and censures , and the same to be dispenced by Church-officers onely : And that the Magistrate as he may not preach the Word , and administer the Sacraments ; So he may not exercise Church-discipline , nor inslict spiritual censures , such as excommunication . Though Erastus pag. 175. hath not spared to say , that the Magistrate may in the New Testament ( though he might not in the old ) exercise the ministeriall function , if he can have so much leisure from his other employments . Fourthly , The power of Church discipline is intrinsecall to the Church , that is , both they who censure , and they who are censured , must be of the Church , 1 Cor. 5. 12. 13. They must be of one and the same Corporation , the one must not be in the body , and the other out of the body . But if this power were in the Magistrate , it were extrinsecall to the Church . For the Magistrate quatenus a Magistrate , is not so much as a Church-member ; far lesse can the magistrate as magistrate have jurisdiction over Church-members , as Church members , even as the minister as minister is not a member of the Common-wealth or State , far lesse can he , as minister , exercise jurisdiction over the Subjects , as Subjects . The Christian magistrate in England is not a member of the Church as a magistrate , but as a Christian. And the minister of Jesus Christ in England , is not subject to the magistrate as he is a minister of Christ , but as he is a member of the Common-wealth of England He was both a learned man and a great Royallist in Scotland , who held that all Kings , Infidel as well as Christian , have equal authority and jurisdiction in the Church , though all be not alike qualified or able to exercise it . Io. Wemius , de Reg. primat . pag. 123. Let our opposites loose this knot among themselves ; for they are not of one opinion about it . Fifthly , Church-officers might and did freely and by themselves dispence Church-censures , under Pagan and unbeleeving magistrates , as is by all confessed : Now the Church ought not to be in a worse condition under the Christian magistrate , then under an Infidel ; for the power of the Christian magistrate is cumulative , not privative to the Church ; He is a Nursing Father , Isa. 49. 23. not a Step-Father . He is keeper , defender and guardian of both Tables , but neither Judge nor Interpreter of Scripture . Sixthly , I shall shut up this Argumentation with a convincing dilemma . The Assemblies of Church-officers being to exercise discipline , and censure offences ( which is supposed and must be granted in regard of the Ordinances of Parliament ) either they have power to do this Iure proprio , and virtute officii : or onely Iure devoluto , and virtute delegationis , such authority being derived from the magistrate ; If the former ; I have what I would ; If the latter , then it followeth , 1. That where Presbyteries and Synods do exercise spirituall Jurisdiction , not by any power derived from , or dependant upon the civil Magistrate , but in the name and authority of Iesus Christ , and by the power received from him , as in Scotland , France , the Low-Countries , &c. there all Ecclesiastical censures , such as deposition of Ministers , and Excommunication of scandalous and obstinate persons . have been , are , and shall be void , null , and of no effect . Even as when the Prelaticall party did hold , that the power of ordination and jurisdiction pertaineth onely to Prelats , or such as are delegate with commission and authority from them : thereupon they were so put to it by the Arguments of the Anti-Episcopall party , that they were forced to say , that Presbyters ordained by Presbyters in other Reformed Churches , are no Presbyters , and their excommunication was no excommunication . 2. It will follow , that the Magistrate himself may excommunicate , for nemo potest aliis delegare plus juris quam ipse habet ; No man can give from him by delegation or deputation to another , that right or power which he himself hath not . 3. If the power of excommunication come by delegation from the Magistrate , either the Magistrate must in conscience give this power to Church-officers onely , or he is free and may without sin give this power to others ; If the former , what can bind up the Magistrates conscience , or astrict the thing to Church-Officers , except it be Gods ordinance that they only do it ? If the latter , then though this Parliament hath hath taken away the old High Commission Court , which had Potestatem utriusque gladii , yet they may lawfully and without sin erect a new High Commission Court , made up of those who shall be no Church-officers , yea having none of the Clergy in it ( as the other had ) with commission and power granted to them to execute spiritual Jurisdiction and Excommunication , and that not onely in this or that Church , yea or Province , but in any part of the whole Kingdom . So much of the first point . Now to the second , concerning appeals to the Magistrate , as to the head of the Church . It is asked , what remedy shall there be against the abuse of Church-discipline by Church-officers , except there be appeals from the Ecclesiastical Courts to the civil Magistrate : which if it be , Church-officers will be the more wary and cautious to do no man wrong , knowing that they may be made to answer for it : And if it be not , there is a wide dore opened , that ministers may do as they please . Answ. 1 Look what remedy thene is for abuses in the preaching of the Word , and administration of the Sacraments ; the like remedy there is for abuses in Church-discipline ; Mal-administration of the Word and Sacraments is no lesse sinfull to the ministers , and hurtful to others , then mal-administration of discipline : and in some respects the former is more to the dishonour of God and destruction of men than the latter : Ministers have not an arbitrary power to preach what they will , Now when the word is not truly preached , nor the Sacraments duely administred by any minister or ministers , the Magistrate seeketh the redresse of these things ( in a constituted Church ) by the convocating of Synods , for examining , discovering , and judging of such errors and abuses as are found in particular Churches . But if the Synod should connive at , or comply with that same error ; yet the Magistrate taketh not upon him the supreme and authoritative decision of a controversie of faith , but still endeavoureth to help all this by other Ecclesiastical remedies ; as another Synod , and yet another , till the evil be removed . The like we say concerning abuses in Church-discipline : The Magistrate may command a resuming and re-examination of the case in another Synod : but still the Synod ratisieth or reverseth the censure . In which case it is betwixt the Magistrate and the Synod , as betwixt the will and understanding ; for Voluntas imperat Intellectui quo ad exercitium , yet notwithstanding determinatur per intectellum quoad specificationem actus . Take for instance this also . If it be a case deserving deposition or degradation : In such a case saith learned Salmasius appar . ad lib. de primatu pag. 298. the Prince or Magistrate cannot take from a minister that power which was given him in ordination with imposition of hands , for he cannot take away that which he cannot give . But if a Prince would have a minister for his offence● to be deprived of his ministeriall power , he must take care that it be done by the ministers themselves ; qui Judices veri ipsius sunt , & auferre soli possunt quod per ordinationem dederunt . Who are his true Judges , and they onely can take away what by ordination they have given . Thus Salmasius . 2. And further , if Presbyteries or Synods exceed the bounds of Ecclesiasticall power , and go without the Sphaere of their own activity , interposing and judging in a civil cause which concerneth any mans life or estate , The Magistrate may reverse and make null whatsoever they do in that kind , and punish themselves for such abuse of their power ; As Solomon punished Abiathar , and banished him to Anathoth , he being guilty of high treason : 1 Kings 2. 26. It was not a case of scandall onely , or of Delinquency or mal-administration in his Sacerdotall office , otherwise it had fallen within the cognizance , and jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin . 3. Though the case be meerly spirituall and ecclesiastical the Christian Magistrate ( by himself and immediatly ) may not onely examine by the judgement of discretion the sentence of the Ecclesiastical Court , but also when he seeth cause ( either upon the complaint of the party , or scandall given to himself ) interpose by letters , messages , exhortations , and sharp admonitions to the Presbyterie or Synod , who in that case are bound in conscience , with all respect and honour to the Magistrate , to give him a reason of what they have done , and to declare the grounds of their proceedings , till by the blessing of God upon this free and fair dealing , they either give a rationall and satisfactory accompt to the Magistrate , or be themselves convinced of their mal-administration of Discipline . 4 And in extraordinary cases when the Clergy hath made defection , and all Church discipline is degenerated into Tyrannie , as under Popery and Prelacy it was ; it belongeth to the Magistrate to take the protection of those who are cast out or censured unjustly ; for extraordinary evils must have extraordinary helps . And in this sence we are to understand divers of our Reformers and others , groaning under the pressures of the Roman Clergy , and calling in the help of the civil Magistrate for their relief . But we deny that ( in a well constituted Church ) it is agreeable to the will of Christ , for the Magistrate , either c to receive appeals ( properly so called ) from the sentence of an Ecclesiastical Court , or to receive complaints exhibited against that sentence by the party censured , so as by his authority , upon such complaint , to nullifi● or make void the Ecclesiastical censure . The latter of these two V●…delius pleadeth for , not the former . But Apollonius oppugneth the latter , as being upon the matter all one with the former . Now to ascribe such power to the Magistrate , is 1. To change the Pope , but not the Po●…edome ; the Head , but not the Headship ; for is not this the Popes chief supremacy , to judge all men ▪ and to be judged of no man , to ratifie or rescind at his pleasure the dec●ees of the Church , Councels ●nd all : and shall this power now be transferred upon the Magistrate ? Good Lord , where are we , if this shall be the up-shot of our Reformation ? O● for it ? Shall we condemn the Papists and Anabaptists who give too little to the Magistrate , and then joyn hands with the Arminians , who give as much to the Magistrate as the Pope hath formerly usurp●d ? 2. Appeals lie in the same line of subordination , and do not go de g●…nere in genus ; but the civil and Ecclesiasticall Courts stand not in one line , neither are they of one kind and nature ; they are disparata , non subordinata . 3. They who receive appeals , have also power to 〈◊〉 the sentence , else the appeal is in vain . But the Magistrate hath no power to execute the Church ce●sure , nor to shut out of the Church , our opposites themselves being Judges . It was not therefore without just cause that Augustine did v●ry ●uch ●lame the Donatists for their appealing from the Ecclesi●stical Assemblies , to the Emperors and civil C●urts , Epist. 48. and Epist. 162. There are two examples alledged from Scripture for appeals from Ecclesiastical to Civil Courts : One is the example of Ieremiah ; I●…r . 26. The other is the example of Paul , Act. 25. But neither of the two prove the point . For 1. Ieremiah was not censured by the Priests with any Spirituall or Ecclesiastical censure ( of which alone our controversie is ) but the Priests took him and said to him , Thou shalt surely die . Jer. 26. 8. 2. Would God that every Christian Magistrate may protect the servants of God from such unjust sentences and persecuting decrees . When Ecclesiasticall Courts are made up of bloody persecuters ▪ that is an extraordinary evil which must have an extraordinary remedy . 3. Neither yet is there any syllable of Ieremiahs appealing from the Priests to the Princes , but the Text saith , When the Princes of Judah heard these things , then they came up , &c. verse 10. that is , The Princes so soon as they understood that the Priests had taken Ieremiah , and had said to him Thou shalt surely die . verse 8. And being also informed that all the people were gathered together tumultuously and disorderly against the Prophet , verse 9. They thought it their duty to rescue the Prophet from the Priests and people , that he might be examined and judged by the civil Court , he being challenged and accused as one worthy to die . As for Pauls Appellation to Caesar. First , It is supposed by our opposites that he appealed from the Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin of the Jews , which is a great mistake ; For he appealed from the Judgement-seat of Festus to Caesar ; that is , from an in●eriour civil Court , to a superiour civil Court , which he had just cause to do : for though Festus had not yet given forth any sentence against Paul , yet he appeals à gravamine , and it was a great grievance indeed , while as Festus shew'd himself to be a most corrupt Judge , who though the Jews could prove none of those things whereof they accused Paul , Act. 25. 7. ( which should have made Festus to acquit and dismisse him ) yet being willing to do the Jews a pleasure , he would have Paul to go to Ierusalem , there to be judged before himself . verse 9. Now this was all the favour that the Jews had desired of Festus , that he would send Paul to Ierusalem , they laying wait in the way to kill him . vers . 3. No appellation here from the Sanhedrin at Ierusalem , where he had not as yet compeered to be examined , far lesse could he appeal from any sentence of the Sanhedrin . The most which can be with any colour alleadged from the Text , is , that Paul declined to be judged by the Sanhedrin at Ierusalem , they not being his competent and proper Judges in that cause . I stand at Caesars Iudgement-seat saith he , where I ought to be judged ; meaning that he was accused as worthy of death , for sedition , and offending against Caesar ; whereof he ought to be judged onely at Caesars Tribunall ; not by the Jews , who were no Judges of such matters . A declinator of a Judge is one thing , and Appellation from his Judgement or sentence is another thing . But put the case that Paul had indeed appeal●d from the Sanhedrin at Ierusalem , either it was the civil Sanhedrin , or the Ecclesiasticall . If the civil , it is no President for appeals from Ecclesiastical Courts . If the Ecclesiastical , yet that serveth not for appeals from Ecclesiasticall Courts in Ecclesiasticall causes ; for it was a capital crime whereof Paul was accused . Nay , put the case that Paul had at that time appealed from the Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin in an Ecclesiastical cause : yet neither could that help our opposites , for the government of the Christian Church , and the government of the Jewish Church were at that time separate and distinct , so that the Ecclesiastical Court , which should have judged of any scandall given by Paul ( if at all he ought to have been censured ) had been a Christian Synod , not a Jewish Sanhedrin . And so much of Appeals . Of which Question Triglandius , Revius , and Cabeljavius , have peculiarly and fully written . Three famous Academies also , of Leyden , Groening , and Utrecht , did give their publike testimonies against appeals from Ecclesiastical to civil Courts . And the three Professors of Utrecht in their testimony do obtest all Christians that love truth and peace , to be cautious and wary of the Arminian poyson lurking in the contrary Tenent . See Cabeljav . defensio potestatis Ecclesiasticae . pag. 60. It is further objected , That thus fixing a spirituall jurisdiction in Church-officers , we erect two collateral Powers in the Kingdom , the Civil and the Ecclesiastical , unlesse all Ecclesiastical Courts be subordinate to Magistracy , as to a certain head-ship . Answ. There is a subordination of Persons here , but a co-ordination of powers : A subordination of Persons , because as the Ministers of the Church are subject to the civil Magistrate , they being members of the Common-wealth or Kingdom ; So the Magistrate is subject to the Ministers of the Church , he being a Church-member . The former we assert against Papists , who say that the Clergy is not subject to the Magistrate . The latter we hold against those who make the Magistrate to be the head of the Church : Again , a co-ordination of powers ; because as the subjection of the person of the Christian Magistrate to the Pastors and Elders of the Church , in things pertaining to God , doth not inferre the subordination of the power and office of the Magistrate to the Church-officers : So the subjection of Pastors and Elders to the Magistrate in all civil things ( as other members of the Common-wealth are subject ) may well consist with the co-ordination of the Ecclesiastical power with the civil . And as it is an error in Papists to make the secular power dependant upon , and derived from the Ecclesiasticall power : So it is an error in others to make the Ecclesiastical power derived from , and dependant upon the civil power : for the Ecclesiastical power is derived from Christ , Ephes. 4. 11. And now while I am expressing my thoughts , I am the more confirmed in the same , by falling upon the concession of one who is of a different Judgement ; For he who wrote Ius Regum in opposition to all spiritual authority exercised under any forme of Ecclesiastical Government , doth not withstanding acknowledge pag. 16. Both of them ( the Magistrate and the Minister ) have their Commission immediatly from God , and each of them are subject to the other , without any subordination of offices from the one to the other , for the Magistrate is no lesse subject to the operation of the Word from the mouth of the Minister , then any other man whatsoever : And the Minister again is as much subject to the authority of the Magistrate as any other Subject whatsoever ; And therefore though there be no subordination of Offices , yet is there of Persons ; the Person of a Minister remaining a Subject , but not the function of the Ministery . He might have said the same of the exercise of Church-discipline which he saith of the preaching of the Word , for the same Christ who gave the keyes of doctrine , gave also the keys of discipline , without any tye to make the use thereof subject to the pleasure of the civil Magistrate . Let him prove that the ministery of the Word is not subordinate to , nor dependant upon the Magistrate ; and I shall prove by the same medium , that the ministery of Church-censures hath as little of that subordination in it . And this I must adde , that least of all others can our Independent brethren charge the Presbyterians with the setting up of an Ecclesiastical Government co-ordinate with , and not subordinate unto the civil Government : For themselves hold as much in this point ( if not more ) then we do . Take for instance Mr. Cotton his k●…yes of the Kingdom of Heaven , published by Mr. Goodwyn and Mr. Nye , pag. 49. The first Subject of the ministeriall power of the keyes , though it be independent in respect of derivation of power from the power of the sword to the performance of any spiritual administration : &c. Pag. 53. As the Church is subject to the sword of the Magistrate in things which concerne the civil peace : so the Magistrate ( if Christian ) is subject to the keyes of the Church . &c. As for that collaterality which is objected , I answer , The Civil and Ecclesiastical power , if we speak properly , are not collateral . 1. They have no footing upon the same ground : there may be many subject to the Magistrate , who are no Church-Members , and so not under the Spiritual power : and where the same persons are subject to both the powers , there is no more collaterality in this case , nay , not so much , as is betwixt the power of a Father in one man , and the power of a Master in another man , when both powers are exercised upon the same man who is both a son and a servant . 2. Powers that are collateral , are of the same eminency and altitude , of the same kinde and nature ; but the civil Power is a Dominion and Lordship : the Ecclesiastical power is Ministerial , not Lordly . 3. Collateral powers do mutually and alike exercise authority over each other respectively . But , though the Magistrate may exercise much authority in things Ecclesiastical , Church-Officers can exercise no authority in things civil . The Magistrates authority is Ecclesiastical objective , though not formaliter : but the Church-Officers authority is not civil so much as objective , not being exercised about either civil , criminal , or capital cases . 4. Collateral powers are subordinate to , and derived from the Supreme and Original power , like two branches growing out of the same stock , two streams flowing from the same fountain , two lines drawn from the same center , two arms under the same head . But the power of the Magistrate is subordinate unto ; and dependeth upon the Dominion of God the Creator of all : the power of Church-Officers dependeth upon the Dominion of Christ , the Mediator and King of the Church . I shall conclude my answers to the present Objection , with the Testimony of learned d Salmasius , who hath so overthrown the Papal and Prelatical Government from Scripture and antiquity , that he hath withall preserved , yea strengthened the distinction of civil Government and Church-government , and holdeth that Church-censures and civil punishments do very well consist and sweetly agree together . I have now done with the negative part of this present Controversie , what the power of the Magistrate in Ecclesiasticis is not . I proceed to the positive part , what it is . To this I w●ll speak first more generally , then more particularly . For the general , I hold with the large Consession of Faith of the Church of Scotland ; Art. 25. Moreover to Kings , Princes , Rulers , and Magistrates , we affirm , that chiefly and most principally , the conservation and the purgation of the Religion appertains ; so that not onely they are appointed for civil Policy ▪ but also for maintenance of the true Religion , and for suppressing of Idolatry and Superstition whatsoever . To the same purpose , Calvin , Instit. lib. 4. cap. 20. sect . 9. Hoc nomine maximè laudantnr sancti Reges , quòd Dei cultum corruptum vel eversum restituerint , vel curam gesserint Religionis , ut sub illis pura & incolumis s●…oreret . The like see in Zanchius in 4. praec . pag. 791. and in Polanus Syntag. lib. 10. cap. 65. They hold that the Christian Magistrate his Office , as concerning Religion , is , diligently to take care that in his Dominion , or Kingdom , Religion from the pure Word of God , expounded by ●…he Word of God it self , and understood according to the Principles of Faith ( which others call the Analogy of Faith ) be either instituted , or ( being instituted ) kept pure ; or being corrupted , be restored and reformed : that false Doctrines , Abuses , Idolls , and Superstitions be taken away , to the glory of God , and to his own and his Subjects salvation . Unto these things I do assent as unto safe and undoubted truths . But for the clearer un●erstanding and enodation of our present Question , I will particularize and explain what I hold , by these five following Distinctions . 1. Distingue materiam subjectam . There are two sorts of things belonging to the Church . Some which are intrinsecal , and belonging to the soul or inward man , directly and primarily . Such things are not to be dispensed and administred by the civil Magistrate , I mean the Word and Sacraments , the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven , the Suspension or Excommunication of Church-Officers or Members , the Ordination or Deposition of Officers , the Determination and Resolution from Scripture of Controversies concerning the Faith , the Worship of God , the Government of the Church , Cases of Conscience . These being in their nature , end , and use , meerly spiritual , and belonging not to the outward man , but to the inward man or soul , are committed and intrusted to the Pastors and other ruling Officers of the Church , and are not of civil and extrinsecal , but of Ecclesiastical and intrinsecal cognizance and judgement . There are other things belonging to the Church , which are extrinsecal and do properly belong to the outward man , and are common to the Church with other humane Societies or Corporations . Things of this kinde fall within the civil Jurisdiction . For the Churches of Christ , being Societies of men and women , and parts of Common-wealths , are accountable unto and punishable by the civil Magistrate , in their bodies , lives , civil Liberties , and temporal Estates , for trespasses against the Law of God or the Law of the Land : By the Law of God I understand here Ius divinum naturale , that is , the moral Law or Decalogue , as it bindeth all Nations ( whether Christians or Infidels ) being the Law of the Creator and King of Nations . The Magistrate by his authority , may and in duty ought to keep his Subjects within the bounds of external obedience to that Law , and punish the external man with external punishments for external trespasses against that Law. From this obligation of the Law , and subjection to the corrective power of the Magistrate , Christian Subjects are no more exempted then Heathen Subjects , but father more straitly obliged . So that if any such trespasse is committed by Church-Officers or Members , the Magistrate hath power and authority to summon , examine , judge , and ( after just conviction and proof ) to punish these , as well as other men . We do therefore abominate the disloyal Papal Tenent , that Clergy men are not to be examined and judged by civil , but by Ecclesiastical Courts onely , even in causes civil and criminal . Whereof see Duarenus de Sacr. Eccl. Minist . lib. 1. cap. 2. Spelman Concil . Britann . Tom. 1. pag. 413. I further explane my self by that common distinction , that there are two sorts of things that belong to the Church , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , things inward , and things outward . For Church Officers and Church-members do consist ( as other men ) of a soul , and of a body . All things properly belonging to the soul or internal man , ( which here we call things inward ) are the object of Ecclesiastical power given to Church-officers , Pastors , and other ruling officers . But what belongs to the outward man , to the bodies of Church-officers and members ( which things are outward ) the judging and managing thereof , is in the hand of the Magistrate , who ruleth not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , those that are without , whom the Church judgeth not , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the things outward of the Church . Salmasius calls the power of the Magistrate in things Ecclesiastical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the inward Episcopacy or overseeing . Which well agreeth with that which Constantine said to the Bishops , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . You are made Bishops of the inward things of the Church , I of the things outward . So that he doth not assume their government , but distinguisheth his from theirs . This external inspection and administration of the Magistrate , in reference to Religion , is twofold . 1. Corrective , by externall punishments . 2. Auxiliary , by externall benefits and adminicles . The Magistrate may and ought to be both Custos & vindex utriusque Tabulae , he ought to preserve both the first and second Table of the holy and good Law of God , from being despised and violated , and punish by corporal or other temporal punishments such ( whether Church Officers or Church-members ) as openly dishonour God by grosse offences , either against the first or against the second Table ; and this he doth as Gods Deputy and Vicegerent subordinate and subservient to that universall dominion which God almighty exerciseth over the children of men . But in doing hereof , he is also helpfull and usefull to the Kingdom of Christ as Mediator ; Magistracy being ( in the respects aforesaid ) serviceable and profitable ( as to order the Common-wealth aright , so also ) to purge the Church of scandals , to promote the course of the Gospel , and the edification of one another . But how ? not perfectly , but pro tanto ; not every way , but more suo ; not intrinsecally , but extrinsecally ; not primarily , but secundarily ; not directly , but ex consequenti ; not sub formalitate scandali , sed sub formalitate criminis , not under the notion of scandall , but of crime ; The Magistrate in punishing all crimes committed by any in the Church ( which are contrary to the Law of God ) in suppressing tumults , disorders , in prot●cting the Church from danger , harme , or mol●station , in putting a hook in the nostrils , and a bridle in the mouthes of unruly , obstinate , and contumacious sinners , who vexe the Church , and create trouble to the people of God ; in so doing , he doth by consequence , and removendo prohibens , purge the Church , and advance the Kingdom of Christ , and the course of the Gospel : In the mean while not depriving the Church of her owne int●insecall power and Jurisdiction , but making it rather more 〈◊〉 by the aid of the secular power . And so much of the corrective part of the Magistrates administration . The other part of his administration in reference to Religion , is auxiliary , or assistant to the Church . For the Magistrate watcheth over the outward businesse of the Church , not onely by troubling those persons , and punishing those sins that trouble the Israel of God ; but by administring such things as are necessary for the well being and comfortable subsistence of the Church , and for that end , doth convocate Synods pro re nata , ( beside the ordinary and set meetings ) and presideth therein ( if he please ) in externall order , though not in the Synodicall debates and resolutions : He addeth his civil sanction to the Synodical results , if he find nothing therein which may hurt Peace or Justice in the Common-wealth . The Magistrate ought also to take care of the maintenance of the Ministery , Schooles , poor , and of good works for necessary uses , that Religion and Learning may not want their necessary adminicles . Finally , He ought to take care that all Churches be provided with an able , orthodox , and Godly Ministery , and Schools with learned and well qualified Teachers , such as shall be best approved by those to whom it belongeth to examine and Judge of their qualifications and parts . And all these wayes the Magistrate ought to be , and the well affected Magistrate hath been and is a nursing Father to the Church of Christ. 2. My second distinction shall be this : The Magistrate may and ought not onely to conserve Justice , peace and order in the Common-wealth , and in the Church , as it is in the Common-wealth , but also to take speciall care of the conservation of the true Reformed Religion , and of the Reformation of it when and wherein it needeth to be reformed , imperativè , not elicitivè . The Magistrate saith Dr. Rivet on the decalogue , pag. 262. is neither to administer Word , nor Sacraments , nor Church discipline , &c. but he is to take care that all these things be done by those whom God hath called thereunto . What ever is properly spiritual belonging to the soul and inward man ( such as Church-censures , and the other particulars before mentioned ) cannot be actus elicitus of the Magistrate : The Magistrate can neither immediatione suppositi , nor immediatione virtutis , determine controversies of faith , ordain Ministers , suspend from the Sacraments , or excommunicate . He can neither doe these things himself ; nor are they done in the name and authority of the Magistrate or by any Ministeriall power receeived from him , but in the name and authority of Jesus Christ , and by the power given from Jesus Christ. Yet all these and generally the administration of the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven , are actus imperati of the Christian Magistrate , and that both antecedenter and consequenter . Antecedently , the Magistrate may command Church-officers to suspend or excommunicate all obstinate and scandalous persons : he may command the Classis to ordain able and godly ministers , and no other : he may command a Synod to meet , to debate and determine such or such a controversie . Consequently also , when the thing is examined , judged , resolved , or done by the Ecclesiasticall power , the Magistrate hath power and authority to adde his civil sanction confirmation , ot ratification , to make the Ecclesiasticall sentence to be obeyed and submitted unto by all whom it concerneth . In all which the Christian Magistrate doth exceeding much for the conservation and purgation of Religion : not elici●…ndo actus , doing or exercising by himself or by his owne authority acts of Church . Government or discipline , but taking care , that such and such things be done by those to whom they do belong . 3. Distinguish the directive part and the coercive part . The directive part , in the conservation or purgation of Religion , doth belong to the Ministers and ruling Officers of the Church assembled together ; In administring therefore that which concerneth Religion and peoples spirituall good , the Magistrate not onely juvatur , but dirigitur , is not onely helped , but directed by the Ecclesiastical directive power ; Fest. Hon. Disp. 30. Thes. 6. Magistracy may say to Ministery as Moses said to Hobab ; Thou mayest be to us in stead of eyes . Ad sacrae Religionis informationem , fid●…lis Magistratus verbi divini administris , veluti oculis , uti debet ; and for that end he is to make use of consistoriall and Synodicall Assemblies say the Professors of L●…yden , Synopspur . 〈◊〉 . Disp. 50. Thes. 44. But the coercive part , in compelling the obstinate and unruly , to submit to the Presbyteriall or Synodicall sentence , belongs to the Magistrate . Not as if the Magistrate had nothing to do , but to be an executioner of the pleasure of Church-officers , or as if he were by a blind and implicite faith to constrain all men to stand to their determination . God forbid . The Magistrate must have his full liberty to judge of that which he is to compell men to do , to judge of it , not onely judicio appreh●…nsivo , by understanding and apprehending ●right what it is , but judicio discretivo , by the judgement of Christian prudence and discretion , examining by the Word of God , the grounds , reasons , and warrants of the thing , that he may in Faith , and not doubtingly , adde his authority thereto . In which judging , he doth Iudicare , but not Iudicem agere ; that is , he is Iudex suarum actionum , he judgeth whether he ought to adde his civil authority to this or that which seemeth good to Church-officers , and doth not concur therewith , except he be satisfied in his Conscience that he may do so ; yet this makes him not supreme Judge or Governour in all Ecclesiastical causes , which is the Prerogative of Jesus Christ , revealing his will in his word : nor yet doth it invest the Magistrate with the subordinate ministeriall forensicall directive judgement in Ecclesiastical things or causes , which belongeth to Ecclesiasticall not to civil Courts . 4. Distinguish between a Cumulative and a Privativ●… authority . The Mag●strate hath indeed an authoritative influence into matters of Religion and Church-Government ; but it is cumulative , that is , the Magistrate takes care that Church-officers as well as other Subjects may do those things which ex officio they are bound to do ; and when they do so , he aideth , assisteth , strengtheneth , ratifieth , and in his way , maketh effectuall what they do . But that which belongs to the Magistrate is not privative , in reference to the Ecclesiastical Government . It is understood salvo jure Ecclesiastico : for the Magistrate is a nursing Father , not a step . Father to the Church : and the Magistrate ( as well as other men ) is under that tye ; 2 Cor. 13. 8. We can do nothing against the Truth , but for the Truth . This Proviso therefore is justly made , that whatever power the Magistrate hath in matters of Religion , it is not to hinder the free exercise of Church discipline and censures against scandalous and obstinate sinners . As the Casuists in other cases distinguish Lucrum cessans , and damnum emergens , so must we distinguish between the Magistrate his doing no good to the Church , and his doing evil to the Church : between his not assisting , and his opposing : between his not allowing or authorizing , and his forbidding or restraining . It doth properly and of right belong to the Magistrate to adde a civil sanction and strength of a law for strengthning and aiding the exercise of Church discipline , or not to add it . And himself is Judge whether to add any such cumulative act of favour or not . But the Magistrate hath no power nor authority to lay bands and restraints upon Church-officers to hinder any of Christs ordinances , or to forbid them to do what Christ hath given them a commission to do . And if any such restraints of prohibitions or lawes should be laid on us , we ought to obey God rather than men . 5. Distingue tempora . Whatever belongs to the Magistrate in matters of Religion , more then falls under the former distinctions , is extraordinary , and doth not belong to ordinary Government . In extraordinary reformations the Magistrate may do much by his owne immediate authority , when Synods have made defection either from the truth of doctrine , or from holinesse and godlinesse : yet in such a case he ought to consult with such orthodox godly Divines as can be had , either in his owne or from other Dominions . Fest. Hon. Disp. 30. Thes. 5. And so much be spoken of the Magistrate his power and duty in things and causes Ecclesiasticall . As we do not deny to the Magistrate any thing which the Word of God doth allow him , so we dare not approve his going beyond the bounds and limits which God hath set him . And I pray God that this be not found to be the bottome of the controversie , Whether Magistracy shall be an arbitrary Government ; if not in civil , yet in Ecclesiastical things ? Whether the Magistrate may do , or appoint to be done in the matter of Church-Government , admission to , or exclusion from the Ordinances of Christ , what ever shall seem good in his eyes ? And whether in purging of the Church he is obliged to follow the rules of Scripture , and to consult with learned and godly Ministers ? although Erastus himself ( as is before observed ) and Sutlivius ( a great follower of him ) de Presbyt . cap. 8. are ashamed of , and do disclaim such assertions . CHAP. IX . That by the Word of God there ought to be another Government beside Magistracy ●r Civil Goveram●nt , ●amely an Ecclesiastical Government ( properly so call●d ) in the hands of Church-offic●rs . THis Question hath arisen from Mr. Colemans third and fourth rule which he offered to the Parliament , excluding all Government of Church-officers , Ministers and Elders ; that is , as he expounds himself all corrective government , leaving them no power except what is meerly doctrinal , and appropriating all government properly so called to the Magistrate onely . Mr. Hussey following him falls in the same ditch with him . The Question is not whether Church-officers ought to have any share in the Civil Government ? Nor whether Church-officers may have any Lordly government or imperious domination over the Lords heritage ? Nor whether Church-Officers may exercise an arbitrary irregular Government , and rule as themselves list ? God forbid . But the Question plainly is , Whether there may not , yea ought not to be in the Church a Ministeriall or Ecclesiastical Government properly so called , beside the civil Government or Magistracy . Mr. Coleman did , and Mr. Hussey doth hold there ought not . I hold there ought : and I shall propound for the affirmative these Arguments . The first Argument I draw from 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Elders that rule well . Mr. Hussey pag. 8. askes whether the word Elder be prima , or secunda notio . If prima notio , why must not Elder women be Church-officers as well as Elder men ? If secunda notio for a ruling Officer , Parliament men , Kings and all Civil Governours are such Elders . I know no use which that distinction of prima and secunda notio hath in this place , except to let us know that he understands these Logicall termes . Egregiam vero laudem . He might have saved himself the labour , for who knowes not Hieromes distinction ? Elder is either a word of age or of office : but in Ecclesiasticall use it is a word of office . Mr. Husseys first notion concerning Elder women is no masculine notion . His second notion is an anti-parliamentary notion . For the honourable Houses of Parliament in the first words of their Ordinance concerning ordination of Ministers have declared , that by the word of God a Bishop and a Presbyter or Elder are all one ; for thus beginneth the Ordinance , Whereas the word Presbyter , that is to say Elder , and the word Bishop , do in the Scripture intend and signifie one and the same function , &c. Therefore Parliament men and civil Governors cannot be the Elders mentioned by the Apostle Paul , except Mr. Hussey make them Bishops , and invest them with power of ordination . Besides this , if Kings and Parliament men be such Elders as are mentioned in this Text , then the Ministers of the Word must have not onely an equall share in Government , but more honour and maintenance then Kings and Parliament men . See how well Mr. Hussey pleadeth for Christian Magistracy : It is also an anti-Scripturall notion , for some of those Elders that ruled well , did labour in the Word and Doctrine , as Paul tells us in the very same place ; these ( sure ) are not civil Governours . Wherefore Mr. Hussey must seek a third notion before he hit the Apostles meaning . It is not hujus loci to debate from this Text the distinction of two sorts of Elders ; though among all the answers which ever I heard or read , Mr. Husseys is the weakest , pag. 11. that by Elders that labour in the Word and Doctrine , are meant those Ministers whose excellencie lies in Doctrine and instruction , and that by Elders that rule , are meant those that give reproof . He contradistinguisheth a reproving minister from a minister labouring in the Word and Doctrine . The very reproof given by a minister will be , ( it seemes ) at last challenged as an act of government . It is as wide from the mark , that he will have the two sorts of Elders to differ thus , that the one must governe and not preach , the other must preach and not govern ; not observing that the Text makes ruling to be common to both . The one doth both rule and labour in the Word and Doctrine : The other ruleth one y , and is therefore called ruling Elder , non quia solus praeest , sed quia solum praeest . But to let all these things be laid aside as heterogeneous to this present Argument : the point is , here are Rulers in the Church who are no civil Rulers . Yea this my Argument from this Text was clearly yeelded by Mr. Coleman in his Maledicis pag. 8. But I will deal clearly saith he , these Officers are Ministers , which are instituted not here , but else-where ; and those are the Rulers here mentioned . Ergo , he yeeldeth Ecclesiastical rulers ( and those instituted ) distinct from Magistracy . Neither is it a Lordly but a ministeriall ruling of which our Question is . For my part saith Mr. Hussey , I know not how Lordship and Government doth differ one from another . Then every Governour of a ship must be a lord . Then every Steward of a great house must be lord of the House . There is an oeconomicall or ministerial government , and of that we mean. My second Argument I take from 1 Thes. 5. 12. And we beseech you brethren to know them which labour among you , and are over you in the Lord , and admonish you . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , qui praesunt vobis . Hence doth Calvin conclude e a Church Government distinct from civil government , for this is a spirituall Government , it is in the Lord , that is in the name of the Lord , or ( as others ) in things pertaining to God. Hence also Beza argueth against Episcopall Government ; because the Elders in the Apostolique Churches did govern in common . But saith Mr. Hussey pag. 18. Pasor telleth us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a genitive case signifieth praecedo , and then it signifieth no more but them that go before you , either by Doctrine or example . I answer first to the matter , next to the force of the Word . For the matter , certainly the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or ruling power of ministers , is not meerly doctrinall or perswasive , as is manifest by 1 Tim. 5. 17. where those who are not convinced of two sorts of Elders , are yet fully convinced of two sorts of acts , the act of ruling , and the act of teaching . Whatsoever that Text hath more in it , or hath not , this it hath , that those who labour in the Word and Doctrine , are Rulers ; but they are more especially to be honoured for their labouring in the Word and Doctrine . Next , as to the force of the Word , if it be true which Mr. Hussey here saith , then the English Translators that read are over you ; Calvin , Beza , Bullinger , Gualther , and others that here follow Hierome , and read praesunt vobis ; Arias Montanus who reads praesidentes vobis , have not well understood the Greek . But if Mr. Hussey would needs correct all these and many more , Why did he not at least produce some instances to shew us where the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , are used for no more , but a meer going before , either by doctrine or example , without any power or authority of Government . Yea if this here be no more but a going before either by Doctrine or example , then every good Christian who goeth before others by good example is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Neither will that of the genitive case help him , for see the like 1 Tim. 3. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , one that ruleth well his owne house , Mr. Hussey will make it no more but this , one that goeth before his owne house , by teaching them , or by giving them good example , though the very next words tell us there is more in it , and that is authoritative government , having his children in subjection . So vers . 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ruling their children well . Pasor is not at all against my sence , but for it : for if Mr. Hussey will make Pasor to say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a genitive doth never signifie any more but praecedo , then he makes him to say both that which is manifestly false , and in so saying to contradict himself , for Pasor tells us also , the word signifieth praesum , and for that he cites 1 Tim. 3. 4. where it is with a genitive . Sometime indeed with a genitive it may be turned praecedo , as Pasor saith , but he citeth onely Tit. 3. 8. where it is not Genitivus personae ( as 1 Thes. 5. but rei ; and we may also read praestare , as A. Montanus to excell or be chief in good works , or to maintain , as our books have it . But furthermore I shall offer for answer to Mr. Hussey the observation of an excellent Grecian . It is f Salmasius de primatu Papae , pag. 18 , 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to speak properly , is another thing then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : the former signifieth a power of jurisdiction and government : the latter a precedence or placing of one before another : although they are sometimes used promiscuously , and although 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Yea they have the very names of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( if you look to the native Etymologie of the words ) from their precedence or standing before , even as Antistites quasi ante stantes , and praetor quasi praeitor : such names being chosen ( for mollifying and dulcifying of Government ) as might hold forth precedence , rather then high sounding names of power and authority . I shall adde but two testimonies of ancient Grecians : Plato Epist. 7. near the end : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Or if he that ruleth some great City , and such as hath the dominion over many smaller Cities , should unjustly distribute to his owne City the means and substance of those lesser Cities . Dionysius Areopagita Epist. 8. speaking of Moses his supreme power of rule and government over Israel , which was envyed by Korah and his faction , calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Well : Mr. Hussey will try if his Logick can help him , if his Greek cannot . Whatsoever this person is that is to be beloved , ho is supposed not instituted in this place , the subject is supposed not handled in any Science . The like he saith afterward pag. 22. that we cannot prove from 1 Cor. 5. that Paul did institute excommunication , but at most that he supposed an Institution . For my part , that Scripture which supposeth an Institution , shall to me prove an Institution ; for I am sure that which any Scripture supposeth , must be true . And herein as I take it , Mr. Coleman would have said as I say , for in his fourth rule he proved the Institution of Magistracy from Rom. 13. yec Magistracy is not instituted in that place , but supposed to be instituted . A third Argument I take from Hebr. 13 7. Remember them which have the rule over you , who have spoken unto you the Word of God : Vers. 17. Obey them that have the rule over you , and submit your selves : for they watch for your soules , as they that must give an account . Bullinger and Gualther referre this 17th . verse both to Magistracy and Ministery , and so far they are ours , in sharing the rule and government between both , and in making obedience due to both . But Calvin and many others doe better expound the Text of Ecclesiasticall Rulers or Governours onel : wherein Salmasius followeth the Greek Scholiasts , who expound the Text of Bishops or Elders who did in common govern the Church . See Walo Messal . pag. 137. 138. That it is not spoken of civil but of Ecclesiastical rulers , may thus appear : beside that it were hard to take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the 17 th . verse in another sence then it hath verse 7. or the Rulers that watch for the soule , vers . 17. to be any other , then the rulers that had spoken the Word of God , vers . 7. it is further to be noted that the Apostle speaks of such Rulers as the beleeving Hebrewes had at that time , as is evident by vers . 24. Salute all them g that have the rule over you , and all the Saints , and those Rulers did watch for their soules . But they had no Christian or godly Magistrates that watched for their soules , or whom the Apostle would thus salute with the Saints . But the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Mr. Hussey pag. 18. which is ducum , them that lead you . The Apostle hath indeed chosen a word free of ambition , yet saith Beza , auctoritatis maximae , it is a word of the greatest authority . The Syriack hath the same word here , by which he rendreth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 1 Cor. 12. 28. And if you consult the Septuagints , the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 except very rarely where it signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seu viae ducem ( and then , to speak properly , subjection and obedience is not due to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) as Exod. 23. 23. where yet it was an Angel that was the guide , and so not without authority : they do usually and in innumerable places use this word to expresse one invested with power and authority of Government ; and the same Hebrew words which they render by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , are likewise by by them translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; all which are names of superiority , command , and government : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Governour , is Pilates highest Title , Matth. 27. 2. And Erastus , lib. 5. cap. 2. pag. 312 , saith , The Magistrates of the Gentiles were called by the names of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the same in signification . Stephen in Theslinguae Gr. citeth out of Plutarch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and tells us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a Genitive , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , generally is used for praesum . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Iosephs greatest Title , to expresse his government over Egypt , Acts 7. 10. yea , Christ himself is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to expresse his governing or ruling power over his Church , Matth. 2. 6. Salmasius doth at once shew us , both that the Apostle means the Elders of the Church under the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and that the same name is used for civil Magistrates , yea Emperours . See Walo Messal . pag. 219 , 220. Far be it from all the Ministers of Christ , to arrogate or assume any such dominion as belongs to the civil Magistrate , or to lord it over the Lords Inheritance . Nay , here that rule must take place , Luke 22. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he that is chief , as he that serveth . Onely the holy Ghost gives to Church-officers those names of authority which are given to civil Magistrates , thereby to teach the people of God their duty , and that there is another Government beside the civil , whereunto they ought to submit and obey in the Lord. Master Husseys next answer is , that where our Books have it Obey them that have the rule over you , the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is no more but Be perswaded . For proof whereof , he tells us out of Pasor , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is verbum foreuse , a word whereby the Advocates perswade the Judges : yet we cannot say that the Judges obey the Advocates . I answer : Let him make of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what he can ; the passive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , doth frequently signisie I obey , or obtemper : For which signification , H. Stephanus in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , citeth out of Xenophon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : out of Plutaroh , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : out of Plato , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . If we come to the Scripture phrase , I am sure in some places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a thing of another nature , then to be perswaded forensically , as Iam. 3. 3 , Behold , we put bits in the horses mouthes , that they may obey us : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But here when we speak of the obedience of Church-members to Church-officers , it is a free , rational , willing , Christian obedience ; yet obedience it is which we owe to Spiritual Rulers , as well as that which we owe to civil Magistrates . Sure Gualther and Bullinger did understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here to be more then be perswaded ; for they apply this Text to the obedience due to Magistrates . And M. Hussey might have also observed that Pasor renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by pareo , obedio ; for which he citeth Gal. 3. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not to obey the truth . And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he renders inobediens , refractarius , as Rom. 1. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , disobedient to parents . I know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is also used for to be perswaded ; but I verily believe M. Hussey is the first man that ever quarrelled the word obey in this Text , and turned it to be no more but be perswaded . Yet if he shall well observe that which followeth in the very next words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and submit your selves ( which in Theodorets opinion noteth here intense obedience : They must not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , yeeld , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , yeeld with subjection and submission : This relateth to authority ; nor can we say that the Judges do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Advocates , nor travellers to their guides ) he himself shall be perswaded to cast away this glosse , and to seek a better . And if he will stand to it , he shall but do a disservice to Magistracy , whiles he would weaken the power of the Ministery : for though there be much in the New Testament concerning subjection or submission to Magistrates ; yet the clearest , fullest , yea ( to my remembrance ) the onely expresse word for obedience to Magistrates is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is rightly translated in our Books to obey Magistrates : but Master Hussey will make it no more , but to be perswaded by Magistrates . Yea , the very simple and uncompounded Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ in the fore-cited passages of Xenophon and Plutarch is used where they speak of obedience to Magistrates and masters . If this must fail him , he hath yet another answer : Let the word stand , saith he , as it is translated obey ; yet it is not alway correlative to the command of a Superiour : and the holy Ghost requireth obedience here , not by an argument from the authority of him that leadeth them , but from the benefit that cometh to themselves ; for that is unprofitable for you . He divideth what the Apostle joyneth ; for there are two sorts of Arguments in the Text , by which the Apostle perswadeth them to this obedience : one is taken from the authority of the Ministery , which is intimated both by that name of authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and by their subordination or submission which the Apostle calls for : another from the benefit that cometh to themselves , by their obedience , and the hurt which they shall do to themselves by their disobedience . Both these Arguments are wrapt up in these words , For they watch for your souls , which is the very same with that Acts 20. 28. To all the flock over the which the holy Ghost hath made you overseers . The Apostle doth also perswade Christians to be subject to the Magistrate , by an Argument taken from the benefit that cometh to themselves , Rom. 13. 4. For he is the Minister of God to thee for good : yet that doth not weaken but rather strengthen the Authority of the Magistrate . The fourth Argument shall be taken from 1 Tim. 5. 19. Against an Elder receive not an accusation , but before ( or under ) two or three witnesses . Which is not a temporary charge laid upon Timothy as an Evangelist , and so incompetent to ordinary Ministers : for it is joyned with the rules of publike Rebuking , of laying on of hands , not partaking of other mens sins , and such like things which are of ordinary concernment . He is also charged to keep the Commandment till the appearing of Christ , 1 Tim. 5. 14 , which cannot be otherwise understood then as spoken to him in reference to the Ministery . Now what is an act of Government , if this be not , to receive accusations , and that against Elders , and that under two or three witnesses ? The Apostle intendeth here the avoiding of these two evils ; first , upon the one hand , because veritas odium parit , and Elders doing their duty faithfully , will certainly be hated , and slandered , and evil spoken of by some , that therefore every Diotrephes pratling against a servant of Christ with malicious words , may not be able to blast his Christian reputation and good name : Next , upon the other part , because the offences and scandals of Elders are not to be connived at , but to be aggravated and censured , more then the offences of others , that therefore an accusation be received against them , if it be under two or three witnesses . Now where accusations ought to be received , and that under two or three witnesses , and not otherwise ( with special charge also to observe these things , without partiality , or preferring one before another , vers . 21. ) there is certainly a forensical proceeding , and a corrective Jurisdiction or Government . More of this Argument in Malè audis , pag. 14. Fifthly , what is that else but a corrective Jurisdiction , Tit. 3. 10. A man that is an heretick , after the first and second admonition , reject , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He speaks of a rejecting of persons , not of things onely ; and of such a rejecting of persons , as cannot be understood onely of that avoiding or rejecting , by which every private Christian ought to observe , and avoid , and not receive false Teachers , but of a publike Ministerial or Consistorial rejecting of an Heretick , by cutting him off , or casting him out of the Church . It is a Canon de Judiciis Ecclesiasticis , saith Tossanus upon the the place . This the Greek will easily admit : for Stephanus in Thesauro linguae Gr. tells us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for recuse , aversor , repudio ; and citeth out of Plutarch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to repudiate or put away a wife . As here also we may read , A man that is an Heretick , after the first and second admonition , repudiate or put away ; though the word reject doth also bear the same sence . And as the Greek will admit it , so I have these reasons to confirm it , which shall suffice for the present . ( He that pleaseth , may read a large Discourse concerning the censure of Hereticks , in Claudius Espencaeus upon this place . ) First , The Apostles scope is not to hold forth the common duties of all Christians , except ex consequenti : but his primary intention all along in that Epistle , is to instruct Titus concerning the ordering and governing of the Church , Chap. 1. vers . 5. Secondly , there must be a first and second admonition , before the Heretick be thus rejected . This rejecting is not for his dangerous and false Doctrine , simply or by it self considered , but for his contumacy and incorrigiblenesse . But private Christians ought to observe by the judgement of private discretion , and ought in prudence and caution to avoid all familiar fellowship and conversation with a man that is an Heretick , though he hath not yet gotten a first and second admonition : Matth. 7. 15 , 16. Beware of false Prophets which come to you in ●…eeps clothing , but inwardly they are ravening Wolves . Ye shall know them by their fruits . Thirdly , the admonition in the Text is a publike authoritative or ministerial admonition , after that thou ( Titus ) hast once and again admonished him saith the Syriack : therefore the rejecting must also be publick and ministerial . Fourthly , h This rejecting of an Heretick is the last act , when he appears incorrigible . We find before chap. 1. vers . 13. Rebuke them sharply ; and chap. 2. vers . 15. Rebuke with all authority . But now when the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reject , this is a higher degree . and this ( much more ) must be with all authority , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which words compare with 1 Cor. 7. 25. where the Apostle opposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , commandement , and opinion or judgement . From all which it will appear , that this rejecting of an Heretick by Titus and others joyned with him in the Government of the Church , was an authoritative and Juridical act , and the judgement thereupon decisive , not consultative onely . Fifthly , Look by what authority Elders were ordained , by the same authority they were for heresie ( maintained with contumacy ) rejected : for the Apostle committeth into the same hands , the ordaining of Elders , and the rejecting of Hereticks ; compare Tit. 3. 10. with Tit. 1. 5. Now the ordination was by the Presbyterie : 1 Tim. 4. 14. Therefore so was the rejection . I conclude with the Dutch Annotations upon Tit. 3. 10. reject . i. e. Have no communion with him . Let him go without disputing any further with him , and casting the holy things before such dogs . Matth. 7. 6. Let him not remain in the outward communion of the Church . The sixth Argument I draw from 1 Cor. 5. 12. Do not ye judge them that are within ? Vers. 13. Therefore put away from among your selves that wicked person . 2 Cor. 2. 6. Sufficient to such a man is this punishment ( or censure . ) which was inflicted of many . Here is an Ecclesiastical judging , not by the judgement of private Christian discretion onely ( for so they judged those also that were without ) but an authoritative corrective Judgement , by which a scandalous brother , a rotten member , like to infect other members , is put away from among the people of God. And this Judgement was made , sentence given , and censure inflicted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by many , that is not by all , but by the Elders of that Church saith Walaeus , Tom. 1. pag. 468 , or you may read by the chiefest ; So Piscator and Heinsius upon the place . The sence is all one , as if the Apostle had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by them that have the rule over you . Now what will you make of judging , putting away , and censuring , being acts neither of a civil power , nor put forth upon any except Church-members , if you make it not a corrective Church-government ? As for Mr. Colemans answer that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amounts to no more but an objurgation , I have fully confuted that in Male audis pag. 12. 13. 14. which I will not resume . But beside all I said there , I add somewhat which I have since observed . Zonaras in Conc. Antioch . can . 22. useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for to be punished or censured : and in Conc. Carthag . can . 49. he calls the man who is under Church-censure , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Balsamon in Conc. Carthag . can . 46. calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Both of them do often use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Church-censure , as in the place last cited , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Yea the Councell of Antioch held under Constantius , useth Pauls word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to expresse Ecclesiasticall censure , and an act of corrective government . Can. 3. It is said of him that receiveth a Presbyter or Deacon being justly deposed , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ille quoque à communi Synodo puniatur , ut qui Ecclesiastica statuta dissolvat . Ibid. Can. 22. A Bishop is prohibit to ordain within the charge of another Bishop , unlesse that other Bishop consent . But if any presume to do such a thing , let the ordination be void or null , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , & ipse a Synodo puniatur , and let himself be punished by the Synod : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Balsamen , how they should be punished who ordain without the bounds of their owne charge , and without consent of him whose charge it is , may be learned from other Canons . Where you see he understands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to agree in signification with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is punishment . The sixth general Councel Can. 60. useth the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for suffering punishment , adding also by way of explanation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to be subject to afflictions and labours . Seventhly , We have an Argument from 1 Cor. 14. 32 , 33. And the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets ; for God is not the Author of confusion , but of peace , as in all Churches of the Saints . The Apostle is giving such rules and directions concerning prophecying or interpretation of Scripture , that upon the one hand there may be a liberty to all the Prophets to prophecy , and that the Church may be edified by the gifts of all , and that for that end one ought to give place to another : upon the other hand , that a boundlesse liberty and confusion , and immunity from censure , may not be introduced into the Church ▪ To this latter branch belongs vers . 29. 32. 33. Let the Prophets speak two or three , and let the other judge . He will have two , or at most three Prophets to speak in one Congregation , at one diet or time of assembling : and those Prophets , saith he , must be i examined , judged , and censured by the other Prophets : for the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets , that is , every particular Prophet distributively , is subject to all the Prophets collectively , or to the colledge of Prophets ( add , and of other spirituall persons intrusted with the government of the Church , together with the Prophets , as from vers . 37. and Gal. 6. 1. is well observed by our Country-man Mr. Dickson upon this place ) . Therefore Walaeus Tom. 1 pag. 468. doth rightly collect from this place an authority of Church-Government . Protestant Writers prove hence the authority of General-Councels above the Pope : and that the Pope is a false Prophet , because he refuseth to be subject to the Prophets . Iunius in divers places , applieth this Text to the authority of Presbyteries and Synods . Gualther upon the place applyeth it against the Pope who will judge all men , and be judged of no man ; whereas ( saith he ) the Apostle here will have no man how eminent soever , to be free from censure , when he is censurable . So then we have in this Text a subjection , and an authority of judging and censuring . And this Judgement which the Apostle here speaks of , is neither the Judgement of the civil Magistrate , nor the Judgement of discretion common to the whole Church , but it is the Judgement or censure of Prophets , and that not School-wise according to Mr. Husseys notion of Schooles , that is by the Prophets disputing a man out of his error , and no more , no vote , no decision , no result , except he that hath taught an error do agree to the arguments of the other Prophets , and so all end in a brotherly accord , and in the unanimous consent of the whole Clergy ( for so doth he advise the Parliament ) so that he shall be no more subject to all the Prophets , then all the Prophets to him . Yea in Mr. Husseys sence the Pope will not refuse to be subject to a Councel of Prophets , and then Protestant Writers have been far out of their way , who have disputed against the Pope from this Text , supposing it to hold forth a binding authoritative Judgement of the Prophets , whereunto any one Prophet is bound to be subject , the Judgement of his private discretion being alwaies reserved to him , that he give not blind obedience . Eighthly , I argue from Revel . 2. 14. 20. The Lord Jesus reproveth the Angel of the Church in Pergamus for suffering those that taught the doctrine of Balaam , and the Angel of the Church in Thyatira for suffering Iezebel which called her self a Prophetesse , to seduce his people . The fault here reproved must be the neglect of Church-censures and corrective government , which is so manifest , that they who plead most for liberty of Conscience from the Magistrate , do acknowledge that the Angels of these Churches are reproved for not censuring Ecclesiastically those that did thus seduce Gods people . Neither is it said because thou art silent and dost not reprove nor convince ; but because thou hast there them that hold the Doctrine of Balaam : that is , because thou dost not cast them out of the Church , that they may not hurt others . So the English Annotations upon the place , referring us also to 1 Cor. 5. The Angel of the Church was guilty in this , that those who had so much scandalized the Church by their Doctrine , were still in the Church , and not yet cast out of the Church . And who can imagine that the Angels of those Churches whom Christ himself commendeth for holding fast his name , and for their love , service , faith , and patience were so void either of prudence as not to observe , or of zeal , as not to gainsay and confute by sound doctrine those soul and scandalous errors ? Certainly their sin was like that of Eli , they did not together with the doctrinal and monitory part , make use of that Jurisdiction and corrective power , which God had put in their hands . Ninthly , We have another Argument from 1 Thess. 3. 14. And if any man obey not our word by this Epistle , note that man , and have no Company with him , that he may be ashamed . Here the Syriack helpeth us much . And if any man obey not these words which are contained in this Epistle , let that man be separated from you , neither have company with him , that he may be ashamed . Gualther upon the place saith , the Apostle speaks de disciplina Ecclesiastica , what discipline they ought to have in the Church , and the end thereof . So Calvin , Beza , Piscator , Zanchius , Diodati , The Dutch Annotations , Gomarus , also Mariana , Cajetan , Salmeron , Gorranus , Esthius in lib. 4. Sent. Dist. 19. Sect. 7. and diverse others following Augustine , Ambrose , Chrysostome , Theophylact , Theodoret , Aquinas , all these do apply it to Ecclesiasticall discipline and censure . Some controversie there is whether this Text reach as far as Excommunication ( which doth not belong to this present Argument ) but certainly it reacheth to a publick Church-censure , and is more then the withdrawing of private Company and Fellowship , either because of personal or private injuries , or because of prophanesse . For 1. the offence spoken of by the Apostle is not a matter of Civil or Personal injury , but of scandal ; he speaks of idle bodies that walked disorderly , not working at all , and if these must be noted and separated , how much more saith Theoylact . those who commit crimes and wickednesse ? 2. Here is contumacy added to the offence , if any man obey not our word by this Epistle , intimating that upon occasion of this Epistle , those that walked disorderly were to be solemnly admonished , and required to work in quietnesse , and to eat their owne bread : which if after admonition they would not do , then to note them . Aquinas clears it by 1 Sam. 15. 23 - for rebellion is as the sin of witck-craft , and stubbornesse is as iniquity and as idolatry . 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , note that man : signate ( as Menochius rendreth it ) rather then either significate or notate : set a mark upon him , even as ( saith Erasmus ) we set a mark upon pushing oxen that we may avoid them ; which agreeth well with the Syriack , Let that man be separated from you : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is some what more then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The latter usually signifieth no more , but significo , indico , signum do : but the former is signum & notam imprimo , obsigno , insignio . The Septuagints make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to answer to the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , levavit , elevavit , sustulit , So Psal. 4. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. signatum est super nos : that is , the light of thy c untenance is lifted up upon us examplarly , or banner-wise , so as it may be remarkeable to others . The learned Authors of the Dutch Annotations upon 2 Thess. 3. 14. tell us that this Greek word doth not properly signifie to present or represent one , but to note one and mark him out , putting some ignominy upon him , or outing him from an honourable Congregation , and marking or blotting out his name , as one unworthy of that honour . By which reason , as likewise by that which followes , they confute those who construe the word note with the Word Epistle , as if the Apostle had said , note or present me such a one by a letter . 4. Have no company with him . He speaks it to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they may have no fellowship with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he will have those that walk orderly and by rule , to have no company with those that walk disorderly . Now this concerneth the whole Church equally , and it is spoken to the Church , for what reason can there be that some in the Church should have no company with one , because of his scandalous and disorderly walking , but the same reason will make the whole Church to have no company with him ? there may be divers civil respects and considerations which may make it unfit for some to keep familiar civil fellowship , which respects and considerations do not concern others . But the avoyding of the company of those who walk scandalously and disorderly , and that because they walk in that manner , and further adde obstinacy to their sin after publike admonition ; must needs belong to the whole Church . 5. Note that man and have no company with him ; he must first be noted , before he be avoyded , and both these are publick Ecclesiastical acts : for it was far from the Apostles meaning that every man should be herein left to his liberty ; he that pleaseth to note him and have no company with him , well and good ; he that pleaseth not , shall be free . But unlesse there be an Ecclesiastical Judgement and censure past upon such a one , every one had been left to his liberty . 6. That he may be ashamed : this as it is the end of Church-censures , so it will be attained in a very small measure , and perhaps not at all , by one private man his avoyding the company of another , which will not make the offender ashamed , abased , and humbled , but when he is publikely noted , and when the Church avoids his Company , that is it which most covers a man with shame and confusion of face . Tenthly , The Apostle mentioneth Ecclesiastical Rulers , Rom. 12. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praefectus , or qui praeest , he that ruleth , that is , the ruling Elder . He is making an enumeration of Ecclesiastical offices and administrations , and no other : So Calvin , Beza , Piscator , Martyr , Tossanus , Diodati , all upon the place , and Iunius Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 1. do conceive , and the whole context and the allusion to the severall offices of severall members in the same body proveth it , and if all the rest be Ecclesiastical , why not k the office of ruling also , which is there mentioned ? for how should civil ruling come in among the Ecclesiastical administrations , especially in those dayes when Magistrates were not Christian ? Musculus takes the Rulers here to be Elders . Gualther and Bullinger , though they make this Text applicable to civil Rulers , yet they do not exclude Church-officers from ruling , but expressely mention Church-Governours distinct from civil Governours , to be there comprehended under 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Mr. Hussey pag. 19. answering this argument , can neither deny what I said of Gualther and Bullinger , nor yet doth affirm that civil Rulers are there meant , onely his reply is that my argument is drawn from the interpretation of the place , but the Disputant may not interpret saith he , that is the answerers part : This calls to mind the Anabaptistical error , Concionatores non retinent verba Textus , sed interpretantur ea , id quod non ferendum . For which see Petrus Hi●…kolmannus de Anabaptism●… , Disp. 9. cap. 1. My Argument was drawn from the Text , for the Text rightly understood and interpreted ; is the Text. But see now what strange rules you may exspect when Mr. Hussey comes to School-disputes , the disputant may not interpret , he must keep close to termes , if the thing be not in terminis in the Text , it s no Argum●nt , by which rule he will at one dash overthrow not onely the disputations of Protestants against Papists ; of the ancient Fathers against the Hereticks of their times ( for how is Justification by Faith ONELY , the number of the Sacraments , the consubstantiality of the Sonne with the Father , and many other most materiall points proved , but by Scripture rightly opened , cleared , and interpreted ? ) but also the disputations of the Apostles , and of Jesus Christ himself against the Pharisees , Sadduces , and Jewes ; for there is nothing more ordinary with Christ and his Apostles in their disputes for the truth , then to interpret Scripture , and give the sence of it . Eleventhly , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Governments mentioned 1 Cor. 12. 28. are not Civil but Ecclesiastical Governments , as I have largely proved Chap. 6. and shall not need here to repeat it ; onely observe what l Bullinger saith on the place : whereunto add the Testimony of Hugo Grotius ( whom I suppose our opposites do not look upon as an adversary ) on Luke 12. 14. He acknowledgeth that in the Church of Corinth , censura morum was penes Presbyterium , the censure of mens manners , was in the power of the Presbytery . This Government the Church of Corinth had , a Christian Magistrate they had not . Twelfthly , If in the Jewish Church there was an Ecclesiastical Government , distinct from the Civil ; then in the Christian Church also there ought to be an Ecclesiastical Government distinct from the Civil . But in the Jewish Church there was an Ecclesiastical Government distinct from the Civil . Ergo. The Proposition is proved thus . There can be no reason given for an Ecclesiastical government among the Jews , distinct from the Civil , which will not hold as well and as strongly for an Ecclesiastical government among Christians , distinct from the Civil : for we speak not now of the particulars ( a high Priest , or the like ) which were typical and proper to that time , but we speak of a Church government distinct from the Civil , look upon it under that notion , and then see if any reason can be given for it among them , which will not conclude the like among us : yea much more among us , for if the Priests had a great influence and interest into the Civil Government of the Jewes , and yet there was a Church-government distinct from the Civil ; how much more now when Ministers have not , neither ought to have any share in the Civil government ? The assumption hath been abundantly proved before in the first book . I will not repeat , but here note these Scriptures : Ier. 5. 31. The Prophets bear rule : It was their office to bear rule , It was their sin to support themselves in their ruling by the false Prophets . 1 Chron. 9 11. Azariah , the Ruler of the House of God. 2 Chron. 31. 13. And Azariah the Ruler of the House of God. 〈◊〉 . 11. 11. Serajah the Ruler of the House of God. All the chief Pri●sts or heads of the several Classes or Orders of Priests were called Principes Sanctuarii saith Matthias Martinius Lexic . Philol. pag. 3268. So 2. Chron. 35. 8. Hilkiah and Zachariah , and Jehiel , Rulers of the House of God. Act. 23. 5. Then said Paul , I wist not brethren that he was the high Priest , for it is written thou shalt not speak evil of the Ruler of thy people . Finally , Deut. 31. 28. where we find schoterim , that is Officers , Rulers , or such as were set over the charge ; the 70. read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Hierome , Doctores . More plainly 2 Kings 11. 18. the Priest appointed Officers over the House of the Lord. Thirteenthly , A corrective Ecclesiastical government in the Churches of Galatia seemeth to be intimated , Gal. 5. 12. I would they were even cut off ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) which trouble you . Which many understand of Excommunication . See Esthius in lib. 4. Sent. Dist. 19. Sect. 6. 7. Also Salmeron , Menochius , Vasquez , Novarinus , and ( of ours ) B●…za , Diodati , Gomarus , all upon the place , beside diverse others . Musculus upon the place doth paralell this cutting off , with delivering to Sathan , 1 Cor. 5. 5. 1 Tim. 1. 20. and explaineth excindantur by abalienentur which best suteth to excommunication . Certainly the words will easily admit this sence , or rather invite to it : for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not properly perdo , destruo , consumo , but amputo , abscindo , also minuo , because that from which any thing is cut off , is diminished and made lesse : also repello , abjungo , separo , ahstraho . And so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , abscindor , excindor , separor , abstra●…or . Hunters and such as trace the Vestigies , but cannot find them , are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to be cut off or abstracted . H●…sych . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , abscissus , is not he who is cut off by death or destruction , but he that hath his members cut off : Which seems to have been the ground of Augustine his mistake of this Text , conceiving the Apostles wish to be , that those men should be made Eunuchs . The Septuagints have sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , circumcido , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , demitto , as synonymous with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Now from the phrase , to the purpose of the Text. That it is meant of Excommunication , I have these reasons which confirme me : 1. Because vers . 9. a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump , are the very same words which he useth 1 Cor. 5. 6. where he presseth the excommunication of the inces●uous man ; as there , one unclean person in life ; so here , some few seducers ( especially that one who is singularly pointed at vers . 10. ) is meant by the little leaven , which was to be purged out , lest it should leaven the whole Church . 2. Interpreters do generally agree , that the Apostle here alludeth to Circumcision , which those Judaizing teachers pressed upon the Galatians as necessary : wishing that they who would so fain have the Galatians circumcised , were themselves cut off and cast out of the Church as rotten members , or as a Gangren out of the body . This allusion suteth best with excommunication . 3. The words so understood will more fitly answer and be paralel unto the cutting off in the Law , that soul shall be cut off from among his people ( which I have before proved to be meant of excommunication ) as likewise to that 1 Cor. 5. 14. Put away that wicked person from among you . 4. Other Interpretations do not so well agree to the Text. This cutting off could not be expected nor any hopes had of it by the hand of Justice , or of the Magistrate , for the Magistrates of that time were themselves troublers of the Christians , so far they were from cutting of those that troubled them . Those that understand the words of an imprecation of eternal cutting off from God , and being accursed from Christ , draw themselves into thorny questions , wherein they can hardly satisfie themselves or others . To understand it of cutting off by death , doth not well answer that allusion to Circumcision , generally observed ( as hath been said ) by Interpreters : which allusion doth intimate that it is not a cutting off out of the World , but a cutting off from the body of the Church . I would that they themselves were cut off as the praeputium from the Church , that is , cut off à consortio Ecclesiae saith Gu●…lther . If it be said , why then doth the Apostle onely wish it ? Why doth he not prescribe or command to excommunicate them ? To this we may either answer as B●…za , The Apostle Pauls authority at that time was extreamly blasted and weakned in the Churches of Galatia ; Or thus , the Apostle knew that as the Churches of Galatia then stood affected ( being bewitched with the Judaizing Zealots , and in a manner moved away to another Gospel ) both Churches and Ministery were unwilling to excommunicate those that he means of : for which cause he would not peremptorily command their excommunication , renitente Ecclesiâ , but forbeareth for that season , wishing for better times . Some think that the Apostle speaketh positively of excommunication , vers . 10. He shall bear his Judgement . But others are of opinion the Apostle there speaks of the judgement of God , which he certainly and positively denounces , and that vers . 12. he addeth this as a distinct purpose , that he could wish them also cut off from the Church by excommunication . It will be an Argument of more weight against Erastus his Interpretation of that Text , if we object against him thus . This cutting off which the Apostle wisheth to those that troubled the Galatians , cannot be meant of a divine or miraculous judgement upon them , such as he thinks to be meant 1 Cor. 5. ( which place he parallels with Gal. 5. 12. as to the punishment intended ) for if so , why doth not the Apostle adjudge them positively to be cut off or destroyed , as he did constitute and decree by his Apostolical power of miracles ( so thinks Erastus ) the incestuous Corinthian to be delivered to Satan ? To this Erastus replieth , lib. 3. cap. 9 , Because the Apostles had not power to work miracles quoties vellent , as often as they would , nor to afflictor stay any , but when it seemed good in Gods eyes , sed quando Deo visum fuit utile , necessarium , & salutare . But I ask , Was it right and agreeable to the will of God , that the Apostle should wish their cutting off ? Was it not profitable and necessary for the Churches good , that they should be cut off ? Where shall we finde that the working of a miracle was profitable and necessary for the Churches good , and that an Apostle did desire and thirst after the working of that miracle , and yet had not power from God to work it ? How had the false Apostles insulted at this ? Is this the great Apostle of the Gentiles , who hath not power from God to work a miracle , when himself professeth he would gladly have it wrought ? Fourteenthly , that passage , 2 Cor. 10. 6. is by some brought ( not without very considerable Reasons ) for the Spiritual or Ecclesiastical censures . And have in readin●…sse , saith the Apostle , or ( as the Syriack , we are ready ) to revenge all disobedience , when your obedience is fulfilled . Novarinus in 2 Cor. 10. 6. plerique de excommunicandi potestate haec verba interpretantur . In this sence was the Text understood a thousand yeers ago by Gegro●…y Epist. lib. 2. cap. 37. The Dutch Annotations upon the place , say that the Apostles meaning is ; of declaring the vengeance of God against the obstinate ; and of exercising the Ecclesiastical Banne or Discipline , against those who professing themselves members of the Congregation , do yet teach or lead unchristian lives or doctrine . Others also ( among whom is Master David Dickson ) understand Church-censures to be here meant . The Apostle is in that Chapter confuting the calumny of such as said of him , His Epistles were weighty and powerful , and did speak of great things ; but when he himself is bodily present , he doth but little , he assumes no great authority , he is weak and almost contemptible . In answer hereunto , he tells them , The weapons of our warfare ( speaking not onely in his own name , but in the name of all the Ministers of Christ ) though they be not carnal , yet they are mighty through God to conquer and captivate souls to the obedience of Christ. And as for the stubborn and unruly , we are armed with a power of corrective government , which shall be more fully executed in due time . There is but one of two Interpretations which can with any probability seem to agree to this Text , namely , that it is meant either of the extraordinary Apostolical power , by which they did miraculously punish some offenders ( as Peter did Ananias and Sapphira , and as Paul did E●…ymas ) or of a corrective Church-government , and Excommunication . The Reasons which induce me to believe , that the Apostle meaneth here of Church-censures , especially Excommunication , and not of that extraordinary miraculous power , are these . 1. The reason added , When your obedience is fulfilled , cannot suit to the power of working miracles ( for it had been the more seasonable to work such miracles , while the obedience of the Corinthians was not yet fulfilled . Miracles are not for them that believe , but for them that believe not , saith the same Apostle . ) But it suits very well to the power of Church-censures : for as Esthius and Novarinus explain the Apostles reason , it is in vain to excommunicate all such as are worthy of Excommunication , when there is a general re●itency and unwillingnesse in the Church ; or to cut off a member , when the same evil hath infected either the whole or the greatest part of the body ; which Augustine also tells us in divers places . And this ( by the way ) confirms the reason which I gave why the Apostle onely wisheth those that troubled the Galatians to be cut off , but doth not command it , in regard of the present unwillingnesse and disaffection of those Churches . 2. We may have a great deal of light to this place by comparing it with Cha●… . 12. verse 20 , 21. and Chap. 13. verse 2. Many among the Corinthians had sinned foul and ●eandalous sins , whereof they had not repented , and for which they were not censured or cast out of the Church . The Apostle certifieth them , that if he come , he will not spare . What ? was it his meaning to work a miracle upon every fornicator , and each other scandalous person in the Church of Corinth ? No sure : mark his words ; Now I write to them which heretofore have sinned , and to ALL OTHER , that if I come again , I will not spare . Who can imagine his meaning to be , that he would work a miracle upon them and all other ? So ●ere when it is said , having in readiness●… to 〈◊〉 ALL 〈◊〉 , let it be remembred that the Apostolical power of miracles was never appointed to be executed against ALL disobedience . Thirdly , that which the Apostle saith of the Spiritual weapons , mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds , &c. was not proper or peculiar to the Apostles , but is rightly applied to all the Ministers of the Gospel : the more hardly can it be supposed , that what is immediately added , and as it were with one breath uttered , And having in readinesse to 〈◊〉 all disobedience , is meant of the extraordinary Apostolical power . Fourthly , such as the weapons are for conquering and subduing souls to the obedience of Christ , such is the corrective or punitive part there spoken of . But the weapons for conquering , are meerly Spiritual , not corporal : Therefore the corrective or punitive part there spoken of , is also Spiritual , and so doth not concern the inflicting of corporal punishment , such as the Erastians understand by delivering to Satan . Fifteenthly , an Ecclesiastical ruling power may be proved from 2 Cor. 2. 8. I beseech you that you would confirm your love towards him . Here is a Juridical power of loosing , and consequently of binding ; for it belongeth to the same power to binde and loose , to excommunicate and to absolve . An authoritative juridical loosing , I prove from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which properly signifieth the making a thing sure or firm by a decisive suffrage , authoritative judgement , or ratificatory and obligatory sentence past upon it . Hen. Stephanus in Thes. linguae Gr. in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith that this Text 2 Cor. 2. 8. is more rightly read , Ut ratam faciatis in illum charitatem , then as the vulgar Latin hath it , Ut confirmetis . The Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he expoundeth thus ; Auctoritatem do , auctoritate mea comprobo ; vel ratum habeo , ratum facio . Pasor renders the same Verb sancio , ratum facio , and citeth for that sence , 2 Cor. 2. 6. So Erasmus likewise upon the place . So Cartwright upon the same place against the Rhemists . So Chemnitius Exam. Conc. Trident. part . 4. de Indulg . pag. 53. The force of this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was urged against the opinion of Erastus in a publike Dispute at Heydelberg ; the narration whereof is left by Ursinus in his Catechetical explications . That the word signifieth an authoritative act , and supposeth a ruling power , may be thus further confirmed . First , who did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ? No doubt the Apostle borroweth the word from the language and customs of the Heathen Greeks . Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was a fixed or set lawful Assembly , which met with a judicial ruling power , and ratified a thing by decisive suffrages , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . See Suidas in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Stephanus and Scapula in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Erasmus in 2 Cor. 2. 8. Arias Montanus in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , tells us that to the Graecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the same thing , which Comitia to the Latines : Therefore such Assemblies had a judicial power , and their suffrages were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , firm and ratified Sentences . Secondly , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commeth from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whence also cometh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dominion , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to rule , or to have a dominion : It was long ago observed by Dionysius Areopagita , de divinis nominibus , cap. 12. where after he hath put into the description of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dominion , that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , true and unshaken firmenesse , he addes this reason , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Which Balthasar Corderius rendereth thus : Qu●…propter dominatio Grae●…è à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 derivato nomine , idem est quod firmatio , firmamentum & firmum , ac firmans seu ratificans . Pachimeres in his Paraphrase addeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , hath its name from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So then it is not every confirming , certifying , or making sure a thing , but when a thing is made sure or firm with fulnesse of authority and power . The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is therefore rightly rendred by Stephanus , Scapula and Pasor , not onely firmamentum , rata fides , but auctoritas plena , full authority . Thirdly , the same Apostle calls a ratified Testament ( which ratification is by a legal and judicial authority ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Gal. 3. 15. Fourthly , the opposite Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth anctoritate priv●… , omni imperio spolio , irritum reddo . As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noteth a privation of authority , so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a giving of authority or ratification . The sixteenth Argument to prove a distinct Church-Government , is this . The visible political ministerial Church is the Kingdom of Jesus Christ , and he is the Head , King , Judge , and Law-giver thereof , Isa. 9. 6. Isa. 22. 21 , 22. Psal. 2. 6. Luk. 1. 33. 1 Cor. 15. 24 Eph. 1. 21m 22 , 23. Dare any say that the Lord Jesus shall not governe the Church of England , and reigne over the same ? Luk. 19. 14 27. Must he not be received both as Lord and as Christ ? Acts 2. 36. Now in the administration and government of a Kingdom these three things are necessarily required . 1. Lawes . 2. Officers , Ministers , Judges , Courts . 3. Censures and punishments of offences . Which three being universally necessary in every Kingdom , can 〈◊〉 of all be supposed to be wanting in the Church and Kingdom o● Jesus Christ , who hath been more faithfull in the execution o● his Kingly office , and hath provided better for the Government of his Church , then ever any King or State in this world did for a Civil Government . I adde the Lawes , Judicatories , and censures in the Kingdom of Christ must be spiritual and Becl●siastical , because his Kingdom is not of this world , and his servants cannot take the sword , Iohn 18. 36. Neither are the weapons of our warfarre carnal , but yet mighty through God , and in readinesse to revenge all disobedience : 2 Cor. 10. 4. 6. I do not see what can be answerd to this Argument , except any do so far deny the Kingly office of Jesus Christ , as to say that the Church Political or Ministerial is not his Kingdom ; but onely the Church Mystical ; that is , as he ruleth over our soules by his Word and Spirit . To which purpose Mr. Hussey in his plea pag. 33. denyeth that the visible Church can be called the Body of Christ , or he their Head ; and tells us that the government which Christ hath over the faithful , is truely spiritual , and of this Kingdom faith he , he hath indeed no Officers but his Spirit . I reply , 1. The Scripture is plain that a visible ministeriall Church is the body of Christ , Rom. 12. 4 , 5. 1 Cor. 10. 16. 17. 1 Cor. 12. 12. to 28. If we admit of a visible Church and visible Saints , we must also admit of a visible body , and a visible Kingdom of Christ. 2. The Political Ministerial Church were a body without a head . The Analogie of a political head as well as of a natural head agreeth to Christ : the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : and he hath an influence upon the Church potestative as well as effective . 3. He 〈◊〉 his Prophe●icall office not onely in teaching us inwardly by his Spirit , but in teaching the Church outwardly by his servants the Ministers of his Word : Now i● he be a Prophet to the visible ministerial Church , he is also a King to the same ; for his offices cannot be divided , his Scholars are his Subjects , and whosoever receive him as a Prophet , must also receive him as a King. Yea , let us hear Mr. Hussey himself pag. 17. The Kingdom of Christ is 〈◊〉 ample as his Prophecy , &c. the Doctrine which they must teach commands , no●… commands have alwaies power and authority 〈◊〉 . So that either he must say that Christ gives no commands to the visible Church , or confesse that the visible Church is the visible Kingdom of Christ. 4 That the Kingdom of Christ comprehendeth the Government and discipline of the Church , I prove from Matt●… . ●16 . 28. There be some standing here which shall not tast●… of death till they see the Son of man comming in his Kingdom : Where first of all note , Christ hath not onely an invisible , but a visible Kingdom ; Next , this visible Kingdom is not meant of his comming again in glory to judge the quick and the dead ; for all that were then hearing Christ , have tasted of death , and yet Christ is not come to judgement . Nor is it meant of Christs tranfiguration mentioned Matth. 17. for that was six dayes after , Matth. 17. 1. and if he meant that , he would not have said so emphatically , there be some here that shall not taste of death , &c. intimating what was to come to passe , not after some daies , but after some yeares ; as if he had said this age or generation shall not passe away till these things be fulfilled . Neither is that transfiguration any where called the Kingdom of God , nor can it be properly so called . Nor lastly is the Kingdom of God in that place meant onely of the preaching of the Gospel , for so they had seen Christ comming in his Kingdom . Luk. 10. 9. 11. Nor is it meant of Christs working of miracles , for so likewise they had seen his Kingdom . Matth. 12. 28. Melius ergo Beda & Gregorius , quorum sententiam nostri sequuntur , per illud Regnum Christi intelligunt constitutionem Ecclesiarum , post Christi ascensum , saith Tossanus upon the place . Some of those to whom he spoke at that time lived to see Christ reigne in the gathering and governing of Churches . Gregor .. Hom 32. in Evang. Et quia nonnulli ex discip●…lis usque ad●…o in corpore victuri erant ut Ecclesiam Dei constructam conspiceren●… , & contra mundi hujus glorium erectam , consolatoria promissione nan●… dieitur : Sunt quidam de hinc 〈◊〉 qui non gustabu●…t mortem , donec videant reg●…um Dei. The very same words hath Bed●… on Mark. 9. 1. following ( it seemes ) Gregory . Grotius on Matth. 16. 28. doth likewise understand the promulgation of the Gospel , and the Sc●pter of Christ , that is , his law going out of Zion to be here meant . I conclude , as the Church is not onely a mystical but a political body , So Christ is not onely a mystical but a political Head. But peradventure some men will be bold to give another answer , that the Lord Jesus indeed reigneth over the Church , even in a political respect , but that the administration and influence of this his Kingly office is in , by , and through the Magistrate , who is supreme Judge , Governour , and Head of the Church under Christ. To this I answer , Hence it would follow 1. That Christs Kingdom is of this World , and commeth with observation , as the Kingdoms of this World do , which himself denieth Luke 17 20 Iohn 18 36. Next , It would follow , that Christ doth not reigne nor exercise his Kingly office in the Government of his Church under Pagan , Turkish , or persecuting Princes , but onely under the Christian Magistrate , which no man dare say . 3. The Civil Magistrate is Gods Vicegerent , but not Christs : that is , the Magistrates power hath its rise , orig●nation , institution , and deputation , not from that speciall dominion which Christ exerciseth over the Church as Mediator and Head thereof , But from that Universal Lordship and Soveraignity which God exerciseth over all men by right of Creation : In so much , that there had been ( for orders sake ) Magistrates or superior Powers though man had not fallen , but continued in his innocency ; and now by the Law of Nature and Nations there are Magistrates among those who know nothing of Christ , and among whom Christ reigneth not as Mediator , though God reigneth over them by the Kingdom of power . 4. If the Magistrate be supreme Head and Governour of the Church under Christ , then the Ministers of the Church are the Magistrates Ministers as well as Christs , and must act in the Magistrates name , and as subordinate to him ; and the Magistrate shall be Christs Minister , and act in Christs Name . The seventeeth Argument I draw from the institution of Excommunication by Christ , Matth. 18. 17. Tell it unto the Church : But if he neglect to hear the Church , Let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a Publican . In which Text 1. All is restricted to a brother , or a Church-member , and agreeth not to him who is no Church-member . 2. His tre●pasle is here lookt upon under the notion of scandal , and of that which is also like to destroy his owne soule . 3. The scope is not civil , but spiritual , to gain or save his soul. 4. The proceedings are not without witnesses . 5. There is a publick complaint made to the Church . 6. And that because he appeares impenitent , after admonitions given privatly , and before two or three . 7. The Church speaks and gives a : Judgement concerning him , which he is bound to obey . 8. If he obey not , then he is to be esteemed and held as a heathen man and a Publican . 9. And that for his not hearing the Church , which is a publike scandal concerning the whole Church . 10. Being as as an Heathen and Publican , he is kept back from some ordinances . 11. He is bound on earth by Church-Officers . Whatsoever ye bind , &c. 12. He is also bound in Heaven . More of this place else-where . These hints will now serve . The Erastians deny , that either the case , or the court , or the censure there mentioned is Ecclesiastical or Spiritual . But I prove all the three . First , Christ speaketh of the case of scandals , not of personal or civil injuries , whereof he would be no Judge , Luk. 12. 14. and for which he would not permit Christians to go to Law before the Roman Emperor or his deputies , 1 Cor. 6. 1. 6. 7. But if their interpretation stand , they must grant that Christ giveth laws concerning civil injuries , and that he permitteth one of his disciples to accuse another for a civil injury before an unbeleeving Judge . Beside , Christ saith not , If he shall hear thee , thou hast from him a voluntary reparation of the wrong , or satisfaction for it ( which is the end why we deal with one who hath done us a civil injury ) But he saith , If he shall hear thee , thou hast gained thy brother , intimating that the offending brother is told and admonished of his fault , onely for a spiritual end , for the good of his soul , and for gaining him to repentance . All which proveth that our Saviour meaneth not there of private or civil injuries , as the Erastians suppose , but of scandals , of which also he had spoken much before , as appeareth by the preceding part of that chapter . A civil injury done by one brother to another is a scandal , but every scandal is not a civil injury . The Jewes ( to whose custome Christ doth here allude ) did excommunicate for diverse scandals which were not civil injuries . And Paul saith of a scandal which was not a civil injury : when ye sin so against the brethren . &c. 1 Cor. 8. 12. 2. The court is Ecclesiastical , not civil , for when it is said Tell it unto the Church , must we not expound Scripture by Scripture , and not understand the Word Church to be meant of a civil Court ? for though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used Act. 19. reoitative , of a heathenish civil assembly , called by that name among those heathens : yet the pen-men of the holy Ghost have not made choice of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in any place of the new Testament , to expresse a civil court either of Jewes or Christians . So that we cannot suppose that the holy Ghost speaking so as men may understand him , would have put the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place to signifie such a thing as no where else in the new Testament it is found to signifie . Nay , this very place expoundeth it self , for Christ directeth his speech to the Apostles , and in them to their Successors in the government of the Church . Whatsoever ye shall bind &c. And if two of you shall agree , &c. So that the church which here bindeth or judgeth , is an Assembly of the Apostles , Ministers , or Elders of the church . 3. The censure is spirituall , as appeareth both by these words , Let him be unto thee as a Heathen and a Publican ; which relate to the Excommunication from the church of the Jewes , and comprehendeth not onely an exclusion from private fellowship and company ( which was the condition of the Publicans , with whom the Jewes would not eat ) but also an exclusion from the Temple , Sacrifices , and communion in the holy things , which was the condition of heathens , yea of prophane Publicans too : of which elsewhere . And further it appeareth by these words , Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth , &c. The Apostles had no power to inflict any civil punishment , but they had power to bind the soul , and to retain the sin . Ioh. 20. 23. And this power of binding is not in all the Scripture ascribed to the civil Magistrate . The eighteenth Argument shall be drawn from the example of excommunication , 1 Cor. 5. 4 , 5. The Apostle writeth to the church of Corinth to deliver to Sathan ( for the delivery to Sathan was an act of the church of Corinth , as the Syriack explaineth it ) the incestuous man , which is called a censure inflicted by many 2 Cor. 2. 6. that is , by the whole Presbytery of the Church of Corinth . And whereas some understand by delivering to Sathan , the putting forth of the extraordinary Apostolicall power to the working of a miracle upon the offender , by giving him over into the hands of Sathan , so as to be bodily tormented by him , or to be killed and destroyed ( as Erastus takes it ) I answer 1. It cannot be meant of death , for it is said that Hymeneus and Alexander were delivered to Sathan , and to what end ? that they might learne not to blaspheme , 1 Tim. 1. 20 which had been too late to learn after death , 2. Nor is it at all meant of any miraculous tormenting of the body by the divel , for beside that it is not likely this miracle could have been wrought , Paul himself not being present to work it , it is utterly incredible that the Apostle would have so sharply rebuked the Church of Corinth , for that a miracle was not wrought upon the incestuous man , ( it not being in their power to do : ) or that he would seek the consent of that Church to the working of a miracle , and as a joynt act proceeding from him and the Church by common counsell and deliberation , for where read wee of any miracle wrought that way ? Therefore it is much more safe to understand by delivering to Sathan , ( as Gualther himself doth ) Excommunication , which is a shutting out of a Church-member from the Church , whereby Sathan commeth to get dominion and power over him , for he is the God of this World , who reigneth at his pleasure in and over those who are not the Church and people of God. 2 Cor. 4. 4. Eoh. 2. 2. And if any shall be so far unsatisfied as not to admit this sence which we put upon that phrase of delivering to Sathan ; Yet our Argument for Excommunication drawn from 1 Cor. 5. standeth strong , the weight of it not being laid upon tradere Satanae onely , but upon vers . 6. 7. 11 , 12. compared with 2 Cor. 2. 6. which undeniably prove Excommunication from Church fellowship . The nineteenth Argument shall be drawn from Act. 20. 28. Take heed therefore unto your selves , and to all the flock over the which the holy Ghost hath made you Overseers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , compared with 1 Pet. 5. 2. 3. Feed the flock of God which is among you , taking the oversight thereof : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : Which Texts as they hold forth a Bishop and a Presbyter to be one and the same Iure divino , so they hold forth the ruling power of Presbyters or Elders . First , Because otherwise the simile ( so much made use of in these Scriptures ) of overseeing the flock ( mentioned and joyned together with the feeding thereof ) will fall short in a main and most materiall point : for the overseers of flocks do not onely make them to lye down in green pastures , and lead them beside the still waters , but they have also rodds and staves for ruling the flocks , and for correcting and reducing the wandring sheep , which will not be brought home by the voice of the shepheard , Psal. 23. 2. 4. The Pastorall rod there mentioned by David is corrective : as Clemens Alexandrinus paedag . lib. 1. cap. 7. who doth also paralel it with that 1 Cor. 4. Shall I com● unto you with a rod ? Secondly , Paul requireth the Elders of the Church of Ephesus to take heed unto , and to oversee the whole flock , which did consist of more then did or could then meet together ordinarily into one place for the worship of God , as appeareth by the Church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla ( which was one , but not the onely one Church assembly at Ephesus ) by the great and wonderfull increase of the Gospel at Ephesus , and such other Arguments which I do but point at , the full debate of them not being my present work . Peter also writing to the Churches of the strangers in severall provinces , calls them the flock not flocks , and commends unto the Elders the feeding and oversight of that flock . Now what is it that can denominate many particular visible Churches or Congregations to be one visible ministeriall flock or Church , unlesse it be their union and association under one Ecclesiasticall Government ? No doubt , they had the administration of the Word and Sacraments partitive , or severally . Nor do I deny but they had a partitive several Government : but there was also an union or association of them under one common Government , which did denominate them to be one visible Ecclesiastical flock . Thirdly , The very name given to the Elders of the Church , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is a name of authority , rule , and government , especially in the Christian and Ecclesiasticall use of the Word . H. Stephanus in Thes. ling. Gr. in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith that the Elders of the Church were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , seu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to wit saith he , those qui verbo & gubernationi praeera●…t . Where he tells us also that the Magistrate or Praetor who was sent with a Judiciall power into those Townes which were und●r the power of the Athenians , was called by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Septuagints use the word Nehem. 11. 9. Ioel the son of Zi●…hri was their overfeer ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) and Judah the son of Senuah was second over the City . He that had but the second place was a Ruler , how much more he that was in the first place . Loe here , the head and chief Ruler of the Benjamites called by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So Numb . 31. 14. 2 Kings 11. 15. the chief officers of the Host , the Captains over thousands , and captains over hundreds , are called by the Septu●gints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The same Hebrew words which they render by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they render in other places by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , praefectus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Antistes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , praepositus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Princeps : Yea the name of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they render by this word Iob. 20. 29. This is the portion of a wicked man from God , and the heritage appointed to him by God , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Greek , by the overseer , ( even as the same name of Bishop is given to Christ , 1 Pet. 2. 25. ) Conradus Kirch●…rus in the word Pakad , tells us also that Gen. 41. 34. L●…t Pharaoh do this and let him appoint Officers over the Land , where the 70. read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Greek Scholia which he useth to cite hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fourthly , Peter addeth , not as being Lords , or over-ruling 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that we might understand he condemneth the ruling power of the Lord Bishop , not of the Lords Bishop , of Episcopus Dominus , not of Episcopus Domini . Just as Ezek . 34. 4. the shepheards of Israel are reproved for lording it over the flock , with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them , It was their duty to rule them , but it was their sin to rule them with force and with cruelty . The twentieth Argument I take from 1 Cor. 4. 1. Let a man so account of us , as of the Ministers of Christ , and Stewards of the mysteries of God. Moreover it is required in Stewards that a man be found faithfull . And Tit. 1. 7. a Bishop is the Steward of God ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . This name doth exclude Lordship and dominion , but withall it noteth a ministeriall rule or government , as in the proper , so in the metaphorical signification : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a name diverse times given by Aristotle in his Politicks to the civil Magistrate . The Septuagints have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as fynonymous with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Esth●…r 8. 9. To the Lieutenants and the Deputies . The 70. thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The holy Ghost by the same word expresseth Government , Gal. 4. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is under Tutors and Governors . Rom. 16. 23. Erastus is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Theophylact thinks he was Governour of the City ; Erasmus that he was praefectus aerario , Town-Treasurer . The English Translators call him the Chamberlain of the City . Yea setting aside the metaphorical signification of this name often used for a name of rule ; the very literall and native signification of the word will serve to strengthen this Argument in hand . Ministers are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , house-stewards , or over the house ; but what house ? Aristotle at the beginning of the second book of his Oeconomicks , distinguisheth a fourfold oeconomy , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : kingly , noble , civil , private : The Ministers of Christ are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the first sort . They are stewards in the house of the great King. He that is steward in a Kings house , must needs have a ruling power in the house . 1 Kings 4. 6. Ahishar was over Solomons houshold . 1 Kings 18. 3. And Ahab called Obadiah which was the Governour of his house . 2 Kings 18. 18. Eliakim which was over the houshold . In all which places the 70. have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . I hold therefore with m Peter Martyr upon 1 Cor. 4. 1. that Ministers being by their calling and office stewards in the house of God , ought to cast out prophane impure persons out of the house , and receive them again upon their repentance . And why are they called Stewards of the mysteries of God ? surely the Sacraments are part ( and a chief part ) of those mysteries : and Christ hath made his Ministers ( not the civil Magistrates ) stewards of these mysteries , to receive unto , or to exclude from the Sacraments ; and as they may not keep back any of the children of the house , so they may not suffer dogs to eat at the childrens Table . The one and twentieth Argument , which shall claudere agmen , shall be drawn from Act. 15. where we find an Ecclesiastical Assembly or Synod of the Apostles , Elders , and other choice brethren , snch as Iudas and Sylas : These did so assemble themselves , and proceed with authority in a businesse highly concerning the truth of the Gospel , Christian liberty , the healing of scandal , and the preserving of peace in the Church , as that it is manifest they had , and executed a power of government distinct from Magistracy . Mr. Selden de Jure natur . & Gent. lib. 7. cap. 12. hath sufficiently expressed that which is the ground of my present Argument : and I rather choose to speak it in his words then in my owne , Now a dispute being had of this thing at Antioch , Paul and Barnabas ( who having used many Arguments against that Pharisaical opinion , yet could not end the controversie ) are sent to Hierusalem that there the thing might be determined by the Apostles and Elders . It is agitated in a Synod . In it it is determined by the Apostles and Elders , that the Gentiles who had given their names to Christ , are not indeed bound by the Law of Moses or of the Hebrewes , as it is Mosaicall and prescribed to the Church or Common-wealth of the Iewes , but that they ought to enjoy their Christian liberty . And so much for that which the Synod loosed them from . But what dorh the Synod bind upon them ? The Synod doth also impose certain things , namely abstinence from fornication , and from things offered to Idols , and from blood , and things strangled , VT QUAE NECESSARIO OBSERVANDA , EX AUTHORITATE SYNODI , saith Mr. Selden , BEING SUCH AS WERE NECESSARILY TO BE OBSERVED , IN REGARD OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE SYNOD , by those who giving their names to the Christian Religion , should live with the Jewes ( they also giving their names to the Christian Religion ) and so enter into religious fellowship with them . I shall adde two other Testimonies of Mr. Prynns ; The first I shall take out of his twelve considerable serious Questions concerning Church-Government , pag. 5. where arguing against the Independency of particular Congregations , he askes , whether the Synod●…l Assembly of the Apostles , Elders , and Brethren at Hierusalem , Act. 15. who MADE AND SENT BINDING DECREES to the Churches of the Gentiles in Antioch , Syria , and Cilicia , and other Churches , be 〈◊〉 an apparent subversion of Independency . So that by Mr. Prynns confession , the Scripture holds forth other Governours or Rulers in the Church beside Magistrates , and the authority of these other Governours to be such as to make and send to the Churches BINDING DECREES in things and causes Ecclesiastical . Another Testimony I take from his Independency examined , pag. 10 11. where he argueth against the Independents , and proveth from Act. 15. the authority of ordinary Ecclesiastical Synods , bringing also six Arguments , to prove that the Apostles did not there act in their extraordinary Apostolical capacity , or as acted by a spirit of infallibility , but in their ordinary capacity . Thereafter he concludeth thus . Therefore their assembling in this Councel , not in their extraordinary capacity , as Apostles onely , bu●… as Elders , Ministers : and the Elders , Brethrens sitting together in Councell with them , upon this Controversie and occasion , is an undeniable Scripture authority for the lawfulnesse , use of Parliaments , Councels . Synods under the Gospel , upon all like nec●…ssary occasions : and FOR THEIR POWER TO DETERMINE CONTROVERSIES OF RELIGION , TO MAKE CANONS IN THINGS NECESSARY FOR THE CHURCHES PEACE AND GOVERNMENT . Loe here Mr. Prynn gives us an undeniable Scripture authority for a diataktick governing power in the Church , distinct from Magistracy . How he will draw from Act. 15. the use of Parliaments or their authority , I do not imagine : It is enough for my Argument that he acknowledgeth this Scripture to warrant Synods of Ministers and Elders , and the power of these Synods to be not onely consultive , but conclusive , decisive , and obligatory ; for , this ( I suppose ) he means by the power to determine controversies , and to make Canons for the Churches peace and government : else he had concluded nothing against the Independents , who yeeld a consultive Synodicall power . If any shall yet desire to be more parti●ularly satisfied concerning the strength of my present Argument from Act. 15. I will make it out from these particulars following . First , Here is a power and authority to assemble Synodically , and it is an intrinsecall power within the Church it self , not adventitio●s or extrinsecall from the Magistrate . Whence the soundest Protestant writers prove , that though the civil Magistrate hath a power of convocating Synods , and he ought to do it when the Churches necessity or danger doth call for such a remedy ; yet this power of his is positive , not privative , cumulative , not destructive , And that if the Magistrate be an enemy and persecuter of the Church and of true Religion , or cease to do his duty , that is to wit , in a manifest danger of the Church , the Church notwithstanding ought not to be wanting to her self , but ought to use the right and authority of convocation , which first and for●…most remaineth with the Rulers of the Church ; as may be seen Act. 15. So say the Professors of Leyden in Synops. purior . Theol. Disp. 49. Thes. 24. beside diverse others whom I might here cite , but that is not now my businesse . Secondly , Beside the publike debate and deliberation , the Synod did also choose and send certain delegates or commissioners to Antioch , and wrote by them a Synodical Epistle to the Churches in Antioch , Syria , and Cilicia . I beleeve such Synodical acts of sending Commissioners and letters to the Churches in other Nations or Provinces , should now be lookt upon as acts of government , if done without the leave of the Magistrate , as then Iudas and Silas were sent . Thirdly , That Synod did exercise and make use of a threefold Ecclesiastical power , for remedy of a three-fold Ecclesiastical disease . 1. They purge out the leven of false doctrine and heresie , by deciding and determining that great controversie , whether Circumcision and the keeping of the Ceremoniall Law of Moses were neeessary to salvation . They hold forth and declare to the Churches the negative ; And this they do by the dogmatik power . 2. There was a great scandal , taken by the beleeving Jewes ( then not fully instructed and perswaded concerning the abrogation of the Ceremoniall Law by the death of Christ ) who were so far stumbled and offended at the beleeving Gentiles for their eating of things sacrificed to Id●ls , and of blood , and things strangled , that they could not freely nor contentedly converse , company , and eate together with the Gentiles . For remedy whereof , the Synod doth require ( in regard of the law of love , edification , peace , and avoyding of scandall ) that the Gentiles should abstain from those things , as also from fornication , ( which for what cause it is added , I do not now dispute ) And this they do by the Diataktik power . 3. There was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a schisme , dissention , and rent made in the Church by the Judaizing Teachers , vers . 2. Who clothed themselves with a pretended authority and warrant from the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem , and thereupon got the more following , and drew away the more disciples after them . For remedy hereof , the Synod stigmatizeth and brandeth those men , by declaring them to be lyars , troublers of the Church , and subverters of souls , vers . 24. And this they do by the Critick power , or authority of censures . Fourthly , The decree and Canon of the Synod , which is made , imposed , emitted and promulgat , is authoritative , decisive , and binding ; Act. 15. 28. For it seemed good to the holy Ghost , and ( here the Arabick repeateth it seemed good ) to us , to lay upon you no greater burthen then these necessary things , That ye abstain &c. If it be said that this was but a doctrinal advice . It seemed good &c. I answer , Iosephus Antiq. Iud. lib. 4. cap. 8. speaking of the decree of the supreme Sanhedrin ( which he that disobeyed was to be put to death ) calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that which seemeth good : So likewise in this place , the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is not meant of an Opinion onely , for an Opinion ( as Schoolmen define it ) is properly such a 〈◊〉 of or assent to a thing , as is evident and firme , but not certain : So that Opinion cannot be ascribed to the holy Ghost ; It is therefore here a word of authority and decree : as Mr. Leigh in his Critica sacra at the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noteth out of Ch●…mnitius . In which sence the Grecians frequently use it . So Stephanus out of Demosthenes : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It is de reed by the Senate . And Budaeus out of Plato , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It is certainly appointed to die . Observe also the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , imposing and burthen . They do impose some burthen , onely they are carefull to impose no burthen except in necessary things . Acts 16. 4. And as they went through the Cities they delivered them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the decrees that were ordained of the Apostles and Elders which were at Hierusalem . And here I cannot passe the observation of that gentleman who hath taken so good pains in the Original Tongues , Mr. Leigh in his Critica sacra of the New Testament , in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : Wheresoever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is found in the New-Testament , it is put for Decrees or Lawes , as Luke 2. 1. Acts 17. 7. it is put for the Decrees of Caesar ; and Ephes. 2. 15. Colos. 2. 14. for the Ceremonial Lawes of Moses ; and so frequently by the LXX . in the Old Testament for Decrees ; as Dan. 2. 13. and 3. 10. 29. and 4. 6. for Lawes , Dan. 6. 8. Caeterum saith Erasmus upon Act. 16. 4. Dogmata Graeca vox est , significans & ipsa decreta five placita , non doctrinam ut vulgus existimat . And whereas some have objected , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used onely in reference to a doctrinal power , as Col. 2. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . I answer , Budaeus expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be decerno , and Col. 2. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The Syriack makes it judicamini ; Erasmus and Bullinger , Decretis tenemini . Stephanus , Beza , and Gualther , ritibus oneramini ; the English Translators , are ye subject to Ordinances ? This subjection was not onely to Doctrines , but to Commandements , vers . 22. after the Commandements and Doctrines of men : and these commandements ( though in deed and truth the commandements of men onely at that time ) were imposed as the Commandements of God , and as Ceremoniall Lawes given by Moses . The vulgar Latine hath decernitis , and Tertullian readeth Sententiam fertis , both of them ( it seemeth ) having read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : however they understand the power related unto to be more then Doctrinall . I conclude that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Acts 16. 4. must be more then Doctrinal declarations , and that it is meant of binding decrees ( that I may use Mr. Prynns phrase ) especially when joyned with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , there was a Judgement passed and given upon the making and sending of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not the judgement of one or two , but the judgement of the Apostles and Elders Synodically assembled . So Acts 21. 25. Iames and the Elders speaking of that Synodical judgement say , we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing , &c. These four considerations being laid together , concerning an intrinsecall Ecclesiastical power of assembling together Synodically ; of choosing and sending Commissioners with a Synodical Epistle to the Churches in other parts ; of providing effectual and necessary remedies both for heresies , scandals , and schismes arising in the Church ; of making and imposing binding decrees on the Churches , will infallibly prove from Scripture authority another Government in the Church beside Magistracy . I might here adde other Arguments , but so much for this time . CHAP. X. Some Objections m●de against Ecclesiastical Government a●d Discipline answered . MR. Hussey in his Epistle to my selfe objecteth thus , What will your censure doe ? it will shame a few whores and knaves ; a great matter to shame them the Law of nature shameth . All this in terminis might have been as justly objected against the Apostle Paul , when he wrote to the Corinthians to put away from among themselves the incestuous man. What will your censure do Paul ? a great matter to shame one whom the law of nature shameth . The Lord save me from that Religion which will not shame Whores and Theeves , and all other whom the Law of Nature shameth , and that in a Church way ( as well as civilly ) if any such member fall into such impiety : yet this is not all . All Orthodox Writers that write of Church-censures , will tell him , that scandalls either of Doctrine or life , either against the first or second Table , fall under Ecclesiastical cognizance and censure . Secondly , He argueth thus Ibid. Sure in the day of our Lord there will be as good a returne of the word preached , as of the censure . And in his plea pag. 1. If the Word be able to make the man of God perfect , then nothing is wanting to him : perfectum cui nihil deest : and it is a wonder how that Conscience should be wrought upon by humane authority , with whom divine cannot prevail . Answ. 1. This also he might as well have objected against the Apostle Paul , who did require the Corinthians to put away from among them the incestuous man , and Titus to rej●ct an Heretick after once or twice admonishing of him . 2. He might object the same thing against Magistracy . Shall there not be a better account of the word preached then of Magistracy ? and if the Word be able to make the man of God perfect , there is no need of Magistracy . Perfectum est cui nihil deest . Surely many Erastian Arguments do wound Civil as well as Ecclesiastical Government . 3. Church-censures are not acts of humane authority , for they are dispensed in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ , and ( if clave non errante ) are ratified in heaven . 4. Discipline is no addition to that Word which is able to make the man of God perfect , for it is one of the directions of the Word . 5. The comparison which some make between the efficacy of the Word preached , and the efficacy of Church-discipline , as to the point of converting and winning foules , is a meer fallacy ab ignoratione ●…lenchi : for Church discipline is not intended as a converting , light-giving , or life-giving Ordinance . Faith comes by hearing , and hearing by the Word of God : and the Word is the power of God for salvation to every one that beleeveth . But Ecclesiastical Discipline hath a necessary use , though it hath not that use . Discipline and censures in the Church are intended . 1. For the glory of God. that his name may not be blasphemed , nor the doctrine of the Gospel reproached , by occasion of uncensured scandalls in the Church . 2. For keeping the Ordinances of Christ from prophanation and pollution , that signa gratiae divinae , the signes of Gods favour and grace , and the seales of his Covenant may be denied to unworthy scandalous persons . 3. For preserving the Church from the infection of bad and scandalous examples , it is fit to put a black mark upon them , and to put away the wicked person as the Apostle saith ; for a rotten member if it be not cut off , and a scabbed sheep if not separated from the flock , may infect the rest . 4. For the good also of the offender himself , that he may be ashamed , and humbled . 2 Thes. 3. 14. 2. Cor. 2. 7. This afflicting of the sinner with shame and sorrow , may and shall by the blessing of God be a means to the destruction of the flesh ; 1 Cor. 5. 5. that is to tame and mortifie his lusts , and so far removere prohibens that he may be the better wrought upon by the Word . I conclude , Church-Government being instituted by Christ , and having a necessary use in the Church ; the Erastians gain nothing by comparing it with the Word . Because it is not so necessary as the Word , Ergo , it is not necessary at all . Or because it is not efficacious in the same manner as the word is . Ergo it is not efficacious at all . The Apostle saith Christ sent me not to baptiz●… but to preach the Gospel , 1 Cor. 1. 17. What if he had said Christ sent me not to rule but to preach the Gospel ? Then had the Erastians triumphed . Yet this expression could not have proved that Church-government is not an Ordinance of Christ , more then that can prove that Baptisme is not an Ordinance of Christ. A negative in the comparative , will not inferre a negative in the positive . 3. Object . I could never yet see said Mr. Coleman , how two co-ordinate governments exempt from Superiority and inferiority can be in one State. Against this I instanced in the co-ordinate governments of a General and an Admiral , of a Master and a Father , of a Captain and a Master in one ship . Mr. Hussey finding he can not make good Mr. Colemans word , tells me pag. 7. that he meaneth two supreme co-ordinate Governments . Where first he loseth ground , and tacitely yeeldeth that Church-Government and Civil Government , distinct each from other do well consist , as long as they are not supreme , but as two armes under one head : No inconsistency therefore of Congregational and Classical Elderships , and of Provinciall Assemblies , with the subordinate Magistrates and civil Courts in Cities and Counties . Next we shall find also in Scripture two co-ordinate supreme Governments , for the civil and the Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin of the Jewes were both supreme and co-ordinate , and there was no appeal from the sentence of either : as is evident by that disjunctive Law , Deut. 17. 12. And the man that will do presumptuously , and will not hearken unto the Priest ( that is to the Priests , as vers . 9. ) or unto the Judge ( that is , the Assembly or Court of Judges , as I have cleared else-where ) even that man shall die . But I have also answered more fully this objection concerning co-ordination . Chap. 8. 4. Object . Ministers have other work to do , and such as will take up the whole man. To this Argument ( saith Mr. Hussey pag. 8. ) Mr. Gilespie maketh no answer at all , though Saint Paul useth the very self same Argument to discharge the Preachers from oversight of the poor . Act. 6. 2. God forbid we should leave the care of the word of God , and serve at Tables . It will not be unseasonable to mind both him and Mr. Prynne that the canonized names by them used Stylo Romano , Saint Paul , Saint Matthew , Saint Mark , &c. ought to be laid aside , except they will use it of all Saints , and why not as well Saint Moses , and Saint Aar●…n ( whom the Psalmist calls the Saint of the Lord ? ) or why not Saint Aquila , Saint Apollos , Saint Epaphras , &c. Methinks men professing Reformation ought not to satisfie themselves in using this forme of speech , onely of such as have been canoniz●dat Rome , and inrolled Saints in the Popes Calender . And as strange it is that Mr. Hussey makes Paul to act in the businesse , Act. 6. before he was either Saint or Apostle . Now to the Argument . I did answer at first ( though Mr. Hussey is pleased not to take notice of it ) pag. 36. that where Mr. Coleman objected , Ministers have other work to do , he might as well have added , that when Ministers have done that other work , and all that ever they can , yet without the power of Church-government , they shall not keep themselves , nor the Ordinances from pollution : that is , Church-Government is a part of their work , and a necessary part , which hath been proved : I thought it enough to touch an answer where an objection was but touched : another objection in that very place being more insisted on ( and with more colour of reason ) concerning the fear of an ambitious ensnarement . And for the objection now in hand , Mr. Hussey hath made it no whit stronger by his instance from Act. 6. For 1. the Apostles did not wholy lay aside the care of the poor . Sure Paul ( afterward an Apostle ) took great care of the poor at diverse times , and in diverse places as himself recordeth : but such taking care of the poor as did distract and hinder them from the main work of preaching the Gospel , this was it which they declined ; and in that respect the work of baptizing also did give place to the work of preaching , 1 Cor. 1. 17. Likewise the work of Discipline must be so ordered , as may not hinder the principal work of preaching the Gospel : which is very possible , yea probatum est : for where Church-government is exercised , there are as painful Preachers as any in the World , and such as neglect none of their other work . 2. To take speciall and particular care of the poor , did belong by Christs institution ( whose mind was no doubt known to the Apostles ) to the office of Deacons , and for that reason the Ministers of the word ought in like manner to be relieved of that burthen by Deacons : but Church-Government doth belong to the Elders of the Church , of whom some labour both in Doctrine and Government , others in Government onely . But neither must the Argument go so , I have another thing to ask ; what is that other work which will take up the whole man ? Mr. Hussey pag. 12. expounds Mr. Colemans meaning , that the preaching of the Gospel would take up the whole man , especially in our time : our knowledge of the Scriptures is to be acquired by ordinary means &c. And in his Epistle to the Parliament he saith , I found the Minister charged onely with preaching and baptizing , which being performed with such zeal and diligence as is needful , is aboundantly a sufficient employment . And so he takes off the Minister not onely from Government , but from visiting particular families , especially the sick ; from catechising and examining those who are to be admitted to the Lords Supper , from the celebration of the Lords Supper it self , to say nothing of the solemnization of marriage , yea from disputations in Schools concerning the controversies of the time , which yet himself so much calls for . And why ? the Minister hath other work to do , and such as will take up the whole man , which is to preach and baptize . 5. Object . If acts of Government be put in the hands of Church-Officers , there is fear of an ambitious ensnarement , which Mr. Coleman proved by an arguing from his owne heart to the hearts of other men . Mr. Gilespies answer to the matter of ambition saith Mr. Hussey , pag. 10. is onely by involving the Civil Magistrate in the same danger of ambition . And here he falleth out into a concertation , professedly with my answer , but really with Mr. Colemans Argument : for the foundation of his Argument was universal . Might I measure others by my selfe , and I know not why I may not ( God fashioneth mens hearts alike , and as in warer face answers to face , so the heart of man to man ) &c. Hereupon I replyed , Is this corruption onely in the hearts of Ministers ? or is it in the hearts of all other men ? I suppose he will say in all mens hearts ; and then his Argument will conclude against all Civil Government . And now per omnes musas I beseech him , which of us involveth the Magistrate in ambition ? Must I be charged with involving the Magistrate because I discovered that Mr. Colemans Argument involveth the Magistrate ? He might as truly say he is not the Traytor that commits Treason , but he is the Traytor that 〈◊〉 Treason . And why saith he that my answer was onely concerning that involving of the Magistrate ? Did I not first shew that the two Scriptures on which Mr. Colemans Argument was grounded , did not prove it : though now Mr. Hussey tells us Mr. Coleman did but allude to those Scriptures ( I am sure it was all the Scripturall proof which was brought for that Argument upon which so much weight was laid ) which I will not trouble my Reader withall saith he : A pretty shift , when a man cannot defend the Argument , then forsooth he will not trouble the Reader . Next , did I not deny that which Mr. Coleman did take for granted ; that we may reason from this or that particular corruption in one mans heart , to prove the same particular corruption in all other mens hearts , and that Paul taught us not so ? Phil. 2. 3. Did I not also answer in his owne words , that his Brethrens wisedom and humility may safely be trusted with as large a share of Government as themselves desire ? Did I not lastly answer , that if his whole Argument were granted , it cannot prove that there ought to be no Church-Government , for where the thing is necessary , abuses must be corrected and amended , but must not take away the thing it self ? Unto which exceptions nothing hath been replied , nor offered to vindicate or make good that Argument which was publikely offered to the Parliament . If such men were fit to put the reverend Assembly and all the Ministery of England to school again , to learn to dispute , let every pious and wise man judg . And so I am ledd on to another Objection . 6. Object . Schools of Divinity will advance learning and Religion , and get us an able Ministery more then Ecclesiasticall Government can do . So Mr. Col man in his Sermon pag. ●6 . Yea Mr. Hussey calleth for Schools , that there may be unity found among the Preachers of the Gospel , together with more learning and knowledge , pag. 12 , 13 , 14 , 15. ( where by the way the Jesuits are much beholding to him , and Protestant Writers very little . ) In his Epistle to the Parliament he desireth that Ministers would unbend their thought of Government , and think on wayes to get knowledge . I should have thought multum scientiae , parum Cons●…ientiae , might be as seasonable a complaint . Knowledge and learning are indeed most necessary , and I am confident shall flourish more under Presbyteriall Government , then either under Popery or Prelacy . School-disputes need not hinder Ecclesiastical Government : that ought to be done , and this not to be left undone . There is a practical part which belongs to Presbyteries and Synods , as well as a contemplative part belonging to Schools : which made m the Divines of Ze●…land to offer this among other Articles to be advised upon by the Synod of Dort , that they who are preparing for the Ministery , may ( after their education at Schools , before their setling in the Ministery ) be for some space present in Presbyteries , to learn Church-Government . That which a Minister must do , is work : and that work is labouring in the Word and Doctrine , in ruling and watching over the flock , in dispensing the Ordinances to them as a faithful Steward . But Mr. Hussey pag. 15. tells us the Minister must not be called from his study to examine notorious offences : which indeed suteth his notion of Schools . The Grecians did not intend Schools for any such work ; for to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was rest from work , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be idle , to take a vacation from work , that is , from other affairs , and from a practical life , to attend reading and studies . If Schools be made to serve for all those necessary uses which Church-Government will serve for ; then there is much said ; but other wise nothing against us . 7. Object . But Quis custodiet ipsos custodes ? if the power of Government and censures be in the hands of Church-officers , how shall they be censurable and punishable for their owne offences ? How shall the Censurers themselves be censured ? This objection I find in the eight Epistle of Dionysius Areopagita ( or who ever he was that wrote under that name ) It was made by one D●…mophilus , What then say you , must not the prophane Priests , or such as are convicted to have done somewhat amisse be corrected ? and shall it be lawful to them alone , while they glory in the Law , to dishonour God by breaking of the Law ? A little after , this direct answer is made to the objection . But if perhaps any among these erre from that which it becommeth him to do , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , let him be corrected by the Saints of his owne order , and so order shall not be intermixed with order , but each one shall be exercised in his owne order and administration . As the faults of Church-officers deserve the greatest censures , so in all the Reformed Churches , where the free exercise and administration of Church-discipline is received , there is greatest severity of Church-discipline against Church-officers , and especially against Ministers of the Word , when any such are upon just proof convict of scandal . It is too much diffidence ( and groundlesse , I dare say ) to apprehend that Ministers who have taken upon them the bond of such a Covenant , and joyned in such a Reformation , will yet be ready to connive at any scandalous person of their owne coat . And if a Classis should happen to commit such an error , yet there can be no such fear in this particular from a Provinciall or National Assembly , which in a well Reformed Church , ( as they are constituted of choice , able , and godly , both Ministers and others assembled from diverse quarters , so ) use to correct ( not to confirme ) the mal-administration in inferior Ecclesiastical Courts . I speak here of the Ecclesiastical offences of Church-officers : their other offences belonging wholy to the Civil cognizance and Jurisdiction . 8. Object . But let the Scripture speak expressely , and Institutions appear Institutions , and all must bow . It is asked why we must not prove a must be , as well as a may be : and whether do our proofes amount to an Institution and a Ius divinum . For satisfaction in this point also . I answer the Question which for the present I speak to , is not whether Christ hath in his Word limited and determined us to any one particular forme of Church-government , so as no other forme can be admitted as lawful or agreeable to the Word : Much lesse do I now enquire what is that particular forme or kind of Government which Christ hath instituted . But the present controversie with the Erastians is , whether Christ have not appointed and instituted a Government in his Church in the hands of Church-officers , distinct from Civil government : As it is one thing to enquire whether it be the will of God , that there be a civil Government or Magistracy , that is , that there be not an Anarchie in a N●tion , but some rule and government . Another thing , to enquire whether God hath in his Word limitted a nation to any one particular kind of Civil Government , and if any , what it is ? So it is one thing to enquire whether it be the will of Christ , that there be an Ecclesiastical Government , or an intrinsecal power of ruling in the hands of Church-officers , distinct from the civil Government ? Another thing to ask whether the Word determineth any one kind of Church-Government as necessary , and which it is ? The former , not the latter is our present controversie . Yea in very truth the Erastians do oppose not onely the institution , but the lawfulnesse and agreeablenesse to the Word of God , of a Church-Government distinct from the civil ; For their principles and Arguments tend to the investing of the civil Magistrate with the whole and sole power of Church-Government ; as that which belongeth to him onely , and that Iure divino : So that if their Principles hold good , it shall be unlawful and contrary to the Word of God , for Church-officers to claim , or assume , or exercise any Government or power of censures . Though ( I say ) the clearing and vindicating of the lawfulnesse of a distinct Church-Government , doth overthrow the Erastian Principles : yet that I may deal the more clearly and fully , for the satisfaction of all such as may be satisfied , this I avouch and averre : It is Jure divino , It is the will of God , and of his Sonne Iesus Christ the King and Head of his Church , that there be a Church-Government in the hands of Church-Officers distinct from the Civil Government . It is de necessitate praecepti , of the necessity of precept that it be s●… . It is sin and a violation of Christ●… Institution if it be not so . I am confident the Arguments which I have brought Chap. 9. will reach this point , and fully conclude it , especially if the strength of them be put together . Yet now to drive the nail to the head , I adde these following Arguments , directly inferring and proving an Institution . First , The Scripture speaks of Church Government in the same manner , and with the same height , fulnesse , and peremptorinesse of expression , as it speaketh of other things which are without controversie acknowledged even by the Erastians themselves to be Institutions of Christ. For instance , Let the Erastians prove against the Socinians the necessity and perpetuity of the Ordinance of Baptisme , that it ought to continue alwais in the Church , and that by vertue of an Institution and precept of Christ : I will undertake by the like medium to inferre the like conclusion concerning Church-Government . Again , let them prove the necessity , perpetuity , and institution ( I say not now of the Word it self , or of preaching , but ) of the ministery , or of the Pastoral office , I will bring the like Argument concerning Church-Government : I do not now compare or paralel the Government with the Ministery of the Word quo ad necessitatem medii vel finis , as being equally necessary to salvation , nor yet as being equally excellent ; but this I say , The one is by the Scripture language an Institution and Ordinance of Christ as well as the other . One Ordinance may differ much from another , and still both be Ordinances . Secondly , Church-Government is reckoned among such things as had an Institution , and which God did set in the Church , 1 Cor. 12. 28. It is a good Argument for the Institution of Pastors and Teachers , that God set them in the Church , as we read in that place , and Christ gave them to the Church , Ephes. 4. 11. Will not this then hold as well for the Institution of a Government in the Church ? That the Governments mentioned 1 Cor. 12. 28. are Ecclesiastical and distinct from civil , is already proved , Chap. 6. Thirdly , If it be the will and commandement of God , that we be subject and obedient to Church-Governors , as those who are over us in the Lord , as well as to civil Governors , then it is the will of God that there be a rule and Government in the Church , distinct from the civil . For Relata se mut●…o ponunt vel tollunt . If we be obliged by the fifth commandement to honour Magistrates as Fathers , then it is the will of God that there be such Fathers . So when we are commanded to know them which are over us in the Lord , and to esteem them highly , 1 Thess. 5. 12. to honour doubly Elders that rule well , 1 Tim. 5. 17. to be subject and obedlent unto Ecclesiasticall Rulers , Heb. 13. 17. with verse 7. 24. doth not this intimate the will of God , that Pasto●s and Elders be over us in the Lord , and rule us Ecclesiastically ? Fourthly , That which being administred is a praise and commendati●n to a Church , and being omitted is a ground of controversie to Christ against a Church , can be no other then an Ordinance , and necessary duty . But Church-Government and Discipline is such a thing , as being administred , it is a praise and commendation to a Church , 2 Cor. 2. 9. Revil . 2. 2. and being omitted is a ground of Controversie to Christ against a Church , 1 Cor. 5. 1. 2. 6. Revel . 2. 14. 20. Ergo. Fifthly , The rules and directions concerning an Ecclesiastical Government and Discipline are delivered preceptwise in Scripture 1 Cor. 5. 13. Put away that wicked person from among you . 2 Thess. 3. 14. Note that man. Tit. 3. 10. A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject . Augustine lib. contra Donatistas post Collationem , Cap. 4. saith that Church-censur●s and discipline are exercised in th● Church secundum praeceptum Apostolicum , according to the Apostolick precept , for which he citeth 2 Thess. 3. 14. Sixthly , There is an Institution and command , Matth. 18 17. Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican . In which place there are three Acts of the Church , that is , of the Assembly of Church-Officers . 1. They must be met together to receive complaints and accusations , Tell the Church . 2. They give sentence concerning the case , if he neglect to hear the Church , &c. Where heareing is required and obedience , there must needs be an authoritative speaking or judging . So that they who would prove the Church here hath onely power to admonish doctrinally , because it is said If he hear not the Church ; they may as well prove that the Judges of Israel had no more power but to admonish doctrinally because it is appointed Deut. 17. 12. that the man who will not hearken to the Judge shall die ; and it is not there expressed that the Judge shall put him to death , more then it is expressed here that the Church shall declare the offender to be as a heathen and a publican . 3. They must bind such a one by Excommunication , Whatsoever ye bind on earth , &c. Neither could it ever enter in the thoughts of Jesus Christ to command one Church-member or private brother to esteem another brother as an heathen and a publican , whom he would not have so esteemed by the whole Church : and least of all can it be the will of Christ that one and the same person should be esteemed by one of the Church to ▪ be as a heathen and a publican , and withall be esteemed by the whole Church as a brother , a good Christian , a Church-member , and accordingly to be freely admitted to the Ordinances . CHAP. XI . The necessity of a distinct Church-Government under Christian as well as under Heathen Magistrates . SOme when they could not denie but there was a Church-Government in the Primitive and Apostolick Churches , distinct from all civil Government , and Churchcensures distinct from all civil punishments ; yet they have aledged ( though no such thing was alledged of old , neither by Constantine and other Christian Emperors , nor by others in their behalf ) that this was for want of Christian Magistrates , and that there is not the same reason for such a Church-Government or censures , where there is a Christian Magistracy . See Mr. Husseys plea , pag. 24. As likewise Mr. Prynne in his Diotrephes catechised . Master Colemans re-examination , pag. 16. calls for an instance where the State was Christian. For taking off this exception , I shall observe , First of all n Grotius ( otherwise no good friend to Church-Government , being poisoned with the Arminian Principles , who have endeavoured to weaken extremely the authority of Classical and Synodical Assemblies , and to give a kind of Papal power to the Magistrate ) yet in this particular he argueth strongly for us , and not against us . Secondly , Where is that Christian Magistracy which hath suppressed or punished all such offences as did f●ll under Ecclesiastical cognizance and censure , in the Primitive and Apostolick Churches ? Or where is that Christian Magistrate that will yet undertake to punish all those offences and scandals which were censured in the Apostolick Churches ? Till some such instance be given , this exception against Church-discipline and censures under a Christian Magistrate hath not so much as colour enough . Aliae sunt leges Caesarum ▪ ali●…e Christi : aliud Papinianus , aliud Paulus noster praecipit saith Hierome in Epitaph . Fabi●…lae . Caesars Lawes , and Christs Lawes are not the same , but different . Papinianus commands one thing , Paul another thing . Chrysostome Homil. 12. in 1. Epist. ad Cor. tells us that the best and wisest Law-givers had appointed no punishment for fornication , for consuming and trifling away of time with playing at dice , for gluttony and drunkennesse , for Stage-plaies and lascivious whorish gestures therein . Is there not some cause to apply all this ( and much more of this kind ) even to Christian Law givers and Magistrates ? Put the case that he who is called a brother ( as the Apostle speaks ) that is a member of the visible Church , be found grossely ignorant of the Principles of Religion , and so far from growing in knowledge , that he loseth the knowledge of the Scriptures , and of the truth of God which he had ( for this hath been diverse times observed ) through neglect of the means : or if he be known to neglect ordina●lly prayer in and with his Family , and to continue in that offence after admonition : or if he live in known or scandalous malice and envie , and refuse to be reconciled with his neighbour , or if he be a known lyar and dissembler : or if by his words and actions he do scandalously and manifestly shew himself covetous , drowned in sensuality , ambitious , proud : or if he give a foul scandal by filthy and obscene speeches , by lascivious , obscene , whorish-like gestures or actions , where the act it self of adultery or fornication cannot be proved . I suppose that for these and such like scandals ( which are causes deserving not onely the Elderships enquiry and admonition , but suspension from the Lords Table ) the Christian Magistrate neither doth , nor by the civil or municipal Laws is bound to arraign and punish all such as are guilty thereof . Thirdly , whereas Arch-bishop Whitgift Answ. to the Admon . pag. 114. did alledge that the Church may not be governed under a Christian Magistrate as it may under a Tyrant , which he brings as an exception against ruling Elders and Elderships , while he could not denie but such there were in the Primitive Church . Mr. Cartwrigh ▪ in his Reply pag. 140. answereth , that if these Elders under a Tyrant had medled with any office of a Magistrate , then there had been some cause why a godly Magistrate being in the Church , that office should cease : but since they did onely assist the Pastor in matters Ecclesiastical , there is no distinction between times of persecution , and times of peace , as touching the office of Elders . The like say I of Church-censures and discipline . If the Government of the Church by Presbyteries and Synods , if suspension and excommunication in the Apostles times had been an usurping of any thing belonging to the Magistrate , then there had been some reason to lay aside all Church-censures and Ecclesiastical Government , when the Magistrate turned Christian , and willing to do his duty . But if not , then the civil and Church-government may still remain distinct , even where the State is Christian. Fourthly , Every Institution or Ordinance of Christ , must continue as a perpetual obligation , unlesse we can find in the Word that Christ hath given us a dispensation or taken off the obligation , and set a period to the Ordinance , that it shall continue so long and no longer . I mean every Ordinance of Christ must be perpetual , which we cannot prove from the Word to be but temporal or extraordinary . Now in the Word Christ hath not appointed the governing the Church , and correcting scandals , to be onely under a Tyrant , and to cease under a Christian Magistrate : neither is there any such thing held forth in Scripture ( which yet our opposites must shew , if they will make good what they say ) But contrariwise , what Christ delivered to the Apostles , and they to the Churches , is to be kept and continued , till our Lord come again 1 Cor. 11. 23. 26. 1 Tim. 6. 14. and he himself saith , Rev. 2. 24. 25. That which ye have already , hold fast till I come . These things were not spoken to the Apostles , to Timothy , to the Churches of that time personally ( for they were not to live till Christs comming again ) but the charge was given to them in name of and with respect unto all the Ministery and Churches of Christ. Fifthly , This exception made against Church-censures under a Christian Magistrate , supposeth that such censures will make an interfering and clashing between the civil and Ecclesiastical power . But there is no cause for that fear , these powers being so hugely differenced in their efficient causes , matters , formes , ends , effects , objects , adjuncts , correlations , and ultimate terminations , as I have made it to appear in the particulars , Chap. 4. Sixthly , The Churches liberty and power is not to be infringed , diminished , nor taken away ; but preserved , maintained , enlarged , and augmented under a Christian Magistrate . Were it not a sad case , if there should be cause to say that the Churches of Christ have not so much liberty under a Christian Magistrate to keep themselves and the Ordinances from pollution , as they had under Pagan and Infidel Magistrates ? Seventhly , Why may not Christian Church-government consist with Christian Magistracy , as well as the Jewish Church government did consist with the Jewish Magistracy , being of the same Religion ? Or if we please to look to later Presidents , who can be ignorant that civil government and Church-discipline have rather strengthened then destroyed each other , not onely in France where the Magistracy is not Protestant , but in Scotland , in the Low-Countries , in Geneva , and else-where ? Eightly , We have covenanted to endeavour a Reformation of Church-Government and discipline according to the word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches . Now both the Word of God , and the example of the best Reformed Churches , leadeth us to a Church-government distinct from civil Government : and the example of the best Reformed Churches doth undeniably lead us to a Church-discipline , even where he Magistrate is Christian , neither doth the word make any exception of Christian States , but contrariwise chargeth us to keep the commandement and Ordinances till Christ come again . Ninthly , The Magistrate hath other work to do , and such as will take up the whole man : and if he should take upon him the whole burthen of Church-Government , the enquiring into , examining and correcting of all scandals in the Church , surely it is more then he can discharge , or give a good account to God of . It will be hard enough to Church-officers to do it , though they are set apart to that service , and ex officio do watch over peoples souls , as they that must give an account . But for the Christian Magistrate to discharge the whole corrective part of Church-Government , and to watch over the soules of all the people ; so as to take care of the purging of the Church from scandals , and for that end to observe , examine , and judge all offences in the Church , and to determine that this man ought to be admitted to the Sacrament , and that man ought not to be admitted ( for that there must be a suspension of scandalous and unworthy persons , I now take it for granted because of the Ordinance of Parliament ) as it is impossible for the Magistrate to do all this , so I beleeve it will be to him durus sermo , a hard saying , to hear that he must give account to God of all these things ; and that Ministers have no more to answer for but preaching , ministring the Sacraments to those to whom they are appointed to give them , catechizing , visiting the sick , exhorting , admonishing , reproving , comforting . It was a good argument against the Prelat ; he assumed the Ecclesiastical government of a whole Diocesse , and could not give account to God for so many thousands , and sometime hundreths of thousand souls . Yet Mr. Coleman would have had the Parliament to be Church-Officers to the whole Kingdom in point of corrective Government , and the Ministery to have no part of that government . But then I ask , How shall they answer for that Ecclesiastical Government and administration of theirs , more then the Prelat could answer for the Ecclesiastical Government of a whole Diocesse ? If it be said that the Parliament is onely to settle a rule , and to give order what is to be done , and to commit the execution and the managing of particular cases to subordinate Courts and inferiour Officers , then no more is said then the Prelats did plead for themselves , that they did per alium what they could not do per se. So that such principles do tend directly to involve the Parliament in the Prelatical guiltinesse , which our Principles do avoid . Was it not another Argument used against the Prelats , that they could not manage both Civil and Church-government , and that an Ecclesiastical Administration could not consist with civil power and places in the Parliament or with offices of State , any one of these administrations ( either the civil or the Ecclesiastical ) requiring the whole man. Do not the Erastians endeavour to draw the Parliament into the very same absurdity with which the Prelats were pressed ? For if any of these two administrations require the whole man , how can the civil Magistrate ( though Christian ) take upon him the burthen of Church-Government , more then Church-Officers can take upon them the burthen of civil-government ? Philo the Jew gives this reason why Moses did make a partition of the charge between Ioshua and Aaron , committing to the one the civil , to the other the Ecclesiastical administration . He considered that it was impossible rightly to take care both of the supreme civil power , and of the Priesthood , since the one professeth to care for things pertaining to God , the other for men . Philo de charitate . Tenthly , Ratio immutabilis facit praeceptum immutabil●… . If the Apostle had required the Corinthians to excommunicate the incestuous man , upon such grounds and reasons as were proper to that time , and are not applicable to after times , so as to prove the necessity of excommunication for , the like offence , then there were some reason why excommunication should not be esteemed a perpetual ordinance in the Church : but it is manifest that the reasons given by the Apostle were not proper to that time , but do concern this time as well as that . The reasons are taken 1. From the glory of God , vers●… 1. 2. He that had done such wickednesse as was not so much as named among the Gentiles , was not to be suffered among Gods people , but to be taken away from among them ; If evil be not put away from Israel , it is a great dishonour to the God of Israel . This first argument used by the Apostle , is like that Ezek. 36. 22 , 23. They had prophaned the holy name of God among the Heathen , therefore God would sanctifie his great name , and make the Heathen to know that he is the Lord , when he should be sanctified in his people before their eyes . 2. From the commission , power , and authority which the Church of Corinth that is their Presbytery ( compare 2 Cor. 2. 6. ) had to excommunicate such a●one . vers . 4 , 5. In the name of our Lord Iesus Christ when ye are gathered together . &c. 3. From the good and benefit of the sinner himself , that he might be ashamed , humbled , reclaimed , mortified and saved : vers . 5. For the destruction of the Flesh , that the Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus . 4. From the Churches good , that the Church might be preserved from the contagion of such sinful examples vers . 6. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump ? 5. From that which was signified and typified by the purging out of leaven from Israel in the time of the Passeover . vers . 7 , Purge out therefore the old leaven &c. 6. From the end of Christs death , which was to purifie and sanctifie , as well as to reconcile and justifie his people , vers . 7. 8. For Christ our Passeover is sacrificed for us , Therefore let us keep the Feast , &c. 7. From the difference which ought to be made between the foul sins of Church-members , and others that are not Church-members : a blacker mark is to be put upon the former , then upon the latter : and more withdrawing there must be from a scandalous brother or professor of Christian Religion , then from a prophane Heathen , vers . 9. 10. 11. From all which it doth appear , that it is not without good reason that Martyr and Pareus upon 1 Cor. 5. do maintain the necessity of Excommunication , under a Christian and pious Magistrate , as well as under an Infidel and prophane Magistrate . Eleventhly , The end and use for which Church-censures are necessary , is not intended and endeavoured , much lesse attained , by the government of the Christian Magistrate . For though the Christian Magistrate punisheth many ( I cannot say all ) grosse and scandalous sins with corporal or civil punishments : yet to punish sin is one thing ; to seek the salvation of the sinner is another thing : so the offender his suffering of punishment and satisfying the Law of the Land is one thing ; his declaring of his repentance , and publike confession of his sin , for taking away the scandal which he hath given to the Church , is another thing . Suppose a deli●quent ( whose fault is not capitall by the law of the land , for instance a Fornicator , a drunkard , a common swearer , a Sabbath-breaker , or the like ) to have suffered in his person or estate , all the punishment which he ought to suffer , so that he hath now made a civil atonement ( as I may call it ) for his offence , and the Christian Magistrate hath no further to charge him with . Suppose also that he is by such corporal or civil punishments as by a bit and bridle over-awed and restrained from committing again the like ext●rnal acts : Notwithstanding he hath not the least signe of true repentance and godly sorrow for his former foul and scandalous sins , and he is known to be not an accuser , but an excuser of himself for those faults and scandals . Such a one comes and desires to receive the Sacrament . Must his poenal satisfaction to the Christian Magistrate be a sufficient poenitential satisfaction to the Church ? Here is a rock which the Er●…stians dash upon , unlesse they admit of a distinct Ecclesiastical Judgement , concerning the signes of repentance in a scandalous sinner , according to which , as these signes shall appear or not appear , he is to be admitted or not admitted to the Sacrament . Twelfthly , the power of binding and loosing , is not a temporary but a perpetual power , that is , appointed by Christ to continue in his Church alwaies unto the end . Now this power is given onely to Church-officers , and Christ hath not given the keyes of discipline and the power of binding and loosing ( of which else-where ) to the Magistrate , nay not to the Christian Magistrate , more then to the Infidel Magistrate . Let the least hint be found in Scripture , where Christ hath given any such power to the Christian Magistrate , and I yeeld the cause . Thirteenthly , The new Testament holdeth out as little of the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments under a Chrīstian Magistrate , as it doth of a Church-government under a Christian Magistrate . Shall this therefore strengthen the Socinian Tenent , That Baptisme is not a perpetual Ordinance in the Church , and that we are not obliged by that commission which the Apostles had to baptize ? God forbid . Fourteenthly , The German Anabaptists required an expresse warrant or example in the New Testament of a Christian Magistrate , or of the sword and wars in a Christian State , yet this hath been thought no good Argument against Magistracy and wars among Christians . I cannot pretermit a passage of Gualther , who may seem to be opposite to me in this present Question . Even he in his Homily upon Iohn 9. 22. after he hath spoken of Excommunication in the Jewish Church , and in the Apostolick Churches , he addeth o And this day also there is need of Ecclesiastical discipline , which being instituted in the Reformed Churches , ought to be diligently kept , lest the indulgence of Magistrates , which reignes almost every where , should render the Doctrine of the Gospel suspected among those that are without , and that themselves also may be contained in their office , and may not think that any thing they will is lawful to them in the Church . But after all this , let me put Mr. Hussey and other Erastians in mind , that if they do acknowledge that Jesus Christ hath instituted or commanded that there be a Church Government and power of censures distinct from the Civil Government , when the Magistrate is Heathenish or Idolatrous , let them speak it out , and let us agree so far . Otherwise if they do not agree in this , it is but a blind for them to make use of this distinction , that where the Magistrate is Christian , there is no necessity of a distinct Church-Government . I conclude with a passage of Mr. Prynne in his twelve considerable serious Questions touching Church-Government . The ninth of those Questions runs thus . Whether the Independents challenge of the Presbyterians to shew them any National Church , professing Christ in our Saviours or the Apostles daies , before any one Nation totally converted to the Christian Faith , or any general open profession made of it by the Princes , Magistrates , and major part of any Nation , Kingdom , Republick , who were then all generally Pagans and Persecutors of the Gospel , not then universally imbraced , be not a most irrational unjust demand ? Sure if this hold against the Independents , it will hold as strongly , yea more strongly against the Erastians , to prove their demand to be most irrational and unjust , while they challenge us to shew them in the New-Testament a distinct Church-Government under a Christian Magistrate , or where the State was Christian , though themselves know Magistrates and States were then generally Pagan and not Christian : Yea there was in those daies much more of a national Church then of a Christian Magistrate . An Appendix to the second Book , containing a Collection of some Testimonies not cited before ; And first a Testimony of King Iames in a Declaration of his , penned with his own hand , signed and delivered to the Commissioners of the Church of Scotland at Linlithgow , December 7. Anno 1585. I For my part shall never , neither my posterity ought ever cite , summon , or apprehend any Pastor or preacher for matters of Doctrine , in Religion , Salvation , Heresies , or true Interpretation of the Scripture : but according to my first act which confirmeth the liberty of preaching the Word , ministration of the Sacraments , I avouch the same to be a matter meer Ecclesiastical , and altogether impertinent to my calling . Therefore never shall I , nor ever ought they , I mean my posterity , acclaim any power or Iurisdiction in the foresaids . His Majesties meaning was that he ought not to do this in prima instantiâ , that is , before the person be accused , convict , or judged in any Ecclesiastical Court. ( which was the Question at that time , occasioned by Mr. Andrew Melvill his Case ) Afterward in the same Declaration it followeth thus . Christ saying Dic Ecclesiae , and one onely man stealing that dint in a quiet hole , the Act of Parliament reduceth the sentence for informality and nullity of processe , not as Iudges whether the Excommunication was grounded on good and just causes or not , but as witnesses that it was unformally proceeded , against the warrant of Gods Word , example of all Reformed Ki●ks , and your owne particular custome in this Countrey . A little after . I mind not to cut off any liberty granted by God to his Kirk . I acclaim not to my self to be judge of Doctrine in Religion , salvation , heresies , or true Interpretation of Scripture . And after . My Intention is not to meddle with Excommunication , neither acclaim I to my self or my Heires power in any thing that is meer Ecclesiastical and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , nor with any thing that Gods Word hath simply devolved in the hands of his Kirk . And to conclude , I confesse and acknowledge Christ Iesus to be Head and Law-giver to the same . And what soever persons do attribute to themselves , as Head of the Kirk , and not as Member , to suspend or alter any thing that the Word of God hath onely remitted to them , that man I say committeth manifest Idolatry , and sinneth against the Father in not trusting the Words of his Son , against the Son in not obeying him and taking his place , against the holy Ghost , the said holy Spirit bearing the contrary record to his Conscience . Testimonies taken out of the Harmony of the Confessions of the Faith of the 〈◊〉 Churches , R●printed at London 1643. Pag. 238. Out of the confession of Helvetia . FUrthermore , there is another power of duty , or ministerial power limited out by him , who hath full and absolute power and authority . And this is more like a Ministry then Dominion . For we see that some master doth give unto the steward of his house authority and power over his House , and for that cause delivereth him his keyes , that he may admit or exclude such as his master will have admitted or excluded . According to this power , doth the Minister by his office , that which the Lord hath commanded him to do , and the Lord doth ratifie and confirm that which he doth , and will have the deeds of his ministers to be acknowledged and esteemed as his own deeds , unto which end are those speeches in the Gospel : I will give unto thee the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven , and whatsoever thou bindest or loosest in earth , shall be bound and loosed in heaven . Again , whose sins soever ye remit , they shall be remitted ; and whose sins soever ye retain , they shall be retained . But if the minister deal not in all things as his Lord hath commanded him : but passe the limits and bounds of Faith , then the Lord doth make void that which he doth . Wherefore the Ecclesiastical power of the Ministers of the Church , is that function whereby they do indeed govern the Church of God , but yet so as they do all things in the Church as he hath prescribed in his Word ; which thing being so done , the faithful do esteem them as done of the Lord himself . Pag. 250. Out of the confession of Bohemia . THe 14th . Chapter of Ecclesiastical doctrine is of the Lords keyes , of which he saith to Peter , I will give thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven , and these keyes are the peculiar function or Ministery and administration of Christ his power , and his holy Spirit ; which power is committed to the Church of Christ , and to the Ministers thereof , unto the end of the world : that they should not onely by preaching publish the holy Gospel , although they should do this especially , that is , should shew forth that Word of true comfort , and the joyful message of peace , and new tydings of that favour which God offereth , but also that to the beleeving and unbeleeving , they should publikely or privately denounce and make known , to wit , to them his favour , to these his wrath , and that to all in general , or to every one in particular , that they may wisely receive some into the house of God , to the communion of Saints , and drive some out from thence , and may so through the performance of their Ministery , hold in their hand the Scepter of Christ his Kingdom , and use the same to the government of Christ his Sheep . And after , Moreover a manifest example of using the power of the keyes is laid out in that sinner of Corinth and others , whom St. Paul , together with the Church in that place , by the power and authority of our Lord Jesus Christ , and of his Spirit , threw out from thence and delivered to Sathan : and contrariwise after that God had given him grace to repent , he absolved him from his sins , he took him again into the Church to the communion of Saints and Sacraments , and so opened to him the Kingdom of Heaven again . By this we may understand , that these keyes , or this divine function of the Lords , is committed and granted to those that have charge of souls , and to each several Ecclesiastical Societies , whether they be smal or great . Of which thing the Lord sayeth to the Churches , Verily I say unto you , whatsoever ye bind on earth , shall be bound in heaven . And straight after : For where two or three are gathered together in my Name , there am I in the middest of them . Pag. 253. Out of the French Confession . VVE beleeve that this true Church ought to be governed by that regiment or disc●pline which our Lord Jesus Christ hath established , to wit so , that there be Pastors , Elders , and Deacons , that the purity of doctrine may be retained , vices repressed . &c. Pag. 257. Out of the Confession of Belgia . VVE beleeve that this Church ought to be ruled and governed by that spiritual Regiment which God himself hath delivered in his word , so that there be placed in it Pastors and Ministers purely to preach , and rightly to administer the holy Sacraments : that there be also in it Seniors and Deacons , of whom the Senate of the Church might consist , that by these means true Religion might be preserved , and sincere doctrine in every place retained and spread abroad : that vicious and wicked men might after a spiritual manner be rebuked , amended , and as it were by the bridle of discipline kept within their compasse . Pag. 260. Out of the Confession of Auspurge . AGain , by the Gospel , or as they term it by Gods Law , Bishops , as they be Bishops , that is , such as have the administration of the Word and Sacraments committed to them , have no jurisdiction at all , but onely to forgive sin , Also to know what is true doctrine ; and to reject such Doctrine as will not stand with the Gospel , and to debarre from the communion of the Church such as are notoriously wicked , not by humane force and violence , but by the word of God. And herein of necessity the Churches ought by the law of God to perform obedience unto them , according to the saying of Christ , He that heareth you , heareth me . Upon which place the Observation saith thus . To debar the wicked , &c. To wit by the judgement and verdict of the Presbyterie , lawfully gathered together . &c. A Testimony out of the Ecclesiastical Discipline of the Reformed Churches in France . Cap. 5. Art. 9. THe knowledge of scandals , and the censure or judgement thereof belongeth to the Company of Pastors and Elders . Art. 15. If it befalleth , that besides the admonitions usually made by the Consistories to such as have done amisse , there be some other punishment or more rigorous censure to be used : It shall then be done either by suspension , or privation of the holy communion for a time , or by excommunication or cutting off from the Church . In which cases the Consistories are to be advised to use all prudence , and to make distinction betwixt the one and the other : As likewise to ponder and carefully to examine the faults and scandals that are brought before them , with all their circumstances , to judge warily of the censure , which may be required . Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum . Cap. 14. Art. 7. 8. 9. PEccata sua natura publica , aut per admonitionis privatae contemtum publicata , ex Consistorii totius arbitrio , modo & formâ ad aedificationem maximè accomodatis sunt Corrigenda . Qui pertinaciter Consistorii admonitiones rejecerit , à S. Coenae communione suspendetur . Si suspensus post iter atas admonitiones nullum poenitentiae signum dederit , ad Excommunicationem procedet Ecclesia . Melchior Adamus de vitis Germanorum Theologorum , Pag. 342. CUmque sub id tempus ( Anno 1545. ) Fredericus Elector Palatinus , qui Ludovico successerat , de Ecclesiarum agitaret Reformatione : composuit Melanchthon , cum evocato venire integrum non esset , scriptum de reformandis Ecclesiis : cujus Synopsin aliquot regulis comprehendit : quas addimus . Vera & salutaris gubernatio Ecclesiae Christi praecipuè in his sex Membris consistit . PRimum , In vera & pura Doctrina , quam Deus Ecclesiae suae patefecit , tradidit , & doceri mandavit . Secundo , In legitime usu Sacramentorum . Tertio , In conservatione Ministerii Evangelici & obedientiae erga Pastores Ecclesiarum ; sicut Deus vult & postulat conservari Ministerium Evangelii , & servat ipse sua potentiâ & presentiâ . Quarto , In conservatione honestae & pia Disciplinae retinendae per judicia Ecclesiastica , seu jurisdictionem Ecclesiasticam . Quinto , In conservandis studiis necessariae doctrinae & Scholis . Sexto , Ad haec opus est defensione corporali & facultatibus , ad personas , quae sunt in efficiis necessariis , alendas . The Irish Articles of Religion . Art. 58. NEither do we give unto him ( the Supreme Magistrate ) hereby the administration of the Word and Sacraments , or the power of the keyes . And Art. 69. But particular and visible Churches ( consisting of those who make profession of the Faith of Christ , and live under the outward means of Salvation ) be many in number : wherein the more or lesse sincerely according to Christs Institution , the Word of God is taught , the Sacraments are administred , and the authority of the keyes is used ; the more or lesse pure are such Churches to be accounted . Laurentius Humfredus de Religionis conservatione & Reformatione vera . Ad Nobilitatem , Clerum , & Populum Anglicanum . PAg. 23. Nec satis mirari possum nec satis dolere , cum intellgam in his locis * repudiari disciplinam Ecclesiasticam , & vel nullam esse vel nimis laxam , vel non satis vigilanter administratam , in quibus tamen alioqui Religionis sincera ef●igies cernitur : quasi Evangelium esse possit ubi non vivitur Evangelicè : aut quasi Christus laeto ▪ carnali , voluptuario delectetur Evangelio . &c. At in Ecclesia manere debet censura & jurisdictio , non minus quam gladius in Repub. Pag. 25. Sit ergo haec prima Reformationis perfectae ratio , nostri ac peccatorum recognitio & emendatio . Deinde severior adsit in Ecclesia castigatio & animadversio : ut illa laxit as & remissio frnaeetur , quo minus & levius deinceps peccetur . FINIS . THE THIRD BOOKE . OF Excommunication from the CHURCH . AND , Of Suspension from the LORDS TABLE . CHAP. I. An opening of the true state of the question , and of Master Prynnes many mistakes and mis-representations of our Principles . HAving now by the light of Scripture and other helps asserted a Church-government distinct from civill Magistracy , both in the Old and New Testament , the last part of my present undertaking shall be to vindicate the particular Ordinances of Excommunication and Suspension , called by the Schoolmen Excommunicatio major & minor . Of which also I have before spoken divers things occasionally ; for I have asserted an Excommunication and Suspension in the Jewish Church , Booke 1. Chap. 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12. The nature , grounds , reasons , uses , and ends whereof , were not proper to the Old Testament , but such as concerne the Christian Church . I have also brought arguments Booke 2. Chap. 9 , 10. which conclude not onely Church-government , but Excommunication . And so much of my worke is done : Neverthelesse there is more to doe . M r Prynne first in his foure grand Quaeres , and thereafter in his Vindication of the same , hath argued much , both against the Suspension from the Sacrament of a person not Excommunicated and wholly cast out of the Church , and against some of the most pregnant Scripturall proofes for Excommunication it selfe . In his Vindication he hath branched forth the controversie into ten points of difference . Two of these , viz. the fifth concerning suspension from the Sacrament of the Passeover , and the ninth concerning casting out of the Synagogue , I have discussed before in the first Book . Where I have also examined other assertions of his concerning the Jewish Sanhedrin , Temple , confession of sinne . The other points of difference not handled before , I am ( as the Lord will help me ) now to speak to . The first point of difference is , whether in those foure Quaeres of his he stated the Controversie aright . He is offended that I ( in a Sermon of mine before the honourable House of Commons ) charged the Questionist with mistakes , and that I did not take notice of the question concerning suspension from the Sacrament , as he stated it . Vindic. pag. 3. I had reason , because he had mis-stated it ; and since it pleased him to interpose in a matter depending between the Honourable houses of Parliament , and the Reverend Assembly of Divines , and to publish a paper plainly reflecting upon a Petition of the Assembly , I hope he can not think either the Assembly , or me , tied to his stating of the question . If he will meddle with the businesse of the Assembly , he must speak to it as it is . And that it may now appeare how just cause I had to charge his Queres with mistakes of the state of the question , ( which he still mistaketh ) I shall endeavour a more particular and full discovery of these his mistakes . And first , that which was desired by the Assembly was , that such a rule may be established by authority of Parliament , as may keep off all scandalous and notorious sinners from the Sacrament . The question was not what Texts of Scripture doe warrant this thing . It did not concerne me to debate whether the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament quoted by him , prove suspension from the Lords Table . The controversie was of the practicall conclusion , and of establishing such a rule , as may keep off scandalous persons from the Sacrament . If the thing be done , if the conclusion be consented to , there is the greater liberty for men to abound in their own sence concerning the mediums to prove it . Secondly , and if he would needs debate what Texts of Scripture doe prove the thing , and what precept or president in Scripture doth warrant it : me thinks he had done better to have informed himselfe , on what Scripturall proofs the Reverend Assembly had grounded the suspension of scandalous sinners from the Sacrament , though not yet cast out of the Church ; The proofes from Scripture voted in the Assembly , were these . Because the Ordinance it selfe must not be prophaned . And because we are charged to withdraw from those who walk disorderly . And because of the great sinne and danger both to him that comes unworthily , and also to the whole Church . The Scriptures from which the Assembly did prove all this , were , Matth. 7. 6. 2 Thess. 3. 6 , 14 , 15. 1 Cor. 11. 27 , to the end of the Chapter , compared with Iude vers . 23. 1 Tim. 5. 22. Another proofe added by the Assembly was this . There was power and authority under the Old Testament to keep unclean persons from holy things , Levit. 13. 5. Num. 9. 7. 2 Chro. 23. 19. And the like power and authority by way of analogy continues under the new Testament , for the authoritative suspension from the Lords Table , of a person not yet cast out of the Church . Now that which was the strength of the Assemblies proofes of the proposition , M r Prynne hath almost never touched , but run out upon other particulars . Thirdly , observe that he disputes all along whether any Minister can suspend one from the Sacrament . But this no body , that I know , asserts . The power is given not uni , but unitati , to the Eldership , not to any one , either Minister or Elder . Fourthly , that which in the Preface of his Queres he undertakes to prove , is , that Excommunication and suspension from the Sacrament , being a matter of great moment and much difficulty , is to be handled and established with great wisdom , caution and moderation . And his result in the close is concerning a limited jurisdiction in Presbyteries . As these things are not denied by any that I know , so himselfe manifestly acknowledgeth by these expressions , the thing it selfe for the substance , ( which yet the current of his debate runneth against● ) and onely questioneth concerning the bounds , cautions and limitations . God forbid that Church-officers should ever claim an unlimited power : their power is given them to edification , and not to destruction , and we can doe nothing against the truth , but for the truth , 2 Cor. 13. 8 , 10. The power of censures must not be in the power of any one man , nor in the power of any who are themselves scandalous and worthy of censure . a There must be no sentence of Excommunication or suspension , upon reports , surmises , suspitions , but either upon the confession of the offence or proofe thereof by two witnesses at least . None must be excommunicated nor suspended for money matters , debts , and such like civill causes which are not of Ecclesiasticall cognizance , but are to be Judged by the civill Judge . It must not be for those peccata quotidianae incursionis , such sinfull infirmities as all the godly in this life are guilty of : though on the other side , the scandalous sinnes meant of in this controversie , must not be restricted to such sinnes onely as can not stand with the state of grace . These and such like limitations we doe not onely admit of , but desire to be put . Fifthly , he goeth about to cleare the state of the question out of Aretius , and citeth him for what himself now undertaketh to prove . Whereas Aretius holds Excommunication to be an ordinance of God both in the Old and New Testament , and that it was wanting through the injury and corruption of the times , the abuse of it in Popery having made the thing it self hatefull ; and the most part in those places where he lived , loving carnall liberty so well ; and taking upon them the protection and defence of prophane ones , and being so unwilling to be brought under the yoke of Christ. For these and the like reasons , he thought it not expedient to have that discipline of Excommunication erected at that time in those parts ; as himselfe gives the reasons : and b he professeth withall , that he doth not despaire of better times , when men shall be more willing to submit to that discipline . So that this is the question , if it shall be stated out of Aretius ; Whether Excommunication , being an Ordinance of God , ought to be setled where prophanesse and licentiousnesse abounds , and where the better party is like to be oppressed by the greater party : or whether we should wait till God send better times for the setling of it . Sixthly , the Author of those questions maketh a parallel between that power of censures now desired to be setled in Presbyteries , and the Prelaticall tyranny , as if this were the very power which heretofore was declaimed against in , denied to , and quite taken away from the Prelates . Yea in the close he makes this power now desired to be setled in Presbyteries , to be such as our very Lordly Prelates never durst to claime . Yet Ecclesiae Anglicanae politeia in tabulas digesta authore Richardo Cousin Tab. 5. tels me that the Episcopall Jurisdiction did exercise it selfe in these censures , which were common both to Lay-men and Clergy-men ( as they were called . ) 1. Interdictio divinorum . 2. Monitio . 3. Suspensio vel ab ingressu Ecclesiae , vel a perceptione Sacramentorum . 4. Excommunicatio . 5. Anathematisinius , &c. Neverthelesse there is a truth too in that which M r Prynne saith . I confesse the Prelates never durst desire that which this learned and pious Assembly hath desired in this particular . He hath said it . The Prelats never durst indeed take upon them to suspend all scandalous persons from the Sacrament ; for if they had , it had been said unto most of them , Physitian cure thy selfe , besides the losing of many of their party . And moreover the very Lordly Prelates never durst make themselves to be but members of Presbyteries , nor to be subject to the admonitions and censures of their brethren , which every Minister now must doe . The Lordly Prelate did ( contrary to the institution of Jesus Christ ) make himselfe Pastor of many Congregations , even of his whole Diocesse , and did assume sole and whole power of Government and Church censures to himself , and his underling officers which were to execute the same in his name . And as the appropriating of Jurisdiction to the Lordly Prelate , so the manner and kind of his Government , and his proceedings in Ecclesiasticall censures , came neither from Christ nor from the purest antiquity , but from the Popes Canon Law. What then hath Presbytery to doe with Prelacy ? as much as light with darknesse , or righteousnesse with unrighteousnesse . He that would see more of the differences between Presbyteriall and prelaticall Government , let him read a Book Printed in the Prelates times , entituled The Pastor and the Prelate . And the cleere Antithesis between Presbytery and Prelacy Printed at London anno . 1644. See also what I have said before Book . 2. Chap. 3. 7. It is evident by his fourth Question , that he states the case , as if Ministers meant to know the secrets of all mens hearts , and to be so censorious and peremptory in their Judging as to quench the smoaking Flax or to break the bruised Reed ; Thereupon he askes whether the Sacrament may be denyed to a man , if he desires to receive it , in case he professe his sincere Repentance for his sinnes past , and promise newnesse of life for the time to come . God forbid we be censorious , peremptory , and rigid in our judging of mens spirituall Estate ; where there is any thing of Christ , it s to be cherished , not quenched . But again , God forbid that we shut our eyes to call darknesse light , or black white . In that very place where our Saviour condemneth uncharitable Judgement , immediately he addeth , Give not that which is holy unto the Doggs , neither cast ye pearles before swine Mat. 7 6. Impenitency under a scandalous sinne is discerneable either by not confessing it , or by not forsaking it . All our present controversie is concerning a visible Church , visible Saints , visible holinesse , visible Repentance , visible fitnesse or qualification for the Sacrament , that is c of such externall signes and evidences as the word of God holds out for judging of the spirituall Estate of other men , not of such internall gracious marks whereby a man must judge of his own spirituall Estate . And so he that professeth his sincere Repentance for his sinnes past , and promiseth newnesse of life for the time to come , if there be nothing which ( visibly and to the eye of man ) giveth the lye to his profession and promise , ( for instance , if it can be proved that immediately before or immediately after he hath professed or promised the contrary to his companions in his wickednesse , or that he still continueth in the practise of that sinne ) is not to be excluded as an impenitent sinner from the Sacrament . 8. The third Quaere , as also the conclusion of all , runneth upon a great mistake , by reason of the confounding of things which are of a different nature . There is great weigh-laid upon this , that there is as much sin & danger to a mans soule in his unworthy and unprofitable hearing of the word , as in his unworthy receiving of the Sacrament ; and therefore Ministers may as well refuse to Preach unto people , whom they deeme unprofitable hearers , as refuse to give them the Sacrament , because they judge them unmeet to receive it . Whether the sinne of unworthy hearing be as great as the sinne of unworthy receiving the Sacrament , I will not now debate . The d Reply which was made to his Quaeries by another , hath said enough to that point . But that which I intend in this place , is ( for clearing a maine Principle which we goe upon ) to distinguish these two things . There are some Ordinances appointed for the Conversion of Sinners . There are other Ordinances appointed for the Communion of Saints . The Preaching of the word and the hearing thereof , though it hath no small influence into the Communion of Saints , yet it is also appointed for converting and bringing in Sinners who have no part in the Communion of Saints . The Sacrament was not appointed for the Conversion of Sinners , but is peculiar to the Communion of Saints . The Apostles Preached to the unbeleiving Jewes in the Temple and Synagogues Act. 2. 46. Act. 3. 11. 12. Act. 5. 12. 42. Act. 9. 20. 22. 23. But it is onely said of those that gladly received the word , they continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and fellowship , and in breaking of bread and in prayers . Act. 2. 42. The Apostles Preached also to many Heathens and Idolaters , but they admitted none to the Sacramens till they saw such evidences as might perswade them in the judgement of charity that they were such as might be admitted . They that are suspended from the Sacrament , yea they that are excommunicate , are admitted to the hearing of the word for their conversion , as the unbeleeving Jewes and Heathens were . Can any alledge the like reason for admitting them to the Sacrament ? Erastus himself observeth that the unclean under the Law who might not eat of the Passeover , yet were not forbidden but commanded to observe the Sabbath , and the feast of Expiation . I mention it onely as an argument ad hominem . If a sinner be known for a improfitable hearer of the word , that cannot make it a sinne to me to Preach any more to him . But if he be known to be a Dogg or a Swine in reference to the Sacrament , that will make it a sin to me if I minister the Sacrament to him . The reason is because I am still bound to endevour his conversion ( not knowing that he hath blasphemed against the holy Ghost ) but I am not bound to give him the seale of remission of sinnes and salvation by Jesus Christ : yea it were sinne to give that Seal to him who is visibly and apparently uncapable of such sweet and comfortable application of Christ. I conclude that the suspending of scandalous persons from the Sacrament , is neither onely nor principally grounded upon the sinne and guilt of eating and drinking unworthily , which will cleave to the unworthy Communicant : but rather ( not excluding the other ) upon the nature of the Ordinance which is such as cannot admit of the notoriously scandalous to receive , but that holy Ordinance shall thereby be prophaned and made Common ; for what can be more contrary to the na ure of that Ordinance and to the Institution of Jesus Christ , than to turne the communion of Saints , into the communion of scandalous sinners ; and to make that which was instituted for the comfort of those that repent and beleeve , to be a comfort and Seal of Salvation to those who are known by their fruits to have neither Repentance nor Faith , and so to send them away with a good conceit of their spirituall Estate , and thereby to strengthen their hearts and hands in wickednesse ? 9. The Question is not whether all scandalous persons are to be excommunicated and wholly cast out off the Church . The Assemblies Petition was not concerning excommunicating , but concerning suspending from the Sacrament all scandalous Persons . Yet the current of Master Prynnes Argumentation both in his Quaeries , and in his Vindication thereof , for the most part , runneth along against Excommunication and Suspension from the Sacrament , as the Tittles likewise doe promise . Which is a fallacy d conjunctis ad divisa . And when he debateth so much concerning excommunication and suspension , his and is either copulative or exegeticall . If copulative , he opposeth no body that I know so much as himself ; for I know none that would have all scandalous sinners suspended , to be excommunicated also , except himself . If exegeticall , even so he is contrary to himself , who confesseth that one may be suspended from the Sacrament before he be excommunicated . vindic . p. 50. 51. And whereas in the latter part of his first Quaere , he would drive us to this hard choice , that either a scandalous person must be excommunicated , or not suspended from the Sacrament ; He saith it is evident by Tertullians Apology cap. 39. & lib. de poenit . that scandalous persons were ever excommunicate and wholly cast out of the Church , not barely sequestred from the Sacrament . Whence saith he all the Canonists and Schoolemen determine that an excommunicate person is excluded from the Church and all publike Ordinances . Let the prudent reader observe , that in stead of proving that scandalous persons were wholly cast out of the Church , he tells us out of the Canonists and Schoolemen , that excommunicate persons were wholly cast out of the Church , that is , that those who were cast out of the Church , were cast out of the Church . And for his antiquity , he hath given here no small wound to the Reputation of his skill in Antiquities . Which will more fully appear Chap. 17. Meane while , how can any that hath read Tertullian or Cyprian , not know , that some failings and falls in time of persecution , and other smaller offences , were not punished by excommunication , but by suspension from the Sacrament , till after publike Declaration of Repentance and confession of the offence , the offender was admitted to the Sacrament . And for the places he citeth , I find in Tertullians Book de poenitentia much of that Exomologesis and publike Declaration of Repentance , but that all scandalous persons brought under Church-censures were wholly cast out of the Church , I find not ; In the 39 Chapter of his Apologetick there is no such thing as is alledged , but the contrary plainly intimated , e concerning severall degrees of Ecclesiasticall Discipline , and that if any mans offence was so great , as to deserve excommunication , then he was excommunicate and wholly cast out of the Church . And as in the Antient Churches there were , and in the reformed Churches there now are different degrees of censures , according to the different degrees of offences : so in the Jewish Church the like may be observed , both concerning Ceremoniall uncleannesse , and morall offences . Touching the former , that Law Num. 5. 2. command the children of Israel that they put out of the Camp every Leper , and every one that hath an issue , and whosoever is desiled by the dead , hath been understood by the Jewish Doctors respectivè , that is , that the , Leper was put out of all the three Camps , the Camp of Israel the Camp of the Levites , and the Camp of divine Majesty which was the Tabernacle : he that had an issue might be in the Camp of Israel , but was put out of the other two . He that was defiled by the dead , was onely restrained from the Camp of divine Majesty , for which also see before Book . 1. Ch●…p . 10. And touching morall offences , there were severall Steps and degrees in the Jewish excommunication , as f Master Selden hath observed from the Talmudists : for first a man was separate from the Congregation for 30 dayes , and if thereafter he was found obstinate , he was separate for other 30 dayes , and if after 60 dayes he did not repent , then they passed from the lesser excommunication to the greater , that is from Niddui and Shammatha ( as he thinketh ) to Cherem or Anathema . The Author of the Quaeries , while he argueth in that first Quaere against the suspending from the Sacrament of a person not excommunicated nor wholl● cast out of the Church , closeth in this particular with them of the Separation ( which I beleeve he did it not intend to doe ; ) for they in one of their Letters in answer to the second Letter of Fr. Junius written to them , where they bring eleven Exceptions against the Dutch Churches , one of these Exceptions was that they use a new censure of Suspension , which Christ hath not appointed . They doe hold Excommunication to be an Ordinance of Christ , but doe reject the distinction of Suspension and Excommunication , as Master Prynne doth . Tenthly , the true state of the present Question is not , whether the Parliament should establish the power of suspending scandalous persons from the Sacrament , as Iure divino , ( nay , let Divines assert that , and satisfie peoples consciences in it : but let the Parliament speak in an authoritative and legislative way , in adding their civill sanction . ) Nor , whether there ought to be any suspension from the Sacrament of scandalous persons , not yet excommunicated and cast out of the Church ; and that the Elder-ship should doe it ; for the Ordinance of Parliament hath so farre satisfied the desires of the Reverend Assembly and of the generality of godly people , that there is to be a suspension of scandalous persons ( not excommunicated ) from the Sacrament , and power is granted to the Eldership to suspend from the Sacrament for such scandals as are enumerate in the Ordinances of Octob. 20. 1645. and March. 14. 1645. Which Ordinances doe appoint that All Persons Or any Person that shall commit such or such an offence , shall be by the Eldership suspended from the Sacrament , upon confession of the party , or upon the Testimony of two credible witnesses . So that in truth the stream of Master Prynnes exceptions runneth against that which is agreed and resolved upon in Parliament : and his arguments ( if they prove any thing ) must necessarily conclude against that power already granted by Parliament to Elder-ships . And now if he will speak to that point which is in present publike agitation , he must lay aside his Querees and his Vindication thereof , and write another Book to prove that the Assembly and other godly ministers and people ought to rest satisfied ( in point of conscience ) with the power granted to Elderships to suspend from the Sacrament in the enumerate cases , and that there is not the like reason to keep off scandalous persons from the Sacrament for other scandalls beside these enumerate in the Ordinance of Parliament . Nay , and he must confine himself within a nearower circle , then so ; for the Parliament hath been pleased to think of some course for new emergent cases , that the door may not be shut for the future upon the Remonstrances of Elderships concerning cases not expressed . I know the Gentleman is free to choose his own Theme to treat of , and he may handle what cases of Conscience he shall think fit for the Churches edification . But since he professeth in the Conclusion of his foure Questions and in the Preface before his Vindication , and in divers other passages , that his scope is to expedite a regular settlement of Church Discipline , without such a power of suspending the scandalous , as is now desired to be setled in the new Elderships , and manifestly reflecteth upon one of the Assemblies Petitions concerning that businesse , as hath been said ; yea the first words of his Queres tell us , he spoke to the point in present publike agitation , the case standing thus ; I must put him in mind ( under favour ) that he hath not been a little out of the way , nor a little wide from the mark . And if the Question were which of these Tenents ( Master Prynnes or ours , ) concerning Suspension , doth best agree with the mind of the Parliament , let us heare their own Ordinance dated March 14. 1645. the words are these : yet were the fundamentalls and substantiall parts of that Government long since setled in persons by and over whom it was to be exercised , and the nature , extent , and respective subordination of their power was limitted and defined ; onely concerning the administration of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , how all such persons as were guilty of notorious and scandalous Offences might be suspended from it , some difficulty arising , not so much in the Matter it self , as in the Manner , how it should be done , and who should be the Judges of the Offence : The Lords and Commons having it alwayes in their purpose and Intention , and it being accordingly declared and Resolved by them That all sorts of notorious scandalous Offenders should be suspended from the Sacrament , Which is the very point so much opposed by Master Prynne ; for the controversie moved by him is not so much concerning the manner , or who should be the Judges , as concerning the matter it selfe : he contending that all sorts of notorious scandalous offenders should not be suspended from the Sacrament , but onely such as are excommunicated and excluded from the hearing of the Word , Prayer , and all other publique Ordinances . Having now removed so many mistakes of the true state of the question : that which is in controversie is plainly this ; Whether according to the word of God there ought to be in the Elderships of Churches a spirituall power and authority , by which they that are called brethren , that is , Church members , or Officers , for the publique scandall of a prophane life , or of pernicious doctrine , or for a private offence obstinately continued in after admonitions , and so growing to a publique scandall , are upon proofe of such scandall to be suspended from the Lords Table untill signes of repentance appeare in them ; and if they continue contumacious , are in the name of Jesus Christ to be excommunicate and cut off from all membership and communion with the Church , and their sinnes pronounced to be bound on earth , and by consequence in Heaven , untill by true and sincere repentance they turne to God , and by the declaration of such repentance be reconciled unto the Church . The affirmative is the received doctrine of the reformed Churches , whereunto I adhere . The first part of it concerning Suspension , is utterly denyed by M r Prynne , which breaketh the concatenation and order of Church discipline held forth in the question now stated . Whether he denieth also Excommunication by Elderships to be an Ordinance and Institution of Christ , and onely holdeth it to be lawfull and warrantable by the word of God , I am not certaine . If he do , then he holds the totall negative of this present question . However I am sure he hath gone about to take away some of the principall Scripturall foundations and pillars upon which Excommunication is builded . * As touching the gradation and order in the question as now stated , it is meant positively and exclusively , that such a gradation not onely may but ought to be observed ordinarily ( which M r Prynne denieth ) although I deny not tha● for some publique enormous , haynous abominations , there may be ( without such degrees of proceeding ) a present cutting off by Excommunication . But this belongs not to the present controversie . CHAP. II. Whether Matth. 18. 15 , 16 , 17. prove Excommunication . THe second point of difference is concerning Matth. 18. M r Prynne in the first of his foure questions told us that the words Matth. 18. 17. Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , are meant onely of personall private trespasses between man and man , not publique scandalous sinnes against the Congregation : and that t is not said , Let him be to the whole Church , but let him be to Thee , &c. This I did in my Sermon retort . For if to thee , for a personall private trespasse ; much more to the whole Church , for a publique scandalous sinne , whereby he trespasseth against the whole Congregation . Yea , it followeth upon his interpretation , that he may account the whole Church as Heathens and Publicans , if all the members of the Church doe him a personall injury , whereupon I left this to be considered by every man of understanding , whether if a private man may account the whole Church as Heathens and Publicans for a personall injury done to himselfe alone , it will not follow that much more the whole Church may account a man as a Heathen and Publican , for a publique scandalous sinne against the whole Church . M r Prynne in his Vindication , pag. 3. glanceth at this objection , but he takes notice onely of the halfe of it , and he is so farre from turning off my retortion , that he confirmeth it ; for pag. 4. he confesseth that every Christian hath free power by Gods word to esteeme not onely a particular brother , but all the members of a Congregation , as Heathens and Publicans , if he or they continue impenitent in the case of private injuries , after admonition . Now my exception against his Quere remains unanswered . If I may esteem the whole Church as Heathens and Publicans , when they doe me an injury and continue impenitent therein : may not the whole Church esteem me as an Heathen man and a Publican , when I commit a publique and scandalous trespasse against the whole Church , and continues impenitent therein ? Shall a private man have power to cast off the whole Church as Heathens and Publicans ? and shall not the whole Church have power to cast off one man as an Heathen and Publican ? I know he understands those words , Let him be to thee as a Heathen man and a Publican , in another sence then either the reformed Churches doe , or the ancient Churches did , and takes the meaning to be of avoyding fellowship and familiarity with him , before any sentence of Excommunication passed against the offender . But however my argument from proportion will hold . If civill fellowship must be refused , because of obstinacy in a civill injury , why shall not spirituall or Church-fellowship be refused to him that hath committed a spirituall injury or trespasse against the Church ? If private fellowship ought to be denied unto him that will not repent of a private injury , why shall not publique fellowship in eating and drinking with the Church at the Lords Table be denied unto him that will not repent of a publique scandall given to the Congregation ? Are the rules of Church fellowship looser and wider than the rules of civill fellowship ? or are they straiter ? Is the way of communion of Saints broader than the way of civill communion ? or is it narrower ? Peradventure he will say , that the whole Church , that is , all the members of the Church , have power to withdraw from an obstinate scandalous brother , that is , to have no fraternall converse or private Christian fellowship with him . Well then : If thus farre he be as a Heathen and a Publican to the whole Church distributively , how shall he be as a Christian brother to the whole Church collectively ; If all the members of the Church severally withdraw fellowship from him even before he be excommunicated , how shall the whole Church together be bound to keepe fellowship with him till he be excommunicated ? Instead of loosing such knots , M r Prynne undertakes to prove another thing , that this Text of Matthew is not meane of Excommunication or Church censures , and that the Church in this Text was not any Ecclesiasticall Consistory ( here he citeth Iosephus , as if he had spoken of that Text ) but onely the Sanhedrin or Court of civill Justice . But though all this were true which he saith , yet there may be a good argument drawn by necessary consequence from this Text to prove Excommunication . Which Grotius did well perceive : for in his annotations upon the place , after he hath told his opinion that excommunication is not meant in this Text , he addeth , that he hath elsewhere spoken of the antiquity and necessity of Excommunication : quanquam ad eam ex hoc etiam loco non absurde argumentum duci p●…sse , non negaverim : though I will not deny , saith he , that even from this place , the argument may be drawn to excommunication without any absurdity . My argument afore-mentioned will hold good even from Master Prynnes owne exposition . Thus farre I have gone upon a consession : now to the confutation . Before I come to his reasons , I observe in his margent a double mistake of the testimony of Scapula . First , he sends us to Scapula to learn that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth any civill assembly or councell , as well as an Ecclesiasticall Presbytery . Yes : Scapula tels us , it hath in Heathen writers a generall signification , to expresse any Assembly called forth . But he addeth immediately , that in the writing of Christians it signifieth the assembly of such as are called to eternall life and doe professe Christian Religion . Since therefore it hath not the same signification in Heathen writings , and in the New Testament , he should have shewed us where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the new Testament doth signifie a civill Court of Justice . I hope the holy Ghost did speake so in this place as he might be understood , and to take the word Church here , in that sence which it hath nowhere else in the new Testament , doth not agree with that received maxime , That Scripture is to be expounded by Scripture . I finde indeed the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for a Civill assembly , Acts 19. 39 , 41. But as that is an Heathen assembly , so it is not the Evangelist Luke his expression otherwise then recitative : that is , he mentioneth an Heathen assembly under that name by which Heathens themselves called it . His other mistake of Scapula , is , the citing of him for that assertion , that the Church in this Text is not an Ecclesiasticall Con sistory . Whereas Scapula doth expound the Church Matth. 18. to be meant of the Presbytery or Colledge of Elders , ( as g Stephani Thesaurus doth also ) and having told that the word signifieth the whole Christian Church : also particular Congregations : he addeth two more restricted significations : sometimes it signifieth a Christian family : sometimes the Presbytery ; for this last he citeth Matth. 18. Now I proceed to M r Prynnes Reasons . First , saith he , this Text speakes not at all of any publique scandalous sinne against the Church or Congregation , the proper object of Church censures , but onely of private civill trespasses between man and man , as is evident by the words , If thy brother trespasse against thee , goe and tell him his fault between him and thee , &c. Answ. We have ever understood that place of such trespasses , which grow publique afterwards by the offenders obstinacy after admonition . Yet the trespasse here meant , may be often such as even at first is scandalous to more then one . Such a case falleth under Christs rule here , and is not excluded . Wherein observe Durand upon the fourth Book of the Master of Sentences Dist. 19. Quest. 4. But if , saith he , the sinne be not altogether secret , nor altogether knowne , that is , such as is known to many by whom he may be convict , or be is ill reported of among grave persons , though the publique fame be not against him , so the procedor which Christ hath set us in the Gospell , seemeth to have place , to wit , that first he may be secretly admonished , concerning his amendment ; which if it profit not , that he may be admonished concerning his amendment before those who know the fact ; but if that also doe not profit , that then he may be declared to the Church . But if we should grant that no other trespasse is meant here , but a private trespasse , yet I aske , is there no private trespasse but that which is civill ? The Schoolmen writing de scandalo will tell him that one brother trespasseth against another when he scandalizeth him by any sinfull example , though without any civill injury . Nay it s the greatest trespasse which is committed against the soule of our neighbour : scandall is soule murther . It is a breach of the Law of love , not onely by omission , but by commission . He that is commanded to edifie his brother , and then giveth scandall to him , doth he not trespasse against his brother ? The like answer I return to that which he addeth , that Luke relating the same thing without any Dic Ecclesiae , Luk. 17. 3 , 4 puts it out of question , if compared with Gen. 52. 31. ( there is no such Scripture ) 1 Sam. 25. 28. What ? out of question . Doth he not find scandalous sins in the two verses immediately preceding in Luke , and thereupon it s immediatly added , Take heed to your selves , if thy brother trespasse against thee , rebuke him , and if he repent , forgive him . Can not a Christian rebuke his brother who scandalizeth him , and if he repent forgive him ? Luke needed not adde Dic Ecclesiae , because he speaks of a repenting brother , not of an impenitent brother , after private admonition . And that scandalous trespasses are understood Matth. 18. 19. ( as Augustine , Tostatus , and many others have observed ) may thus appeare . 1. Scandals are the greatest and worst trespasses , as hath been said , and woe unto the world because of offences . Surely Jesus Christ did intend to provide a remedy against the greatest evils , rather than against the lesser . 2. Christ would not be Judge of civill injuries , Luke 12. 14. How can it be then supposed that he giveth here Lawes concerning civill rather then spirituall injuries ? 3. Christ saith , If be shall heare ( not repaire ) thee , thou hast gained ( not thy goods or thy good name , or the like , but ) thy brother . Intimating , that it s not a mans owne interest , but the rescuing of his brothers soule from sinne and scandall , which is here sought . M r Prynne himselfe confirmeth it not a little , for he takes the meaning to be of avoyding a brothers company , in the case of a civill or private injury , if he continue impenitent after admonition . Now what if he that hath done the injury make full reparation , and all reall satisfaction to the brother injured , and yet continue impenient shewing no symptome at all of repentance , must he not by M r Prynnes exposition be esteemed as an heathen man and a Publican , because of his visible and scandalous impenitency ? How often hath it been seen that a man was compelled by Law , or perswaded by friends to make a reall restitution and full satisfaction for a civill or personall injury ; and yet hath given very great scandall by his impenitency , not so much as confessing , but still defending and justifying his sinfull act , in his discourses ? 4. The dependency upon the preceding parts of that Chapter confirmeth it : from the beginning of the Chapter to this very Text , vers . 15. Christ hath been upon the doctrine of scandals , warning us not to offend so much as one of his little ones , which he presseth by divers arguments . 5. The Erastians and we doe both agree in this , that Christ here hath a respect to the Jewish Government . Now the trespasses for which men were excommunicate by the Jewish Sanhedrin were scandalous trespasses , such as the despising of any of the precepts of the law of Moses , or Statutes of the Scribes : The doing of servile worke upon Easter Eve : The mentioning of the Name of God rashly , or by a vaine oath : The inducing of others to prophane the Name of God , or to eate holy things without the holy place ; and the like ; More of this elsewhere , in the 24 causes of the Jewish Excommunication . 6. M r Prynne expoundeth this Text in Matthew by 1 Cor. 5. 9 , 10 , 11 , 12. but there the Apostle intends the purging of the Church from scandals , whether those scandals have any private injury in them or not . Instance in Idolatry and drunkennesse , there mentioned . 7. I can also ( without yeelding the least advantage to the Erastian cause ) admit and suppose that which is so much pressed both by Erastus , M r Prynne , and others , viz. that these words , If thy brother trespasse against thee , are spoken of a personall injury between man and man , Though I doe not grant the thing , yet I am content , even upon their own supposition , to argue from this Text. And first , it may be answered with Aegi dius de Coninck . de actib . supernat . Disp. 28. Dub. 8. that Christ doth not speake of the case of personall injuries , as if he meant to restrict unto such cases the order of proceeding for gaining of the offenders soule from sinne ; h but onely for examples sake he brought such kind of sinne , of which it might have been most doubted , whether in the reproofe thereof this order be to be kept , and in which it can be most hardly observed , in respect of the innate desire of revenge in many . 2. Let our opposites themselves say , whether we ought not in conscience and duty , endeavour the gaining of an offending brothers soule , when we see him commit a trespasse against God , which is no personall injury to our selves , as well as when the trespasse is a personall injury . 3. As this order of proceeding here prescribed by Christ , is ( in the case of a personall injury ) the greatest triall of Christian love in the person offended , so it may ( by Gods blessing ) be the stronger and more efficacious upon the person offending , to conquer and overcome his spirit , while he that might prosecute him in a legall and criminall way , commeth in meeknesse and love to admonish him , and to endeavour the gaining of him from sin by repentance . Which is the observation of Chrysostome upon the place , for if he that might demand punishment upon him , even that man be seen to be taking care of his salvation , this most of all other things is able to make him ashamed , and to yeeld . 4. If it be a civill and personall injury matterially , yet it comes not in here under that formall consideration , but partly as a scandall to him that hath received the injury ( so that Chrysostome doth rightly make this Text to hang together with that which was said before in the same Chapter concerning scandals ) partly as a soul-destroying sinne upon him that doth the wrong , which doth endanger his salvation : And if under such a notion private injuries be here spoken of , then what have our opposites gained ? 5. The scope also is not civill but wholly spirituall ; which Chrysostome doth very well explaine . Hom. 60. in Matth. What is it , if he shall heare thee ? if he shall be perswaded to condemne himselfe of sinne . Thou hast gained thy brother , he saith not thou bast a sufficient punishment or satisfaction , but thou hast gained thy brother . And after , He saith not accuse , nor censure , nor demand punishments , but convince , saith he . The Context confirmeth it ; for these words are added immediately after the parable of bringing home the lost sheep . Which parable we have also Luke 15. ( where it is not applied to the reducing of such as have done private injuries , but of Publicans and sinners who were publiquely scandalous : this I thought good to note by the way ) Ammonius Alexandrinus de Quatuor Evang. consonantia , cap. 96 , 97. doth together with the parable of the lost sheep , adde also the other two , of the lost penny , and the lost sonne , immediately before these words , If thy brother trespasse against thee &c. 6. And suppose that the businesse hath its rise and beginning from a personall injury , verse 15. yet the trespasse for which the man is to be held as a Heathen and Publican , is a publique scandalous sinne against the Church or Congregation , namely his neglecting to heare the Church vers . 17. for it is not his first trespasse , but his contumacy against the Church , which by this Text is to make him esteemed as an Heathen and a Publican . Before I leave this point , I will answer the chief Argument by which Eràstus would prove that this Text is meant only of private civill injuries : because ( saith he ) the trespasse here spoken of is no other then what one brother may forgive to another . I answer , both he and Master Prynne doe suppose this Text Mat. 15 , 16 , 17. to be parallell to that in Luk. 17. 3. 4. which they take for granted , without proof or reason . Certainly there is a great difference between the purpose and scope of the one place and of the other . It will be replyed that even in this very Chapter Matth. 18. the next thing which follows vers . 21. is concerning personall injuries which one brother can and ought to forgive to another . Then came Peter to him and said , Lord how oft shall my Brother sinne against me , and I forgive him ? &c. To that I answer . 1. We cannot gather from the Text that Peter did propound this question immediately after or upon occasion of that which went before vers . 15 , 16 , 17 , &c. where nothing is spoken of one Brothers forgiving another . We read Luk. 8. 19. Then came to him his Mother and his Brethren , &c. yet the meaning is not that his Mother and his Brethren came to him immediately after his speaking of the words before mentioned by Luke in that place ; for that it was not after these , but after other words , is plain from the Harmony of the other Evangelists Matthew and Mark. So here these words Then came Peter , may very well relate to a new businesse and to another time . 2. Or if it was the same time , it might be said , Then came Peter , that is , Peter being absent , and not having heard that which Christ had been before speaking , he came immediatly after , & did propound a new Question . 3. Suppose also that Peter was present and heard all which had been before spoken , yet it is much doubted among Interpreters , whence Peter had the rise and occasion of that Question . Some think it was upon his calling to minde those words in the rule of Prayer , even as we forgive those who trespasse against us . Others conceive the occasion of his Question was that which was said vers . 19. Againe I say unto you if two of you shall agree on earth , supposing that agreement ( and consequently forgiving of injuries ) is necessary to make our Prayers the more effectuall ; for my part , I think it not improbable that whatever the occasion of the Question was , vers . 21 beginneth a new and distinct purpose . Which I take to be the reason why the Arabik here makes an intercision , and beginneth the eight and fiftieth Section of Matthew at those words , Then came Peter and said , Lord how oft , &c. 4. And if vers . 21. have a dependence upon that which went before , it may be conceived thus : Christ had said , If thy Brother trespasse against thee , goe & tell him his fault betweene thee and him alone , which supposeth a continuance of the former Christian fellowship and fraternall familiarity , and that we must not cast off a scandalous Brother as lost , or as an Enemy , but admonish him as a Brother . This might give occasion to Peter to aske , Lord how oft shall my Brother sinne against me , that is , scandalize me by his sinne against God , ( for even in Luk. 17. 3. 4. that of forgiving one that trespasseth against us , is added immediately after a Doctrine of scandals ; ) and I forgive him , that is , as Grotius expounds it , restore him to the former degree of friendship and intimate familiarity , to deale with him thus as with a Brother ; Which he well distinguisheth from that other forgiving which is a not revenging . And so much of Master Prynnes first reason . His second reason is because the Mention of two or three witnesses vers . 16. relateth onely to the manner of trying civill capitall crimes ( as murders and the like ) before the civill Magistrates of the Jewes , &c. not to any proceedings in Ecclesiasticall causes , in their Ecclesiasticall Consistories , of which we find no president . Answ. 1. If this hold , then the Text must not be expounded indefinitely of civill injuries ( as he did before ) but of civill capitall injuries , whereas Erastus takes the meaning to be of smaller offences onely , and not of Capitall crimes . 2. The Law concerning two or three witnesses is neither restricted to Capitall crimes , nor to civill Judicatories . I appeale to the Ordinance of Parliament dated Octo. 20. 1645. The Elder-ship of every Congregation shall judge the matter of scandall aforesaid , being not Capitall , upon the Testmiony of two credible Witnesses , at the least . That Law therefore of witnesses is alike applicable to all causes and Courts Ecclesiasticall and civill Deut. 19. 30. One witnesse shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity , or for any sinne , in any sin that he sinneth : at the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses shall the matter be established . 3. And the same Law is in the new Testament clearly applied to proceedings in Ecclesiasticall causes 2 Cor. 13. 1. & again 1 Tim. 5. 19. Against the Elder receive not an accusation but before two or three witnesses , which is not spoken to any civill Magistrate , but to Timothy and others joyned with him in Church Government . His third reason doth onely begge what is in Question , that by the Church is not meant any Ecclesiasticall but a civill Court of the Jewes . He needed not to cite so many places to prove that the Jewes had civill Courts . If he could but cite one place , to prove that they had no Ecclesiasticall Courts , this were to the purpose . Not that I grant that at this time the Jewes had any civill Jurisdiction or Jewish Court of Justice ; for after that Herod the great did kill Hircanus and the Sanhedrin , ( in the opinion of many learned men ) the Jewes had no more any civill Jurisdiction . Now Herod the great was dead before the time of Christs Ministery . Others think they had some civill Jurisdiction a while after Hircanus death . How ever he cannot prove , that at this time when Christ said Tell the Church , the Jewes had any civill Court of Justice , which did exercise either Criminall or Capitall Judgements . I have in the first Book shewed out of Buxtorf , L'Empereur , Casauhon , and I. Coch. ( who prove what they say from the Talmudicall writers ) that 40 yeeres before the destruction of the Temple ( and so before Christ said Tell the Church ) the Court of civill Justice at Hierusalem did cease . If Master Prynne make any thing of this Glosse of his , he must prove 1. That there was no Ecclesiasticall Court among the Jewes . ( I have before proved that that Councell of the Jewes in Christs time was an Ecclesiasticall Court , though he conceives it was meerely civill ) 2. That a private civill injury might not then , nor may not now , be brought before a civill Court , except after severall previous admonitions despised . 3. That Chists Rule , Tell the Church was antiquated and ceased , when a civill Court of Justice among the Jewes ceased . If he say that the same rule continueth for telling the civill Magistrate in case the offender prove obstinate after admonition , then I aske . ● . how will he reconcile himself ? for pag. 4. he saith the Church in this Text is onely the Sanhedrin or Court of civill Justice among the Jewes . 2. If this Text Mat. 18. was applicable to the primitive Church after the destruction of Ierusalem , and when there was no Jewish Sanhedrin to goe to , then the Pagan Magistracy must passe under the name of the Church , for they had no other civill Court of Justice to goe to . One thing I must needs take notice of , that whereas he would prove here that Tell the Church , is nothing , but , tell the civill Court of Justice among the Jewes , commonly called the Councell saith he , or Sanhedrin , he doth hereby overthrow all that he hath been building for the Jewish Sanhedrin at that time , had not power to judge civill , nor criminall , and least of all Capitall offences , but onely causes Ecclesiasticall : The Romans having taken from them their civill Government , and left them no Government nor Jurisdiction except in matters of Religion . I hope Master Prynne will not in this contradict i Erastus . And if so , how shall his Glosse stand , that this Text is to be understood of civill injuries yea , and of these onely , for remedy whereof he conceives that Christ sends his Disciples to the Jewish Sanhedrin ? How sweetly doe his Tenents agree together ? His fourth reason is , that those words , let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , cannot signifie excommunication , because Heathen men being never members of the Church , could never be excommunicated or cast out of it , being uncapable of such a censure . As for publicans , those of them who were members of the Jewish Church , though they were execrable to the Jewes , by reason of their Tax-gatherings and oppressions , yet we never read in Scripture , that they were excommunicated or cast out of their Synagogues , but contrarily , that they went up into the Temple to pray , as well as the Pharisees , and were more acceptable to Christ himself , &c. So likewise Sutlivius ( against Beza ) de pres●…yt . Cap. 9. pag. 57. I answer 1. by a retortion . Master Prynne p. 4. expounds these words , let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a publican , to be meant of avoiding familiar fellowship with the Brother that hath committed a civill trespasse , and keeping no more civill company with him . Now I argue thus ad hominem . This cannot be the meaning which he gives , because Heathens being never admitted into familiar fellowship and company with the Jewes ( who might not marry nor familiarly converse with them , as himself proveth pag. 4. ) could never be cast out of their fellowship and company , being uncapable of any such thing . If our exposition of excommunication must drive us to acknowledge that Heathens were formerly members of the Jewish Church , his exposition of avoiding familiar fellowship , must drive him to acknowledge that formerly the Heathens were admitted into familiar fellowship with the Jewes . 2. Those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , let him be unto thee , &c. do not look backward but foreward ; neither is the matching and comparing of the scandalous impenitent Brother , with an heathen , à priori , but à posteriori , so that no comparison is to be made between the praeterite Estate of an offending Brother , and the praeterite Estate of an Heathen man , but between the future Estate of an offending obstinate Brother , and the present Estate of an Heathen man. 3. Let him be unto thee as an Heathen , is as much as have no communion nor fellowship with him in the holy Assemblies nor in the Temple ; for Heathens were not permitted to come into the Temple Ezek. 44. 7. 9. Act. 21. 28. whereupon Paul is accused for bringing Greeks into the Temple and so polluting that holy place Act. 21. 28. Heathens were excluded from Atrium Israelis , the Court of Israel , which was without the Court of the Priests . There was without the Court of Israel , Atrium Gentium , the Court of the Heathen , otherwise called Intermurale , because it lay between the Temple and the utter wall mentioned Ezek. 42. 20. Into this utmost Court or intermurale Heathen men were admitted to come and worship there , according to that 1 Kings . 8. 41. 2 Chro. 6. 32. They might not onely come into the holy Land , but to the holy City , and not onely to the holy City , but to the mountain of the house of the Lord , yea , not onely to the mountaine of the Temple , but within the utter Wall : yet into the Court of Israel which was properly the first or utter Court of the Temple , they were forbidden to enter . He that would be further satisfied that these things were so , let him read Ioseph . antiq . lib. 15. cap. 14. T●…status in 1. Reg. 8. quaest . 21. Arias Montanus de saer . fabric . pag. 15. Azorius Instit . moral Tom. 1. lib. 6 Chap. 53. L'Empereur Annot. in Cod Middoth cap. 2. Sect. 3. Peradventure you will say , if it was thus , then an excommunicate person being esteemed as an Heathen , must not g●t leave to heare the word , nor at all to enter into the places of publike Ass●molies where the word was Preached . Answ. I will not now debate that point . Others have debated it with the Anabaptists who hold that excommunicate persons ought not be admitted to the Hearing of the word . Luc. Osiand . Enchirid. contra Anab. c. 6. quest . 2. but however it doth not follow upon what I have said , that excommunicate persons must be wholly excluded from hearing of the word . First , because the places of our publike worship have no Sacramentall significancy or holinesse as the Temple and Tabernacle had of old : therefore say the professors of Leyden there is not the like reason to exclude excommunicate persons wholly from our Temples , as there was excluding them from the Temple of Ierusalem . 2. because both Christ Io. 10. 23. and the Apostles Acts 5. 12. did use to Preach in Solomons Porch , ( b ) This Porch so called was the great east Porch in the Intermurale , whether Heathens were admitted , and so they did hear the word , though they had no leave to come into the Court of Israel , there to have fellowship with or to be esteemed and reputed among the people of God. Yea , as Master Selden tells us de Jure nat . & Gent. lib. 3. cap. 6. some understand by Solomons Porch act . 3. 11. & 5. 12. the very Court of the Gentiles , into which they came to worship , which Gentiles were not withstanding forbidden by a superscription under paine of death to enter into the Court of Israel , or into that which Iosephus calls the second Temple . Iosephus doth also make mention of foure Porches of the Temple ; into the utmost of which ( & this is certainly meant of Solomons porch ) it was lawful for heathens to come . contra appron . l. 2. 4. For the other part , let him be unto thee as a publican , if the meaning were no more but this avoid all fellowship and familiarity with him , it doth not hurt our Exposition : exclusion from the Temple being clearly signified by his being as an Heathen : and avoiding of fellowship with him being in the most emphaticall manner further expressed by his being as a publicans both these put together do the more fully hold forth excommunication . And in this sence some resolve the words . 5. Yet let us see how Master Prynne proves that the Publicans were admitted into the Temple or Synagogues . He tells us that Christ received them or conversed with them , as if the meaning had been to compare an impenitent Brother with penitent publicans , Luk. 18. 13. who drew neer to Christ to heare him Luk. 15. 2. who left all and followed Christ to be among his disciples Matth. 10. 3. Luk. 5. 27 , 28. Mark. 2. 15. who justified God Luk. 7. 29. who knew themselves to be sick of soule-diseases Matth. 9. 12 , 13. These very places cited by himself make against him . However the Question is how Publicans were esteemed of in the Jewish Church ( for that is the thing pointed at in those words , let him be unto thee as a Publican ) for that , he objecteth that Publicans went up into the Temple to pray . If he meane that Publicans who were neither devout Jewes nor Proselytes , went up into the Temple to pray , had accesse to and fellowship in the Sacrifices and Temple worship , as well as the Jewes themselves , it s more than he can prove . If he mean that publicans who were Jewes or Proselytes , went up into the Temple to pray , it helpeth him not , except he can prove that when Christ saith , let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a publican , the meaning is of such a publican as was a devout Jew or proselyte . And if so , then he had to prove that the Jewes did not keep civill company or fellowship , so much as with the religious publicans with whom they went together to the Temple to pray and worship . This also he hath to prove , not that religious publicans ( of whom Christ means not ) but that impious infamous Publicans came to the Temple . 6. That passage Luke 18. 10. concerning the Publicans goe ing up to the Temple to pray ; first , it is expressely declared to be a parable Vers. 9. and therefore can not prove the reality of the thing according to the letter , no more than an audible conference between Abraham and the rich man in Hell can be proved from Luke 16. 24. to the end of the Chapter , ( though I believe that be a History related parabolically , as V●…ssius proveth in his Theses : ) farre lesse can a parable properly so called prove an historicall narration . The meaning may be no other but this , that if such a Publican and such a Pharisee should goe up to the Temple to pray , then the one should depart justified , and the other not . 7. I can also grant without any prejudice to the businesse of Excommunication that the Publican , yea an execrable Publican did goe up to the Temple to pray . For an excommunicate person among the Jewes ( as many thinke ) so long as there was hope of his repentance , had leave to come into the utter Court of the Temple , yet so that they came in at the gate of the mourners , and excommunicate persons were known by all that saw them , to be excommunicate persons . More of this Booke 1. cap. 4. 8. This very Text Luke 18. helpes us . For t is said Vers. 13. The Publican stood afarre off , that is , ( in the opinion of Diodati ) in some remote part of the first Court of the Temple , 1 Kings 8. 41. It is very probable ( whereof see Book 1. chap. 9. that the Intermurale or atrium Gentium is meant , which sometime hath the name of the Temple . To the Publicans standing afarre off is opposed the Pharisees standing by himselfe , Vers. 11. where I construct 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Camero doth : So Camerarius and Beza following the Syriack and some old Greek copies : he stood apart by himselfe , the very custome making it so , that the Publican should not come neere him , but stand in atrio Gentium . 9. The reason why Publicans are named as hatefull and execrable persons , was not for civill respects , nor because Publicans , ( for the Jewes themselves did not refuse to keep company with good and just Publicans , as I shall prove afterwards : ) particularly , it was not for their Tax-gathering ( a particular mentioned by M r Prynne , it seems to strengthen his exposition of civill injuries ) but for divers scandalous sinnes and abominable prophanesse , therefore publicans and sinners , publicans and harlots , publicans and gluttons , and wine-bibbers are almost synonyma's in the Gospell , Matth. 9. 11. & 11. 19. & 21. 32. Murke 2. 16. Luke 5. 30. and Publicans are named as the worst of men , Matth. 5. 46 , 47. the most of them being so reputed . From all this which hath been said in answer to his fourth reason it appeareth that let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican , is more than he would make it , keepe not any familar company , or have no civill fellowship with him . And whereas page 4. he saith that Paul expresly interprets it so , 1 Cor. 5. 10 , 11 , 12. 2 Thess 3. 4. Ephes. 5. 11. Rom. 16. 17. I answer out of himselfe , in that same place , and pag. 5. Let him be to thee as an Heathen , &c. is a phrase never used elsewhere in Scripture . How then , saith he , that Paul doth expresly interpret it ? Paul commandeth to withdraw fellowship , ( and that for any scandalous sin in a Church-member , although it be no private injury to us , as the places quoted by himselfe make it manifest ) Therefore Paul doth expresly interpret that phrase Mat. 18. to be meant of withdrawing civill fellowship only . What consequence is there here ? I come to his fifth and last reason , the words runue only , Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , not to the whole Church . Answ. 1. This is the very thing he said in his first Quaere , which is answered before . I shall onely adde here another answer out of l Erastus , who argueth thus : One brother should forgive another seventy times in a day , if the offending brother doe so oft turn againe and crave pardon : Therefore so should the Church doe to a sinner that craveth pardon , even as often as he doth crave pardon . For ( saith he ) there can be no just reason given wherefore the whole Church ought not to doe herein , what Church members ought to doe severally . If this be a good argument when Christ saith , If thy brother repent , forgive him , Luke 17. 334. ( by which place M r Prynne expoundeth Matth. 18. 15. ) will it not be as good an argument , Let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican , therefore let him be such to the whole Church , when the whole Church is offended by his obstinacy and impenitency ? 2. Those words , Let him be to thee , cannot be restrictive . It must be at least extended to all such as are commanded to rebuke their brother , and if he continue obstinate to tell the Church . Now the commandement for rebuking our brother that fals into a scandalous sinne , is not restricted to him that is personally or particularly wronged , but it is a common Law of spirituall love , Levit. 19. 17. Yea , saith M r Hildersham , lect . 36. on Psal. 51. Every man hath received ●… commandement from Christ , to inform●… the governours of the Church of such a brother as cannot otherwise be reformed , Matth. 18. 17. Tell the Church . If it belong to every Church member to reprove a scandalous sinne which his brother committeth in his ●ight or hearing , or to his knowledge , and if he repent not , to tell the Church , then it also belongs to every Church member to esteeme him as an Heathen man and a Publican , if he heare not the Church . 3. The next words , Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Hraven , being spoken to the Apo les , and in them to other Mini●ers of Jesus Christ , doe expound the former words Let him be unto thee , &c. to be meant not of private withdrawing of fellowship , but of a publique Church censure . 4. The reason why Chri● will have such an offender to be esteemed as an Heathen man and a Publican , is not the offence and fault first committed , but his obstinacy and contumacy in that offence , and his neglecting to heare the Church . So that suppose the offence had been a private or personall injury ; yet that for which thē offender is to be esteemed as an Heathen and a Publican , toucheth the whole Church , and is a generall scandall to them all , namely his contumacy and not hearing the Church . How can it then be imagined , that Christ would onely have one Church member to esteem a man as an Heathen and a Publican , for that which is a common generall scandall to the whole Church ? m Munsterus in his Annotations upon Matth. 18. doth better hit the meaning , that the offender is to be esteemed as an Heathen man and a Publiean , by those who did before admonish him but were despised , that is , by the Church , whose admonitions being despised , they ought to cast out him who had despised them . 5. And how can it be supposed , that Christ would have one and the same person to be as a Heathen man and a Publican to one member of the Church , and yet not to be as ● Heathen man and a Publican , but as a brother received in fellowship by the whole Church ? Sure this were a repugnancy between the judgement of the whole Church , and the judgement of one member of the Church : and two things which are repugnant can not be both of them agreeable to the will of Christ. CHAP. III. A further demonstration that these words , Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , are not meant of avoyding Civill , but Religious or Church-fellowship . I Hope I have already made it to appeare that to draw Excommunication from Matth. 18. is not to extract water out of flint , as M r Prynne supposeth : but that it commeth as liquidè from the Text , as water out of the fountaine . Wherein I am the more confirmed , because M r Prynnes exposition of these words , Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , can not stand , for he takes the sence to be no more but this , keepe not any civill fellowship or company with such a one . Now that this can not be our Saviours meaning , I prove thus . 1. If a private man shall thus at his owne hand withdraw and separate from an offending brother , as from an Heathen man and a Publican , n what order , peace , or good government can there be either in Church or State ? And all the odium cast upon Excommunication ( as contrary to the spirituall priviledges of Christians ) will fall more heavy upon his owne way , which brings any man ( be he Prince , Parliament-man , Pastor , or whoever he be ) under so much slavery to the lust of any private person , that he may be by that person ( and by ten thousand persons more , in case of so many civill injuries , not amended after complaint to the Magistrate ) esteemed , avoyded , and abhorred , as an Heathen man and a Publican . So that in the issue it may fall out , that any man how eminent or deserving soever he be in Church or State , may be looked upon as a Heathen and a Publican by ten thousand of the people , before ever he be so judged by any Judicature . For instance , put case that a Minister be judicially convict to have wronged his parishioners in the matter of small tythes , and they conceive him to persevere in the same injury , must or may each of them flee from him as from an Heathen and a Publican ? Put case a whole company thinke themselves wronged in pay or otherwise by their Captaine , or a whole Regiment by their Colonell , and after complaint made finde themselves not repaired , are they therefore free to avoyd all civill company with the Captaine or Colonell , and to flee from them as from Heathens and Publicans ? And what if both the Lord Major of London and many godly Ministers who have eate at his Table , should accuse Mr. Prynne of a calumny , because of that passage in his Booke , pag. 12. where he saith of Anabaptists , Separatists , Independents , Presbyters or Divines , Neither of which make any conscience of not repairing to the Lord Majors , or any other publique City feast , where they are sure of good fare , because they were certaine there to meet and eate with some covetous or other scandalous persons , with whom St. Paul probibtes them , no not to eate ? If , I say , the Lord Major should accuse M r Prynne for slandering him and his house with the company of scandalous persons : and if many godly conscientious Ministers should accuse him for aspersing them , as having more love to good fare , then conscience of avoyding to eate with scandalous persons : And if after sentence past against M r Prynne he should still continue impenitent and not confesse his fault in this particular ? Will he allow the Lord Major , and all the godly Ministers who have eaten at the Lord Majors table to avoyd M r Prynne as an Heathen and a Publican ? Let hm take heed whether his principles will lead him . 2. M r Prynne saith pag. 4. that Let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican , is interpreted by 1 Cor. 5. 10 , 11 , 12. 2 Thess. 3. 14. and elsewhere by Paul. Now that place of the Corinthians which he citeth , is meant of Excommunication , as shall be proved in due time . And vers . 12. ( cited by himselfe ) makes it plaine , that a judiciall act , not a private mans withdrawing onely , is meant ; for that verse speaks twice of judging , an Apostolicall judgeing , and an Ecclesiasticall judging . And the best interpreters expound 2 Thess. 3. 14. of Church censures . It s not the case of private civill injucies which the Apostle there speaks of , but the case of publique scandall , If any man be disobedient to the Apostolicall Epistle , note that man , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , put a marke upon him , that is , let him be publiquely censured , Let him be separated from you , saith the Syriak , and then have no company with him , and all this that he may be ashamed , which must needs be by some publique censure or blacke mark put upon him . 3. Let him be to thee as an Heathen ; if it be meant of keeping no civil company , he must shew us that the Jews of old were and Christians under the new Testament are forbidden to keepe civill company with Heathens and those that are without the Church . He goeth about to prove that the phrase is taken from the practice of the Jewes in that age , pag. 4. But how doth he prove it ? He citeth some places to prove that the Israelites might not marry with the Canaanites , but he doth not prove that they might not keep civill company with any of the Heathens . There was no such favour nor fellowship permitted between the Israelites and the Canaanites , as between the Israelites and other Gentiles who came among them from other Lands , as Tostatus noteth in Matth. 26. quaest . 43. The reason was because God had destinat the Canaanites to utter destruction , and that the whole Land of Canaan should be given to the children of Israel . Onely some few by speciall dispensation were spared as the Gibeonites because Ioshua and the Princes had sworne unto them , and Rahab with her kindred because she saved the spies . But such extraordinary cases excepted , the Israelites ought not to permit any of the Canaanites to live , nor receive them though they had been willing to be circumcised as Tostatus there thinketh . However that great distance and alienation in point of fellowship between the Israelites and the Canaanites , was not qua Heathens , but qua Canaanites , otherwise the children of Israel had been obliged to root out other Nations as well as the Canaanites . Yea the Law puts an expresse difference between the Nations , in so much that some of them were not to be abominate , though others were , Deut. 23. 7. Thou shalt not abhorre an Edomite , for he is thy brother : thou shalt not abhorre an Egyptian , because thou wast a stranger in his Land. The very Canaanites themselves were by the Law , Deut. 20. 10 , 11. to have so much favour as an offer of peace , which if any of their Cities had accepted , that City was not to be cut off , but the people thereof were to be tributaries , and to serve Israel , and so permitted to live among them . The last of his citations maketh very much against him , namely , Acts 21. 28 , 29. where the Jewes of Asia doe accuse Paul for bringing Greekes into the Temple . For they had seen before with him in the City Trophimus an Ephesian , whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the Temple . Marke here Paul is not challenged for conversing familiarly with a Greeke , but onely for bringing him into the Temple ; and without all doubt the malice of his adversaries did catch at every advantage which they could have against him . I cannot but admire how M. Prynne could cite this place to prove that the Jewes might not converse nor keepe civill company with the Heathens , since it proveth the very contrary , that the Jewes might have civill , but no religious fellowship with Heathens . And whereas he addeth that the Jewes had no dealing or conversation with the Samaritans , Joh. 4. 9. Luke 9. 52 , 53. I answer , the reason was because the Jewish Church had excommnnicated and anathematized for ever the Samaritans , who being once circumcised and having received the booke of the Law , did afterward hinder the building of the house of the Lord. This Excommunication of the Cuthites or Samaritans most solemnly performed you may finde in Pirke R. Ecclesiae , cap. 38. More of this elsewhere . Here I onely touch it , to shew that this also of the Samaritans makes against him . 4. It is certaine that the Jewes had civill company and conversation with Heathens . For Solomons servants and Hirams servants were both together . 1 Kings 5. 18. 2 Chr. 2. 8. yea , 2 Chr. 2. 17 , 18. Solomon numbred of strangers or heathens in the Land of Israel , a hundred fifty and three thousand and six hundred . Could there be so many of them and employed also in the building of the Temple , and yet no civill company kept with them ? Nehemiah in the Court of Artaxerxes , and Daniel with his companions in the court of Nebuchadnenar had civill company with Heathens , but religious company with them they would have none . We finde the King of Edom in fellowship with Iehoshaphat and Iehoram , 2 Kings 3. And the Merchants of Tyre were permitted to come into Ierusalem , and there to fell all manner of ware unto the children of Iuda , onely they were forbidden to doe it upon the Sabbath day , Nehem. 13. 16 , 20 , 21. L'Empereur de legibus Ebraeorum forensibus pag. 180 , 181. putteth it out of controversie , that in Christs time there were many Heathens in the Land of Canaan with whom the Jewes did converse and dwell together ; and that Christ found in those places where he preached both Jewes and Gentiles . Istis locis inter istos commorabantur Gentiles , qui magistrorum placitis se astringi passi non sunt . And a little after , Nec enim Israelitas ab alienigenarum urbibus abstinuisse , Iosephus Indicat . And that long before that time there was a mutuall conversing of Jewes and Gentiles , I gather from 1 Kings 20. 34. Thou shalt make streets for thee in Damascus as my father made in Samaria , meaning for trade and commerce . I will here anticipate a great objection which may be made against me , from Acts 10. 28. Ye know that it is an unlawfull thing for a man that is a Jew to keepe company or come unto one of another Nation . This might seem to make more for M r Prynnes exposition , then all the places cited by himselfe . But I answer , for the better understanding of that place , first of all observe what Drusius Quaest. & resp . lib. 2. quaest . 67. tels us out of Elias in Thesbite : The Jewes had an old law against drinking Wine with Gentiles or Heathens , Lata videlicet eo tempore quo gentes vinum libabant in sacris , the Law was made at that time when the Gentiles used a praelibation of Wine in their idolatrous solemnities : whereupon the wise men of the Jewes fearing lest Heathen men should give to Jewes that Wine which had been dedicated to Idols did forbid the Jewes to drinke Wine with Heathens : which ( as other Statutes of their wise men ) the Jewes did religiosè religiously observe . Marke we hence , 1. It was not a generall received custome among the Jewes , in no case to eate or drinke with Heathens ; else it had been unnecessary and supervacaneous to forbid the drinking of Wine with Heathens , exceptio affirmat regulam in non exceptis . 2. It was for a religious and consciencious reason , propter 〈◊〉 idololatriae , for feare of pertaking with Idolatry , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 civill respects , that they were forbidden to drinke Wine with the Gentiles . The same I say of their shunning to eate with them , for the Heathens used also a dedicating of their meats to Idols , 1 Cor. 10. 27. Secondly , observe Peter addeth immediately : but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or uncleane : meaning , so as not to keepe company with him because of his Gentilisme or uncircumcision , or because of his eating of meats which were uncleane by the ceremoniall Law , as Ludovicus de Dieu doth rightly give the meaning , understanding , not morall , but onely ceremoniall uncleannesse to be there spoken of ; for many men under the Gospell are still to be looked upon and avoyded as morally uncleane . But God had taught Peter by abrogating the ceremoniall differences of meats in the vision , that the ceremoniall Law which was the partition wall between Jewes and Gentiles , was now to be taken away : so that the Gentiles should be no longer called dogs , as Matth. 15. 26. neither were the Disciples to be forbidden any longer to goe into the way of the Gentiles , Matth. 10. 5. Henc forth no man should be called holy because of his circumcision , no man uncleane because of his uncircumcision . This being the meaning , it followeth that the unlawfulnesse of eating and companying with an Heathen mentioned Act. 10. 28. must not be so understood , as if bare civill fellowship had been unlawfull ; but it must be understood , first , in reference to the morall Law , that is for avoiding the danger of Idolatry in eating or drinking that which Idolatrous Heathens had sacrificed to Idolls , as hath been just now cleared . Secondly , in reference to the Ceremoniall Law , or of such fellowship as was contrary to the ceremoniall Law , in eating together with Heathens of meats legally unclean , such as were represented to Peter in the vision , and he commanded to eate what was formerly unclean to him . Otherwise when the Gentiles did not eat any thing which the Jewes were forbidden to eat , it was lawfull for the Jewes to eat with the Gentiles saith Tostatus in 2. Paral. 6. Quest. 21. So likewise Grotius de Jure Belli ac pacis lib. 2. cap. 15. Sect. 9. where he referreth the Jewes their not eating with the Heathens , to the Law of meats or the peculiaris victus which was prescribed to the Jewes . But otherwise the Law did not make it unlawfull for them to eat with any of another Nation : which he thinks is proved by Christs own example who took a drink of water from the woman of Samaria , being yet most observant of the Law. That the unlawfulnesse of eating with the Heathens was understood in reference to the ceremoniall Law , I prove , from Gal. 2. 12. 14. Peter having before eaten with the Gentiles , to avoid the scandall of some Jewes that came from Iames , did withdraw and separate himself from the believing Gentiles : What ? to keep no more any civill company with them . I hope no man will imagine that . But the Text expounds it selfe vers . 14. If thou being a Iew , livest after the manner of the Gentiles , and not as doe the Iewes , why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as doe the Iewes ? This was Peters fault , that having formerly lived as the Gentiles , that is , eating with them all sorts of meats freely , thinking himself liberate from the Yoke of the ceremoniall Law , afterward he withdrew and separated himself from that manner of fellowship with the Centiles , and bound up himselfe to live as doe the Jewes , and to observe the distinction of meats according to the Law. And in so doing , whiles he avoided the scandall of the Jewes , he gave a greater scandall to the Gentiles in compelling them by the authority of his example to Judaize , and to thinke the ceremoniall Law necessary . Thirdly , The foresaid place Act. 10. is to be understood of such fellowship as was not meerely civill , but religious and sacred : as may appear , 1. by the exposition formerly given of these words , God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean . 2. by the invitation of the men that were sent from Cornelius to Peter who did not call him to civill but to sacred fellowship Act. 10. 22. And they said , Cornelius the Conturion , a just man and one that feareth God , and of good report among all the Nation of the Jewes , was warned from God by an holy Angell , to send for thee into his house and to heare words of thee . 3. Peter calls in the men and lodgeth them ; that being a civill fellowship , he doth it freely , v. 23. but when he comes to Cornelius and those that were assembled with him , to heare words from Peter , here was the case of conscience , and here Peter beginneth to apologize v. 28. ye knew how that it is an unlawfull thing , &c. The Syriak hath it thus , ye know that it is not lawfull for a man that is a Jew to joyn himself unto a man that is a stranger , who is not a sonne of his generation : as it were intimating a religious and Church fellowship . 4. That which gave offence to them of the circumcision at Ierusalem . was , that they heard Peter had so gone in to men uncircumcised , that they had also received the word of God from him Act. 11. 1. 3. And as soone as they were satisfied in that point , that God had given unto the Gentiles repentance unto life vers . 18. they held their Peace , and made no further scruple concerning eating with them . I hope I have sufficiently answered the strongest objection which can be made against that which I did begin to prove , namely , that the Jewes might and did keep civill company and fellowship with Heathens . Which that I may now further consirme , let it be observed with Schindlerus in lexic. pentaglo p. 297. that there were two sorts of Proselytes among the Jewes . Some that were circumcised and received the Law of Moses ; and such a one was even as a Jew , and was called Proselytus justitiae or faederis , a righteous or a true Proselyte , or a Proselyte of the Covenant . Others , that did onely renounce ldolatry and keep the seven precepts given to the sonnes of Noah , not being circumcised nor keeping the Law of Moses , were permitted to dwell with the Jewes , and therefore such a one was called Proselytus portae or Proselytus incola , a Proselyte of the Gate , or a Proselyte indweller , who dwelt within their Gates . See for the same thing L'Empereur de legibus Ebraeorum forensibus pag. 72 Buxtorflexic . Rabbin . p. 408. 409. Grotius de Jure belli acpacis lib. 1. cap. 1. Sect. 16. Henr. Vorstius observ . ad chronol . R. Ganz . pag. 279. Georgius Genzius in annot . ad Maimon . canon . Ethic. p. 91. 92. To the same purpose , Master Ainsworth annot . in Gen. 9. 4. and on Exod. 12. 45. and on Levit. 22. 10. hath noted out of the Hebrew writers : that such of the Heathens as did observe the seven precepts given to the Sonnes of Noah , though they were not circumcised , neither did observe the Ordinances of the ceremoniall Law , nor were admitted to the holy things of the Children of Israel , yet they were permitted to cohabit and converse with the people of God in the holy Land. And that it was so , may be proved from Levit. 25. 6. 45. 47. ( where the Chaldee hath an uncircumcised indweller ) Deut. 14. 21. yea , such a one might dwell in the Priests house Lev. 22. 10. The Jewes receive no Proselyte now except one that undertakes to keep the whole Law to the least jote , as Doctor Buxtorf informes us in the place last cited : and so they are a great deale more strict in reference to the Gentiles then the Antient Jewes were . Notwithstanding they doe without scruple familiarly converse and keep company with Gentiles who keep not the last of the seven precepts which bind ( as they think ) all the Sonnes of Noah , namely that concerning the not eating of blood . How much more may we suppose that the Antient Jewes did keep civill company and fellowship with such Gentiles as did observe all these seven precepts ? And this comparison the Jewes have made between themselves and the Gentiles in reference to the Law of Moses . It is our inheritance , not theirs : as for them , let them observe the seven precepts . Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin . cap. 7. Sect. 6. So that the Jewes were not scandalized at the Gentiles their not observing of the whole Law of Moses , not being circumcised , &c. but at their not keeping of those seven precepts , which were also a part of the Law of Moses . This to me appeareth to be a chief reason ( if not the reason ) why the Synod of the Apostles & Elders at Ierusa . did impose upon the Churches of the Gentiles no other burthen of Jewish rites & Ceremonies , but to abstain from blood & things strangled : they did not impose circumcision , nor holy dayes , nor the like : because that which was intended was , to draw together the beleevers of the Jewes & the beleevers of the Gentiles into a familiar conversation , that they might live together and eat together without scandall : and this could not be , except the beleiving Gentiles should observe the seven precepts which were given not onely to the posterity of Abraham , but to the posterity of Noah ; of which precepts one did forbid the eating of blood Gen. 9. 4. ( and under that is comprehended also the eating of things strangled ) Now there was no doubt of the beleiving Gentiles their observing of the other six precepts which the Hebrewes say were observed from Adam to Noah : the first against Idolatry , 2. against blasphemy , 3. against shedding of blood , 4. against uncleannesse or unlawfull copulations , 5. against Rapine or Robbery , 6. for executing judgement and inflicting punishment upon malefactors . All the question was of the seventh and last against eating of blood , which the beleiving Gentiles ( though they knew it to be older then the ceremoniall Law or circumcision it self , and to belong to all the posterity of Noah , yet ) knew to be temporary and not perpetuall , and so at the abrogation of the other ceremonies , and propagation of the Gospell to the Gentiles , thought themselves free from that , as well as other Ceremonies . On the other part , it was a principle among the Jewes , that they ought not to converse familiarly with any of the Gentiles , except such as observe the seven precepts given to the Sonnes of Noah . Wherefore the Synod of the Apostles and Elders thought good that the beleiving Gentiles should so farre condescend to the weaknesse of the Jewes ( not fully instructed concerning Christian liberty , and the abrogation of the old ceremonies ) as to observe for a time that precept against eating blood , as well as the other precepts given to the Sonnes of Noah ; to the intent that the Jewes and Gentiles might Peaceably and familiarly cohabite and converse together : for though the Gentiles did not observe the other ordinances and ceremonies of the Jewes : yet observing those seven precepts , they were free to converse familiarly with the Jewes . Schindlerus in his Lexicon pentagl . pag. 298. land pag. 1530 seemeth to have had the same notion ; for he saith the Apostles and Elders would not impose circumcision and the keeping of the Law of Moses , but they imposed some things not unlike to the precepts given to the Sonnes of Noah . I returne to that distinction of the two sorts of Proselytes . The one had the name of Ger tzedek a Proselyte of righteousnesse , and Ger berith , a Proselyte of the Covenant . The other was called Ger toschav , a Prosclyte indweller and Ger schagnar , a Proselyte of the Gate , qui intra portas , inter Judaeos scilicet habitabat , who dwelt within the Gates , to wit among the Jewes saith Matthias Martinius in Lexic . philol . pag. 2922. This Proselyte indweller was not called nor esteemed as one of the Jewes , being no Church Member , nor admitted to any religious or Church Commnnion with the Jewes , but he was still esteemed and reckoned as one of the uncircumcised Gentiles . Yet the Iewes did keep civill company and fellowship with such a one , as with a neighbour and a inhabitant of the same City , or Land. And if the Jewes had not been free to keep civill company with Heathens or Infidells , yet Christians are expressely allowed to do so . 1 Cor. 10. 27. If any of them that beleeve not , bid you to a Feast , aud ye be disposed to go , whatsoever is set before you , eat , asking no question for conscience sake ; and Ch. 5. 10. 11. 12. the Apostle permitteth Christians to company and eat with Fornicators , Covetous , Extortioners , or Idolaters , who are no Church-Members , but by no meanes with scandalous Brethren . I doe not dispute whether any more liberty of this kind is granted to Christians , then peradventure was granted to the Jewes . Yet I am sure a great measure of the liberty of civill fellowship with Heathens was granted to the Jewes also . It must needs follow from that which hath been said , that , Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , is not a casting out from mere civill fellowship and company , but from religious and Church-fellowship . This agreeth well with that passage in Iosephus contra Appionem lib. 2. Whoever ( of the Gentiles ) are willing to come and live under our Law , it doth freely receive them esteeming Communion to consist not onely in origination or descent , but also in choyce of life . But as for those ( of the Gentiles ) who come occasionally among us , our Law doth not admit them into our solemne or sacred Assemblies , but it appointeth to communicate unto them all such things as they need , as fire , water meat , also to shew them the way , and to let none of them be unburied . ( So likewise Publicans noted for impiety and injustice were permitted to be City Members , but not owned for Church-Members ) Grotius de Jure Belli ac pacis lib. 2. c. 15. Sect. 9. holds that it was lawfull for the Jewes , not onely to have company and commerce with Heathens , but to doe them good and to enter in League and Covenant with them , such onely excepted as the Law did accurse , namely the seven Nations in Canaan , the Amalekites , Ammonites and Moabites . He brings among other things the example of the Asmonites , who as they were themselves skilled in the Law , so with the approbation both of Priests and People , they made a Covenant with the Lacedemonians and Romanes : yea publikely prayed for them . Learned Master Selden de Jure nat . & Gent. lib. 2. c. 3 doth not onely confirme what hath been said before of the Proselyti Domicilii , Heathens not circumcised nor keeping the Law of Moses , but observing the seven precepts given to the Sonnes of Noah , and that such were permitted to dwell together with the Children of Israel ; but he further tells us out of Maimonides that though when the Jewish Republike did flourish and when they were sui Juris , no strangers were permitted to dwell among them except such as did renounce Idolatry and keep the seven precepts , yet after the captivity and under the Romans , the Jewes did allow to themselves a common commerce and civill conversing even with such Gentiles , as had not renounced the Pagan or Idolatrous worship ; & as for such of the Gentiles , as the Jewes did observe to be good men whom they called ex piis è Gentibus mundi , such as Cornelius the Centurion , to whom the Jewes themselves gave a good estimony of these he saith that though they were not formally admitted and received as Proselyte indwellers were wont to be ( that formall reception of Proselyti Domicilii having ceased in those later times ) yet he puts it out of doubt that the Jewes were willing that such Gentiles should dwell among them . Adde hereunto that which Gul. Vorstius annot . in Maimon . de fundam●…legis cap. 5. Sect. 9. observeth ou● of Beth Joseph de Idololat . and out of aboda zara , that a Heathen man was permitted to be Phi●tian to a Jew , provided that he should not entice him to Idolatry : and that a Jew also was permitted to be Physitian to a Gentile , for which purpose they alledged the example of Moses who ( as their Tradition told them ) did practice medicine in Egypt . Furthermore when Master Prynne understands nothing by those words Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , but avoid civill fellowship and keep no familiar company with him , and expounds it also by 1 Cor. 5. 11. with such a one not to eat ( which he still conceives to be onely meant of avoiding civill fellowship ) and by 2. Io. 10. receive him not into thy house . He is twice out , both because the Jewes did keep civill company with Heathens which hath been proved : and also because ( if we beleive the Jewish writters concerning the customes of their Nation ) the Rabbies or wise men among them did not keep familiar fellowship nor civill company with the Plebeians of the Jewes themselves : they were forbidden to eat and drink with or among the Plebeians . Maimen de fundam . legis cap. 5. Sect. 13. neither might they converse in the paths nor come into the houses of the Plebeians . Ibid. Sect. 14. Gul. Vorstius in his annot . pag. 73. addeth a passage in Misua that a wise man might neither lodge with a Plebeian nor receive a Plebeian to lodge with him . Neverthelesse a wise man was permitted to converse not onely civilly but frequently with an Heathen man , for which see Master Selden de Jure nat . & Gent. lib. 6. cap. 10. quoniam nihil mali ex Gentilium consuetudine viro scientiori im●…inere censebant . So that in Master Pryn●… sence , all the Plebeians of the Jewes themselves were as Heathens and Publicans , or civilly excommunicated by their wise men . Wherefore we must needs distinguish a two fold communion or fellowship among the Jewes , one civill , another Ecclesiasticall ; It was the shutting out from the Ecclesiasticall communion of the Jewes , which Christ alludes to Mat. 18. for beside the distinct notions of the Jewish Church and the Jew State ( of which before ) Is. Abrabanel de capitc fidei cap. 6. speaking of certaine fundamentall Articles which the Jewish Church did beleive , saith , they were intended to be Articles of Judaisme , so that he that should beleive these should be in the communion of Israel : and Ib. cap. 3. speaking of an Article concerning the coming of the Messiah , he moves a doubt about it , because Rabbi Hillell who denieth it , was not excluded from the communion of the Law , for the Gema●…a gives him the Title of Rabbi . When he comes to the solution of this doubt cap. 14. he cleares Rabbi Hillell , as not denying that Article . But all this intimateth that for heresy there was a shutting out from Ecclesiasticall communion : Or that an hereticall apostat Jew was unto them as an Heathen man ; and therefore they were permitted to take usury as from strangers or Heathens , so from an apostat Jew , quia fratris nomen exuerat saith Master Selden de Jure nat . & Gent. lib. 6 c. 10. In Tzemach David edit . Hen. Uorst . pag. 67. it is said that the chief of the Hereticks were Tzadok and Baythos , who denying rewards and punishments after this life , exiverunte communione ( vel caetu Israelis ) they went out from the Ecclesiasticall communion of Israel . This is good reason to say of a sonne of Israel , if he be a sonne of Belial , let him be to thee as an Heathen , that is , esteeme him as prophane , and as lost as an Heathen ; have no more Church communion with him then with an Heathen . And by this time I suppose it doth fully appeare to the intelligent Reader that some uncircumcised Heathens were admitted in to the civill fellowship , and some Israelites continued not in the Ecclesiasticall fellowship of ihe Jewes : which overturneth the whole strength of M r Prynnes answer to our argument from Matth. 18 But once more , ( for I have thought good to insist the longer upon this point , because much dependeth upon it . ) Let him be to thee as an Heathen , doth forbid Ecclesia●icall communion , not civill company except secondarily & as a consequent of Excommunication , & for spirituall respects and ends ( as I shall shew anon ) but it is not meant of abstaining from meere civil company & fellowship : because the Jews were permitted to keep civil company and fellowship with Heathens , even any civill company which did not encroach upon Religion , or had appearance of an ensnarement into Idolatry , and in that respect ( as participating of Religious fellowship ) became unlawfull . This is the point I have been proving , and which I will yet further prove out of Maim mides de Idolalotria cap ▪ 9. That one Chapter is sufficient to 〈◊〉 the present question . Thus it begins . Three daies before the feasts ( or holydaies ) of Heathens that worship Idols , we are forbidden to buy from them , or to sell unto them any durable thing ; to take or give any thing in lend ; to take or make payment of that which was given in lend upon writ , or pledge ; but what was given in lend upon words onely , it is lawfull to exact ; because this seemeth to be taken out of their hands . It is also lawfull to sell unto them , that which can not last , as green herbs or anything sodden ; and that ever untill their holy day . You see it was lawfull among the Jewes to buy and sell , borrow and lend , to make contracts , with Heathens , yea with Idolatrous Heathens ; onely in some ( not in all ) things there was a restraint upon them , and that but three daies before the Heathen sestivities . Then follows Sect. 2. This hath place in the land of the Israelites : but in the other lands , it is not forbidden except upon their holy day . If any man transgresse , by having trade or commerce with them , during that space of three daies , it is lawfull ( though ) to use the ware : but if any man trade with them upon their holyday , the things are forbidden to be used . It is unlawfull also to send a gift to an Heathen man upon his holy day : unlesse it be known that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 n●…t 〈◊〉 the worship of Idols , neither ser●…eth them . But if som●… 〈◊〉 m●…n upon his Holyday send a gift to an Israelite , let him not take it from him , 〈◊〉 it be suspected that h●… will be offended . Nevertheless●… he shall not use it , untill it be known that the Heathen man doth not worship Idols nor esteem them to be Gods. Observe 1. that the things mentioned in the first Section , though unlawfull to the ●ewes in their own Land , three daies before the Heath●nish 〈◊〉 , yet they held them not unlawfull in other Lands . 2. They held it lawfll for a Jew to send a gift to an Heathen man , or to receive a gift from him , so that it were not upon the Heathenish festivity . 3. Yea in some cases it was permitted to a Jew to send a gift to an Heathen man , upon the very Heathen festivity , ( to wit , if he knew that Heathen man to be no worshipper of Idols ) as likewise to receive a gift from him ( though upon the holy day ) for avoyding of offence . Sect. 4. reckoneth among the Heathenish festivities a day set apart by them for coronation of a King , or in memory of a mans nativity , deliverance out of danger , or the like . Then it is added Sect. 5. But with those Idolaters who spend that day in mirth and gladnesse , eating and drinking , and observe that day whether for custome or for the Kings honour , neverthelesse hold it not for a holy day , it is lawfull to have commerce and trade . Wh●n conversing with Heathens did not entrench upon Religion , they could doe it without scruple , even upon the Heathens good daies or solemnities of joy . Then Sect. 8. Is Israelites dwell among Heathens with whom they have made a Cov●…nt , it is lawfull to sell armes to the Kings servants and to his military forces , &c. It is unlawfull to enter into a Town in which Idolatry is practiced : it is lawfull to come out of it . But if the Idoll be without the Town , it is also lawfull to enter in it . If the Jewes might dwell among and enter into league and covenant with Heathens , yea enter into the Townes of Idolaters , when the Idoll was not in Town , then they held it not unlawfull to have any civill company with Heathens . It follows Sect. 11. It is lawfull to goe to the markets or faires of Heathens , and to buy from them beasts , men-servants , maid-servants , though they be yet Heathens : also houses fields , vineyards . Also for writing ( contracts ) it is permitted to goe to their judiciall courts . If it be objected that Sect. 12. doth forbid an Israelite to come to the banquet of a Heathen , which he hath made for his sonne or for his daughter ; I answer from that very place . For lest this should be taken for a prohibition of civill fellowship , Maimonides did adde these words . Now this intervall is appointed for Idolatry : for it is said , and one call thee , and thou eate of his Sacrifice , and thou take of their daughters unto thy sonnes , and they goe a wboring after their Gods : citing Exod. 34. 15 , 16. From all which I conclude , that Christs words , relating to the Jewish custome , Let him be to thee as a Heathen man , cannot be meant ( as M r Prynne would have them ) of avoyding meere civill company and fellowship ; for as much as it was not held unlawfull among the Jewes to have civill company and commerce with Heathens . Sure the Jewes of our age are farre from holding such a thing unlawfull . Yea so farre I am unsatisfied with M r Prynnes interpretation , that I verily believe ( and so doe some others ) a part of the intendment of these words , Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , is to hold forth the lawfulnesse , yea the obligation of performing all naturall ( and in diverse cases morall ) duties to a person Excommunicated : I meane that the Text doth intimate thus much . As upon the one hand the contumacious offender who will not heare the Church , is to be used no better than an Heathen or a prophane Publican , and is not to be admitted to any Ordinance , except such as Heathens and prophane Publicans are and may be admitted unto ; So upon the other hand , let him have no worse usage and entertainment , then those very Heathens and Publicans , unto whom all naturall and some morall duties are performed , notwithstanding they be Heathens and Publicans . For the Apostle commandeth Christians to be subject even to Heathen Magistrates , servants to honour and be subject to heathen and ungodly Masters , the wife not to depart from the husband because he believeth not . So that this rule of Christ , Matth. 18. 17. is so full and perfect , as to teach us , as well what fellowship is lawfull with such a one , as what fellowship is not lawfull to be kept with him . I doe not deny but that ( according to the ordinary rule ) fellowship with an excommunicate person in meat , drinke , familiarity , and salutations , is unlawfull , as well as in the Sacrament and prayer , according to the received rule : Si pro delictis , anathema quis efficiatur ; Os , or are , vale , communio , mensa negatur . And the Scripture forbidding to eate with such a one , or to have company with him , or to bid him God speed , will reach as farre . Neverthelesse there are divers excepted or reserved cases in which the performance of naturall duties unto and keeping of civill company with an excommunicate person is allowed . The exception made from the rule is this : Haee anathema quidem faciunt , ne possit obesse : Utile , lex , humile , res ignorata , necesse . Utile , as when a man seeketh payment of debt from an excommunicate person . Lex , because the law alloweth husband and wife to company together , though the one of them be excommunicate . Humile , because children may and ought to doe the duties of children , and servants the duty of servants , and subjects the duty of subjects , and vassals the duty of vassals , and souldiers the duty of souldiers , in companying with submitting unto , honouring and obeying of their excommunicated Parents , Masters , Kings , Lords , Commanders . R●…s ignorata , when he that companieth with an excommunicate person , doth not know that he is excommunicate . Necesse , as when a man passeth through the Land or is under the power of excommunicate persons , or some such way is drawn into a necessity of speaking and companying with them . All which is most agreeable to this expression , Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , and to the nature of Excommunication , which doth not breake asunder naturall or morall , but spirituall and ecclesiasticall bonds . If it be asked why then are we forbidden to eate with an excommunicate person , or to bid him God speed ; I answer , these things are not forbidden but under a spirituall notion and for a spirituall end , that the offender may be ashamed and humbled , that others may not be deceived by countenancing of him or companying with him , and that our eating with him or saluting of him may not be interpreted as a conniving at , or complying with his sinnes , or as a signe of Christian fellowship with a scandalous person formerly called a brother ▪ sinally that God may be the more glorified , wickednesse the more ashamed , others the more edified , the sinner the more abas●d , our selves the better kept from snares by avoyding of all appearance of evill . Otherwise setting aside these and such like spirituall considerations and respects , I doe aver that Excommunication hath nothing to doe with the avoyding of civill company qua civill , that is under a civill or politicalln otion . Thus we have the negative part of the rule of Christ. Now to the positive part . What is it to be as an Heathen and a Publican ? He must not be worse used in naturall or civill things , y●t he mu● be used in the same manner as an Heathen and a Publican , in spirituall things . Wherefore , Let him be as an Heathen man , implieth foure things : 1. I have proved that Heathens were not permitted to come into the utter Court of the Temple , which the children of Israel did come into , onely they might come and worship in the 〈◊〉 or atrium Gentium ; and when they were at any time brought into the Temple , it s challenged both by God , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●9 . and by the people of the Jews , Acts 21. 28. 2. H●ns , though sojourning among the children of Israel , and dwelling within their gates might not eate of the Passeover Exod. 12. 43 , 45. where the civill fellowship was allowed , partaking of the Passeover was forbidden . 3. No Heathen man , no not he that was in the Priests house , might ca●e of an offering of the holy things , Levit. 22. 10 , 13. 4. A Sac●ifice was not accepted from the hand of an Heathen L●…it . 22. 25. those that came from a farre Countrey to pray and worship before the Temple , if they had brought out of their owne Countrey , or had bought in the Land of Israel , beasts , or Bread , or Oyle , or Frankincence , or the like , and brought any of these for an Oblation , it was not accepted from their hand as Tostatus in 2. paral . 6. quest . 21. rightly observeth . Onely he collecteth from Ezra 6. 8 , 10. that an Heathen might give to the Priests money or expences to buy Sacrifices , and to offer them in the Temple . Fiftly , and generally , the Heathens had no part or portion with Gods people , Nehem. 2. 20. they were not within but without the Church , being aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel , and strangers from the covenants of promise , having no hope , and without God in the world , Ephes. 2. 12. So that , Let him be as an Heathen must reach thus farre , Let him no more partake in the Ordinances then an Heathen , have no more Church-communion with him then with an Heathen , let him be no more acknowledged for a Church member than an Heathen . And good reason ; he hath made himselfe as an Heathen , yea worse than an Heathen , Rom. 2. 25. If thou be a breaker of the Law , thy circumcision is made uncircumcision . Yea a scandalous and prophane Church member is worse then an Infidell , 1 Tim. 5. 8. 1 Cor. 5. 1. This fivefold restraint of Heathens from the Temple , from the Passeover , from eating of an Offering , from bringing an Oblation unto the Lord , and generally from all Church fellowship , did lie even upon those Heathens who did cohabit and familiarly converse with the children of Israel , who are called proselyti domicilii : and no Heathen man was free of such restraint , except proselyti justitiae , who were circumcised and made members of the Jewish Church , and had the name of Jewes . Finally , Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man , may have a Commentary from 1 Sam. 26. 19. where David curserh his enemies before the Lord , because they had made him as an Heathen man : they have driven me out this day from abiding in the inheritance of the Lord , saying , Goe serve other Gods. He did not reckon his banishment , want of civill liberties , cutting off from the civill fellowship and company of the children of Israel , in comparison of that which was farre worse to him , and a great deale heavier to be borne , namely , that he was rejected and repudiate from spirituall fellowship with Gods people , from partaking in the holy Ordinances , from comming to the Sanctuary , from the Church priviledges , that his persecution was materially and substantially an Excommunication , and qua Excommunication it was more grievous to him then qua persecution . I suppose it now appeares that Let him be to thee as an Heathen man , is a shutting out not from civill , but from sacred fellowship . The other branch , Let him be to thee as a Publican , I have before said enough of it . This onely I adde . There were among the Jewes two sorts of Publicans : some were good and just men , exacting no more then what was appointed them ; others were unjust and extortioners , and thereby made infamous . The former sort the Hebrews have professed they were willing to converse civilly withall , as members of the same Common-wealth . See L'Empereur de legibus Ebraeorum forensibus , pag. 272. But when Christ saith , Let him be to thee as a Publican , he means the impious and unjust Publican onely , as the same learned Antiquary there saith . And so when our Saviour bids us esteem such a one not onely as an Heathen man , but as a Publican , he means that he is not only to be denied fellowship in the holy things , but further made infamous among the people ; for the name Publican is used to signifie the worst of men , Matth. 5. 46 , 47. and in the Gospell it is said , Publicans and Sinners , Publicans and Harlots , as was noted before . So Hierome upon Matth. 18. 17. understands the name of Publicans secundum Tropologiam , for such as are given to unlawfull gaines , deceits , thefts , perjuries , and such like abominable wickednesses . Wherefore we must not thinke that for civill respects of Tax-gathering or the like the Jewes refused to keepe civill company or fellowship with the Publicans . For we read in Exc. Gem. Sanbedrin cap. 3. sect . 3. that though he that was a shepheard , as such , was unfit to be a witnesse , yet he that was simply a Publican ( that is , as I. Coch. saith in his Annotation , a Publican who is not convict of exacting more then is appointed by Law ) or a Publican as a Publican is not forbidden to be witnesse . Where it is also added , that the father of R. Sira had the office of a Publican thirteen yeeres . Hence we see that a Publican were he a Jew or Gentile , provided he were a just Publican , his testimony had faith and credit in Judgement ; How then can it be supposed that the Jewes did not so much as keep any civill company with such a one ? We must therefore understand that the Jewes refused to have any fellowship with the impious and unjust Publicans , as with Church members , and this the Jewes did because of their scandalous ungodlinesse and unrighteousnesse . Wherefore to be esteemed as a Publican was esteemed among the Jewes , comprehendeth these three things . 1. To be esteemed as the worst of men , impious , abominable , execrable , infamous , and as it were publici odii victimae , for so were the Publicans esteemed among the Jewes . D r Buxtorf●…lexic . Chald. Talm. & Rabbin . pag. 1065. tels us that where in Sanhedrin fol. 44. 2. it is said of a certaine Publican , the Glosse expounds it thus , Of a certaine wicked man. 2. Not to hold or keep with such a one , the religious Christian fellowship , which we keep with Church members ; yea , and ( for religious ends , and in spirituall respects , as was said before ) not to keep with such a one , so much as that civill fellowship which we are permitted to keep with Pagans and unbelievers , with whom when bidden to a feast , we may goe and eate together as the Apostle expresly resolveth , but with him that is called a brother when scandalous and obstinate , ( and therefore justly made as a Publican ) we may not so much as eate , as the same Apostle teacheth , wherein those are ever to be excepted , who are tied by naturall relations to performe naturall and humane duties to the party excommunicate and made as a Publican , as the wife to the husband , the children to their parents . In both these respects , Let him be as a Publican , superaddeth somewhat , and saith more then was in that other part , Let him be as an Heathen man. The third thing which I conceive to be meant by being esteemed as a Publican , is coincident with was meant by Let him be as an Heathen , that is , let him be kept that which back from communion and fellowship with the Church in the holy things . M r Prynne brought a parabolicall argument concerning the Publicans going up to the Temple to pray . That devout and religious Publicans , whether Jewes or Gentiles did goe up into the Temple to pray , I make no question , and such a one is the Publican in the Parable ; yea , if we marke the Pharisees owne words he speaketh of that Publican as one of the best and most religious Publicans Luk. 18. 11. God , I thanke thee that I am not as other men are , extortioners unjust , adulterers , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 even as this Publican , The vulgar Latin hath it velut etiam hic publicanus , as likewise this Publican , making the publican to be one of those extortioners , unjust , adulterers . But it is a mistake of the Text , which plainly holds forth a disjunctive , not a copulative sence . The Pharisee is further declaring what himself was not , and the disjunctive ● intimateth some new matter . Therefore the Syriak and Arabik hath it , neither as this publican . Erasmus , aut etiam ut hic publicanus . Arias Monntanus , aut & ut hic publicanus . and the English , or even as this publican . Many of the publicans were extortioners , unjust , adulterers , but the Pharisee thought he had not said enough when he had preferred himself to these , therefore he addeth this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or even as this publican , which is a rising and heightning of his speech , as if he had said , God , I thank thee that I am more holy and righteous then the best of the publicans , who yet are not ( as most of them are ) extortioners , unjust , adulterers . But that prophane , unjust , scandalous , infamous , publicans whether Jewes or Gentiles , were allowed or permitted to come to the Temple , to the Worship , Prayer and Sacrifices , among the rest of the people of the Jewes , I deny it , and Master Prynne hath said nothing to prove it . These onely are the publicans meant of when Christ saith , let him be unto thee as a publican . Now this sort of publicans , if they were allowed any thing in reference to the Temple , it was but to stand afarre off in the Intermurale or atrium Gentium as Heathens might doe . If the religious publican stood afarre off , how much more the prophane infamous publican ? That such as were publikely scandalous , infamous for impiety , and esteemed the worst of men ( which I have shewed to be meant by let him be unto thee as a publican ) were admitted into the Temple as much as the rest of the people of the Jewes , or had fellowship with the Church in the holy things , I doe not beleive , I have proved the contrary from Philo and Iosephus . CHAP. IV. A confutation of Erastus and Bilson their Interpretation of Math. 18. 15 , 16 , 17. as likewise of Doctor Sutliffe his Glosse differing some what from theirs . AS for that other Erastian Glosse upon Matth. 18. 17. that Christ meaneth of going to the orthodox Magistrate being of the same true religion , ( & that this is the sence of those words Tell the Church ) but if the Brother who hath done us wrong will not heare nor obey that Magistrate , then let him he unto thee as an Heathen man and a publican , that is , thou mayest prosecute him , as thou wouldest prosecute an Heathen man or a Publican before an extrinsecall Tribunall , such as at that time the Roman Emperours was to the Jewes . See Erastus thes . 41. wherein he is followed by Bishop Bilson of the perpetuall Government of Christs Church cap. 4. This Glosse hath been justly rejected by many learned men . The first Argument which I bring against it , is that it is wide from the scope of the Text , yea prejudgeth and even overthroweth the great thing which is principally intended by Jesus Christ in this place , Camero Myroth . in Math. 18. thinks it is , utterly different from Christs intention in this place , which is to prescribe rules to our consciences concerning the amendment of our Brother , and the reducing of him from his sinne , not to give oeconomicall rules concerning the reparation of our injuries or losses : Wherefore he concludes that by the Church is meant the Presbytery mentioned 1. Tim. 4. 14. He holdeth also that in the new Testa . the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth ever signifie an Assembly cum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad religionem , with an habitude and reference to religion . Let it be also observed with Bucerus Script . Anglic. pag. 40. 41. 304 , 305 , 306. that what our Saviour directeth one Brother to doe toward the gaining of another , by admonitions and reproofs , doth onely belong to the care and sollicitude of the salvation of his soule , and the gaining of him from eternall death to eternall life ; and this he collects from these words in the Text , thy Brother , and thou hast gained thy Brother . He doth also paralell Math. 18. 15. with Gal. 6. 1. Brethren , if any man be overtaken in a fault , ye which are spirituall , restore such an one in the spirit of meeknesse . Now this as it is the surest exposition ( expounding Scripture by Scripture ) so it doth not concerne a Judiciall proceeding in the case of private Injuries , but the Christian duty of reclaiming and saving the soule from sin . He further observeth that the thing which Christ recommendeth to every Christian , to be done ex Charitate Christiana , is nothing else but what is incumbent to Pastors ex officio ; for Pastors ought by vertue of their publike charge and ministery to doe the same thing authoritatively , which one Christian is bidden doe to another in Christian Brotherly charity , that is to admonish , rebuke , &c. I am perswaded were the Lord Jesus his scope and intent in this Text rightly understood , there should need no other confutation of the Glosses given either by Erastus or by M r. Prynne . They restrict to the case of private or personall injuries , and to the party injuried civilly , that which our Saviour prescribeth o as a duty of Christian Charity , which every Church Member oweth to another . It was an impious word of Cain , Am I my Brothers Keeper ? though spoken in reference to his Brothers body and naturall life ; How much more sinfull is it , to say or thinke in reference to our Brothers soule , Am I my Brothers Keeper ? Every Christian is bound by the commandement of God to rebuke his Brother , when he seeth , heareth , or knoweth hlm to commit sinne : Lev. 19. 17. Thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour , and not suffer sinne upon him . Where the Marginall paralell in the English Bibles is Mat. 18. 15. Yea , Erastus himself lib. 2. cap. 2. pag. 154. confesseth that Christ doth in Matth. 18. interpret that Law Lev. 19. So Prov. 28. 4. Such as keep the Law contend with the wicked . We ought to hate and abhorre sinne by which God is dishonoured ( and consequently to expresse our zeale against it by rebukes when it is committed in our sight , hearing , presence , privity or knowledge ) as much yea much more , then if it were a private and personall injury against our selves Psal. 97. 10. Amos , 5. 15. Rom. 12. 9. Psal. 139. 21 , 22. Hence it is that the Apostle exhorteth Christians to warne them that are unruly or disorderly , 1 Thess. 5. 13. Wherefore it is justly and truly maintained by Augustine Regul . 3 infine Tomi primi . Durandus lib. 4. dist . 19. Quaest. 3. Tostatus in Math. 18. Quaest. 29. and divers thers , that to admonish and rebuke a Brother committing sinne , is a necessary Christian duty commanded by the word of God , whereunto Christians are obliged by the love of God and their Neighbour : for which see also Aegidius de Coninck de actib . supernat . disp . 28. dub . 2. & 4. And if the offender be not reduced by more private admonitions and rebukes , the same Law of spirituall love bindeth his Brother that knoweth his sinne and impenitency to tell the Church , as Ioseph told his Father of his Brethrens faults , Gen. 37. 2. and Joseph brought unto their Father their evill report , that is their scandalous sinnes which made them to have an evill report . It is well noted by Pareus upon the place , that the thing which Ioseph did complaine of to his Father , was not his Brethrens hatred against himselfe , nor any personall injury done to himself , ( because their hatred of Ioseph was the effect , not the cause , of the information which he gave to his Father of their faults ) but it was their sinne and scandalous life by which they brought an evill name upon themselves and the family of their Father . Wherein he doth upon good reason justifie what Ioseph did , because he told not his Brethrens faults to an Enemy but to a Father , nor for their evill , but for their good . It was also declared unto the Apostle by them of the house of Cloe that there were contentions among the Corinthians 1 Cor. 1. 11. So it is collected from 2 Thess. 3. 11. that some in the Church of Thessalonica gave notice to the Apostle of such as walked disorderly . And as he that spares the Rod hates the Child , so he that neglects to rebuke an offending Brother , or ( when that cannot amend him ) neglects to tell the Church , doth hate his Brothers soule , in so farre as he suffers sinne upon him . If these things be acknowledged for truths , we will be easily induced to believe that the scope of Jesus Christ Math. 18. 15 , 16 , 17. is to teach us , not what he permits the party injured to doe toward the party injuring , but what he commands every one that loves the soule and salvation of his Neighbour , to doe for reducing his Neighbour from a sinne wherewith he is overtaken . Which fitly agreeth with p that which Drusius praeter . lib. 1. on Mat. 18. 15. citeth e libro Musar . Besides , both Fathers , Schoole-men , Casuists , Commentators , Popish , and Protestant , when they handle the Questions de correptione fraterna , they make Brotherly rebukes to be a common duty of love which one neighbour oweth to another , and ever and anon they cleare what they hold from Mat. 18. I verily believe it is one of the wiles yea depths of Sathan in perverting that Text with the Erastian Glosses , to throw out of the Church and to drown in desuetude and oblivion , a great and necessary duty which every Christian by the law of love oweth to the soule of his Brother with whom he converseth , which were it conscionably practised , I dare say , it should be a most powerfull and effectuall meanes ( by the blessing of Christ upon his owne ordinance ) to purge the Church of scandals , to gaine soules , and to advance holinesse . Now he that can neither be reduced by more private reprehensions nor by publike Ecclesiasticall conviction , Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man , saith Christ , let him be esteemed as one that hath no part in the communion of the Saints , in Church-Membership , in the holy things , in the common-wealth of Israel , in the Covenants of promise , more then an Heathen man. Which is a spirituall , not a civill separation , according to that Gal. 2. 15. We who are Jewes by nature , and not sinners of the Gentiles . My second Argument shall be this . That which Christ saith generally of any sinne whereby one Brother scandalizeth another Brother , the Erastians restrict to private or personall injuries . And whereas Christs rule tendeth to the rescuing and saving of a sinner , their Glosse runnes upon a mans particular interest in the resarclating of a private injury . If thy Brother trespasse against thee , that is , Cum quis coram aliquo peccaverit , saith Munsterus , when any brother sinneth in the presence of some other . Are we not oblidged to rebuke an offending Brother in Christian love ; and to endeavour to bring him to repentance and to save his soule ; whether he hath done to us any particular injury or not : May we suffer sinne upon his soule , because that sinne is not an injury to us ? Let it be well observed , the thing here aimed at , is the salvation of the offending Brother , and his turning from sinne , as Grotius rightly noteth from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( which q Erastus also confesseth from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) for in that sence is the same word used 1 Cor. 9. 19 , 20 , 21 , 22. that I might gain them that are under the Law , &c. and 1 Pet. 3. 1. they may be wonne by the conversation of the wives . This ( saith Grotius ) James doth explain Ch. 5. v. 20. he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way , shall save a soule from death , and shall hide a multitude of sinnes . If this then be the meaning of Christs words , thou hast gained thy Brother : then it concerneth all sinnes whereby we know our Brothers soule and salvation to be in hazard . Wherefore though Grotius understand private injuries to be that case which the Text putteth , yet saith he , it is the manner of the Law of God , by one particular and more remarkable kind of things , to intimate what ought to be done in other things according to the rule of just proportion . And it holds more true in other sinnes , then in the case of private injuries : This rebuking is necessary as well in sins which are committed against God as in those which are committed against man , and by so much the more its necessary in sinnes which are committed against God , by how much they are heavier then sinnes which are committed against man , saith Tostatus in Mat. 18. quest . 93. And Grotius himself citeth out of Mimus , Amici vitia si feras faeias tua . And whereas the Erastian take much hold of the words against thee . If thy Brother trespasse against thee . I have before answered , that any sinne against God which is committed in my sight , hearing , or knowledge , and so becommeth a scandall or stumbling Block to me , is a trespasse committed against me , because he that ought to edifie me doth scandalize me . So that the words against thee are added , to signifie , not a civill injury , bnt rather a spirituall injury or scandall . Augustine regul . 3. in fine Tom. 1. applieth the rule and method of proceeding mentioned Mat. 18. to lascivious or adulterous behaviour , which one Brother observing in another , ought to admonish him , first secretly , then to take witnesses , then to tell the Church , and if he be contumacious , de vestra societate projiciatur , let him be cast out of your society saith he , and the context carrieth it to any scandall whereby one Brother scandalizeth another : whereof much was spoken in the preceding part of the Chapter . Erastus pag. 154. Scopus Christi est in hoc capite docere , quantum malum sit scandalum . The scope of Christ is in this Chapter to teach how great an evill scandall is . Wherefore I adhere to the resolution of Tostatus in Math. 18. quaest . 84 , sive sit peccatum directè contra deum , sive contra proximum , si fit nobis scientibus , fit contra nos , cum nos scandalizet . Both Chrysostome and Theophilact upon Math. 18. 15. observe this cohesion , that Christ having before spoken against those that give scandall , now he gives a rule to the person scandalized . Thirdly , that exposition which now I argue against , tendeth to make one Scripture contradict another , and to make that lawfull by one Scripture , which another Scripture makes unlawfull even some of themselves being Judges . They so expound Matth. 1 S. that they make it lawfull ( and as such allowed by Christ himself ) for a Christian to pursue his Brother for a civill injury before Infidell or Heathnish Judges , even as he would pursue an Heathen or Infidell , if such an one had done him the in ury . r Erast , saith freely ( yet foully ) that if a Congregation of the faithfull be under the Turke or the Pope , one of them may pursue another for an injury ( when the offender will not hearken to his own Assembly ) before those Judges who are aliens , and Enemies to the true Religion . His exposition of Matth. 18. doth plainly lead hereunto . So saith Bishop Bilson ( a great follower of Erastus ) in this debate upon Matth. 18. in the place before cited , let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a publican , that is pursue him in those courts , where thou wouldest a Pagan and Publican that should do thee wrong . But how doth this agree with 1 Cor. 6. ( the place which Erastus thes . 41. conceiveth to be a Commentary upon Matth. 18. ) doth not the Apostle expressely condemne it , as being utterly a fault that one brother went to Law with another for the things of this life or civill causes , before the unjust and unbeleevers ? Nay , let us heare Bishop Bilson himself in that very place . Paul saith he by no means permitted them to pursue their Brethren at the Tribunals of Infidels . What then ? will they set Paul against Christ ? or will they make 1 Cor. 6. contrary to Matth. 18. As for that whereby Erastus would reconcile this difference , it is as good as nothing . He saith pag. 183. that Paul requireth them to referre to arbitrators within the Church it self , only the smallest matters and things pertaining to this life , but not crimes or weighty matters which he would reserve to the Magistrates , otherwise he had detracted much from those to whom he every where commandeth to give obedience . And so ( saith he ) that which Paul saith is nothing but what Christ saith , Tell the Church . Besides Paul himself appealed to Cesar. let all men judge ( saith he ) whether the Apostle would make it unlawfull to other wronged persons , which he thought lawfull for himself ? I answer , 1. If it was a shame and foule scandall for Christians to pursue one another for smaller matters pertaining to this life , how much more for crimes and weightier matters ? for then the unbeleevers might cast the heavier load of reproaches upon the Christian religion . 2. This might have opened a door to elude that which the Apostle so earnestly presseth ; for one would be ready to say , this cause of mine is a weighty one , it is an injury and crime that can not be born , therefore I am free to pursue it before unbelievers . Whereas the Apostle saith , Why do ye not rather take wrong ? why doe ye not rather suffer your selves to be defrauded ? 3. The judging of the smallest matters , and of the things pertaining to this life , is by the Apostle opposed , not to weighty civill injuries , but to the judging of the world and of Angells , as is manifest by the Antithesis in the Text. But he maketh no intimation of the least distinction of civill injuries , as if some might be pursued before unbeleiving Judges , some not : he speaketh generally vers . 1. Dare any of you having a matter against another . vers . 4. If then ye have judgements of things pertaining to this life vers . 7. Why doe ye not rather take wrong ? 4. If that which Paul saith , be the same with that which Christ saith Tell the Church , and if it was Pauls mind that he who would not hearken to chosen arbitrators among the Saints might be pursued before the unbeleiving Judges ( as Erastus tells us both here and Thes. 47. ) then Tell the Church cannot be meant of telling the Magistrate of the same religion ; for Paul sends them to no Christian Magistrate ( because there was none such then and there ) but to arbitrators chosen among the Saints . T is most strange to me that so acute a disputant could expound the Telling of the Church Matth. 18. by the reference to arbitrators 1. Cor. 6. and yet understand the Church Matth. 18. to be the civill Magistate . 5. There might be subjection and obedience to the Heathen Magistrates , although the Saints should not go to Law one against another before them 6. Paul did but appeal from Caesars Deputy to Caesar himself . He was drawne by the Jewes before the Tribunall of Festus ( wherein Paul was a sufferer ) and finding Festus unjust and partiall , and that he endeavoured to deliver him to the Jewes , who had a mind to have him put to death , thereupon he appealeth from Festus to Caesar. So that if Erastus had made the paralell right , all that he could conclude from Pauls example , had been this , that when a Christian is drawne and compelled by his accusers and Enemies ( not being Christians ) before the Tribunall of an inferiour Heathen Judge , if he there find himself in danger of his life , he may appeale in his just defence to an higher Heathen Judge . Wherefore I yet conclude that by the Erastian principles Christ and Paul cannot be reconciled ▪ These three Arguments doe militate not onely against Erastus and Bilson , but likewise against Sutlivius de Presb. Cap. 9. where he gives this sence of Matth. 18. 15 , 16 , 17. that we ought to take heed we give no scandall in the pursuing of injuries , and for that end ought to give admonition first privately , then before witnesses , and in case of obstinacy in the brother that hath done the injury , to tell the Rulers of the Church ( meaning the Prelates ) and if he will not hear them , then to go to Law with that Brother , as with an Heathen or Publican . The other Arguments which are to follow , ( the last excepted ) strike not at his Interpretation , but at those other Glosses , of Erastus , Bilson , and Master Prynne . Fourthly , this Erastian exposition makes these words , but if he neglect to hear the Church , let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a publican , to be applicable onely to such Christians as live under unbelieving Magistrates , and not to all Christians . This consequence Erastus foresaw , that it would needs follow from his Interpretation , therefore he plainly owneth it Thes. 47. He confesseth that the former part concerning rebuking and seeking to gaine the offending Brother , belongs to all Christians ; What a boldnesse is here to rent asunder this passage of Scripture , which was uttered as it were with one breath ? And why doth not the latter part also belong unto all Christians ? Must Christians that live under an Infidell Magistrate have more effectuall meanes and wayes to use towards an offending Brother , and may they go a step further in putting him to shame or in humbling him , then those Christians can doe who live under a Christian Magistrate ? How well doth this hang together ? I should have thought the ballance must rather fall to this hand . But to make the condition of those , who live under a Christian Magistrate to be more privative , and the condition of those who live under an Infidell Magistrate to be more cumulative , is too great a paradoxe for me . Sixthly , Whereas they say that the way prescribed by Christ Matth. 18. is such as is agreeable to the Law of Moses , and they understand by Tell the Church , Tell the Magistrate , I aske what Magistrate ? If the Judges and Magistrates of the Cities , as Bishop Bilson thinkes , then he who did not hearken to those Judges might appeale to the great Sanhedrin at Hierusalem , or the Judges themselves might referre and transmit the case thither : so that the man was not to be straight way accounted as an Heathen man and a Publican . But if by the Church they understand the great Sanhedrin it self , he that would not hearken to it was to be put to death by the Law Deut. 17. So that it had not been agreeable to the Law of Moses , to teach that he who will not hearken to the great Sanhedrin is to be esteemed as an Heathen man and a Publican ; for this supposeth that he shall not dye but be suffered to live . Seventhly , the Erastian principles do plainly contradict and confute themselves . For both Erastus , Bishop Bilson , and Master Prynne hold that he Jewish Sanhedrin in Christs time was a temporall Magistracy and a civill Court of justice , which had power to scourge , imprison , torture , and outlaw offenders , yea to put to death as the first two doe positively averre . s How then can it be said , If he neglect to heare the Church , &c. that is , if he neglect to heare the civill Magistrate who hath power to imprison , scourge , torture , outlaw , yea to put him to death ? Surely if he neglect to heare the Church , doth intimate that the Church hath not used nor cannot use any externall coercive power . Erastus findes himselfe so mightily puzled with this difficulty , that to make out his interpretation of Matth. 18. he confesseth Thes. 53. and confirm . Thes. lib. 2. cap. 2. the Jewish Sanhedrin had no power under the Romans to judge of civill causes and injuries , but of things pertaining to their religion onely , t so that at that time ( saith he ) a man might impune without punishment contemne the judgement of the Sanhedrin in civill things . And thus while he seeketh a Salvo for his Glosse upon Matth. 18. he overthroweth the great argument by which he and his followers endeavour to prove that there was no other Sanhedrin in Christs time , but a civill Court of justice , because say they , that Sanhedrin had the power of the Sword and other temporall punishments . Eighthly , observe the gradation in the Text , 1. a private conviction or rebuke . 2. Conviction before two or three witnesses . 3. Conviction before the Church , and the Churches declaring the thing to be an offence , and commanding the offender to turn from his evill way . 4. If he will not heare the Church ( which implieth that the Church hath spoken and required him to doe somewhat which he refuseth to doe ) then Let him be as an Heathen man and a Publican . This last is heavier then all that went before , and is the punishment of his not hearing the Church now this gradation is in consistent with the Interpretation which Erastus giveth ; for by his owne confession the Sanh drin of the Jewes at that time had not power to judge of civill causes nor to punish any man for a civill injury , but for a matter of religion onely . ( yet they are not matters of Religion , but civill trespasses which he understands to be meant Matth. 18. ) Here is an intercision in the third step of the gradation . And if it were an offence in the matter of religion , it had not been a greater punishment , but a greater ease to the offender , to draw him before the Roman tribunals , for the Romans cared for none of those things , of which the Jewish Sanhedrin was most zealous . The gradation in the Text is as inconsistent with M r Prynnes interpretation ; for imagine the offender to be after previous admonitions publiquely accused and convict before the Church ( that is , in his opinion ) the civill Court of justice which had power to imprison , scourge , torture , and outlaw offenders , if not to condemne , and put to death ) what should be done with such an one ? can we goe no higher ? yes : thus it is in M r Prynnes sence . He that will not submit to the Magistrate , and cannot be reduced by stripes and imprisonment , torturing and outlawing , yea peradventure by condemnation to die the death ; let this be the last remedy for such an one , Let him be unto thee as an beathen man and a Publican , that is , withdraw familiar civill company from him . Ninthly , that interpretation of Erastus leaneth to a false supposition , namely that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a Publican , are meant universally of all Publicans good or bad , or whatever they were . To prove this he takes an argument pag. 189 , 190 , 195. from the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; for with the Grecians , saith he , the Article being joyned to the predicate , noteth the nature and consequently the universality of the thing ; whence he concludeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a Publican qua Publican , and so every Publican . Now what can be the sence of Christs words in reference to every Publican ( saith he ) unlesse this be it , that it was lawfull to pursue any Publican at a Tribunall of the Romans ? I answer , his argument goeth upon a most false supposition , which I cleare by the like instances , Matth. 6. 7. Use not vaine repetitions as the Heathen doe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Shall we thence conclude that the Heathens as Heathens , and so all Heathens without exception did use repetitions in prayer , or that they were all so devout in their way as to make long prayers ? Luke 15. 11. I am not as other men are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , extortioners , unjust●… &c. Did the Pharisee meane that every man eo ipso that he was another man , and so the rest of the Pharisees as well as others , were extortioners , &c. Iohn 15. 6. he is cast forth as a branch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . If the rule of Erastus hold , then a branch as a branch , and so every branch is cast out . Many such instances might be given . If in these Texts there must be a restriction of the sence , notwithstanding of the prepositive article , so that by Heathens we must understand devout or praying Heathens : by other men , vulgar men , or the common sort of men ; by a branch , a fruitlesse or withered branch . Why shall we not also understand by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the prophane loose or unjust Publican , and as Grotius doth rightly expound it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let him be esteemed , saith he , as an Heathen man , that is , as an alien from religion , or as a Publican ; that is , if he be a Jew , esteeme him as an infamous sinner , or one of a flagitious life . Since therefore Erastus confesseth pag. 194. that as the office of the Publicans was lawfull , so likewise many Publicans were honest , chast , religious , and pious men , I may safely conclude , that Let him be unto thee as a Publican , cannot be meant universally of all Publicans . For how can it be supposed that Christ would tacitely allow of alienation from or severity to pious Publicans ? Tenthly , whereas the Erastians lay great waight upon that forme of speech , Let him be to thee , ( not to the whole Church ) as an Heathen man and a Publican , ( which is also one of Sullivius his exceptions de Presbyterio , cap. 9. ) in this also they do abuse the Text , for 1. The same offence which is a sufficient ground to one Church-member to esteem another Church member as an Heathen man or a Publican , being a publique and known scandall ( such as is contumacy and disobedience to the Church ) must needs be a sufficient ground to all other Church members , or to the whole Church to esteem so of him . Surely Christ would not have contradictory judgements in his Church concerning so high a point , as is the esteeming of a Church member to be as a Heathen man and a Publican . 2. The Erastians herein argue no better than the Papists : Christ said to Peter , I will give unto thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven . Therefore unto Peter alone . Peradventure Mr. Hussey was so sagacious as to prevent this objection with his popish concession : these Keyes were never given to any of the Apostles but to Peter , saith he , in his plea for Christian magistracy , pag. 9. It seems he will farre lesse sticke to grant the Prelaticall argument , Timothy laid on hands , and Titus ordained Elders , therefore each of these had the power of ordination by himselfe alone . 3. It is a good observation of Luther Tom. 1. Resolv . super propos . 13. de potest . Papae . fol. 299. in the sixteenth of Matthew Christ begins with all his disciples , Whom say ye that I am ? and he endeth with one , Unto thee will I give , &c. In the eighteenth of Matthew he beginneth with one , If thy brother trespasse against thee , &c. and he endeth with all , Whatsoever he binds on earth , &c. Whence he concludeth that in both these places what is said to one is said to all of them . CHAP. V. That Tell it to the Church hath more in it , then , Tell it unto a greater number . THere is yet another interpretation of these words invented to elude the argument for Ecclesiasticall government and censures from Mat. 18. Tell it unto the Church , that is , if the offending brother will neither hearken to private admonition , nor to admonition before two or three witnesses , then tell it unto many or unto a greater company . This cals to mind u D r Sutcliffes glosse upon the word Presbytery , 1 Tim. 4. 14. that it signifieth Presbyters or Ministers non juris vinculo , sed utcunque collectos , as if the occasionall meeting of some Presbyters in Westminster Hall , or upon the Exchange , or in a journey , or at a buriall , were a Presbytery with power to lay on hands . That interpretation of the word Church is no better . But that I may reject nothing without reason , I desire it may be considered , 1. Whether either in Scripture , or in any Greeke Lexicon , or in any Classick author , it can be found that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was ever used to signifie meerly a greater number or company then two or three , not called out and imbodied together for government or worship . For my part I could never yet finde where the simple majority of the number maketh the denomination of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . I finde the word sometimes ( yet very seldome ) used of an unlawfull assembly combining or joyning together to evill : the reason I take to be this , because they pretended to be authorised as a lawfull assembly ; so Christ called Iudas , friend , when he came to betray him with a kisse . But since the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. 18. 17. doth signifie a lawfull assembly , ( as all doe confesse ) I desire some testimony of Scripture or approved authors , where this name is given to a lawfull assembly , which was not imbodied for worship or government , but had the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 simply because of the majority of number . Sure I am 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is at least caetus evocatus , an assembly called forth ; and every offended brother hath not from Christ the priviledge of gathering a Church . 2. If by tell it unto the Church were meant no more but this , tell it unto a greater number , then if the offender doe not heare the Church , there must be recourse unto some others distinct from the Church , for the more authoritative and ultimate determination , ( unlesse it be said that there is no remedy for offences , but in a greater number which each man shall make choice of ) But where is their more effectuall remedy , or where will they fixe the ultimate degree of proceedings ? 3. When Christ saith Tell it unto the Church , and if he neglect to heare the Church , &c. whether respect be had to the forme of the Hebrews , or to the forme of the Grecians , the Church will still have a ruling power . In the old Testament , the originall giveth the name Kahal , Church , ( which is the word used in the Hebrew Evangel of Matthew published by Munsterus , chap. 18. vers . 17. ) and the Septuagints the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Elders and Rulers of Israel , as 1 Chro. 13. 2. 4. & 29. 1. 2 Chro. 1. 3. and in other places . And that which is said of the Elders , Deut. 19. 12. I●…sh . 20. ● . is said of the Congregation or Church , Num. 35. 24. Ios. 20. 6. So Exod. 12. 3. compared with vers . 21. The Septuagints also render Kahal by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prov. 26. 26. It was not therefore to any assembly , but to an assembly of rulers , that causes were brought in the old Testament . If we turne to the Heathen Grecians , among them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had a power of jurisdiction to judge and determine causes , as is manifest from Acts 19. 38. 39. There 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was of two sorts , as Suidas , Budaeus , Stephanus , and others have observed . 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a lawfull set fixed assembly , which met at ordinary diets ( which is meant in that place of the Acts last cited ) It was also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of the jurisdiction and ruling power which was seated in it . Wherein I am confirmed by this passage of Aristotle polit . lib. 3. cap. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . for the assembly , saith he , hath the government or arbitrement of all such things ; He is speaking of the choosing of Magistrates , and of craving an account of their administration . 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was indicted and called pro re nata , upon some urgent extraordinary cause , and it was concio magnatum s●…ve optimatum , in which the people were not present , as in the other . It was therefore rightly noted by Passor that Demosthenes useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro concione magnatum . Afterward the Roman Senate was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without an adjection . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore among the Heathen Grecians ( from whom the word came ) was not any assembly , but an assembly which had a jurisdiction or ruling power . It shall not be in vaine to adde that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to appeale to a superiour Ruler commeth from the same originall verbe from which commeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 4. The Church mentioned Matth. 18. 17. hath a forensicall or juridicall power , as appeareth by that of the two or three witnesses vers . 16. which relateth to a Juridicall proceeding in the trying and punishing of offences , as M. Prynne hath observed . Peradventure some man will say , that the two or three witnesses here are brought in onely to be witnesses to the admonition , or to make the admonition the more effectuall , and the more to be regarded , but not as if any use were to be made of these witnesses , to prove the fact or offence it selfe before the Church , if there be occasion . I answer , either it must be supposed here that the trespasse was seen or knowne onely by him that gives the first rebuke privately , or that it was also seen or known by those two or three witnesses . If the former , it is much disputed among Schoolmen whether he that rebukes his offending brother be to proceed any further than a private rebuke for a private offence , or whether he is to stop at private rebukes , and not to take witnesses with him ( which divers thinke to be unfit and disallowed , as being an officious and unnecessary irritation of the offending brother by the spreading of his shame , a making of a private sinne to become scandalous to others , as likewise an engaging of witnesses to assist in the admonition and rebuke by a blinde and implicite faith ) for my part I shall not need here to dispute this point : for what ever ought to be done , or ought not to be done in this case , when the trespasse is known to one onely : yet in the other case when besides him that rebukes there are two or three more which can be witnesses of the fact or trespasse committed ( the trespasse being yet not publiquely divulged ) it can not be denied , that these witnesses of the fact are to be brought unto and confronted with the offender , when he cannot be gained by private rebuke , and ( if need be ) prove it afterward before the Church . Which I have before noted out of Durand . And x Aegidius de Coninck tels us ( in whatsoever other case witnesses are to be taken , or are not to be taken ) in this case all doe consent that witnesses are to be taken . Concerning the taking of witnesses , when the trespasse is known to me alone , there are three different opinions . 1. That when I have rebuked the offender privately , and cannot gaine him , I am to proceed no further , but have done my duty and must leave the event to God. 2. That when a secret admonition is not effectuall ▪ witnesses are to be taken , in case the offender so admonished continue in his sinne , or in case his relapse be feared and expected , that the witnesses may observe such continuing or relapse in sinne , and then assist and joyne in rebuking him , and if need be ( that is , in case of his contumacy ) to prove the fact before the Church . 3. That even when his continuance or relapse in sinne can not be observed , ( and so can not be afterward proved by witnesses ) yet the second admonition is to be given before witn●sses , when the first admonition given privately hath not gained the offender . Of these let the Reader judge . T is enough for the point now in hand , that when witnesses can be had to prove the trespasse committed , they ought to be brought , first before the offender , and then ( if he continue obstinate ) before the Church to prove the fact : and they must be three , or two at the least , which I doe not see how it can be thought necessary , if we suppose that the sinne is not known to any but to me alone who give tho first rebuke ; for if there must be a witnesse of my second admonition , why may not one witnesse joyn with me as well as two , when I can not have two , but one onely , willing and ready to ●oyn with me . But now a necessity of precept lies on me , that I must have two witnesses at least , which cannot be otherwise understood , but in reference to a forensicall proceeding afterwards , if need be . 5. That interpretation which now I speak against , while it goeth about to avoyd a power of Jurisdiction and Censure in this Text , it doth subject him that is reproved by another , to a heavier yoke , and brings him into a greater servitude . For though a man be not disobedient nor contumacious unto any Court Civill or Ecclesiasticall , yet if he doth not hearken to such a number , as the party offended shall declare the case unto ( being a greater number then two or three ) he must be by and by esteemed and avoyded as an Heathen man and a Publican . 6. This interpretation , as it is fathered upon Grotius , so it may be confuted out of Grotius upon the very place . He expounds Tell it unto the Church by the same words which Drusius citeth , è libro Musar . declare it coram multis , before many . But is this any other then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the many spoken of 2 Cor 2. 6 ? a place cited by Grotius himselfe , together with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before all , 1 Tim. 5. 20. Now these were acts of Ecclesiasticall power and authority , not simply the acts of a greater number . He tels us also it was the manner among the Jewes to referre the businesse ad multitudinem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to the assembly of those who were of the same way , or followed the same rites , the judgements of which multitude ( saith he ) seniores tanquam praesides moderabantur , the Elders as Presidents did moderate . He further cleares it out of Tertullian apol . cap. 39. where speaking of the Churches or assemblies of Christians , he saith : ibidem etiam exhortationes , castigationes & censura divina &c. praesident probati quique seniores . Where there are also exhortations , corrections , and Divine censure , &c. all the approved Elders doe preside . And is not this the very thing we contend for ? I hope I may now conclude that Tell the Church is neither meant of the civill Magistrate , nor simply of a greater number , but of the Elders or ( as others expresse it better ) of the Eldership or Assembly of Elders ; So Stephanus , Scapula , and Pasor in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Calvin , Bucerus , Illyricus , Beza , Hunnius , Tossanus , Pareus , Cartwright , Camero , Diodati , the Dutch annotations , all upon the place . Marlorat in Thesauro in the word Ecclesia Zanchius in 4. Praec . pag. 741. Iunius Animad . in Bell. Contr. 3. lib. 1. cap. 6. Gerhard loc . theol . Tom. 6. pag. 137. Meisuerus Disput. de regim . Eccles. quaest . 1. Trelcatius Instit. Theol. lib. 1. pag. 291. Polanus Syntag. lib. 7. cap. 1. Bullinger in 1 Cor. 5. 4. Whittaker . de Ecclesia quaest . 1. cap. 2. Danaeus in 1 Tim. pag. 246. 394. These and many more understand that neither the Magistrate nor the multitude of the Church , nor simply a great number , is meant by the Church Matth. 18. but the Elders or Ecclesiasticall senate , who have the name of the Church , partly , by a Syn●cdoche because they are a chief part of the Church ( as otherwhere the people or flock distinct from the Elders , is called the Church Act. 20. 28. ) partly , because of their eminent station and principall function in the Church , as we say we have seen such a mans Picture , when haply t is but from the shoulders upward : partly , because the Elders act in all matters of importance , so as they carry along with them the knowledge and consent of the Church . ( And therefore according to Salmeron his observation Tom. 4. part . 3. Tract . 9. Christ would not say , Tell the officers or Rulers of the Church , but Tell the Church , because an obstinate offender is not to be excommunicate secretly or in a corner , but with the knowledge and consent of the whole Church : so that for striking of the sinner with the greater fear and shame , in regard of that knowledge and consent of the Church , the telling of the officers is called the telling of the Church : ) partly also , because of the ordinary manner of speaking in the like cases ; that which is done by the Parliament is done by the Kingdom , and that which is done by the common Councell is done by the City . Among the Jewes with whom Christ and his Apostles were conversant this manner of speaking was usuall . Danaeus ( where before cited ) citeth R. David Kimchi upon Ose. 5. noting that the name of the house of Israel is often put for the Sanhedrin in Scripture . T is certaine the Sanhedrin hath divers times the name Kabal in the Hebrew and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek of the old Testament , Which is acknowledged even by those who have contended for a kind of popular Government in the Church . See Guide unto Zion pag. 5. Ainsworth in his Counterpoison pag. 113. CHAP. VI. Of the power of binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. THey that doe not understand Matth. 18. 17. of Excommunication , are extreamely difficulted and scarce know what to make of that binding and loosing which is mentioned in the words immediately following v. 18. verily I say unto you , whatsoever ye shall bind on earth , shall be bound in heaven , and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth , shall be loosed in heaven . Erastus and Grotius understand it of a private brother , or the party offended his binding or loosing of the offender . Bishop Bilson understands it of a civill binding or loosing by the Magistrate , whom he conceives to be meant by the Church vers . 17. These doe acknowledge a coherence and dependance between vers . 17. and 18. M r Prynne differing from them , doth not acknowledge this coherence , and expounds the binding and loosing to be ministeriall indeed , but onely Doctrinall . Some others dissenting from all these , doe referre this binding and loosing not to a person , but to a thing or Doctrine , whatsoever ye shall bind , that is , whatsoever ye shall declare to be false , erroneous , impious , &c. Sutlivius though he differ much from us in the Interpretation of vers . 15 , 16 , 17. yet he differeth as much ( if not more ) from the Erastians in the Interpretation of vers . 18. for he will have the binding and loosing , to be Ecclesiasticall and spirituall , not civill , to be Juridicall , not Doctrinall onely , to be Acts of Government committed to Apostles , Bishops and Pastors : he alloweth no share to ruling Elders , yet he alloweth as little of the power of binding and loosing , either to the Magistrate , or to the party offended . See him de Presbyteri●… Cap. 9. & 10. So that they can neither satisfie themselves nor others , concerning the meaning and the context . For the confutation of all those Glosses , and for the vindication of the true scope and sence of the Text , I shall first of all observe , whence this phrase of binding and loosing appeareth to have been borrowed , namely , both from the Hebrewes and from the Graecians . The Hebrews did ascribe to the Interpreters of the Law , Power , authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bind , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to loose . So Grotius tells us on Mat. 16. 19. The Hebrews had their loosing of an Excommunicated person , which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Buxtorf . Lexic . Chald. Talm. Rabbin . pag. 1410. The Grecians also had a binding and loosing which was judiciall . Budaeus and Stephanus on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cite out of Aeschines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Quum primo suffragio non absolutus fuerit reus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the stone by which the Senators did give their suffrage in judgement , It was either a blacke stone , by which they did bind the sinner and retaine his sinne , and that stone was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : or it was a white stone , by which they did loose remit and absolve : and that stone was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : which was the thing that Tully calleth Solvere crimine . So where it is said , her iniquity is pardoned Isa. 40. 2. the 70 read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , her iniquity is loosed . And because there is usually some kind of expiation before a loosing and remitting of sinnes , which expiation being performed the loosing follows , therefore the Graecians called such necessary and r●quisit expiation by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is , loosing : and they had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they expiatory Gods , who did chiefly take care of those expiations . That in Scripture the power of binding , is judiciall and authoritative , is cleared by my Reverend and Learned Colleague Ma●er Rutherford in The Divine right of Church Government pag. 234. 235 I adde , that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto which Grotius sends ●s , is ●sed for that binding or incarceration which is an act of 〈◊〉 authority , as Gen. 40. 3. Gen. 42. 16. 19. 24. Num. 15. 34 Levit. 24. 12. 2 Kings . 17. 4. Isa. 42. 7. Jer. 40. 1. Ezek. 3. 25. It is also used for an authoritative prohibition Num. 11. 28. my Lord Moses forbid them . Thence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 interdictum , a decree forbidding somewhat Dan. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. As binding and loosing are Acts of authority and power , such as doth not belong to any single person or brother offended , so the binding and loosing mentioned Matth. 18. 18. are Acts of Ecclesiasticall and spirituall authority , belonging to the Kingdom and Government of Christ in his Church , but not belonging to the civill Magistrate . And as the authority is Ecclesiasticall and spirituall , so it is more than Doctrinall , it is a power of inflicting or taking off Church Censures . These two things I will endeavour to prove . 1. That this power of binding and loosing belongeth neither to private Christians nor to civill Magistrates , but to Church Officers . 2. That this power is juridicall or forensicall , and not Doctrinall onely ; that is , that Church-Officers are here authorised to bind with censures , or to loose from censures , as there shall be cause . In both which we have Antiquity for us . Which I doe the rather observe because Erastus and Grotius alledge some of the Antients , for their exposition of Math. 18. 18. that this binding or loosing is by the offended brother . That which Augustine , Origen , and Theophylact say of one brother his binding or loosing , is but spoken tropologically , and not as the literall sence of the Text , yea , Theophylact in that passage cited by Erastus and Grotius , doth distinguish between the Ministeriall or Ecclesiasticall binding and loosing , and the party offended his binding and loosing . Non enim solùm quae solvunt sacerdotes sunt soluta , sed quaecunque & nos &c. Theophylact doth also find excommunication in that Text Illam autem ( Ecclesiam ) si non audierit , tunc abjiciatar , ne suae maliti●… participes faciat alios . I further appeal to Augustine himself Epist. 75. where speaking of Excommunication and Anathema he distinguisheth it from corporall punishment , and after he hath spoken of the temporall sword he addeth , Spiritualis autem paena , qua fit quod scriptum est , Quae ligaveris in terra , erunt ligata & in caelo , animas obligat . But the spirituall punishment , by which that thing is done which is written , What thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven , doth bind soul●… . Againe in his sixth Tome lib. 1. contra adversarium legis & prophetarum ●…ap . 17. y he doth most plainly interpret Math. 18. 18. of Church discipline and binding by Censure . z Hierome both in his Commentary upon Matth. 18. and in his Epistle to Heliodorus , speaketh of this power of binding as a judiciall forensicall power belonging to the Ministers or Officers of the Church , by which they judge and censure offenders . But to save my self the labour of more citations , I take help from Bishop Bilson , of the perpetuall Government of Christs Church cap. 4. where though he expound the binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. to be Acts of the Magistrate , yet he acknowledgeth hat the Antient writers leane vere much another way , and understand that Text of the ministeriall and spirituall power of Excommunication , for which he citeth Chrysost. de sacerdotio lib. 3. Ambros. de paenitent . lib. 1. c. 2. Hierom. in Matth. cap. 18. Hilar. in Mat. can . 18. Vnto these I also adde Isidorus Polusiota in the third Book of his Epistles , Epist. 260. where he applieth this Text Matth. 18 , 19. to this sence , that impenitent finners are to be bound , and penitent sinners loosed , and thence argueth against the absolving of a perjured person who had not declared himself penitent , but had purchased his absolution by a gift . Nor can I passe Chrysostome upon this very Text , where he tells that Christ will have such a one to be punished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , both with a present Chastisement and with a future punishment , or both in earth and in heaven ; and would have the offender to fear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , casting out of the Church . He addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he cuts not off immediately , but after admonitions . I will now proceed to a further confirmation of the two propositions afore mentioned . Touching the first , That this binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. belongeth nei her to private Christians , nor to civill Magistrates , but to Church Officers , I clear it thus . There are two things by which ( as Schoolemen observe ) mens soules and consciences are bound , 1. They are bound by their sinnes . Prov. 5. 22. His own iniquities shall take the wicked himself , & he shall be holden with the cords of his sins , Act. 8. 23. thou art in the bond of iniquity . 2. Men are bound by precepts Matth. 23. 4. They bind heavy burthens and grievous to be born , and lay them on mens shoulders . This binding by precept or law , some take to be meant Ezech. 3. 25. O Sonne of man behold they shal put bands upon thee , & shall bind thee with them , that is , thou shalt in vision see thy self bound with bands upon thee , to signifie that I have forbidden thee to be a reprover to the rebellius house . So the Chaldee paraphrase . But thou a Sonne of man , behold I have put my word upon thee , as a band of cords with which they bind , and thou shalt not goe forth into the midst of them . Now in both these respects the Scripture elsewhere doth ascribe to Church-Officers a power of binding and loosing . 1 In respect of sinne Io. 20. 23. Whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them , and whosesoever sin s ye retaine they are retained . It is spoken to the Apostles and their successors in the Ministery of the Gospell . Matth. 16. 19. I will give unto thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of heaven : and whatsoever thou shal●… bind on earth , shall be bound in heaven , and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven . Where the power of binding and loosing is given to the Apostles , & Grotius upon the place cleareth it from 2. Cor. 5. 19. 20. God hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation . Now then we are Ambassadours for Christ. So that we find in Scripture Church Officers inabled and authorised ex officio as the Heraulds and Ambassadours of the King of Zion , to loose from the bands of sinne all repenting and beleiving sinners , and to bind over to eternall justice and wrath the impenitent and unbeleevers . 2 They are also authorised , dogmatically and authoritatively to declare and impose the will of Christ , and to bind his precepts upon the shoulders of his peeple Matth. 28. 20. as likewise to loose them and pronounce them free from such burthens , as men would impose upon them contrary or beside the word of God 1 Cor. 7. 23. An example of both we have Act. 15. 28. The Synod of the Apostles and Elders bindeth upon the Churches such Burthens , as were necessary by the Law of love for the avoiding of scandall , but did pronounce the Churches to be free and loosed from other burthens which the Judaizing Teachers would have bound upon them . Now therefore if we will expound Matth. 18. 18. by other Scriptures ( it being the onely surest way to expound Scripture by Scripture ) it is manifest and undeniable , that Church-Officers are by other Scriptures inabled and authorised to bind & loose in both those respects afore-mentioned . But we no where find in Scripture , that Christ hath given either to all private Christians , or to the civill Magistrate , a Commission and Authority to bind or loose sinners ; I know a private Christian may and ought to convince an impenitent brother , and to comfort a repenting brother , ex charitate Christiana : But the Scripture doth not say , that God hath committed to every private Christian the word of reconciliation , and that all Christians are Ambassadours for Christ , nor is there a promise to ratifie in heaven the convictions or comforts given by a private Christian : No more then a King doth ingage himself in verbo principis to pardon such as any of his good Subjects shall pardon , or to condemne such as any of his good Subjects shall condemne : but a King ingageth himself to ratifie what his Ambassadours , Commissioners or Ministers shall doe in his name and according to the Commission which he hath given them to pardon or condemne . Besides all this , if Christ had meant here of the brother to whom the injury was don , his private binding or loosing , not condemning or forgiving , then he had kept the phrase in the singular number , which Erastus observeth diligently all along the Text vers . 15 , 16 , 17. But he might have also observed , that vers . 18. carries the power of binding and loosing to a plurality , VVhatsoever ye bind , &c. As for the Magistrate , it belongeth to him to bind with the cords of corporall or civill punishments , or to loose and liberat from the same , as he shall see cause according to law and justice . But this doth n t belong to the spirituall Kingdome of Jesus Christ ; for his Kingdome is not of this world , neither are the weapons thereof carnall but spirituall . And beside the Magistrate may lawfully and sometime doth bind on punishment , when the soule is loosed in Heaven , and the sinne remitted . Again , the Magistrate may lawfully , and sometime doth loose and absolve from punishment , when a mans soule is impenitent , and sinne is still bound upon his conscience . There is no such promise that God will forgive whom the Magistrate forgiveth , or condemne whom the Magistrate condemneth . Neither hath God any where in Scripture committed to the Magistrate the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven , or the word of reconciliation , as to the Ambassadours of Christ. Binding and loosing in the other sence by a dogmaticall authoritative declaration of the will of Christ , is not so principally or directy intended Matth. 18. 18. as that other binding and loosing in respect of sinne . Howbeit it is not to be excluded , because the words preceding Vers. 17. mention not onely the execution of Excommunication , Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican ; but also the Churches judgement , and determination of the case , if he neglect to heare the Church , which words implie , that the Church hath declared the will of Christ in such a case , and required the offender to doe accordingly , but he shewing himselfe unwilling and contumacious , as it were saying in his heart , I will breake their bands asunder , and cast away their cords from me , thereupon the promise reacheth to this also , that what the Church hath determined or imposed according to the will of Christ shall be ratified and approved in Heaven . a Now Christ hath no where given a Commission either to every particular Christian , or to the Magistrate , to teach his people to observe all things which he hath commanded them , and authoritatively to determine controversies of faith , or cases of conscience . As in the old Testament , the Priests lips did preserve knowledge , and they were to seeke the law at his mouth , Mal. 2. 7. so in the new Testament the Ministers of Christ have the Commission to make known the counsell of God. My second proposition that the power of binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. is juridicall or forensicall , and meant of inflicting or taking off Ecclesiasticall Censures ; this I will make good in the next place against M r Prynne , who to elude the argument for Excommunication from Matth. 18. answereth two things concerning the binding and loosing there spoken of . 1. That these words have no coherence with , or dependence upon the former . 2. That this binding and loosing is meant onely of preaching the Gospell . Touching the first of these , I confesse if by the Church , vers . 17. be meant a civill Court of Justice ; and by those words , Let him be unto thee as an Heathen , &c. be meant no more but keepe no civill fellowship with him ( which is his sence of the Text ) I cannot marvell that he could finde no coherence between vers . 17. and vers . 18. yet if there be no coherence between these verses , the generality of Interpreters have gone upon a great mistake of the Text , conceiving that Christ doth here anticipate a great objection , and adde a great encouragement in point of Church discipline ; for when the offender is excommunicated , ( that is all the Church can doe to humble and reduce him ) put the case he or others despise the censures of the Church , What will your censure doe ? saith M r Hussey : To that very thing Christ answereth , It shall be ratified in Heaven , and it shall doe more then the binding of the offenders in fetters of Iron could doe . But let us heare what M r Prynne saith against the coherence of Text : because ( saith he ) that of binding and loosing is spoken onely to and of Christs disciples , as is evident by the parallel Text of Joh. 20. 23. not of the Jewish Church . It maketh the more against him ( I am sure ) that it s spoken to and of Christs Disciples , for this proveth that the Church vers . 17. is not the Jewish Sanhedrin , but the Christian Presbytery , then instituted , and afterwards erected : and that the thing which makes one as an Heathen and a Publican , is binding of his sinnes upon him . And for the context , immediatly after Christ had said , If he neglect to heare the Church , let him be unto thee , &c. he addeth , Verily I say unto you , whatsoever ye shall bind on earth , &c. The dependency is very cleare . A Christian having first admonished his brother in private , then having taken two or three witnesses , after this having brought it to the publique cognizance of the Ecclesiasticall Consistory , and after all that , the offender being for his obstinacy excommunicate ; here is the last step , no further progresse . Now might one thinke , what of all this ? what shall follow upon it ? Nay , saith Christ , it shall not be in vaine , it shall be ratisied in Heaven . And as the purpose cohereth , so that forme of words , Verily I say unto you , is ordinarily used by Christ to signifie his continuing and pressing home the same purpose which he had last mentioned , as Matth. 5. 26. Matth. 6. 2. Matth. 8. 10. Matth. 10. 15. Matth. 11. 11. Matth. 18. 3. Matth. 19. 23 , 28. Matth. 21. 31. Matth. 23. 36. Matth. 26. 13. Matth. 24. 34 , 47. Marke 10. 15. & 12. 43. & 13. 30. Luke 12. 37. and many the like passages . To my best observation , I have found no place where Christs Verily I say unto you , begins a new purpose which hath no coherence with nor dependency upon the former . This coherence of the Text and the dependency of vers . 18. upon that which went before ( which dependency is acknowledged by Erastus , who perceiving that he could not deny the dependency , fancieth that the binding and loosing is meant of the offended brothers pardoning or not pardoning of the offender , Confirm . Thes. pag. 157. ) doth also quite overthrow Master Prynnes other answer , that this binding and loosing is onely meant of preaching the Gospell , and of denouncing remission of sinnes to the penitent , and wrath to the impenitent . Nay , That potestas clavium conoionalis is instituted in other places : but here its potestas cl●…vium disciplinalis , as is evident : First , by the coherence of the Text , and by the taking of two or three more , and then telling of the thing to the Church ; all which intimateth a rising as from one or two or three more , so from them to the Church , which cannot be meant of one man , as hath been argued against both Pope and Prelate , for no one man can be called a Church : neither hath one man the power of jurisdiction ; but one man hath the power of preaching . Secondly , the Apostles , and those who succeed them in the worke of the Ministery have the same power of the Keys committed from Christ to them ministerially , which Christ hath committed from the father to him ( as Mediator ) authoritatively . For in the parallel place , Ioh. 20. v. 21 , 23. where he gives them power of remitting or retaining sinnes , he saith , As my Father hath sent me , even so send I you . But the Father gave Christ such a power of the Keyes , as comprehends a power of Government , and not meerely doctrinall , Isa. 22. 21 , 22. I will commit the government into his hand , &c. And the Keyes of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder . Thirdly , It may be proved also by that which immediately followeth , vers . 19. Againe I say unto you , that if two of you shall agree on earth &c. which cannot be meant of the power of preaching ; for neither the efficacy of preaching , nor the ratification of it in Heaven , nor the fruit of it on Earth , doth depend upon this , that two preachers must needs agree in the same thing . But it agreeth well to the power of Discipline , concerning which it answereth these two objections . First , it might be said , the Apostles and other Church-governours may fall to be very few in this or that Church where the offence riseth ; shall we in that case execute any Church-discipline ? Yes , saith Christ , if there were but two Church-officers in a Church ( where no more can be had ) they are to exercise Discipline , and it shall not be in vaine . Againe , it might be objected , be they two or three , or more , what if they doe not agree among themselves ? To that he answereth , there must be an agreement of two Church-officers at least , otherwise the sentence shall be null ; we can not say the like of the doctrinall power of binding or loosing , that it is of no force nor validity unlesse two at least agree in the same doctrine , as hath been said ; two must agree in that sentence or censure , which is desired to be ratified in Heaven , and then they binding on Earth , and unanimously calling upon God to ratifie it in Heaven , it shall be done . Fourthly , this binding and loosing can not goe without the Church , it is applicable to none but a Church member or a Brother . So the threed of the Text goes along from vers . 15. If thy Brother trespasse against thee , and vers . 16. thou hast gained thy Brother . And when it is said , Tell the Church , it is supposed that the offender is a member of the Church , over whom the Church hath authority , and of whom there is hope that he will heare the Church . And when it is said , Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican , it is supposed that formerly he was not unto us as an Heathen man and a Publican . For these and the like reasons Tostatus in Matth. 18. quaest . 91. and divers others hold that this rule of Christ is not applicable to those who are without the Church . But if the binding and loosing be meant onely of preaching the Gospell , as Master Prynne would have it , then it were applicable to those that are not yet baptised nor made Church members , for unto such the Gospell hath been and may be preached . The binding and loosing which is proper to a Brother or to a Church member , must be a juridicall power of censures , of which the Apostle saith , 1 Cor. 5. 12. What have I to doe to judge them also that are without ? Doe not ye judge them that are within ? Therefore Chrysostome Hom. 61. in Matth. ( according to the Greeke Hom. 60. ) doth parallel Matth. 18. with 1 Cor. 5. proving that this rule of Christ is not applicable to one that is without , but onely to a brother . Which Paul also saith in these words , What have I to doe to judge them also that are without ? But he commandeth us to convince and reduce brethren , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to cut off the disobedient : this he ( Christ ) doth also in this place . Theophylact also on Matth. 18. noteth the same restriction of this rule of Christ to a Christian Brother . Fifthly , this binding power is not to be made use of , till all other meanes have been essayed , ante tentanda omnia saith Munsterus , first a private admonition , then before witnesses , then the matter is brought to the Church , the Church declareth and judgeth , the offender neglecteth to heare the Church , then after all this commeth the binding , which must needs be a binding with censures ; for that binding which Master Prynne speakes of , the denouncing of the wrath of God against the impenitent , by the preaching of the Gospell , is not , neither ought to be suspended or delayed upon such degrees of proceeding . Sixthly , this binding and loosing is not without two or three witnesses , vers . 16. But that of two or three witnesses relateth to a forensicall or judiciall proceeding , as M r Prynne himselfe tels us . These witnesses may be brought before the Ecclesiasticall court , either to prove the offenders contumacy being admonished , or to prove the scandalous fact it selfe , which was from the beginning knowne to two or three witnesses , according to the sence of Schoolmen , expressed in the precedent Chapter . Seventhly , this phrase of binding and loosing is taken both from the Hebrews , and from the Grecians . But both the Hebrews and the Grecians used these words in a juridicall sence , as I observed in the beginning . Eighthly , that the binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. is juridicall , not doctrinall , belonging to the power of jurisdiction , not of order , is the sence of the ancients above cited , as likewise of Scotus lib. 4. Sent. Dist. 19. Quaest. 1. art . 5. Tostatus in Matth. 18. Quest. 113. yea the current both of Schoolmen and of Interpreters , as well Protestant , as Popish , runneth that way . It were too long to cite all . Yea further Salmasius in appar . ad lib. de primatu p●…p . 296. understands the binding and loosing Matth. 16. 19. Ioh. 20. 23. of Discipline . So Walaeus Tom. 1. pag. 92. So divers others . From the same places Aretius Theol. probl . loc . 133. de excom . draws Excommunication as an Ordinance of Christ. From the same two Texts Ioh. 20. 23. and Matth. 16. 19. Dionysius Areop agita de Ecclesiastica Hierarchia cap. 7. sect . 7. doth prove that Christ hath committed unto the Ministers of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . His ancient Scholiast Maximus upon that place tels us , that he speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of excommunications and separations , or ( as he there further explaineth ) the judging and separating between the righteous and the wicked . Salmeron upon Matth. 16. 19. thinks that the latter part of that verse , And whatsoever thou shalt binde on Earth , &c. doth belong to the power of jurisdiction and censure : Hugo de S. Victore de Sacramentis lib. 1. cap. 26. doth also expound Matth. 16. 19. of the forensicall power of Excommunication . Now if in these places binding and loosing , remitting and retaining sinnes comprehend a juridicall power of laying on or taking off Church censures ; how much more must this Juridicall power be comprehended Matth. 18. 18. where the context and circumstances will much more enforce this sence , then in the other two places ? this binding and loosing being also in the plurall number , Whatsoever ye bind , &c. not in the singular , as the phrase is Matth. 16. 19. Whatsoever thou shalt bind &c. One Minister may bind doctrinally , but one alone can not bind juridically . Ninthly , the very doctrinall or concionall binding which is yeelded by M r Prynne , is voyded and contradicted by the admission of known scandalous impenitent sinners to the Sacrament : for he that is admitted to the Sacrament is loosed , not bound ; remission , not condemnation is supposed to be sealed up to him , as is manifest by the words of the Institution , Matth. 26. 27 , 28. Drinke ye all of it , for this is my blood of the New Testament , which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes . So that without a power of binding by censures , and namely by suspension from the Sacrament , one and the same scandalous impenitent person shall be bound by the word , and loosed by the Sacrament . Surely he that is to be bound by the word , ought also to be bound by suspension from the Sacrament , unlesse we make one publique Ordinance to contradict another . Tenthly , doth M r Prynne believe that Jesus Christ hath any where given to Church-officers a forensicall or juridicall power of binding by Excommunication , and loosing by Absolution or receiving againe into the communion of the Church ? If he doth believe it , then I aske where hath Christ committed that power unto them , if not Matth. 18 ? If he doth not believe that Christ hath given any such power , then why doth he hold Excommunication to be lawfull and warrantable by the Word of God ▪ Most certaine it is , that neither King , nor Parliament , nor Eldership , nor Synod , nor any power on earth , may or ought to prohibite or keepe backe from the Sacrament such as Christ hath not commanded to be kept backe , or to bind sinners by Excommunication , if Christ hath given no such commission to bind in that kind . Eleventhly , it may give us some light in this present Question , to compare the phrase of binding and loosing Matth. 18. 19. with Psalm 149. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. Let the high praises of God be in their mouth , and a two-edged Sword in their hand , to execute vengeance upon the Heathen and pnnishments upon the people . To bind their Kings with chaines , and their Nobles with fetters of Iron , To execute upon them the judgement written : This honour have all his Saints . Which both Jewish and Christian Interpreters referre to the Kingdome of Christ , out of whose mouth proceedeth a two-edged Sword , Revel . 1. 16. & 2. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the phrase used in the Greeke version of Psalm 149. If it should be understood of temporall or externall victories and conquests of the Nations and their Kings , so it was not fulfilled to the Jews in the old Testament ; and the Jewes doe now but in vaine flatter themselves with the expectation of such a thing to come . There are but two expositions which are most received and confirmed . The first is , that the Saints shall judge the world together with Christ 1 Cor. 6. 2. and then vengeance shall be executed on the wicked , and all they who would not have Christ to reigne over them shall be bound hand and foot and cast into utter darknesse . This is the sence of Arnobius upon the place , and the Jesuits of Doway , Emmanuel Sa , Jansenius , Lorinus , Menochius goe that way . The other Exposition holds an accomplishment of the thing in this same world , and this in a Spirituall sence , concerning the Kingdome of Christ in this world , is holden by Calvin , Bucer , VVestmeherus , Heshusius , Gesuerus , Fabritius , and others . So the Dutch Annotations , Augustine and Hierome , both of them upon the place , take the sword , and the chaine , and fetters to be meant of the word of God conquering and overcomming aliens , and Hereticks , and the mightiest enemies ; which others cleare from Isa. 45. 14. Men of stature shall come over unto thee , and they shall be thine , they shall come after thee , in chaines they shall come over . But because the Psalmist maketh mention of a corrective or punitive judiciary power , therefore others ▪ adde for making the sence more full , the power of excommunication ; for which Lorinus citeth Bruno , and Hugo Victorinus . Of the Protestant Interpreters upon the place , Gesnerus , applieth it to the power of the Keyes , to be made use of according to that which is written Math. 18. Fabritius conceiveth the Text to comprehend castigationes spirituales , and he citeth Math. 16. 19. Math. 18. 18. Io. 20. 23. Heshusius cleareth it by the Instance of Theodosius excommunicated by Ambrose , Master Cotton in his Keyes of the Kingdom of heaven pag. 53. applyeth it to the Ecclesiasticall power of the Keyes . Bartholomaeus Coppen understands it of the spirituall rule and Kingdom of Christ , and makes it paralell to 2 Cor. 10. 4. the weapons of our warrefare are not carnall but mighty through God , to the pulling downe of strong holds , vers . 6. and having in readinesse to revenge all disobedience . This judiciary Ecclesiasticall power is to be executed upon all such of the nations as fall under the Government of the Church according to the rule of Christ. And this honour have all his Saints , that their Ministers are armed with a power . They that follow this latter exposition will be easily induced to beleive that the binding and loosing Mat. 18. 19. is also judiciall or juridicall : They that follow the former exposition , will also observe that the phrase of binding in Scripture , even where it is ascribed to the Church or Saints , is used in a judiciary sence , and therefore it is most sutable to the Scripture phrase to understand Mat. 18 , 19. in that sence . As touching that other Exposition of the binding and loosing , that the object it is exercised about , is not a person , but a thing or Doctrine , for it is not said Whomsoever but whatsoever ye bind : It is sufficiently confuted by ▪ much of that which hath been said already , proving a forensicall binding and loosing even of persons . Onely I shall adde these further considerations . First , the binding and loosing are Acts of the power of the Keyes , and are exercised about the same object , about which the power of the Keyes is exercised Math. 16. 19. Now the power of the Keyes is exercised about persons , for the Kingdom of heaven is opened or shut to persons , not to Doctrines . If it be said that the Keyes are for opening and shutting , not for binding and loosing , to this I answer with Alexr . Alensis part 4. Quaest. 20. Membr . 5. that these Keyes are as well for binding and loosing as for shutting and opening ; but the Act of binding and loosing doth agree to the Keyes immediately and in respect of the subject ; but the act of opening in reference to the last end . Ibid. Membr . 2. He had given this reason why the power of the Keyes is called the power of binding and loosing , because although to open and shut be the more proper Acts of the Keyes themselves , yet neverthelesse to loose and bind are the more proper Acts in reference to those who are to enter into the Kingdome , or to be excluded from the same ; for the persons themselves which doe repent , are the subject of loosing : and they that repent not , of binding . Which is not so of opening and shutting ; for although the opening be to those that are loosed , and the shutting to those that are bound ; yet those that are loosed are not the subject of opening ( as to the manner of speaking ) nor those that are bound , the Subject of shutting . So then antecedently binding and loosing are Acts of the power of the Keyes , because a man is bound before he be shut up , and loosed before the door be opened to him . Secondly , that Glosse which now I despute against , doth suppose one of these two things : either that binding and loosing cannot be exercised upon the same object at different times , and that the binding is such as can never be loosed againe ; or otherwise that one and the same doctrine may be condemned at one time , and approved at another time . Both which are absurd , and contrary to the generality of Divines . Thirdly , seeing the Scripture speaketh of binding and loosing in reference to persons , as corporally , so spiritually , which I have before proved . Why then , shall persons be excepted from being the object of binding and loosing Matth. 18 ? Fourthly , that of binding and loosing Mat. 18. 18. doth cohere with and is added by occasion of that which went before , as is also before proved . If this concerning the context be acknowledged , it will carry it to persons ; for it was an offending brother , not a false Doctrine , which was spoken of in the verses preceding . Fifthly , binding and loosing here doth at least reach as farre as retaining or remitting of sinnes Io. 20. 23. but there it is Whosoever sinnes ye remit , &c. They whose sinnes are retained , are bound . Wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whatsoever Mat. 18. 18. is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whomsoever , by an Hypallage generis , many examples whereof may be given in Scripture : so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Io. 1. 11. is expounded by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : and all things that offend Mat. 13. 41. expounded by them that doe iniquity . Vnlesse you please to understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whatsoever sinnes ye bind upon men or loose from off them , they shall be bound upon them or loosed from off them in heaven . CHAP. VII . That 1 Cor. 5. proveth Excommunication and ( by a necessary consequence even from the Erastian Interpretation ) Suspension from the Sacrament of a person unexcommunicated . MAster Prynne in his first Quaere did aske whether that phrase 1 Cor. 5. To deliver such a one to Sathan , be properly meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament onely . This , he saith , I did in my Sermon wave with a rhetoricall preterition . I answer for the latter part of the Quaere , I know not the least ground , for who did ever expound it of suspension from the Sacrament onely ? for the former part of it , it s not necessary to be debated , therefore for husbanding time and not to multiply Questions unnecessarily , I said in my Sermon , that the Question ought to be whether that Chapter ( not whether that phrase ) prove excommunication ; and that we have a shorter way to prove excommunication from the last words of that Chapter as Doctor Moulin doth in his Vates lib. 2. cap. 11. And if I should grant that delivering such a one to Sathan signifieth either of those things which Master Prynne conceiveth , that is , a bodily possession , torture , or vexation by Sathan , inflicted either by the apostolicall power of miracles , or by Gods immediate permission : yet that will not prove that it signifieth no more . Therefore Peter Martyr upon the place , thinks that the Apostles delivering of the man to Sathan by a miraculous act , and the Churches delivering of him to Sathan by Excommunication , doe very well stand together . So Synop. pur . Theol. disp . 48. Thes. 40 ▪ and he alloweth of both these expositions ; and afterward in his common place of excommunication he speaketh of Gods cooperating with the Church censure , by punishing the Excommunicate person with diabolicall vexations . Sure I am an excommunicate person may truly be said to be delivered to Sathan , who is the God and Prince of this world and reigneth in the Children of disobedience . But Master Prynne will find himself difficulted to prove that tradere Satanae 1 Cor. 5. is onely meant of a miraculous or extraordinary act , or to shew how or why the Apostle requireth the Assembling of the Church and their consent to the working of a miracle . Which ( if there were no more ) may discover the weaknesse of Master Prynnes notions concerning delivering to Sathan 6 , 7 , 8. But as the full debate were long , so it were not necessary , since Master Prynne doth now himself acknowledge that the last verse of that Chapter proveth excommunication , vindic . pag. 2. I come therefore to the next , which he calls the fourth difference , whether 1 Cor. 5. 11. with such an one no not to eat , be properly meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament . But ( whatsoever be properly meant by that phrase ) that which his debate driveth at , is , that this verse doth neither prove excommunication nor suspension from the Sacrament so much as by necessary consequence . But let us see whether his reasons can weaken the proof of Suspension from vers . 11. first he saith there is not one syllable of receiving or eating of the Lords Supper in this Chapter . I answer , the question is neither of syllables nor words but of things , and how will he prove that vers . 8. Let us keep the feast , not with old leavon , &c. is not applicable to the Lords Supper , I say not to it onely , yet surely it cannot be excluded , but must needs becomprehended as one part , yea , a principall part of the meaning , the better to answer the Analogy of the passeover , ( there much insisted upon . ) He may be pleased also to remember that he himself pag. 24. proving the passeover and the Lords Supper to be the same for the substance , for proof hereof citeth 1 Cor. 5. 7. and that Aretius Theol probl . loc . 80. expoundeth our Feast of the Passeover 1 Cor. 5. to be meant of the Lords Supper . But he further objecteth from 1 Cor. 10. 16 , 17. We are all partakers of that one Bread ; if all were then partakers of this Bread , certainly none were excluded from it in the Church of Corinth ; but at the Israelites under the Law , did all eat the same spirituall Meat , and all Drinke the same spirituall Drinke though God were displeased with many of them who were Idolaters , tempters of God , fornicators , murmurers , and were destroyed in the wildernesse . 1 Cor. 10. 1. to 12. so all under the Gospell who were visible members of ●…he Church of Corinth , did eat and drink the Lords Supper to which some drunkards whiles drunken did then resort , as is clear by 1 Cor. 11. 20. 21. Which Paul indeed reprehends vers . 22. Answ. 1 When Paul saith , we being many are one bread and one body , for we are all partakers of that one bread , he speaketh of the communion of Saints , & the word all can be of no larger extent then visible Saints , to whom the Epistle is directed 1 Cor. 1. 2. and cannot be applyed to visible workers of iniquity , who continue impenitent and obstinate in so doing . As we may joyn in communion with a visible Church , which hath the externall markes of a Church , though it be not a true invisible Church ; so we joyne with visible Saints to become one body with them in externall Church communion and to be partakers of one bread with them , though they be not true or invisible Saints in the hid man of the heart . But if these be visibly no Church , we cannot joyne in Church Communion ; and if a man be visibly no Saint , he ought not to be admitted to the communion of Saints . I shall never be perswaded , that the Apostle Paul would say of himselfe and the Saints at Corinth , We are one body with known Idolaters , Fornicators , Drunkards and the like . 2 If all in the Church of Corinth , ( none excluded ) even drunkards whiles drunken , and if all under the Gospell who are visible members of the Church ought to be admitted to eat the same spirituall meat and drinke the same spirituall drink at the Lords Table , as he supposeth that in the wildernesse all the Israelites did the like , who were Idolaters , Fornicators , &c. Then I beseech you observe how Master Prynne doth by all this overthrow his owne rules ; for pag. 2. and elsewhere he tells us he would have notorious scandalous sinners who after admonition persevere in their iniquities without remorse of conscience or amendment to be excommunicated from the Church and from the society of the faithfull in all publike Ordinances ? If both in the Church of Israel and in the Church of Corinth , all were admitted and none excluded , even those who were Idolaters or drunkards , whiles actually such without repentance or amendment ; how can Master Prynne straiten Christians , now more then Moses did the Jewes , or Paul the Corinthians ? Since therefore his Arguments drive at it , it s best he should speak it out , that all manner of persons who professe themselves to be Christians , be they never so scandalous , never so obstinate , though they persevere in their iniquity after admonition without amendment , yet ought to be admitted to the Lords Table . 3 He shall never be able to prove either that those drunken persons 1 Cor. 11. 21. were drunken when they did resort to the Church , ( for it was in the Church and in eating and drinking there , that they made themselves drunke ) nor yet that the Idolaters and Fornic●tors in the wildernesse their eating of the spirituall meat and drinking of the spirituall drinke mentioned by the Apostle 1 Cor. 10. was after their Idolat●ies and Fornications : But of this latter , I have elsewhere spoken distinctly and by it self . 4 To say that all who were visible members of the Church of Corinth were admitted , and none excluded , and to say it with a certainly is to make too bold with Scripture . And the contrary will sooner be proved from 1 Cor. 10. 21. ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of Devills : ye cannot be partakers of the Lords Table and of the Table of Devills . So much for his first exception . His second is concerning persons ( but not to the purpose ) that if we looke upon the catalogue of those with whom we are forbidden to eat , not onely shall most of the Anabaptisticall and Independent Congregations , but too many Presbyterian ministers and Elders , who are most foreward to excommunicate others for Idolatry , Fornication , Drunkennesse , must first be excommunicated themselves for their owne covetousnesse . Answ. Let it light where it may , Ministers doe not stand nor fall to his Judgement ▪ but where just proof can fasten either covetousnesse or any other scandalous sinne upon them , it s all the reason in the world they be censured with the first . If I had fallen upon this passage of his book without knowing the author , I had presently imagined it to be a peece from Oxford , it calls to my thoughts so many expressions in Pamphlets from thence , aspersing London and Westminster , as more full of covetousnesse , lying , hypocrisie , then Oxford of bloody Oathes , Masses and the like . Thirdly , saith he , it is as clear as the noone day sunne , that , no not to e●…t , in this Text is no more , then not to keep company , or hold civill familiarity with such . What ? as cleare as the noon day sun ? let us open our eyes then to see this meridian light ; first saith he , no not to eat , is interpreted in the Text it self by not to keep company , which we find twice in the preceding words , eating together being one of the highest expressions of outward friendship and familiarity . Had the Apostle said simply , not to eat ▪ this Argument had been the more colourable , but after he had twice said , not to keep company , to adde no not to eat , b doth plainly intimate that the Apostle argueth from the lesse to the greater ▪ and that there is some other fellowship and company with such a one , which is more than eating together and so much lesse permitted : and what is that ? ( eating together being as Master Prynne saith one of the highest expressions of outward friendship and familiarity . ) Must it not be communion in the holy things , and especially the receiving such a one to the Lords Table ? as if he had said , If scandalous brethren be spots in your common , how much more in your sacred Feasts ? for which cause the mixture of scandalous persons in Church fellowship is extreamly blamed 2 Pet. 2. 13. Iude v. 12. Put case that a Parliament man or a Divine of the Assembly were known ( as God forbid ) to be an Incendiary , an active malignant , a traytor , a blasphemer , so that no raher Parliament man or Member of the Assembly would eat or company with him , were it not strange , if for all that such a one should be permitted to sit in Parliament or in Assembly ? Is it not as strange if the whole Church distributively shall not so much as eat with a scandalous person , and yet the whole Church Collectively shall eat with him , in that very action which is a symbole of the communion of Saints ? So that if I should now admit that sence , that these words no not to eat , amount to no more then not to keep company , or hold civill familiarity with such , ( as M r. Prynne expresseth it ) yet the Argument will stand firme and strong in regard of this necessary consequence . If a private Christian ought not to hold so much as civill fellowship with a scandalous brother not excommunicated , much lesse ought the Church to admit him to Church communion in all publike Ordinances ; ( there being lesse latitude , & the rule much stricter in this Communion than in private civill fellowship , ) & if we be forbidden to do so much as to eat with such a one at a common meal , quanto magis convictu sacro saith Pareus upon the place , how much more is the Church forbidden to receive him to the Lords Table ? for if the end of avoiding private company with such a one be to make him ashamed , as the Erastians themselves doe confesse from 2 Thes. 3. 14. were it not contrary to that end to countenance and embolden him by receiving him to publike Church communion at the Lords Table ? Surely the refusing of the private could not so much put him to shame , as the admission to the publike should put respects upon him . Wherefore 1 Cor. 5. 11. as it is interpreted by Master Prynne proveth by a necessary consequence the Suspension from the Sacrament of a scandalous Church-Member not excommunicated . If his next reason help him not , surely his sun will go down at noon , He citeth some paralell Texts , which interpret not to eat here , of avoiding them , turning away from and rejecting them , &c. which are no judiciall acts of the Presbytery , but morall or prudentiall acts of particular Christians . Answ. There is a judiciall Presbyteriall act , ( as very many conceive ) in some of those paralell Texts cited by him 2 Thess. 3. 14. Tit. 3. 10. and so his proof is no lesse questionable , then the thing he would prove by it . And here the Apostle intendeth more then a voluntary prudentiall withdrawing of particular Christians , even a judiciall act , in the very next words , What have I to doe to judge them also that are without ? doe not ye judge them that are within ? where he gives the reason of what he had said before , that he had written to them not to be mixed with scandalous brethren , permitting them to keep company with Pagans though guity of the same faults . The reason , because Church-censures are onely for those that are Church-members not for aliens . After M r Prynne hath put forth his strength to prove that Excommunication or Suspension from the Sacrament is not meant 1 Cor. 5. 11. he comes in the next place to answer the argument drawn by consequence ▪ If we may not so much as eate with such a one at our owne Tables , farre lesse at the Lords Table . Whereunto his answer is , The argument is fallacions , saith he , because it varieth in the kinde of eating , the one being civill , the other spirituall ; the one private in ones owne house , or anothers , where he hath absolute freedome or liberty to eate or not to eate with another , the other publike in the Church , &c. But all this ( say I ) maketh our argument the stronger ; for if it be sinne to a private man to eate in his owne house with a scandalous brother , though this be but a civill fellowship in which there is more liberty and lesse latitude than in religious fellowship ; how much more sinfull is it for Church-officers to admit such a one to Sacramentall eating with the Church ? And for that first rule of his , that arguments from the lesse t the greater are not conclusive , except in the same kind of action , it s utterly untrue . For the holy Scripture it selfe hath divers arguments from the lesse to the greater , where the kind is no lesse different , if not more , than private civill eating together is from publique eating together at the Table of the Lord , as Numb . 12. 14. If Miriams father had spit in her face , should she not be ashamed seven daies ? how much more when God hath smitten her with leprosie for speaking against his servant Moses ? H●…g . 1. 4. you have built to your selves ceiled houses , how much more ought ye to have built the house of the Lord ? Ioh. 3. 12. If I have told you earthly things , and ye believe not , how shall ye believe if I tell you of Heavenly things ? 1 Cor. 6. 3. Know ye not that we shall judge Angels ? how much more things that pertain to this life ? His second exception is , that they fall not b●…th under the self-same precept . If this be a just exception against our argument , then one cannot argue thus , It s a sinne to steale a mans private goods , how much more to steale that which is holy ? It s a sinne to reproach a mans name , how much more to reproach Gods Name ? These doe not fall under the selfe-same precept ? shall such arguments be therefore inconcludent ? Whence comes all this new logick which the world never knew before ? His third condition ( let it be remembred he saith , if either of these three conditions faile , the argument is inconseqent ) is , that it must be within the compasse of the same power . If it be so , how shall that hold universally true ? H●…w much better is it to get wisdome then Gold ? and to get understanding rather to be chosen then Silver ? By M r Prynnes rule it must onely hold true in this case , when it fals within the compasse of the same power to get both Wisdome and Gold ? However if he had apprehended out argument aright , he had perceived that the Iesser thing , and the greater thing are both within the compasse of the same power . The Church of Corinth ought not to eate with such a one at common Tables : therefore not at the Lords Table . For this refusing to eate with such a one at common Tables , was by vertue of a judiciall Ecclesiasticall sentence passed against the scandalous person . So that when M r Prynne saith We have free power not to eate Bread with those at our own Tables , with whom we have no power or liberty left us by Christ , to refuse to eate with them at the Lords Table , and thereupon supposeth that our argumentation from that Text is one principall cause and prop of Independency , yea of separation , not onely from Sacraments , but from Churches : he doth altogether misapprehend the businesse . For 1. Separation from Churches is properly a renouncing of membership as unlawfull : our argument concerneth the unlawfulnesse of a particular act , not of a membership in such a Church . 2. The causes and motives of separation suppose either an unlawfull constitution of Churches , or an unlawfull government of Churches , or both , so farre , that they who separate hold it unlawfnll to continue their membership in Churches so constituted and governed , or so much as to communicate and partake in the Sacrament with such Churches , though they know no scandalous person admitted to the Sacrament . 3. The great mistake lieth in this , that our present controversie is apprehended to be whether every particular Christian hath power or liberty from Christ to withdraw from the Sacrament , because of the admission of a scandalous person . Whereas our Question is onely of the Churches power to suspend a scandalous person from the Sacrament , and when the Apostle vers . 9. 10 , 11. forbiddeth to be mixed or so much as to eate with such and such scandalous members of the Church , he meaneth of Church-discipline and Excommunication , which he had begun to speak of , and so he comes to shew them what kinde of persons c he would have to be excommunicated , and used like that incestuous man. So Beza , Bullinger , Hunnius , Gualther , Martyr , Tossanus , and others upon the place . And long before all these Augustine and Beda plainly expound the Apostles words of a publique Ecclesiasticall Judgement , past upon one who hath either confessed his offence or is formally accused and convict thereof ; and as they conceive , that Text doth not at all justifie but doth rather condemne private Christians their separating from the Church , because of a mixture of scandalons persons . I know we ought prudently and cautiously to endeavour the avoyding of the company and fellowship of scandalous brethren , though not yet censured in the Church , ( which may be proved from other Scriptures ) but that is not the point the Apostle is here upon : he meanes by no not to eate synecdochically , the whole casting off of an excommunicate person , and all that separation or withdrawing which is commanded to be made from him , or if you will ( by a metonimy of the effect for the cause ) he meanes excommunication it selfe : and however , the words immediately following prove that a publique judiciall act is intended as hath been said before . These things considered , I shall not need to be led out of my way by M r Prynnes descanting upon the meaning of 1 Cor. 5. 11. how farre it prohibits civill communion and eating with a scandalous Christian , being a railer or fornicator or Idolater , &c. I confesse some of his limitations , as namely , that we may eate with such a●one in cases of expediency or when we can not avoyd it in civility nor without offence , are very lubricke , unsafe , and ensnaring , and at best it s but like that in Martials Epigramme Difficilis , facilis , jucundus , acerbus es idem ; Nec tecum possum vivere , nec sine te . But to treat of that case of conscience in generall is not hujus loci ; for this Text speaks of not eating with an excommunicate person . Neither yet shall I need here to examine M r Prynnes six considerations p. 12 , 13 , 14. which he wisheth to be pondered by Separatists and Independents misled , ( as he thinks ) by our fallacious argument : I hope he doth not mistake our Question so farre as to comprehend the sinfulnesse of any private Christian his receiving of the Sacrament , when and where some scandalous sinners are admitted to the Sacrament , that private Christian not being accessary to the sinne of the Minister and Eldership in admitting those scandalous sinners . Wherefore I will adde eight counterballancing considerations to prove from 1 Cor. 5. * the first twelve verses thereof ( all which M r Prynne conceiveth can not prove Excommunication ) compared with 2 Cor. 2. an Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction or power of censures , and particularly of Excommunication . 1. There was a censure inflicted upon the incestuous man by the Eldership of the Church of Corinth , being assembled together 1 Cor. 5. 4 , 5. Where read we that ever the Church was intentionally gathered together , to cooperate with an Apostle in the exercise of his miraculous apostolicall power ? But we doe read that this mans punishment or censure was inflicted upon him not by the Apostle alone but by Many , 2 Cor. 2. 6. Erastus pag. 214 ▪ thinks that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( in our bookes rendered punishment , and in the margent censure ) was not excommunication , but onely sharpe objurgation or reproofe . To this I have abundantly answered Book 2. chap. 9. and in Male audis pag. 12 , 13 , 14. And if it should be granted that the man was not then excommunicate but sharply and publiquely rebuked ( which indeed is the opinion of some ) yet the Church of Corinth had proceeded to excommunication , had not written to disswade them , if the Apostle and take them off with a Sufficit , which he neither needed nor would have done , if they had power to doe no more ●o the offender then to rebuke him sharply . To conclude this point , M Prynne granteth that 1 Cor. 5. 13. proveth excommunication ; and why the gathering together , vers . 4. should not be intended for the same worke , I cannot imagine ? Some question there was of old whether the Apostles meaning vers . 13. were not that the Corinthians should put away every man out of himselfe the evill of sinne . Which Augustine having somewhere left in medio , doth in his Retractations correct , ( and Beda upon the place out of him tels us the very same ) and expound it of the taking away of the evill man from the Church by Excommunication , because saith he , the Greeke can not be rendered hoc malum , but hunc malum . 2. They who had power to receive him and forgive him , and to confirme their love towards him , had power to cast him out and censure him ; but those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Church officers of the Church of Corinth had power of the former ; Therefore of the latter . See 2 Cor. 2. 7 , 8. The Apostle adviseth them to forgive the offender . How to forgive him ? not as man forgives a private injury : that was not the case . Nor onely by the doctrine of remission of sinnes applied to him in foro conscientiae , upon evidence of his repentance : that any one Minister might doe . But the Apostle will have those many who had censured him consistorially and judicially , to forgive him in the same manner . Which is yet further confirmed by that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that confirming of their love towards him vers . 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is ratum facere , thence commeth not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . When the Apostle will expresse a ratified or confirmed testament Galat. 3. 15. he cals it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . From the same word Erasmus doth collect that the Apostle speaketh to them as the ordinary Judges who have power to confirme their love to that penitent sinner in an authoritative manner . And why doth the Apostle choose a word which properly signifi●th an authoritative confirming or ratifying of a thing , if he were not speaking of a jurisdiction and power of inflicting and taking off againe censures ? 3. The Apostle upon occasion of that offenders case , puts the Corinthians in remembrance , that they ought likewise to purge the Church from the mixture of other scandalous sinners , 1 Cor. 5. 9 , 10 , 11 , 12. The Chapter both begins and ends with the case of the incestuous man and his punishment ; which makes interpreters conceive , that what is enterlaced concerning other scandalous sinners in the Church , is to be understood of such as the Apostle would have to be censured in the same manner as that incestuous man. 4. He instanceth in six cases , ( not intending an enumeration of all the particular cases of Excommunication ) fornication , covetousnesse , ( meaning covetousnesse scandalously and grossely manifested , or practicall covetousnesse , for of the heart God onely judgeth ) idolatry , railing , drunkennesse , extortion . His instancing in these , tels us he intends not the case of private civill injuries , but of scandals , yea though the scandall be without the mixture of any civill or private injury , as in the case of an Idolater or a drunkard . 5. And even where there is a private injury wrapt up in the bosome of the scandall , as in railing and extortion , yet the Apostle there looketh upon them not qua injuries , but qua scandals ; and in that notion , he will have not onely the party particularly interrested and injured , but the other members of the Church also to withdraw communion from the offender ; for he writeth to the whole Church of Corinth , not to keepe company with such . 6. When he saith , with such a one no not to ●…ate , he intimates by No not some further and greater punishment than not eating with him , as hath been said before : If not so much as eating with him , then muchlesse Church communion with him at the Lords Table . 7. He meanes not of that withdrawing whereby each Christian may and ought to withdraw familiarity and fellowship from such a notorious scandalous sinner , whose sinne is manifest before hand , that he may keep himselfe pure , and not partake of another mans sinne : In which case a member of one Church may withdraw familiar conversing with a scandalous member of another Church . But he speakes of such a withdrawing from and avoyding of the fellowship of a scandalous Brother , as is done not by one or some few private Christians , but by the whole Church ( for hee writeth to the whole Church of Corinth , not to company nor eate with such a one ) I say , by the whole Church , whereof the offender was a member : and that not without a judiciall or consistoriall sentence , vers . 12. Doe not ye judge them that are within ? which can not be restricted to the judgement of Christian discretion and prudence ( for so both the Apostles and they did judge those that were without , to walke circumspectly toward them , Col. 4. 5. and to beware of their evill . ) But t is meant of censures and punishments inflicted by many , that is , by the Presbyters of that Church , 2 Cor. 2. 6. 8. And so I have touched upon the last consideration , which is this . That as the fault was a scandall given to the Church , and the judgement and censure was Ecclesiasticall , not civill , so that censure for that offence was inflicted onely upon Church members , not upon unbelievers . If an unbeliever did a civill injury to a Christian , the Christian was free to accuse the unbeliever ( if he saw it good ) before the civill Magistrate , and there to seeke judgement and justice . Or the Christian was free to withdraw civill fellowship from the unbeliever , which did him a civill injury , which I suppose M r Prynne will easily grant . But this way of censuring and punishing a scandalous Church member , did not agree to an Heathen who was an Idolater , or drunkard , or extortioner , &c. Vers. 10 , 11 , 12 , 13. Thus I have proved Church censure from 1 Cor. 5. compared with 2 Cor. 2. without laying the weight of any argument upon Tradere Sathanae . Which I would not have to be understood , as if I yeelded to our opposites , that the delivering to Satan is not meant of Excommunication . My meaning is onely to make the shorter worke of the Erastian Antithesis . The weight of their arguments , not of ours , is laid upon Tradere Sathanae . But for my sence of the word , I am of their opinion who interpret it of Excommunication ; and so doth Gualther himselfe . So doth the Syriack , which readeth , That you ( Corinthians ) may deliver such a one to Satan . If it was an an act of the Church of Corinth , then it was a Church censure , not a miracle . The Greeke doth also carry it to be an act of the Church of Corinth assembled together . We have also some ( though not all ) of the Ancients for us in this particular : as Balsamon in Canon . epist. Basilii ad Amphilo●… . C●…n . ● . observeth . Basil speaketh of some who at that time had been delivered to Satan for 30 yeeres , that they might learn not to carry thnmselves filthily , yea unnaturally , as they had done formerly : concerning whom he adviseth that now after so long a time , they might be ( upon their spontaneous confession of their hainous offence ) received againe into the Church . Hereupon Balsamonn oteth , Those are said to be delivered to Satan , who are separated from the communion of Christians . CHAP. VIII . Whether Judas received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . M r. Prynne hath filled up a good part of his Vindication with the case of Iudas , as going very farre in the deciding of this present contoversie . But as Protestant writers answer the Papists in the case of Peter , that it cannot be proved tha● Peter was ever Bishop of Rome , but rather that he was no● ; and if he had , this cannot prove the Popes Supremacy : the like I say of this case of Iudas . M. Prynne shall never be able to prove that Iudas did receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper : and if he could prove it , yet it shall not at all helpe that cause which he maintaineth . I begin with the matter of fact , whether Iudas received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , as well as the other Apostles , which is the question by him stated . For decision whereof , I hold it necessary , first of all that these two things be premised , concerning the harmony of the Evangelists in that matter of Iudas , the use whereof we shall see afterwards . Matthew and Marke tell us Christs discourse of the Traytor at Table , and the discovery of Iudas , before the institution of the Sacrament . Luke hath the same thing after the institution and distribution of the Sacrament . So that either Matthew and Marke speak by anticipation , or Luke speaketh by a recapitulation ; that is , either Matthew and Marke put before what was done after , or Luke puts after what was done before . Now that there is in Luke an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a narration of that after the institution which was indeed before the institution of the Sacrament , may thus appeare . 1. That very thing which Luke placeth after the institution and distribution of the Sacrament , Luk. 22. 21 , 22 , 23. Behold the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the Table . And truly the sonne of man goeth as it was determined , but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed . And they began to enquire among themselves which of them it was that should doe this thing . The very same thing doe Matthew and Marke record before the institution of the Sacrament , Matth. 26. 21. to 26. Marke 14. 18. to 22. and it is more credible that one of the Evangelists is to be reduced to the order of two , rather than two to the order of one . 2. Especially considering that Luke doth not relate the businesse of the last supper according to that order wherein things were acted or spoken , as is manifest by Luke 22. 17. 18. And he tooke the cup and gave thanks and said , Take this and divide it among your selves . This though related before the taking and breaking of the bread , yet it is but by an anticipation or preoccupation , occasioned by that which had preceded vers . 16. so to joyne the protestation of not drinking againe , with that of not eating againe the Passeover with his Disciples : therefore Beza , Salmeron , Maldonat , and others following Augustine and Euthymius doe resolve it is an anticipation , even as Paul mentioneth the cup before the bread , 1 Cor. 10. 16. I know some understand the cup mentioned Luke 22. 17. to be the Paschall cup ; others , to be the cup in the ordinary supper ; but to me its plaine that it was the Eucharisticall cup ; yea M r Prynne takes it so pag. 25. because that which Luke saith of that cup , that Christ tooke it , and gave thankes , and gave it to the Disciples , that they might all drinke of it , and told them he would not drinke with them any more of the fruit of the Vine till the Kingdome of God should come ; all this is the very same which Matthew and Marke record of the Eucharisticall cup. Therefore our Non-conformists were wont to argue from that place , that the Minister ought not to give the Sacramentall elements to each communicant out of his owne hand , but that the communicant● ought to divide the elements among themselves , because Christ saith in that place , of the cup , Divide it among your selves . 3. Luke saith not that after Supper , or after they had done with the Sacrament , Christ told his Disciples that one of them should betray him ; onely he addeth , after the History of the Sacrament , what Chrst said concerning the Traytor . But Matthew and Marke doe not onely record Christs words concerning the Traytor before they make narration concerning the Sacrament , but they record expresly that that discourse and the discovery of the Traytor was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as they did eate , Matth. 26. 21. Marke 14. 18. Now when the evening was come he sate down with the twelve , and immediately followeth , as the first purpose which Christ spake of , and as they did eate , he said , verily I say unto you , that one of you shall betray me . Which could not be so , if Luke relate Christs words concerning the Traytor in that order in which they were first uttered ; for Luke having told us verse 22. that Christ tooke the cup after Supper and said , This cup is the new Testament , &c. addeth , But behold the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the Table . So that if this were the true order , Christ did not tell his Disciples concerning the Traytor , as they did eate ( which Matthew and Marke doe say ) but after they had done eating . If it be said that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may suffer this sence , when they had eaten , or having eaten . I answer , the context will not suffer that sence ; for they were indeed eating in the time of that discourse , Matth. 26. 23. He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish the same shall betray me , Jos. 13. 26. He it is to whom I shall give a sop after I have dipped it . 4. Musculus in loc . com . de caen . dom . pag. 362. gives this reason out of Rupertus , why Lukes narration of Christs words concerning the Traytor , is placed by a recapitulation after the Sacrament : because Luke is the onely Evangelist who writeth distinctly of the Paschall Supper , and what Christ said at that Supper : and having once fallen upon that purpose , the connexion of the matter did require that he should immediately adde the story of the E●charisticall Supper , without interlacing that of the Traytor . Which reason will passe for good with such as think Iudas did eate of the Paschalll Supper , and that Christs words concerning him were spoken at the Paschall Supper , which I greatly doubt of . 5. M r Prynne pag. 18. doth in effect grant the same thing that I say ; for he saith , that Matthew and Marke record that immediatly before the institution of the Sacrament , as they sate at meat Jesus said unto the twelve , Verily one of you shall betray me , whereupon they began to be sorrowfull and to say unto him , &c. He addeth , that Iudas was the last man that said , Is it I ? immediately before the institution , as Matthew records . But of Luke he saith onely thus much , that he placeth these words of Christ concerning Judas his betraying him , after the institution and distribution of the Sacrament , not before it . If it be thus as M r Prynne acknowledgeth , that Matthew and Marke record , that Christ had that discourse concerning Iudas before the institution of the Sacrament , then most certainly it was before the institution of the Sacrament , because it must needs be true which Matthew and Marke say . Whence ●t will necessarily follow that Luke doth not mention that discourse concerning Iudas in its proper place , and this doth not offer the least violence to the Text in Luke , because he doth not say that Christ spake these words after the Sacrament , onely he placeth these words after the Sacrament , as M r Prynne saith rightly . When Scripture saith that such a thing was done at such a time , it must be so believed . But when Scripture mentioneth one thing after another , that will not prove that the thing last mentioned was last done . More plainly Master Prynne pag. 26 , 27. tels us that the Sacrament was given after Christ had particularly informed his Disciples that one of them should betray him , which he proves from Ioh. 13. 18. to 28. Matth. 26. 20. to 36. Marke 14. 18. to 22. Luke 22. 21 , 22 , 23. Whence it follows inevitably by his owne confession , that Matthew and Marke recording that discourse about Iudas after the Sacrament , doe place it in the proper order ; and that Luke mentioning that discourse about Iudas after the Sacrament , doth not place it in its owne place . This is the first thing which I thought good to premise , which will easily take off the strongest argument which ever I heard alledged for Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament , namely this , that Luke immediately after the institution and distribution of the Sacrament addeth , But behold the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me at the Table . If these words were not uttered by Christ in that order wherein Luke placeth them ( which I have proved ) then the argument is not conclusive . The second thing to be premised , is this : that the story which we have Ioh 13. from the beginning to verse 31. concerning the Supper at which Christ discoursed of Iudas and gave him the sop , after which he went immediately out , was neither in Bethany two daies before the Passeover , as the Antidote Animadverted tels us pag 5. nor yet after the institution of the Sacrament , as M r Prynne tels us , Vindic. pag. 25. herein differing either from himselfe or his friend . That Supper in Bethany , the Pamphlet saith , was two daies before the Passeover ; but some Interpreters collect from Iohn 12. 1 , 2. it was longer before ; Christ having come to Bethany six daies before , and after that Supper the next day Christ did ride into Ierusalem on a young Asse , and the people cried Hosanna , Joh. 12. 12. the very story which we have Matth. 21. Marke saith that two daies before the Passeover the chiefe Priests and Scribes sought how to put Christ to death , but he doth not say that the Supper in Bethany was two daies before the Passeover . But of this I will not contend , whenever it was , it is not much materiall to the present question , there was nothing at that Supper concerning Iudas , but a rebuking of him for having indignation at the spending of the Alabaster box of Oyntment , and from that he sought opportunity to betray Christ : But the discourse between Christ and his Apostles concerning one of them that should betray him , and their asking him one by one Is it I ? was in the very night of the Passeover , as is cleare Matth. 26. 19 , 20 , to 26. Marke 14. 16 , to 22. So that the story Ioh. 13. 18. to 30. being the same with that in Matthew and Marke , could not be two daies before the Passeover . And if two daies before Christ had discovered to Iohn who should betray him , by giving the sop to Iudas , how could every one of the Disciples ( and so Iohn among the rest ) be ignorant of it two daies after , which made every one of them to aske Is it I ? Finally , that very night in which the Lord Jesus did institue the Sacrament , the Disciples began to be sorrowfull , and began to enquire which of them it was that should betray him , Matth. 26. 22. Marke 14. 19. Luke 22. 23. But if Christ had told them two daies before that one of themselves who did sit at Table with him should betray him , surely they had at that time begun to be sorrowfull and to aske every one Is it I ? That which hath been said doth also discover that other mistake that the discourse at Table concerning the Traytor , and the giving of the sop to Iudas Ioh. 13. was after the institution of the Sacrament . If it were after , then either that in Iohn is not the same with the discourse concerning the Traytor mentioned by Matthew and Marke ; or otherwise Matthew and Marke speake by anticipation . But I have proved both that the true order is in Matthew and Marke , and that the discourse concerning the Traytor mentioned by Iohn must be in the Evangelicall harmony put together with that in Matthew and Marke , as making one and the same story . And if this in Iohn had been posterior to that in Matthew , then why doth M r Prynne himselfe joyn these together as one , pag. 18 , 19. These things premised , I come to the arguments which prove that Iudas did not receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . The first argument ( which was by me touched in that Sermon so much quarrelled by M r Prynne ) is this . It is said of Iudas , Ioh. 13. 30. He then having received the sop went immediatly out . But this sop or morsell was given him before the Sacrament , whiles they were yet eating the other Supper , at the end whereof Christ did institute the Sacrament . Therefore Iudas went away before the Sacrament . Let us heare M r Prynnes four answers to this argument , pag. 24 , 25. First , saith he , Iudas went not out till after Supper , Iohn 13. 2. and Supper being ended , &c. Answ. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will not prove that the Supper was fully ended . The Centurists Gent. 1. lib. 1. cap. 10. explaine Iohn 13. 2. thus , Magnâ caenae hujus parte peractâ , A great part of this Supper being done ; yea the Greek may be as well turned thus , When they were at Supper , as the late English Annotations have it . Ludovicus de Dieu chooseth this sence . Salmeron and others proue it from verse 4. He riseth from Supper , with vers . 12 ▪ he sate down againe to Supper , and dipped the sop . Take but two like instances in this same story of the passion , Matth. 26. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now when Jesus was in Bethany , not , after Jesus was in Bethany . Matth. 26. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now when the even was come , not , when the even was ended . His second answer , that all the other three Evangelists prove that Iudas was present at the Sacrament , is but petitio principii . Thirdly ( saith he ) the Sacrament was not instituted after Supper , but as they sat at Supper . Answ. It was indeed instituted while they were sitting at supper , or before they rose from supper , so that they were still continuing in a Table gesture ; yet the actions must needs be distinguished , for they did not at the same instant receive the Sacrament , and eate of another supper too . And though it be said of the bread , that as they did eate , Jesus tooke bread , yet of the cup Paul and Luke say , that Jesus tooke it after Supper , that is , after they had done eating ; therefore certainly after Iudas got the sop and went away , at which instant they had not done eating . Neither is there any ground at all Luke 22. 17. to prove that he tooke the cup during supper , as M r Prynne conceiveth . But finding no strength herein , he addeth : that some learned men are of opinion that Christ had that night first his paschall supper , at the close whereof he instituted his own Supper . Secondly , an ordinary supper which succeeded the institution of his own , in imitation whereof the Corinthians and Primitive Christians had their love feasts , which they did eat immediately after the Lords Supper : and this is more then intimated John 13. v. 2 , 12 , to 31 , &c. therefore Lukes after Supper he tooke the cup , must be meant onely after the Paschall supper , not th●… other Supper . Answ. I verily believe that beside the Paschall and Eucharisticall suppers , Christ and his Disciples had that night a common or ordinary supper , and so think Calvin and Beza upon Matth. 26. 20. Pareus upon Matth. 26. 21. Fulk on 1. Cor. 11. 23. Cartwright ibid. and in his Harmony lib. 3. pag. 173. Pelargus in Ioh. 13. quaest . 2. Tossanu●… in Matth. 26. Tolet and Maldon●… upon Iohn 13. 2. Iansenius cone . evang . cap. 131. and divers others . I am very glad that M r Prynn●… grants it ; and I approve his reason , that in the Paschall supper we read of no sops , nor ought to dip them in . The Jewes indeed tell us of a sauce in the Passeover which they call Chareseth : but I suppose Christ kept the Passeover according to the Law , and did not tie himselfe to rites which had come in by tradition . I could bring other reasons to prove an ordinary supper , if it were here necessary . But what gaineth M r Prynne hereby ? surely he loseth much , a● shall appeare afterwards . 2. Whereas he thinks the common supper at which Christ did wash his Disciples feet , and discover Iudas , and give him the sop , was after the Sacrament , as I know not those learned men that thinke as he doth in this point , so ●t is more than he can prove . The contrary hath been proved from Matthew and Marke who record that the discourse concerning Iudas was while they were eating that supper which preceded the Sacrament ; so that the giving of the sop to Iudas must be before the Sacrament . But after the Sacrament both Matthew and Marke doe immediately adde , and when they had sung a hymne they went out into the mount of Olives . 3. As for that of the Corinthians , the very place cited by himselfe maketh against him , 1 Cor. 11. 21. for when they came together to eate the Lords Supper , every one did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first take his owne supper , and that in imitation of Christ who gave the Sacrament after supper . So Aquinas , Lyra , and others following Augustine . This taking first or before , d hath reference to the Sacrament ; because it is spoken of every one who came to the Lords Table , every one taketh before his owne supper , which made such a disparity that one was hungry and another drunken at the Sacrament , the poore having too little , and the rich too much at their owne supper . 4. The example of the ancient Christians will helpe him as little . I finde no such thing in Tertullians Apologetik , as the eating of the love feasts immediately after the Lords Supper . But I finde both in the e African Canons and in f Augustine , and in g Walafridus Strabo that once in the yeere ( and oftner by divers ) the Sacrament was received after the ordinary meat for a commemoration of that which Christ did in the night wherein he was betrayed . It had been formerly in use among diver● to take the Sacrament ordinarily after meat , till the African Councell discharged it , as Laurentius de la barre observeth in the notes upon Tertullian pag. 339. edit . Paris . 1580. Augustine epist. 118. cap. 5. & 6. answereth certaine quaeries of Ianuarius , concerning eating or not eating before the Sacrament . He saith that Christ did indeed give the Sacrament after supper , and that the Corinthians did also take it after supper : but that the Scripture hath not tied us to follow these examples , but left us at liberty . And upon this ground he defendeth the Churches custome at that time of taking the Sacrament fasting , for greater reverence to the Ordinance . But in this he speakes plainly , h that when Christ was eating with the Disciples , and telling them that one of them should betray him , he had not then given the Sacrament . With Augustines judgement agreeth that Epistle of Chrysostome , where answering an objection which had been made against him , that he had given the Sacrament to some that were not fasting , he denieth the fact , but addeth , if he had done so , it had been no sinne , because Christ gave the Sacrament to the Apostles after they had supped . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Let them depose , saith he , the Lord himselfe , who gave the communion after supper . In commemoration whereof the ancient Church ( even when they received the Sacrament fasting at other times , yet ) upon the passion day called Good Friday received it after meales , as I proved before . And this I also adde by the way , that though ▪ Paul condemneth the Corinthians for eating their love feast in the Church , yet he allowes them to eate at home before they come to the Lords Table , as the Centurists , cent . 1. lib. 2. cap. 6. pag. 384. prove from 1 Cor. 11. 34. And if any man hunger let him eate at home , that ye come not altogether unto condemnation . Casaubon Exerc. 16. pag. 367. edit . Francof . 1615. thinks it was in imitation of Christs example that those Egyptians mentioned by Socrates did take the Sacrament at night after they had liberally supped 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , being filled with all sorts of meats . I conclude therefore that when Luke saith after supper he took the cup , the meaning is , after both paschall and common supper , and that there was no other eating after the Sacrament that night , and so consequently the giving of the sop to Iudas must needs be before the Sacrament ; and his going out immediately after the sop proves that he did not receive the Sacrament . But M r Prynne gives us a fourth answer , which is the last ( but a very weake ) refuge . The word immediately , saith he , many times in our common speech signifieth soon after , or not long after , as we usually say we will doe this or that immediately , instantly , presently , whenas we mean onely speedily , within a short time . Answ. 1. This is no good report which M r Prynne brings upon the English tongue , that men promise to doe a thing immediately , when they do not mean to doe it immediately . I hope every conscientious man will be loath to say immediately , except when he meanes immediately , ( for I know not how to explaine immediately , but by immediately ) and for an usuall forme of speaking , which is not according to the rule of the word , it s a very bad commentary to the language of the holy Ghost . 2. And if that forme of speech be usuall in making of promises , yet I have never known it usuall in writing of Histories , to say that such a thing was done immediately after such a thing , and yet divers other things intervened between them . If between Iudas his getting of the sop and his going out did interveene the instituting of the Sacrament , the taking , blessing , breaking , distributing , and eating of the bread , also the taking and giving of the cup , and their dividing it among themselves , and drinking all of it ; how can it then be a true narration that Iudas went out immediately after his receiving of the sop . 3. Neither is it likely that Satan would suffer Iudas to stay any space after he was once discovered , lest the company ▪ and conference of Christ and his Apostles should take him off from his wicked purpose . 4. Gerard having in his common places given that answer , that the word immediately may suffer this sence , that shortly thereafter Iudas went forth ; he doth professedly recall that answer in his Cotinuation of the Harmony cap. 171. p. 453. and that upon this ground , because Iudas being mightily irritated and exasperated ▪ both by the sop , and by Christs answer , ( for when Iudas asked Is it I ? Christ answered Thou hast said ) would certainly breake away abruptly and very immediately . So much of the first argument . The second argument ( which I also touched in my Sermon ) was this . As Christ said to the Communicants , Drinke ye all of it , Matth. 26. 27. and they all dranke , Matth. 14. 23. so he saith to them all , This is my Body which is broken for you , This is the cup of the new covenant in my Blood , which is shed for you , Luke 22. 19. 20. But if Iudas had been one of the communicants , it is not credible that Christ would have said so in reference to him , as well as to the other Apostles . This argument M r Prynne p. 25. doth quite mistake , as if the strength of it lay in a supposed particular application of the words of the institution to each communicant , which I never meant , but dislike it as much as he : The words were directed to all , in the plurall . This is my Body broken for you , &c. my Blood shed for you , &c. M r Prynne conceives that it might have been said to Iudas , being meant by Christ , onely conditionally , that his Body was broken , and his Blood was shed for him , if he would really receive them by faith . Jonas Schlichtingius a Socinian in his booke against Meisnerus pag. 803. though he supposeth as M r Prynne doth that Iudas was present at the giving of the Sacrament , yet he holds that it is not to be imagined , that Christ would have said to Iudas , that his body was broken for him . And shall we then who believe that the death of Jesus Christ was a satisfaction to the justice of God for sinne ( which the Socini● believe not ) admit that Christ meant to comprehend Iudas ●mong others , when he said this is my body which is broken for you ? Ministers doe indeed offer Christ to all upon condition of believing , being commanded to preach the Gospell to every creature , and not knowing who are reprobates : but that Christ himselfe ( knowing that the sonne of perdition was now lost , that the Scripture might be fulfilled Iohn 17. 12. ) would in the Sacrament ( which is more applicative then the word , and particularizeth the promises to the receivers ) so speake , as that in any sence those words might be applied to Iudas , that even for him his body was broken and his blood shed ; and that thereupon the seales should be given him , to me is not at all credible ; and I prove the negative by foure arguments : ( though I might give many more ) 1. If Christ did in reference to Iudas meane conditionally that his body was broken , and his blood shed for him , if he would believe ( as M r Prynne holds ) then he meant conditionally to save the sonne of perdition whom he knew infallibly to be lost , and that he should be certainly damned and goe to Hell , and that in eating the Sacrament he would certainly eate and drinke judgement to himselfe ( all which M r Prynne himselfe pag. 26. saith Christ infallibly knew ) But who dare thinke or say so of Jesus Christ ? Suppose a Minister knew infallibly that such a one hath blasphemed against the holy Ghost , ( which sinne the Centurists and others thinke to have been committed by Iudas , which could not be hid from Christ ) and is irrecoverably lost , and will be most certainly damned , durst that Minister admit that person to the Sacrament , and make those words applicable to him so much as conditionally ; This is the Lords body broken for you : This is the blood of the new Covenant shed for you unto remission of sinne ? How much lesse would Christ himselfe say so , or mean so in reference to Iudas ? 2. If Christ would not pray for Iudas , but for his elect Apostles onely , and such as should believe through the word of the Gospell , then he meant not so much as conditionally to give his body and blood for Iudas . ( for if he meant any good to Iudas , so much as conditionally , he would not have excluded him from having any part at all in his prayers to God. ) But Christ doth exclude Iudas from his prayer , Iohn 17. not onely as one of the reprobate world vers . 9. but even by name vers . 12. giving him over for lost , and one that was not to be prayed for . 3. Love and hatred in God and in his sonne Jesus Christ , being eternall and unchangeable , ( for actus Dei immanentes sunt aeterni ) it followeth that if there was such a decree of God , or any such meaning or intention in Christ , as to give his body and blood for Iudas , whom he knew infallibly to be lost : and since that same conditionall meaning or intention could not be without a conditionall love of God and of Christ to Iudas and his salvation : this love doth still continue in God , and in Christ , to save Iudas now in Hell upon condition of his believing , which every Christian I thinke will abominate . 4. That conditionall love and conditionall intention or meaning , could not have place in the Sonne of God. For as Spanhemius doth rightly argue in his late learned Exercitations de gratia universali pag. 746. it doth not become either the wisdome or goodnesse of God to will and intend a thing upon such a condition as neither is nor can be . And pag. 829. he saith , that this conditionall destination or intention cannot be conceived , as being incident onely to such as doe neither foreknow nor direct and order the event , and in whose hand it is not to give the faculty and will of performing the thing . Which can not without impiety be thought or said of God. Thus he . The third argument ( which I shall now adde ) is that whereby Hilarius Can. 30. in Matth. and Innocentius the third lib. 4. de mysterio miss . cap. 13. prove that Iudas received not the Sacrament , neither was present at the receiving of it . Because that night while Iudas was present , Christ in his gracious and comfortable expressions to his Apostles did make an exception , as Iohn 13. 10 , 11. Ye are cleane , but not all . For he knew who should betray him , therefore said he , ye are not all cleane , vers . 18. I speak not of you all , I know whom I have chosen . So vers . 21. even as before Joh. 6. 70. Have not I chosen you twelue , and one of you is a divell . But at the Sacrament all his sweet and gracious speeches are without any such exception , This is my body which is given for you , &c. Yea he saith positively of all the Apostles to whom he gave the Sacrament , I will not drinke henceforth of this fruit of the Vine , untill that day when I drinke it new with you in my Fathers Kingdome , Matth. 26. 29. and this he saith nnto them all , as it is cleare from vers . 27. Drinke ye all of it . Againe , Luke 22. 28 , 29 , 30. Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptatoons . And I appoint unto you a Kingdome as my Father hath appointed unto me . That ye may eate and drinke at my Table in my Kingdome , and sit on Thrones judging the twelve Tribes of Israel . Would not Christ much more have excepted Iudas in these expressions , if he had been present , seeing he had so often excepted him before ? As for M r Prynnes reasons from Scripture to prove that Iudas did receive the Sacrament , they are extreamely inconcludent . First , he saith , that Matthew , Marke , and Luke , are all expresse in terminis , that Christ sate down to eate the Passeover , and the twelve Apostles with him ; that Iudas was one of those twelv● , and present at the Table ; that as they sate at meat together , Jesus tooke Bread , &c. that he said of the cup , drinke ye all of it ; and Marke saith they all dranke of it . Answ. 1. The three Evangelists are all expresse in terminis , that when Even was come , Christ sate down with the twelve ; as likewise that the twelve did eate with him that night ; but that the twelve Apostles were with him in the eating of the Passeover , they are not expresse in terminis , and I have some reasons which move me to thinke that Iudas did not eate so much as of the Passeover that night ▪ whereof in the proper place . 2. And if he had been at the Passeover , that proves not he was at the Lords Supper . When Christ tooke the cup and said , Drink ye all of it , it was after supper , that is , after the Paschall supper , as M r Prynne himselfe gives the sence . 3. When Marke saith , They all dranke of it , he means all that were present , but Iudas was gone forth . His argument supposeth that Iudas was present , which being before disproved , there remaines no more strength nor life in his argument . That which he addeth pag. 18 , 19. if it have either strength or good sence , I confesse the dulnesse of my conception . He would prove from Matthew and Marke that immediately before the institution of the Sacrament , Christ told his Disciples that one of them should betray him , and they all asked Is it I ? and that therefore certainly the Sacrament was given to Iudas , because he was the last man that said Is it I ? immediately before the institution . And further ( saith he ) Luke placeth these words of Christ concerning Iudas his betraying of him , after the institution , which manifesteth that Iudas was present at the Sacrament . His inference is this , that seeing Iohn averreth , Chap. 13. v. 2. that all this discourse , and the giving of the sop to Iudas was after supper , and the other three Evangelists agreeing that Christ instituted and distributed the Sacrament , as they did eate , before supper quite ended , it must follow that Iudas did receive the Sacrament . Answ. 1. But how doth this hang together , first to argue that Iudas received the Sacrament , because Christs discourse concerning Iudas , and Iudas his question Is it I ? were immediately before the institution of the Sacrament : and againe to prove that Iudas did receive the Sacrament , because Christs discourse about Iudas was after supper ended , and after the Sacrament which was instituted before supper ended ? the one way of arguing destroyeth the other . 2. For that in Matthew and Marke , that Christ discoursed of the Traytor , and that Iudas said Is it I ? before the institution of the Sacrament , I confesse ; but that it was immediately before the institution of the Sacrament the Evangelists doe not say , neither doth he prove it . Iudas went out after that discourse and the sop , and how much of the consolatory and valedictory Sermon ( which beginneth Iohn 13. 31. ) was spent before the distribution of the Sacrament , who is so wise as to know ? 3. For that in Luke , I have proved that though he sets down the things , yet not in that order wherein they were done : which is also the opinion of Grotius upon that place . And for that Iohn 13. 2. Supper being ended , I have answered before . Shall we in the next place have a heape of humane testimonies concerning Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament ? I see so much light from Scripture to the contrary , that I shall not be easily shaken with the authority of men : yet it shall not be amisse a little to trie whether it be altogether so as he would make us believe . He saith we goe against all antiquity , pag. 18. and against the most and best of Protestant writers , pag. 23. yea , that all ages have received it as an indubitable verity that Iudis received the Sacrament , pag. 19. No Sir , soft a little . The truth is the thing hath been very much controverted both among the Fathers , and among Papists , and among Protestant writers . I have found none so unanimous for Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament as the Lutherans , i endeavouring thereby to prove that the wicked hypocrites and unbelievers doe in the Sacrament eate the true body of Christ , and drinke his true blood , yet ( as hot as they are upon it ) they acknowledge it is no indubitable verity , they cite authorities against it as well as for it . See Gerhard Harm . evang . cap. 171. Brachmand Tom. 3. pag. 2082. Neither doe the Lutherans make any such use of Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament as Master Prynne doth : for they hold that not onely excommunicated persons , but scandalous and notorious sinners , not yet excommunicated , ought to be kept backe from the Lords Table : See Gerhard loc . com . Tom. 5. 180 , 181 , 182. where he proves distinctly that all these ought to be excluded from the Lords Supper . 1. Hereticks . 2. Notorious scandalous sinners . 3. Excommunicated persons . 4. Possessed persons , furious persons , and idiots . 5. Infamous persons , who use unlawfull arts , as Magitians , Negromancers , &c. and for the exclusion of scandalous sinners he citeth the Ecclesiasticall Electorall Constitutions . L. Osiander Enchir. contra Anabap. cap. 6. quaest . 3. tels us that the Lutheran Churches exclude all known scandalous persons from the Sacrament . But it is strangest to me that M r Prynne will not give credit to some of the Testimonies cited by himselfe . Theophylact. enar in Matth. 26. saith Quidam autem dicunt quod egresso Juda , tradidit Sacramentum aliis Discipulis , proinde & nos sic facere debemus , & malos à Sacramentis abarcere . Idem enar . in Marc. 14. Quidam dicun●… ( but who they were appeares not saith M r Prynne , in any extant worke of theirs ) Iudam non fuisse participem Sacramentorum , sed egressum esse priusquam dominus Sacramenta traderet . Shall we take this upon M r Prynnes credit , that it doth not appeare in any extant worke of theirs ? Nay , let him take better heed what he saith , and whereof he affirmeth . In the next page he himselfe excepteth one , which is Hilary ; but except him onely , he saith that all the Ancients unanimously accord herein , without one dissenting voyce . But see now whether all is to be believed that M r Prynne gives great words for . T is well that he confesseth we have Hilary for us . First therfore let b the words of Hilary be observed . Next I will prove what he denieth , namely that others of the Ancients were of the same opinion . Clemens lib. 5. constit . Apost . cap. 13. after mention of the Paschall or typicall supper , addeth these words , as of the Apostles , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But when he had delivered to us the antitype mysteries ( so called in reference to the Paschall supper ) of his precious body and blood , Judas not being present with us . I doe not owne these eight bookes of the Apostolicall constitutions , as written by that Clemens who was Pauls fellow-labourer , Phil. 4. yet certainly they are ancient as is universally acknowledged . Dionysius Areopagita ( or whosoever he was that anciently wrote under that name ) de Ecclesiastica Hierarchia cap. 3. part . 3. sect . 1. speaking of the same bread , and the same cup , whereof all the communicants are partakers , he saith that this teacheth them a Divine conformity of manners , and withall cals to mind Christs supper in the night when he was betrayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . In quo caena : so Ambrose the Monke in his Latine translation , and Iudoeus Clichtoveus in his Commentary , In which supper ( for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relates to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the supper before mentioned , and signifieth the time of supper , or after supper was begun . ; so the Graecians use to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie in the time of sicknesse ) the authour himselfe of those Symbols doth most justly deprive or cast out him ( Judas ) who had not holily and with agreement of mind supped together with him , upon holy things . By these holy things he understands ( it should seem ) the Typicall or Paschall supper , of which Iudas had eaten before , and peradventure that night also , in the opinion of this Ancient . Iudocus Clichteveus in his Commentary saith onely , that Iudas did that night eate together with Christ cibum , meate , he saith not Sacramentum . This ancient writer is also of opinion that Christ did excommunicate Iudas , or as Clichtoveus expounds him , à caeterorum discipulorum caetu aequissime separavit , discrevit & dispescuit . If you thinke not this cleare enough , heare the ancient Scholiast Maximus to whom the Centurists give the Testimony of a most learned and most holy man : He flourished in the seventh Century , under Constans , he was a chiefe opposer of the Monothelites , and afterwards a martyr . His Scholia upon that place of Dionysius , maketh this inference 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that after Judas had gone forth from supper , Christ gave the mystery to his Disciples . Againe , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Where note , that to him also , ( that is , to Iudas ) he ( Christ ) gave of a mysticall bread ( meaning the unleavened bread of the Passeover ) and cup ( meaning the cup drunke at the Paschall supper ) but the mysteries ( that is , the Eucharisticall bread and cup , commonly called the mysteries by ancient writers ) he gave to his Disciples after Judas went forth from supper , as it were because Judas himselfe was unworthy of these mysteries . Adde hereunto the Testimony of Georgius Pachymeres , who lived in the thirteenth Century : in his Paraphrase upon that same place of Dionysius , he saith that Christ himselfe the author and institutor of this Sacrament , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Christ doth cast out and separate or excommunicate most justly Judas , who bad not holily supped together with him . For having given to him also of a mysticall bread and cup , he gave the mysteries to the Disciples alone , after be went forth from Supper , thereby as it were shewing that Judas was unworthy of these mysteries . By the mysteries which Maximus and Pachimeres speake of , and which they say Christ gave to his Disciples , after Iudas was gone forth . , I can understand nothing , but the Eucharisticall supper , the Elements whereof are very frequently called the mysteries by the ancients , as hath been said . And if any man shall understand by these mysteries the inward graces or things signified in the Lords Supper , then what senoe can there be in that which Maximus and Pachimeres say ? for Christ could as easily keepe backe from Iudas , and give to his other Disciples , those graces and operations of his Spirit , when Iudas was present among them , as when he was cast out . So that it could not be said that Christ did cast out Iudas in order to the restraining from him , and giving to the other Disciples , the invisible inward grace signified in the Sacrament , as if the other Apostles had not received that grace at the receiving of the Sacrament , but that Iud●…s must first be cast out , before they could receive it ; or as if Iudas had received the inward grace , if he had not gone out from supper . The sence must therefore be this , that Iudas as an unworthy person was cast out by Christ , before he thought fit to give the Sacrament of his Supper unto his other Apostles . Unto all these Testimonies adde Ammonius Alexandrinus de quatuor Evangeliorum consonantia , cap. 155. where he hath the story of Iud●…s his receiving of the sop , and his going forth immediately after he had received it : thereafter cap. 156. he addeth the institution and distribution of the Lords Supper , as being in order posterior to Iudas his going forth . So likewise before him Tacianus doth make the History of the institution of the Sacrament to follow after the excluding of Iudas from the company of Christ and his Apostles : which neither of them had done , if they had not believed that Iudas was gone before the Sacrament . With all these agreeth l Innocentius the third , who holdeth expresly that the Sacrament was not given till Iudas had gone forth : and that there is a recapitulation in the narration of Luke . Moreover as it is evident by the forementioned Testimonies of Theophylact that some of the Ancients did hold that Christ gave not the Sacrament to Iudas : so also the Testimony cited by M r Prynne out of Victor Antiochenus beareth witnesse to the same thing : sunt tamen qui Judam ante porrectam Eucharistiae Sacamentum exivisse existiment . But yet ( saith he ) there are who conceive that Judas went forth before the Sacrament of the Eucharist was given . And with these words M r Prynne closeth his citation out of Victor Antiochenus . But I will proceed where he left off . The very next words are these , Sane Johannes quiddam ejusmodi subindicare videtur . Certainly I●…hn seemeth to intimate some such thing . Which is more then halfe a consenting with those who thinke that Iudas went forth before the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . I shall end with two Testimonies of Rupertus Tuitiensis , m one upon the sixth : n another upon the thirteenth of Iohn . The latter of the two speaketh thus , being Englished . But we must know , that , as it hath been also said before us , if Judas after the sop did goe forth immediately , as a little after the Evangelist saith , without doubt , he was not present with the Disciples at that time when our Lord did distribute unto them the Sacrament of his owne body and blood . And a little after , Therefore by the Lords example the good ought indeed to tolerate the bad in the Church , untill by the fanne of judgement the graine be separated from the chaffe , or the tares from the wheate : but yet patience must not be so farre void of discerning , as that they should give the most sacred mysteries of Christ , to unworthy persons whom they know to be such . As for moderne writers , this present question hath been debated by Salmeron Tom. 9. Tract . 11. and by D r Kellet in his Tricaenium lib. 2. cap. 14. both of them hold that Iudas did not receive the Lords Supper . Mariana on Luke 22. 21. citeth authors for both opinions , and rejecteth neither . Gerhard Harm . Evang. cap. 171 , citeth for the same opinion , that Iudas did not receive the Lords Supper , ( beside Salmeron ) Turrianus and Barradius : and of ours Danaeus , Musculus , Kleinwitzius , Piscator , & alii complures , saith he , and many others . Adde also Zanchius upon the fourth Command . Gomarus ( who professedly handleth this question upon Iohn 13. ) o Beza puts it out of question , and p Tossanns tels us it is the judgement of many learned men , as well as his owne . q Musculus following Rupertus , concludeth that certainly Iudas was gone forth , before Christ gave the Sacrament to his Apostles . So likewise r Diodati and s Grotius . By this time it appeareth that M r Prynne hath no such consent of writers of his opinion , or against mine , as he pretendeth . As for those Ancients cited by M r Prynne , some of them ( as Origen and Cyrill ) did goe upon this great mistake that the sop which Christ gave to Iudas , was the Sacrament ; which errour of theirs is observed by Interpreters upon the place . No marvell that they who thought so , were also of opinion that Iudas received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper ; for how could they choose to thinke otherwise , upon that supposition ? But now the later Interpreters , yea M r Prynne himselfe having taken away that which was the ground of their opinion , their Testimonies will weigh the lesse in this particular . Chrysostome thinks indeed that Iudas received the Sacrament , but he takes it to be no warrant at all for the admission of scandalous persons : for in one and the same Homily , Hom. 83. in Matth. he both tels us of Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament , and discourseth at large against the admission of scandalous persons . As for Bernard M r Prynne doth not cite his words nor quote the place . Oecumenius ( in the passage cited by M r Prynne ) saith that the other Apostles and Iudas did eate together communi mensa , at a common Table ; But he saith not at the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . That which Oecumenius in that place argueth against , is the contempt of the poore in the Church of Corinth , and the secluding of them from the love feasts of the richer sort . Now , saith he , if Christ himselfe admitted Iudas to eate at one and the same Table , with his other Disciples , ought not we much more admit the poore to eate at our Tables ? M r Prynne tels us also that Nazianzen in his Christus patiens agreeth that Iudas did receive the Lords Supper together with the other Apostles . I answer , first I finde no such thing in that place . Next , those verses so entituled , are thought to be done by some late author , and not by Nazianzen , as Io. NeW enklaius in his Censure upon them noteth , and giveth reason for it . Cyprians Sermon de ablutione pedum , as it is doubted of whether it be Cyprians , so the words cited by M r Prynne doe not prove the point in controverfie . The other Testimony cited out of Cyprians Sermon de caena Domini , as it is not transcribed according to the originall , so if M r Prynne had read all which Cyprian saith in that Sermon against unworthy receivers , peradventure he had not made 〈◊〉 of that testimony . The words cited out of Ambrose doe not hold forth clearely Iudas his receiving of the Eucharisticall Supper . The words cited out of Augustine epist. 162. Iudas accepit pretium nostrum , are not there to be found , though there be something to that sence . It is no safe way of citations to change the words of Authors . This by the way . As for his other three citations out of Augustine Tract . 6. 26. & 62. in Ioh. I can not passe them without two Animadversions . First , the greatest part of those words , which he citeth as Augustines words , and also as recited by Beda in his Commentary on 1 Cor. 11. is not to be found either in Augustine or Beda in the places by him cited ; viz. these words : Talis erat Judas , & tamen cum sanctis Discipulis undecin●… intrabat & exibat . Ad ipsam caenam Dominicam pariter accessit , conversari cum iis potuit , eos inquinare non potuit : De uno p●…ne & Petrus accipit & Judas ; & tamen quae pars fideli & infideli ? Petrus enim accepit ad vitam , manducat Judas ad mortem : Qui enim comederunt indigne judicium sibi manducat & bibit SIBI , NON TIBI , &c. Of which last sentence if M r Prynne can make good Latine , let him doe it , ( for I can not ) and when he hath done so , he may be pleased to looke over his Bookes better to seeke those words elsewhere , if he can finde them , for as yet he hath directed us to seeke them where they are not . My next Animadversion shall be this . The words of Augustine , which M r Prynne alledgeth for Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament , are these , Tract . 6. in Joh. Num enim mala erat buccella quae tradita est Judae à Domino ? Absit . Medicus non daret venenum : salutem medicus dedit , sed indigne accipiendo ad perniciem accepit , quia non pacatus accepit . Thus the originall , though not so recited by M r Prynne : but that I passe , so long as he retaines the substance . Yet how will he conclude from these words that Iudas received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , unlesse he make Augustine to contradict himselfe most grossely : for Tract . 62. in Joh. ( another place whether M r Prynne directeth us , ) speaking of Christs giving of that buccella or sop to Iudas , he saith , Non autem ut putant quidam negligenter legentes , tunc Judas Christi corpus accepit : but Judas did not at that time receive the body of Christ , as some negligently reading doe thinke . Which words Beda also in his Comment on Ioh. 13. hath out of Augustine . It is Augustines opinion that the Sacrament was given before that time , at which Iudas was present . That which M r Prynne citeth out of Algerus ( a Monke , who in that same booke writeth expresly for Transubstantiation ) maketh more against him then for him . For Algerus takes the ●eason of Christs giving the Sacrament to Iudas , to be this , because his perverse conscience though knowne to Christ was not then made manifest , Iudas not being accused and condemned : so that he was a secret , not a scandalous sinner . Thus farre we have a taste of M r Prynnes citations of the Ancients . Peradventure it were not hard to finde as great flaws in some other of those citations . But it is not worth the while to stay so long upon it . Among the re● he citeth Haymo Bishop of Halberstat for Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament . But he may also be pleased to take notice that Haymo would have no notorious scandalous sinner to receive the Sacrament , and holds that a man eats and drinks unworthily qui gravioribus criminibus commaculatus praesumit illud ( sacramentum ) sumere ; that is , who being defiled with haynous crimes presumeth to take the Sacrament ; but if he had thought it ( as Master Prynne doth ) the most effectuall ordinance , and readiest meanes to worke conversion and repentance , he could not have said so . That which M r Prynne pag. 23. citeth out of the two confessions of Bohemia and Belgia , doth not assert that for which he citeth them . For neither of them saith that Iudas did receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . The Belgik confession saith an evill man may receive the Sacrament unto his own condemnation . As for example , Judas and Simon Magus both of them did receive the Sacramentall signe . I can subscribe to all this ; for it is true in respect of the baptisme both of Iudas and Simon Magus . But I must here put M r Prynne in minde , that the thing which he pleads for , is extreamly different from that which the Belgick Churches hold . For Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum cap. 13. saith thus , Nemo ad Caenam dominicam admittatur , nisi qui fidei Confessionem ante reddiderit , & Disciplinae Ecclesiasticae se subjecerit , & vitae inculpatae testes fideles produxerit . Let no man be admitted to the Lords Supper , except he who hath first made a confession of his faith , and hath subjected himselfe to the Church Discipline , and hath proved himselfe by faithfull witnesses to be of an unblameable life . The other confession of Bohemia saith that Iudas received the Sacrament of the Lord Christ himselfe , did also execute the function of a Preacher , and yet he ceased not to remaine a divell , an hypocrite , &c. This needeth not be expounded of the Lords Supper ( which if he had received , how did he still remaine an hypocrite ? for that very night his wickednesse did breake forth and was put in execution ) but of the Passeover received by Iudas once and againe , if not the third time . That Chapter is of Sacraments in generall , and that which is added , is concerning Ananias and his wife , their being baptised of the Apostles . However the very same Chapter saith that Ministers must throughly looke to it , and take diligent heed lest they give holy things to dogs , or cast Pearles before swine . Which is there applied to the Sacraments , and is not understood of preaching and admonishing onely as M r Prynne understands it . Also the Booke entituled Ratio Disciplinae ordinisque Eccles●…astici in unitate fratrum Bohemorum cap. 7. appointeth not onely Church-discipline in generall , but particularly suspension from the Lords Table of obstinate offenders . Finally , whereas M. Prynne citeth a passage of the antiquated Common prayer Booke , as it hath lost the authority which once it had , so that passage doth not by any necessary inference hold forth that Iudas received the Sacrament , as D. Kellet sheweth at some length in his Tricaenium . The citation in which M. Prynne is most large , is that of Alexander Alensis part . 4. Quaest. 11. membr . 2. art . 1. sect . 4. ( though not so quoted by him ) But for a retribution , I shall tell him three great points , in which Alexander Alensis in that very dispute of the receiving of the Eucharist , is utterly against his principles . First , Alexander Alensis is of opinion that the precept Matth. 7. 6. Give not that which is holy to dogs , neither cast ye Pearles before swine , doth extend to the denying the Sacrament to known prophane Christians ; for both in that Section which hath been cited , and art . 3. sect . 1. answering objections from that Text , he doth not say , that it is meant of the word , not of the Sacrament , and of Infidels , Hereticks , Persecutors , not of prophane ones : but he ever supposeth , that the Ministers are forbidden by that Text , to consent to give the Sacrament to prophane scandalous sinners . Secondly , Alexander Alensis holds , that Christs giving of the Sacrament to Iudas , is no warrant to Ministers to give the Sacrament to publique notorious scandalous sinners , though they doe desire it . And thus he resolveth Ib. art . 3. sect . 1. If the Priest know any man by confession to be in a mortall sinne ; he ought to admonish him in secret , that he approach not to the Table of the Lord : and he ought to deny unto such a one the body of Christ , if he desire it in secret . But if he desire it in publique , then either his sinne is publique or secret . I●… publique , he ought to deny it unto him ; neither so doth he reveale sinne because it is publique : If private , he must give it , lest a worse thing fall out . Thirdly , Alexander Alensis holds the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , not to be a converting , but a confirming and conserving Ordinance Ibid. art . 2. sect . 2. His words I shall cite in the debating of that controversie . CHAP. IX . Whether Judas received the Sacrament of the Passeover that night in which our Lord was betrayed . Mr Prynne ( distrusting peradventure the strength of his proofes for Iudas his receiving of the Lords Supper ) betakes himselfe to an additionall argument pag. 24. All our Antagonists , saith he , and the Evangelists clearely agree that Jud●…s did eate the Passeover with Christ himselfe , as well as the other Apostles : now the Passeover was a type of the Lords Supper , &c. It seems he had not the notes of my Sermon truly ( though he endeavour to confute it ) for I did then , and I doe still make a very great question of it , whether Iudas did so much as eate the Passeover at that time with Christ and the other Apostles : and I thinke I have very considerable reasons which make it probable that Iudas did not eate the Passeover that night with Christ and the Apostles . The resolution of this question depends upon another , whether Christ and his Apostles did eate the Passeover before that supper at which he did wash his Disciples feet , and gave the sop to Iudas ( after the receiving whereof Iudas immediately went out ) or whether that supper was before the eating of the Passeover . I finde t some others as well as my selfe have been of opinion that it was before , not after the Passeover ; ( yea that the Jewish custome was to eate their common Supper before the Passeover . See M. Weemse his Christian Synagogue pag 120. ) I finde also Ammonius Alexandrinus de quatuor Evangeliorum consonantia cap. 154. placeth that supper mentioned Iohn 13. 2 , 4 , 12 , 18. at which Jesus did wash his Disciples feet , and when he had done sate down againe , and told them that he who was eating bread with him should betray him . Then cap. 155. he proceedeth to the story of the Paschall supper , in which he conceiv●th the sop was given to Iudas ; but in this particular he did much mistake ; for the sop was given at the same supper mentioned Iohn 13. 2 , 4 , 12 , 18. and not at the Paschall Supper ( as M Prynne also acknowledgeth , ) This is cleare , that Ammonius placeth the common supper at which Christ did wash his Disciples feet , and told them of the Traitor , to have been before the Paschall supper . I will first tell the reasons that incline me this way , and then answer the objections which may seem to be against it . The reasons are these : 1. The orientall custome was to wash before meal , not after they had begun to eate . 2. This Supper ( in which the sop was given to Iudas , whereupon he went away ) was before the Feast of the Passeover , Joh. 13. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , meaning immediately before the feast of the Passeover , it being reckoned from the time of eating the Paschall Lambe , and so before the Feast of the Passeover , hath the same sence as Luke 11. 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Pharisee wondred that Christ had not washed before dinner , that is immediately before dinner . So here I undestand before the Feast of the Passeover , that is immediately before the time of eating the Paschall Lambe , which was the beginning of the Feast of the Passeover . You will say perhaps that Christ did not eate the Passeover upon the same day that the Jewes did , and so those words before the Feast of Passeover , may be understood before the Passeover of the Jewes , not before the Passeover of Christ. I answer , whether Christ and the Jewes kept the Passeover at one time , is much debated among Interpreters . Baronius , Toletus , and divers others hold that Christ did eate the Paschall Lambe upon the same day with the Jewes . Scaliger , Causabon , and others hold the contrary . The question hath been peculiarly debated between Ioh. Cloppenburgius , and Ludovicus Capellus , yet so that Capellus ( who followes Scaliger and Casaubon ) acknowledgeth that both opinions have considerable reasons , and both are straitned with some inconveniencies . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de ultimo Christi paschate pag. 6. & 22. For my part , I shall not contend : but admit the distinction of Christs Passeover and the Jewes Passeover ; yet saith Maldonat upon Ioh. 13. 1. I doubt not but Iohn understands Christs Passe-over ; for all the Evangelists in the story of the last Supper when they speake of the Passeover , they mean Christs Passeover , and it was the true Passeover according to the Law. 3. That which makes many to thinke that Christ did eate the Passeover before that other Supper in which he gave the sop to Iudas , is a mistake of the Jewish custome , which as they conceive was to eate other meat after , but none before the Paschall Lambe . Now to me the contrary appeareth , namely , that whatsoever the Jewes did eate before the Paschall Supper , in the night of the Passeover , was eaten before the Paschall Supper , and it was among them forbidden to eate any thing after the Paschall Supper . Which may be proved not onely by that Talmudicall Canon ( cited by D. Buxtorf in hist. instit . caenae Dom. ) which saith , The Passeover is not eaten except after meal : but also more plainly by w Liber rituum paschalium lately translated and published by Rittangelius : and by another Canon cited by x Martinius . But there are two arguments which may be brought to prove that Iudas did eate the Passeover with Christ and the Apostles . 1. Because that Supper at which Iudas got the sop , was after the Paschall supper , for it is said Iohn 13. 2. Supper being ended . Which must be meant of the Paschall supper . I answer these words may very well be understood not of the Paschall supper , but of that other supper at which the sop was given to Iudas . And as for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : some Greeke copies have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Nonnus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : so the sence were as Augustine expounds , Supper being prepared and ready and set on Table . But be it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the matter is not great ; for there is no necessity of expounding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , thus , when Supper was done or ended . It may suffer other two sences . One is , that of Augustine , when it was Supper time , or when Supper was set on Table . And this sence is followed by A●…binus Fl●…us Alcuinus lib. de divinis Officiis , Artic. de Caena Domini . Circa v●…speram vero caenâ factâ , id est paratâ , & ad convivantium mensam usque perductâ , non transactâ neque ●…initâ , surgit Jesus à caenâ & p●…it vestimenta , &c. So likewise Mariana upon Ioh. 13. 2. tels us that caenâ factâ , may well be expounded , caenâ paratâ , or ante caenam , or cum caenae tempus adesset , which he cleareth by the like formes of speech in other Scriptures . Secondly , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may very well be translated , when supper was begun , or when they were at Supper , as I have before shewed by like instances in the New Testament , Matth. 26. 6. 20. Things permanent as a house , or the like are said to be factae , when they are ended and compleate . But things which are successive are said to be factae , when they are begun , as dies factus , not when the day is ended , but when it is begun . So here , there can be no more proved from the words , but that supper was begun , or they were at supper . This sence is given by Osiander , Erasmus , ●…ossanus harm . evang . part 3. cap. 1. beside the Centuri●ts , Salmeron , and Lud. de Dieu before cited . The other argument may be this . Matthew , Marke and Luke , after they have told of the making ready of the Passeover , adde that Christ sate 〈◊〉 with the Twelve . Ans. 1. It cannot be proved , that this is meant of sitting down to eate the Passeover ; nay , it rather appeareth from the Text , that it was to eate that other supper , at which the sop was given to Iudas ; The same discourse and questioning concerning the Traytor , which Iohn sets down before Iudas his getting of the sop and going out ; is recorded by Ma●…thew and Marke , to have been in that first supper , unto which Christ sate down with the twelve when even was come . Therefore Christs sitting down with the twelve Matth. 26. 20 , 21. Mark ▪ 14. 17 , 18. ●eing spoken of that supper at which Christ told his Disciples that one of them should betray him , and every one asked Is it I ? ( which by M r Prynnes confession was not the Paschall , but the ordinary supper . ) It followeth that the sitting down with the twelve is not meant of the Passeover , but of an ordinary supper before the Passeover . 2. The same words of Christs sitting down with the twelve are expounded ( though upon other considerations ) as spoken in reference not to the Paschall , but the ordinary or common supper , by Lorinus in Psal. 101. 6. following Maldonat , and by Gerhard . Harm . Evang. cap 170. p. 403. Their reason is , because according to the Law , the Passeover was to be eaten standing , not sitting : but that is more then can be proved from the Law which doth not so much as speake of standing at the first Passeover . It is no necessary consequence : they had their stav●s in their hands , ergo they were standing . This by the way . 3. Granting that Christs sitting downe with the twelve were spoken of the Paschall supper , yet the paschall supper being after the other supper , at which Iudas got the sop and went away ( which I now suppose for the reasons before-mentioned till I see better reasons to the contrary . ) It might be said , after Iudas was gone , that Christ sate down with the twelve , as well as 1 Cor. 15. 5. it is said of Christ risen from the dead , he was seen of Cephas , then of the twelve , though he was seen onely of the eleven , and Iudas was gone to his place . Which answers all that can be said from Luke 22. 14 , 15. If I have not said so much , as to put it out of all question that Iudas did not eate of the Passeover with Christ and his Apostles , yet I am sure I have cleared so much as this , that Master Prynne will not be able to prove convincingly that Iudas did eate of the Passeover that ●ight with Christ. I will conclude with the pious observation of M r Cartwright : that it was not a vaine or idle question , which the Disciples propounded , ( being commanded to prepare the Passeover ) they aske , where wilt thou that we prepare ? Luke 22. 8 , 9. for Christ having commanded them , that into whatsoever City they entered , they should enquire who were godly therein , and turne in to such , to lodge and to eate there ; They did thereby easily understand , that if in common and ordinary eating together , then much more in this sacred feast , they must turne in to the families of the godly , and avoyd the prophane ; especially considering that they who were of that houshold were to eate the Passeover with Christ and his Disciples , according to the Law. From this very example of the Passeover he drawes an argument for keeping off all ungodly and prophane persons from the Sacrament , so farre as is possible . Thus Cartwright Harm . Evang. lib. 3. pag. 162. The like observation Chrysostome hath upon Matth. 26. 18. I will keepe the Passeover at thy house with my Disciples . He bids us marke those words with my Disciples : not with prophane or scandalous ones , but with my Disciples . To the like purpose Titus Bostrorum Episcopus in Luke 22. hath this observation . Non manducat autem hoc pascha cum Judaeis , sed tantum cum Discipulis suis : Siquidem Judaei , propter obstinatam incredulitatem , hoc paschate indigni erant . Yet he eateth not this Passeover with the Jewes , but onely with his own Disciples : for as much as the Jews , because of their obstinate incred●…lity , were unworthy of this Passeover . CHAP. X. That if it could be proved that Judas received the Lords Supper , it maketh nothing against the Suspension of known wicked persons from the Sacrament . I Have now done with the first part of this Controversie concerning Iudas , and have disproved that which M r Prynne hath said either for Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , or for his eating of the Passeover . In which particulars , though learned and godly Divines who are against the admission of scandalous sinners to the Sacrament , are not all of one opinion , yet all looke upon it as a matter of debate , and I know none that ever cried downe with scorne and contempt the opinion of Iudas his not receiving of the Sacrament , excep● M r Prynne whose grounds are oftimes weakest where his assertions are strongest . I proceed to the second answer . Granting that Iud●…s did receive the Sacrament , that can make nothing for the admission of scandalons sinners whose prophannesse and ungodly conversation is knowne , and maketh their name to stinke in the Church . For Iudas his wickednesse was not publique nor knowne before he had got the sop and gone out , and left the company of Christ and the Apostles . And moreover he who argueth from Christs receiving of Iudas to the Sacrament , when though his sinne was yet secret , yet Christ knew him to be a divell ; to prove that the Eldership may and ought to admit one to the Sacrament , whom they know to be a Iudas , a Divell : may as well argue from Christs choosing of Iudas to be an Apostle when he knew him to be a Divell , to prove the lawfulnesse of the Elderships choosing of a Minister whom they know to be a divell . But now for that point of the scandall or secresie of Iudas his sinne , let us heare M r Prynnes reply , pag. 26 , 27. He gives it foure feet to runne upon . But the truth is , it hath but two ( the same things being twice told ) and those how foundered you shall see by and by . First he saith , that at the time when Christ instituted the Sacrament he foretold the Disciples that Iudas should betray him Iohn 13. 18. to 28. Matth. 26. 20. to 26. Marke 14. 18. to 22. Luk●… 22. 21 , 22 , 23. More plainly pag. 27. he saith , Christ did admit Iudas , to eate the Passeover and Sacrament with his other Disciples , and they made not any s●…ruple of conscience to communicate with him in both , no not after Christ had particularly informed them , and Iudas himselfe , that he should betray him , Matth. 26. 21. to 36. Answ. 1. It was but just now that M r Prynne told us , ( to manifest that Iud●…s was at the Sacrament ) that Luke placeth Christs words concerning Iud●…s , after the Sacrament , not before it . And more expressely he told us out of Iohn that Christs discourse about Iudas , and his informing of the Disciples that one of them should betray him , and his giving the sop to Iudas , was after the Sacrament , because it was after supper end●d , the Sacrament being instituted and distributed before supper ended Vindic. pag. 18 , 19. & 25. The same thing which before he made to be after the Sacrament , to prove that Iudas did receive the Sacrament , the very same he now makes to be before the Sacrament , that he may prove Iudas a scandalous ●inner and a known Traitor , even before his receiving of the Sacrament . And shall he thus abuse not onely his Reader , but the Word of God it selfe with palpable and grosse contradictions ? I shall beseech him in the feare of God to looke to it , and never more to take this liberty to put contrary sences upon the holy Scripture , so as may seeme to serve most for his present advantage . Surely such lucubrations are not onely subitane but sinfull . 2. His answer which now he gives us doth clearely yeeld these two things : 1. That the Discourse about the Traytor , and the giving of the sop , I●…hn 13. 8. to vers . 28. was before the Sacrament ; Now Iudas having gone out immediately after the sop , hereby Master Prynne strengthneth my argument which I brought to prove that Iudas did not receive the Sacrament ; which argument in this very particular he formerly opposed . 2. He hath here also yeelded that these words Luke 22. 21 , 22 , 23. But behold the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the Table , &c. though mentioned after the Sacrament ( which is the most colourable argument for Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament ) yet were spoken before the Sacrament , and that the order of time is not to be gathered from Luke but from Matthew and Marke who record that discourse about Iudas before the Sacrament . And in yeelding this , he takes off his own strongest argument , and confirmes what I have before taken pains to prove . 3. Those Divines that hold Iudas did receive the Sacrament , doe conceive that those words , But behold the hand of him that betrayeth me , &c. were indeed spoken after the Sacrament , and that Luke placeth them in their proper place . And so holding that the discourse about the Traytor was after the Sacrament , they doe thereby intimate that Iudas was not knowne to be the Traytor , till after the Sacrament . Wherefore either a man must quit the most considerable argument for Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament , or else acknowledge that Iudas was not knowne by the Disciples to be the Traytor till after the Sacrament . 4. When after the giving of the sop Christ said to Iudas , That thou dost , doe quickly , No man at the Table knew for what intent he spake this unto him , John 13. 28. But if Christ had particularly informed them that Iudas was the Traytor , how is it that they could have been so altogether ignorant of Christs intent , as to thinke that he was still trusting Iudas with the buying of what they had need of against the Feast , or with giving to the poore ? Hence Lud. Capellus Spicileg . in Joh. 13. collecteth that when Iohn asked of Christ , who it was , and when Christ said , He it is unto whom I shall give the sop , this was but a secret conference , and the rest of the Disciples did not heare it : else they could not have been so ignorant of it . 5. The places cited by M r Prynne doe not prove that Christ did particularly tell and informe his Disciples that Iudas ( but that one of them ) should betray him . Christ made it known to Iohn alone by the signe of giving the sop , Ioh. 13. 26. Yea Theophylact. upon Ioh. 13. thinkes , that as the other Apostles heard not what Christ said to Iohn concerning the Traytor , so Iohn himselfe even at that instant could hardly imagine that Iudas would commit so great wickednesse . Nullus ergo cog●…vit , saith he , no man did know it , which he gathers from the words of John himselfe , vers . 28 , 29. Bucerus in Matth. 26. 23. holdeth the same . I know some thinke it was made knowne to all the Disciples by that Math. 26. 25 Then Jud●…s which betrayed him answered and said , Master Is it I ? He said unto him , Thou hast said . But others answer that it is not certaine that Christ said this to Iudas in the hearing of all the Disciples : also that these words Thou hast said , are not a cleare affirmation of the thing . Lud. Capellus Spicileg . in Matth. 26. admitteth these words Thou hast said , to be affirmative of that which had been said . But he moves this doubt : when Iudas had said Is it I ? he did not affirme the thing , but doubted of it . How then did Christ returne such an answer as agreeth to that which Iudas had said , as if it had been a positive truth . He gives this solution , that Christ as searcher of the heart did speake it to Iudas , who was in his conscience convinced that he was the man , and so assenteth to the truth of that testimony of his Conscience . Now this could not be certainly known to the other Apostles . For my part I shall not need to contend much about that : for granting it to be a cleare information to all the Disciples that Iud●…s was the Traytor , yet ( by their principles who hold Iudas did receive the Sacrament ) this was after , not before the Sacrament , for they make the anticipation to be in Matthew and Marke , and the true order to be in Luke . 6. Beside that of the French Catechisme , which saith the impiety of Iudas was concealed , and not broken forth into the light and knowledge of men when the Sacrament was given : take these other Testimonies , Martyr . in 1 Cor. 5. Et quod attinet ad Judam , peccatum ejus non erat cognitum atque perspectum , nec ullo judicio convictum . Gerhard . Harm . Evang. cap. 171. pag. 453 , Iudae scelus nondum erat in lucem productum , sed anim●… suo illud ad●…c ela●…sum tenebat . The same he hath in his common places Tom. 5. pag. 181. where he sheweth that Iudas receiving of the Sacrament maketh nothing for the admission of scandalous persons ; because although Iudas had gone to the chiefe Priests and agreed with them , this was knowne to none of the Disciples , at that time , but to Christ himselfe onely . Nay the Testimony cited by M r Prynne himselfe out of Algerus de Sacram. maketh strongly against him in this particular : Quia enim saith Algerus ) Judas accusatus & damnatus non fuerat , ideo Christus conscientiam ejus perversam , quamvis sibi notam damnare noluit . For because Judas was not accused & condemned , therefore Christ would not condemne ( openly ) his perverse conscience , though known to himself . Innocentius 3. in the place above cited De myst . Missae lib. 4. cap. 13. after he hath asserted that Iudas did not receive the Lords Supper , he addeth , that if it should be granted that Iudas did receive it , this onely will follow at most , that Ministers are to admit to the Sacrament such as are not known to the Church , to be impious or wicked , as Iudas his wickednesse was not at that time knowne to the Disciples . Likewise both Chrysostome and Theophylact upon Iohn 13. are cleare in this , that Iudas hypocrisie was not detected to the Apostles till Christ did separate him , and he went forth . Moreover I shall minde M r Prynne how he himselfe doth apply this example of Iudas in his Independency examined , pag. 8 , 9. he argueth thus : Whether Independents refus●…ll to admit such Christians who are not notoriously scandalous in their lives , nor grossely ignorant in the principles of Religion , to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , &c. onely upon this suspition or apprehension , that they are but carnall men , not truly regenerated or sanctified by Gods Spirit ( though they can not certainly judge of their present spirituall conditions infallibly known to God alone ) be not a very uncharitable arrogant , yea unchristian practice , contrary to our Saviours owne immediate example , who at the first institution of this Sacrament admitted Iudas to his last Supper , as well as his Disciples , though he certainly knew him to be both a Traytor and a Divell . In which argumentation he himself supposeth that Iudas was not notoriously scandalous , nor knowne to the Disciples , ( but to God and Christ alone ) to be a Traytor and Divell . For otherwise he could not in any reason argue thus against the Independents : because if this supposition be not laid downe that Iudas was an unregenerate yet not a scandalous person : then the Independents had this obvious answer , that if his Argument prove any thing , it doth conclude the admission not onely of unregenerated and unsanctified , but of scandalous persons , to the Sacrament ; whereas he brings it to prove against them , that persons not scandalous , though unregenerate , ought not to be refused the Sacrament . And now he brings the same thing against us to prove that scandalous persons ought to be admitted , if not excommunicated , and desirous to receive the Sacrament . He tels us by the way of Iudas his theevish , covetous , as well as traiterous disposition Iohn 12. 6. both which did make him scandalous . But he might have observed , that the holy Ghost sheweth plainly that in that act Iudas was not a scandalous sinner in the esteeme of the other Disciples ; for his theevish covetous disposition was not known to the Disciples ; yea the pretext of his care for the poore was so plausible to them ( though abominable to Christ who knew his heart ) that it is said , not onely of Iudas , but of the Disciples ( by his instigation ) they had indignation at the wasting of that which might have been sold for much and given to the poore , Matth. 26. 8. Let us now heare M r Prynnes other answer Vindic. pag. 26 , 27. he tels us that though perchance the other Disciples did not know that Iudas was a Traytor and a Divell , yet Christ himselfe did infallibly know all this of Iudas , and did notwithstanding admit him to the Sacrament . Whereupon he beseecheth all Ministers not to make themselves wiser , holier , rigider in this point then Christ himselfe . Answ. 1. If Ministers did take upon them to suspend men from the Sacrament upon their owne private knowledge of some secret sinnes whereof those men are guilty : his argument might say somewhat . But the question being of suspension by the Eldership upon the notoreity or proofe of the offence , and consis●oriall formall conviction of the offender , he saith here nothing to that point . 2. What a Minister should do when he certainly knows one of the Congregation ( not convict nor notoriously scandalous ) to be a Iudas , a Traytor , a Divell , I will not now dispute . But surely M r Prynnes reason why the minister ought to admit such a one , is not rightly applied , * for Christ did then know Iudas to be a Traytor and a Divel , but how ? not as man , by sight , information , or the like , but as God and as omniscient , that is , he knew Iudas by that same knowledge whereby he knows close hypocrites in whom no eye of man hath seen any thing scandalous , but rather good and promising signes ; some of this kind no doubt are admitted to the Sacrament both among Presbyterians and Independents , whom Christ knowes to be Iudasses , because he knows what is in man. But now for a Minister to know ( not the heart and the reines as Christ doth , but ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some foule act which a man hath done , and some wicked profession which a man hath made , though in private , and not yet known to the world ; this is a very different case from the other , and if Christ had admitted Iudas to the Sacrament , knowing him by his divine knowledge to be a Traytor , this could not prove , that a Minister ought to admit a Traytor , whom by his humane knowledge he knows to be such . 3. And if that which Christ did in this particular ought to be a president to Ministers what to doe in like cases : Then as Christ had a most sad and moving discourse about the Traytor , till Iudas himselfe was made to understand , that Christ knew his traiterous purpose , and then he said to him , That thou dost doe quickly , which x diverse doe rightly conceive to be as much , as if Christ had said to him , Get you gone , I have no more to doe with you : He spake it , ut a consortio suo recederet , that he might be gone out of his company , as Ambrose takes it : and thus did by the Sword of his mouth chase away and as it were excommunicate Iudas before the Sacrament . So should a Minister ( if he see one in the Congregation whom he certainly knows to be a Iudas , and to be living in some abominable wickednesse , even whiles he comes with a professed desire to receive the Sacrament ) tell the Congregation , that he knows and sees one amongst them whom he certainly knows to be guilty of such a particular secret horrible sinne , and ( if it be possible ) make the sinner himselfe to know by such or such a signe , that he is the man whom he speakes of , and not to leave off powerfull checks , sharpe rebukes , terrible comminations , till by the blessing of God and the power of the word , he get such a one terrified and chased away . 4. It shall not be in vaine to observe here that Gamachaeus in tertiam partem Thomae Quaest. 64. c. 4. though he hold that Christ gave the Sacrament to Iudas ( whence he argueth that the Sacraments doe infallibly worke ex opere operato , where no barre is put , though there be no faith nor devotion exercised in the receiver ) yet he doth immediately move this objection , It is unlawfull to give the Sacraments to the unworthy , and to such as live in mortall sinne . Whereunto y he answereth , that it is indeed unlawfull to Ministers to give the Sacrament to the unworthy , when they can refuse them without scandall ( a restriction which I suppose M r Prynne dare not owne ; for if the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of the thing must be determined by the scandall , they goe upon a very slippery ground . ) He addeth that it is unlawfull to us to follow Gods example in giving holy things to the unworthy , as it is unlawfull to follow his example in the permitting of sinne when we can hinder it . The like I finde in Alexander Alensis , Summa Theol. part . 4. Quaest. 11. membr . 2. art . 1. sect . 4. where he moves this objection in the question , whether Christ gave the Sacrament to Iudas . Christ himselfe hath commanded , Give not that which is holy to dogs , &c. and it seems he would not doe the contrary of that which himselfe commandeth . Unto this objection his answer is , that this prohibition lieth indeed upon the Ministers , Dispencers of the Sacraments , but bindeth not Christ himselfe the Law-maker . As long therefore as we are able to prove from Scripture , that scandalous persons ought to be keep back from the Sacrament , and that it is unlawfull for Church ▪ officers to admit such ; the Erastians doe but weakly helpe themselves by arguing from Christs giving the Sacrament to Iudas . Which I have said by way of concession : for my opinion is , that Christ did upon the matter excommunicate Iudas , and that his practice in this very particular is a patterne to us , which I hope I have made evident . Finally , it is observed by Io. Baptista de Rubeis in his Novum rationale divinorum officiorum lib. 1. cap. 24. that this cause of Iudas doth not concerne publique and known scandalous persons , but secret and lurking wicked persons , when they publikely desire to receive the Sacrament ; who yet ( saith he ) ought to be admonished and dehorted by the Minister , that they come not to the Sacrament : and if such a one make his desire to receive the Sacrament secretly known to the Minister , the Minister ought to refuse him , though his sinne be yet secret , and not publiquely known . * But if the sinne be open or manifest , then whether the sinner do secretly or openly desire to receive the Sacrament , the Minister ought to refuse him . CHAP. XI . Whether it he a full discharge of duty to admonish a scandalous person of the danger of unworthy communicating ? And whether a Minister in giving him the Sacrament after such admonition , be no way guilty ? Mr. Prynne pag. 28. stateth the seventh point in difference thus , Whether the Minister hath not fully discharged his duty and conscience if he give warning to unworthy communicants of the danger they incurre by their unworthy approaches to the Lords Table , and seriously dehort them from comming to it , unlesse they repent , reforme , and come preparedly ? But here he much mistakes his marke , or hitteth it not , as may appeare thus . First , what if we should affirme it , as he doth ? What hath he gained thereby ? That the Minister hath not the power of keeping backe scandalous persons : which cannot adde one dram weight to his cause . The power is seated in the Eldership , of which the Minister is a principall member : even as Aristotle polit . lib. 3. cap. 11. tels us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It is not the Senator but the Senat that doth rule . But if M r Prynne meant to conclude against the suspension of scandalous persons not excommunicated ( the thing which all along he opposeth , ) he ought to have stated the point thus , Whether the Eldership hath not fully discharged their duty , &c. For every branch of this controversie concerning Suspension ( which is an act of jurisdiction and censure ) must be fixed upon the Eldership , not upon the Minister . There is a huge difference between the Ministers personall duty , and the censure of suspension : in so much that if the affirmative of this present question ( as he stateth it ) were yeelded to him ; it derogateth nothing from the power of the Eldership to suspend from the Sacrament a person not excommunicate . Secondly , in the debating of this point he sometimes argueth against the refusing or withholding of the Sacrament by any Minister or Presbytery as pag. 29 , 30 , 31. sometimes he argueth that no Ministers private judgement or conscience ought to be the rule of his admitting any to , or suspending them from the Sacrament , as pag. 32. Which is a confounding together of two most different points . Thirdly , and if the question should be stated of the Minister his duty , that which M r Prynne affirmeth , viz. that the Minister hath fully discharged his duty and conscience , if he give warning to unworthy communicants of the danger they incurre by their unworthy approaches , to the Lords Table , and seriously dehort them from comming to it , unlesse they repent , reforme and come preparedly ; is erroneous and false : for there are other necessary duties incumbent to the Minister , in this businesse : as 1. he must be earnest in his prayers to God , for the conversion and reformation of such unworthy persons , else that God would give his Spirit and assistance to the Eldership , and others to whom the case shall be brought , that they may faithfully doe their duty in restraining such persons : or ( if not so ) that God would by his owne providence keepe backe such persons , or hedge up their way with thornes , and make a wall , that they shall not finde their pathes to come and prophane the Lords Table . 2. The Minister must deale seriously with the Eldership by informations , exhortations , and admonitions , to move them to doe their duty . 3. The Minister must give his owne vote and sentence in the Eldership against the admission of such persons . 4. If ( which God forbid ) the Eldership be not willing to doe their duty , but sinfully neglect it , the Minister ought to addresse himselfe with his complaints to the superiour Ecclesiasticall assemblies ( as they lie in their order ) that they may interpose by their authority , to rectifie the mal-administration of the Congregationall Eldership . 5. And if it should fall out that a scandalous unworthy person should finde so much favour in the higher assemblies also , as that they shall judge him fit to be admitted to the Sacrament ; yet if the Minister know him certainly to be a scandalous abominable person , and be also cleere in his conscience , that the matter of scandall is sufficiently proved , he must not doe an unlawfull act in obedience to men , but walke by that Apostolicall rule , 1 Tim. 5. 22. Be not partaker of other mens sinnes ; Keep thy selfe pure . In doing whereof , he doth not make his conscience the rule of inflicting any censure and particularly of suspending from the Sacrament ( which must be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by many ) but yet his conscience so sarre as it is informed and illuminate by the word of God , is a rule to him of his owne personall acting or not acting , notwithstanding of which the offender stands rectus in curia , and is not excluded by the sentence of any Ecclesiasticall Court. I confesse a Minister ought to be very cleare in his conscience , and be perswaded ( not upon suspicions , surmises , or such like sleight motives , but ) upon very certaine grounds , that the sentence of an Eldership , Classis , or Synod is contrary to the Word of God , before he refuse to doe the thing . But what may be the reason why M r Prynne is so large upon this point from pag. 28. to 35 ? I take not upon me to judge de intentione operantis . But the intentio operis is to yeeld somewhat in lieu of suspension from the Sacrament , which yet shall be no Church censure nor act of jurisdiction , and so to make the discipline of Suspension ( yea and Excommunication too ) to be of no necessary use in the Church . For if it be sufficient and a full discharge of duty , to admonish unworthy scandalous persons , not to come to the Lords Table , unlesse they repent and reforme , this cuts off the necessity of Censure , whether Suspension or Excommunication . As for that admonition or warning to be given , it is no Church censure , nor act of Jurisdiction , especially when given by the Minister alone ; for no Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction can be excercised , or Censure inflicted by any one man , how eminent soever in the Church . Yea when it is a Consistoriall or Presbyteriall Admonition , it is not properly a Censure , but a Degree to Censure . 1. Because Admonition doth not exclude a person from any Church priviledge nor from communion in any Ordinance . And how can one be said to be under Church censure , who still enjoyeth all Church priviledges ? 2. If Consistoriall admonition be a binding , where is the loosing of that bond ? Every censure consistorially inflicted , must be also consistorially taken off , upon repentance appearing in the party . These things I doe but t●uch , that I might make it appeare how M r Prynnes doctrine tendeth to strip Elderships out of all jurisdiction or power of Censures . Now come we to the particulars , wheren I doe not finde any great matter to insist long upon . He ●irst premiseth six conclusions . Supposed conclusions he may make them , but proved Conclusions they are not . The first of them is indeed ushered in syllogistically , but very weakly , as shall appeare . The strength of his discourse he contracteth into this argument . Those who have a true right to the Sacrament , as visible members of the visible Church , ought not in justice or conscience to be deprived of it , in case they demand it , by any Minister or Presbytery . But all unexcommunicate Christians , who are able to examine themselves , as visible members of the visible Church , have a true right to the Sacrament , in case they doe demand it , when publiquely administred . Ergo , they ought not in justice or conscience be deprived of it , by any Minister or Presbytery , when publiquely administred , if they shall require it . Answ. First , this is fallacia plurium interrogationum ; for these words , as visible members of the visible Church , both in the Major and Minor , clogge and confound the argument , and patch up two distinct propositions into one . Secondly , his Major cannot be admitted without a distinction . There is Ius ad rem , and Ius in re . There is a remote right , or a right in actu primo , th●t is , such a right , relation , or habitude as entitleth a person to such a priviledge or benefit , to be enjoyed and possessed by him when he shall be capable and fit to enjoy it : Such is the right of a Minor to his inheritance : Such was the right of lepers of old to their T●nts , Houses , and Goods , when themselves were put out of the Camp , and might not ( during their leprosie ) actually enjoy their own habitations : Such is the right which a man hath in England to his sequestred Estate , Lands , and Houses ; he doth not lose but retaine his Right , Title , Charters and Deeds ( as valid in Law , and not made voyd or null ) and may be againe admitted to the actuall possession upon satisfaction given to the State : and a huge difference there is between Sequestration , and forfeiture or Outlawry . There is againe a proxime right , or a right in actu secundo , which rendereth a person actually and presently capable of that thing which he is entituled unto . If M r Prynnes major be understood of the first kind of right , I deny it . If of the second kind of right , I admit it , and it doth not help his opinion , nor hurt mine . Thirdly , yea himselfe must needs admit an exception from his major proposition , for by his owne principles , those that have a true right to the Sacrament , as visible members of the visible Church , may be excommunicated and so deprived , not onely of the Sacrament , but of all other publique Ordinances . When he tels us here that nothing but an actuall excommunication can suspend them from this their right , he doth but begge that which is in question . And if his Argument conclude against a lesser Suspension from their right , why not also against the greater ? Fourthly , he hath not proved his minor , especially being understood of the second kind of right , which renders me● actually and presently capable of the thing . He saith that the Sacraments were bequeathed by Christ , to his visible Church on Earth , and all visible members of it . Which he hath not proved , and I deny it , except it have this limitation , all visible members of the visible Church , which are ( visibly or in externall profession and conversation ) qualified according to the rule of Christ , and against whose admission to the Sacrament there is no just exception . Fifthly , when he concludeth , that no unexcommunicated Christians who are able to examine themselves ( that is , as himselfe hath explained , who are not naturally disabled as children , and fooles : though he shall finde it a very hard taske to prove , that all other unexcommunicate Christians besides these , are able to examine themselves ) ought in justice or conscience to be deprived of the Sacrament by any Minister or Presbytery : he doth upon the matter conclude , that the Ordinances of Parliament Octob. 20. 1645. and March 14. 1645. authorising Presbyteries to suspend from the Sacrament scandalous persons unexcommunicated , are contrary to all justice and conscience . N. B. Sixthly , as touching that limitation yeelded by himselfe , that they must be such as are able to examine themselves , I aske , 1. Are persons grossely ignorant able to examine themselves ? 2. Are drunken persons able to examine themselves ? 3. Are men of corrupt minds and erroneous , yea prophane principles , who call evill good , and pervert Scripture to the defending of some grosse sinnes , are these able to examine themselves ? 4. Are those who are known that they had never any worke of the law upon their consciences to convince or humble them ( for by the Law is the knowledge of sinne ) able to examine themselves ? If the answers be affirmative , then surely this selfe-examination is not ri●htly apprehended what it is . If the answers be negative ; then those who in their address●s to the Lords Table are found ignorant , or drunke , or defenders of sinne , or presumptuous and unconvinced , and doe manifestly appeare such , though they be not excommunicated , and being professed Christians , and desiring the Sacrament , yet ought not to be admitted . I proceed to his second conclusion , the strength whereof ( so farre as I am able to gather from his discourse ) may be drawn together into this Argument . Such as in all ages , yea by the very Apostles themselves , have been deemed fit to receive , and could not be denied the Sacrament of Baptisme , ought to be ( being baptised and unexcommunicated , and willing to communicate ) admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . But in all Churches from Christs time till this present , all externall professors of Christ , even carnall persons , onely upon a bare externall profession of faith and repentance , were deemed fit to receive , and were never denied the Sacrament of Baptisme ( yea , saith he , we read in the very Apostles times that a meere externall sleight confession of sinne , and profession of the Christian faith , was sufficient to enable sinners to be baptized Ergo , all externall professors of Christ , &c. ought to be admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . Answ. 1. I retort the Argument thus . Such as have been deemed by the Apostles and by all well constituted Churches , unworthy to be admitted to Baptisme , ought also to be deemed unworthy though baptised ) to be admitted to the Lords Supper . But all known wicked and prophane livers , how able and willing so ever to make confession of the true Christian faith , have been by the Apostles and all w●ll con●ituted Churches deemed unworthy to be admitted to Baptisme . Ergo , all known wicked , &c. More of this afterward Chap 13. and Chap 15. Secondly , I answer directly , I distinguish the Major , I deny the Minor. I distinguish the Major : Those who have been admitted to Baptisme ought to be admitted to the Lords Supper caeteris paribus , if the proportion hold in the particulars , and if they be as free of scandalous sines now when they desire to receive the Lords Supper , as they were when they desired to receive Baptisme . He needed not make so great a matter of our suspending from the Sacrament a person formerly deemed fit to receive Baptisme . For why ? the person is a scandalous person now which he was not th●n . My limitation of caeteris paribus he himselfe ▪ must admit ; otherwise how will he defend his owne Principle , that the flagicious , abominable and obstinate sinners who cannot be reduced by Admonitions , may and ought to be excommunicated , and so to be cut off from the Lords Supper , and all other publike Ordinances , although formerly deemed sit to receive baptisme ? The Minor I utterly deny as most false and as a reproach ca● upon the Apostles themselves . M r Prynnes Rule is so large , that Turkes or Pagans who practically live in Idolatry , common swearing , adultery , drunkennesse , murthering , stealing , or the like , and are known to live in those abominable scandalous sinnes , ought neverthelesse up●…n a meere externall sleight confession of sinne , and profession of the Christian faith , be baptised . When I expected his proofe from the Apostles times , he onely tels us that Philip baptized Simon Magus though he were in the gall of bitternesse and bond of iniquity , Acts 8. Yea , saith he , many other who turned Wolves , Apostates , Hereticks were baptised by the very Apostles , Acts 20. 2. Tim. 3. If he had proved that Simon Magus was known to be in the gall of bitternesse and bond of iniquity when Philip did baptize him , or that the Apostles did baptise any ( upon a sleight externall profession ) who were then known to be Wolves , Apostates , and Hereticks , he had said more for his cause then all his booke saith beside . But to tell us that some persons baptized ( he might as well have said that some persons who received the Lords Supper did appeare afterward to be in the gall of bitternesse , Wolves , Apostates , Heretickes , is as much as to travell , and to bring forth nothing . For how shall ever this reach the admission of known prophane persons to the Lords Supper ? That which he had to prove was the admission ( not of hypocrites , but ) of knowne scandalous profane persons to Baptisme . His third conclusion that it is the Ministers bounden duty to administer the Sacraments to their people , as well as to preach and pray ; no man will deny it , so that the Ministers doe it debito modo , and according to the rule of Christ : they are stewards of the mysteries of God : moreover it is required in stewards that a man be found faithfull , 1 Cor. 4 1 , 2. It is the bounden duty of Stewards to give the childrens bread to children and not to dogges and swine . It is not the duty of Ministers to preach peace to the wicked , and much lesse to seale it to them who are knowne to be such . The fourth conclusion , that the Word and Sacraments are set accidentally for the fall and ruine , as wel as for the salvation of men ▪ maketh nothing to the purpose in hand . Whatever the secret intention of God be , and his unsearchable judgement upon the soule of this or that man , it is no rule of duty to the Minister or Eldership . To the Law and to the Testimony . Secret things belong to God. The fifth , that God onely infallibly knows the hearts , and present state of all men , is no whit neerer the point The Eldership ●udggeth of words and works , professions and practises . By their fruits ye shall know them . The sixth , that no Ministers private judgement or conscience ought to be the rule of his admitting any to , or suspending them from the Sacrament , is also wide from the controversie in hand , which is concerning the Elderships ( not the Ministers ) power . Of the Ministers personall duty I have spoken before . These six conclusions premised ▪ M r Prynne proceeds to prove , that a Minister in delivering the Sacrament to a scandalous unexcommunicated person , who after admonition of the danger , doth earnestly desire to receive it , &c. becomes no way guilty of his sinne or punish●…ent , in case be eate or drinke judgement by his unworthy receiving of it . His first reason , because this receiver hath a true right to this Sacrament , as a visible member of the visible Church , is the same thing which I have already answered . His second reason , because ●…e ( the Minister ) hath no Commission from Christ to keep back such a person , doth not conclude that the Minister becomes no way guilty &c. He had to prove that a Minister hath no commission touching this businesse , but onely to admonish the person of the danger . I hold there are other five duties incumbent to the Minister . Of which before , If any of these duties be neglected , the Minister is guilty . Whether such a person ought to be kept backe is the point in controversie , and therefore he ought not have taken the negative pro confessò . His third reason pag. 33. is the same which was used by z Erastus as one of his arguments against Excommunication , that the Apostle saith , Let a man examine himselfe , and so let him eate of that bread , and drink of that cup. 1 Cor. 11. 28. Therefore a mans fitnesse or unfitnesse for the Sacrament , is not to be judged by others , but by himselfe onely , and if he judge himselfe fit , the Eldership hath no power to exclude him . The same Scripture is here pressed against us by M r Prynne to prove , that if a man judge himselfe fitly prepared , joynes with others in the publique confession of his sinnes , and promiseth newnesse of life , the Minister ( he should say the Eldership ) ought in point of charity to deem him so , and hath no commission from Christ to exclude him , &c. Let a man therefore examine himselfe , not others , or others him . I answer , 1. The self-examination there spoken of , is not mentioned as exclusive : for it is not said , Let a man examine himselfe onely . 2. Yet I can grant it to be exclusive , it being understood of that judging of a mans selfe , which prevents the judgement of God vers . 31. no mans examining of another can doe this , but his examining of himselfe . That which can give us confidence and boldnesse before God , and assure our hearts before him , 1 Joh. 3. 19. is not the examination or approbation of others , but of our owne conscience ; for what man knowes the things of a man , save the spirit of man which is in him ? 1 Cor. 2. 11. The Pastors and Elders of Corinth had admitted some to the Lords Table , whom they judged sit and worthy Communicants , but God judged otherwise of them . Therefore saith the Apostle , let a man make a narrow search of his owne conscience , and not rest upon the judgement of others . 3. If it be enough for a man to examine himselfe , by what warrant doth M r Prynne require more , namely , that a man joyn with others in the publique confession of his sinnes , and promise newnesse of life . 4. It is not enough for a notorious scandalous sinner to judge himselfe , nor yet to joyne with others in publique confession : but he must publiquely and particularly confesse his owne sinne , which he must doe personally , or for his own part , and others can not doe it with him . 5. a Augustine tels us when a man hath examined himselfe , he must also edifie the Church ( which before he scandalized ) by a publique declaration of repentance for his scandalous sinne . 6. M r Prynne himselfe Vindic. pag. 50. will not have an excommunicated person , to be againe received and admitted to the Lords Supper till publique satisfaction given for the scandall , and open profession of amendment of life , accompanied with externall symptomes of repentance . And why all this examination should not be required for a prevention of excommunication , yea of suspension , I know not . M r Prynnes fourth reason is , because the Minister administers the Sacrament to that scandalous unexcommunicated person , as to a person outwardly fitted and prepared , the inward preparation of whose heart for ought he knows may be sincere towards God , and really changed from what it was before . I appeale to every godly Minister , whether this can pacifie or secure his conscience , that a scandalous unexcommunicated person living in known prophannesse and wickednesse , is or may be esteemed a person outwardly fitted and prepared for the Sacrament , yea that the inward preparation of his heart , while he is living in grosse scandalous sinnes , may be sincere towards God and really changed from what it was before : and that therefore he ( the Minister ) in delivering the Sacrament to a scandalous unexcommunicated person who after admonition of the danger , doth earnestly desire to receive it , as conceiving himselfe in his own●… heart and conscience meet to participate of it , becomes no way guilty , & c ? The Lord save me from that Divinity which holds that a scandalous person in the Church may be admitted to the Lords Supper as a person outwardly fitt●d and prepared for that Sacrament . Fifthly , he argueth from the holinesse and lawfulnesse of administring the Sacrament , and the Ministers good intention to benefit all , and hurt none by it . Answ. The first part of this reason is a fallacy ab ignoratione Elenchi : the point he had to prove was , that the administration of the Sacrament to a scandalous person , is a holy lawfull action . The latter part doth not conclude . A good intention can not justifie a sinfull action . Sixthly , saith he , because such a persons unworthy r●…eiving is onely contingent and casuall ▪ no Minister or creature being able infallibly to judge , wh●…ther God at this instant , may not by the omnipotent working of his Spirit , &c. change both his ●…eart ▪ and his life . Answ. 1. By this principle the Minister shall become no way guilty , if he deliver the Sacrament to an Heathen , to an excommunicated person , for the same reason will have place in that case as much as in this , viz. God may at the very instant before or in the act of receiving change the heart and life of such a Heathen or excommunicate person . 2. A scandalous prophane person his unworthy receiving , is casuall and contingent in sensu diviso , but not in sensu composit●… , that is , peradventure God will give him repentance and change his heart and his life , which done , he shall come worthily , and receive worthily : but while he is yet scandalous and neither heart nor life yet changed , his receiving in that estate will certainly be an unworthy receiving : for it implies a contradiction and impossibility , to say that a mans life can be changed while it is not changed , in sensu composit●… , or that a man can be worthy while he is unworthy . 3. It is a most sinfull tempting of the Almighty to ca●l his word behind us , and then expect the working of Omn●potency for that whereof we have neither promise nor example in the word . Seventhly , he argueth from our Concessions that Ministers may administer the Sacrament to masked hypocrites , and yet are not guilty of their unworthy receiving . This he saith is a yeelding our objection false in the case of scandalous persons too . But his reason is ●ust as if he had said , Ministers are not guilty when they give the Sacrament to those who are not scandalous . Ergo , they are not guilty when they give the Sacrament to those that are scandalous . Or , as if he had argued thus He th●t harboureth a Traytor whom he doth not nor cannot know to be such , is not guilty . Ergo , he that harboureth a knowne Traytor is not guilty . Eighthly , ( for he hath given his seventh already ) he tels us , that the Minister onely 〈◊〉 the Sacrament , and the unworthy receiving is the receivers own personall act and sinne alone . Answ 1. He begges againe and againe what is in Que●ion . 2. There is an unworthy giving , as well as an unworthy receiving . The unworthy giving is a sin●ull act of the Minister , which makes him also accessary to the sinne of unworthy receiving , and so partake of other mens ●innes . The ninth concerning Christs giving of the Sacrament to Iudas is answered before . The tenth I have also answered before in his fourth conclusion . The Minister is a sweet savour of Christ , as well in those that perish by the Sacrament , as in those that are benefited by it , with this proviso , that he hath done his duty , as a faithfull Steward , and that he hath not given that which is holy to dogs , else God shall require it at his hands . Finally , he argueth from 1 Cor. 11. 29. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily , eateth and drinketh ( not condemnation but ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 judgement , ( meaning some temporall judgement ) to himselfe ) not to the Minister or Communicants . ) Answ. 1. Whatever be meant by judgement in this place , certainly it is a punishment of sinne , and such a thing as proceedeth from Gods displeasure : and it is as certaine that unworthy receiving maketh a person lyable to a greater judgement then that which is temporall . 2. If to himselfe be restrictive and exclusive in the case of close hypocrites , such as are by Church-officers ( judging according to outward appearance ) admitted to the Sacrament ; yet how will it be made to appeare that the Apostle meant those words as restrictive and exclusive in the case of scandalous and knowne unworthy communicants . 3. Such a scandalous person doth indeed eate and drink judgement to himselfe ; but this can neither in whole nor in part excuse but rather greatly aggravate the sinne of the Minister : for when a wicked man dieth in his iniquity , yet his blood God will require at the hands of the unfaithfull Minister , who did strengthen his hands in his sinne . CHAP. XII . Whether the Sacrament of the Lords Supper be a converting or regenerating Ordinance . I Had in answer to Mr. Prynns third Quaere , given this reason why prophane and scandalous persons are to be kept off from the Sacrament , and yet not from hearing the Word : because the word is not onely a confirming and comforting , but a converting Ordinance , and is a mean appointed of God to turn sinners from darknes to light , and from the power of Sathan to God : Whereas the Sacrament is not a converting , but a confirming and sealing Ordinance , which is not given to the Church for the conversion of Sinners , but for the Communion of Saints : It is not appointed to put a man in the state of grace , but to seal unto a man that interest in Christ and in the Covenant of Grace which he already hath . Mr. Prynne doth with much eagernesse contradict me in this , and argue at length the contrary . ( Which is the marrow and fatnesse ( if there be any ) in his debate concerning the eighth point of difference ) Whereby he doth not onely contradict me , but himself too ( as shall appear ) yea and joyn not onely with the more rigid Lutherans , but with the Papists themselves against the Writers of the Reformed Churches . For the very same thing which is controverted between him and me , is controverted between Papists and Protestants . The Papists hold that the Sacraments are instrumental● to confer , give , or work grace ; yea ex opere operato ▪ as the School-men speak . Our Divines hold that the Sacraments are appointed of God , and delivered to the Church as sealing Ordinances , not to give , but to testifie what is given , not to make but confirm Saints . And they do not onely oppose the Papists opus operatum : but they simply deny this instrumentality of the Sacraments , that they are appointed of God for working or giving grace , where it is not . This is so well known to all who have studied the Sacramentarian controversies , that I should not need to prove it . Yet that none may doubt of it , take here some few insteed of many testimonies . b Calvin holds plainly against the Papists that the Sacraments do not give any grace , but do declare and shew what God hath given . He clear● it in that chapter thus , the Sacraments are like seals appended to writs , which of themselves are nothing , if the paper or parchment to which they are appended be blank . Again , they are like pillars to a house which cannot be a foundation , but a strengthening of a house that hath a foundation ; We are built upon the Word , the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles . Again , Sacraments are to us from God , that which messengers are which bring good newes from men , they declare what is , but do not so much as instrumentally make it to be . These are Calvins similes . c B●…llinger confuteth the Popish doctrine concerning the Sacraments conferring of grace , by this principle , that the Saints are justified and sanctified before they are sealed and confirmed by the Sacraments . d Ursinus speaks so fully and plainly for us , that none can say more . He distinguisheth between the Word and Sacraments , as between converting and confirming Ordinances , and argueth that the Sacraments do not confer grace , because we receive not the thing by receiving the signe , but we get the signe because it is supposed we have the thing . Yea he speaks of it as a principle known to children . Wolfangus Musculus in his e common places saith thus , Who seeth not what manner of persons we must be when we approach to this mystical Table of the Lord , to wit , not such as do therein first of all seek the fruition of the body and blood of the Lord , as if we were yet destitute thereof ; but such as being already before partakers thereof by faith , do desire to corroborate more and more in our hearts , the grace once received by the Sacramental communication of the body and blood of the Lord , and by the remembrance of his death , and to give thanks to our Rede●…mer . f Martin Bucer upon Matth. 18. 17. puts this difference between the Word preached , and the Lords Supper ; that the Word may be preached to the unconverted : but the Lords Supper may not be given to any who by their lives do declare that they are out of communion with Jesus Christ. Which is the very point now in controversie . g Festus Honnius Disp. 43. Thes. 3. confuting the Popish opinion of the Sacraments working or giving grace , brings this reason against it ; They that receive the Sacraments , have this grace before they receive them , neither are any to be admitted to the Sacraments who may be justly supposed not to be justified and sanctified . Aretius Coment . in Mark 14. loc . 3. observeth , Qui admissi sint ad istam Coenam ? discipuli solum , Who were admitted to that ( eucharistical ) Supper ? the Disciples o●…ely . Hence he inferreth : Quare mysteria haec ad solos fideles pertinent : Wherefore these mysteries do pertain to the faithful alone : that is , to those who are supposed to be converted and beleevers . Vossius Disp. de Sacram. effic . part . poster . After he hath observed two respects in which the Sacraments do excel the Word . 1. That Infants who are not capable of hearing the Word , are capable of the Sacrament of Baptisme , and are brought to the laver of regeneration . 2. That the Sacraments do visibly and clearly set before our eyes that which is invisible in the Word . He adds h Thes. 49. other two respects in which the Word doth far excel the Sacraments . 1. That the Word can both beget & confirm faith : the Sacraments cannot beget faith in those that are come to age , but onely conserve and increase it . 2. That without the word we cannot be saved , for he that beleeves not is condemned ; now faith commeth by hearing : but the Sacraments though profitable means of grace , yet are not simply necessary . The confession of the faith of the Church of Scotland in the Article entituled to whom Sacraments appertain , saith thus . But the Supper of the Lord we confesse to appertain to such onely as be of the houshold of faith , and can try and examine themselves as well in their faith , as in th●…ir duty towards their neighbours . The Belgick Confession Art. 33. saith of the Sacraments in generall , that God hath instituted them to seal his promises in us , to be pledges of his love to us ▪ and to nourish and strengthen our Faith. And i Art. 35. They plainly hold that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is intended and instituted by Christ for such as are already regenerate , and are already quickned with the life of grace . The Synod of Dort in their Judgement of the fifth Article of the Remonstrants k Sect. 14. ascribeth both the inchoation and conservation of grace to the Word : but ascribeth o●ely to the Sacraments the conserving , continuing , and perfecting of that begun grace . In the Belgick form of the administration of the Lords Supper ( See Corpus Disciplinae lately published by the Ministers and Elders of the Dutch Church at London pag. 16. ) it is said thus . Those which do not feel this Testimony in their hearts ( concerning their examining of themselves touching their repentance , faith , and purpose of true obedience ) they eat and drink judgement to themselves ; Wherefore we also ( according to the Commandement of Christ and the Apostle Paul ) do admonish all those who find themselves guilty of these ensuing sins , to refrain from comming to the Lords Table , and do denounce unto them that they have no part in the Kingdom of Christ. ( Here follows an enumeration of diverse scandalous sins concluded with this general , and all those which lead a scandalous life . ) All these as long as they continue in such sins , shall refrain from this spiritual food ( which Christ onely ordained for his faithful people ) that so their ●…udgement and damnation may not be the greater . Which plainly intimates that they hold this Sacrament to be a sealing , not a converting Ordinance . And this they also signifie , Ibid. pag. 17. And to the end we may firmly beleeve that we do belong to this gracious Covenant , the Lord Jesus in his last Supper took bread . &c. l Paraeus puts this difference between the Word and Sacraments ; that the Word is a mean appointed both for beginning and confirming faith : the Sacraments means of confirming it after it is begun . That the Word belongs both to the converted and to the unconverted : the Sacraments are intended for those who are converted and do beleeve , and for none others . And though the Lutherans make some controversie with us about the effect of the Sacraments , yet m Ioh. Gerhardus doth agree with us in this point , that the Lords Supper is not a regenerating but a confirming and strengthening Ordinance , and this difference he puts between it and Baptisme . n Walaeus asserteth both against Papists , and against some of the Lutherans , that Sacraments do instrumentally confirme and increase faith and regeneration ; but not begin nor work faith and regeneration where they are not . Petrus Hinkelmannus de Anabaptismo Disp. 9. cap. 1. Error 6. disputeth against this as a Tenent of the Calvi●…ists . Fideles habent Spiritum S. habent res signatas ante Sacramenta : the faithful have the holy Spirit , they have the things which are sealed , before they receive the Sacraments . Brochmand . System . Theol. Tom. 3. de Sacram. Cap. 2. Quaest. 1. condemneth this as one of the Calvinian errors : Sacramenta non esse gratiae conferendae divinitu●… ordinata media : that Sacraments are not instituted and appointed of God to be means of conferring or giving grace . Which he saith is the assertion of Zuinglius , Beza , Danaeus , Musculus , Piscator , Vorstius . The Lutheran opinion he propounds ibid. quaest . 6. that the Sacraments are means appointed of God to confer grace , to give faith , and being given to increase it . Esthius in Sent. lib. 4. dist . 1. Sect. 9. stateth the opinion of the Calvinists ( as he calls us ) thus , justificationem usu Sacramenti esse priorem , obtentam nimirum per fidem quâ homo jam ante credidit sibi remitti peccata ; Sacramentum verò postea adhiberi , ut verbo quidem promissionis fides confirmetur : elemento verò ceu sigillo quodam diplomati appenso eadem fides obsignetur ; atque ita per Sacramentum declaretur testatumque fiat hominem jam prius esse per fidem justicatum . This he saith is manifestly contrary to the doctrine of the Church of Rome , from which ( saith he ) the Lutherans do not so far recede as the Calvinists . Gregorius de Valentia in tertiam partem Thomae Disp. 3. Quaest. 3. punct . 1. thus explaineth the Tenent which he holdeth against the Protestants concerning the Sacraments giving of grace . Sacramenta esse veras causas qualitatis gratia , non principales , sed instrumentales : hoc ipso videlicet , quod Deus illis utitur ad productionem illius effectus , qui 〈◊〉 gratia , tamet si supra naturam seu efficacitatem naturale●… ipsorum . The Papists dispute indeed what manner of casuality or vertue it is by which the Sacraments work grace , whether Phisica , or Ethica ; whether infita , or adsita . In which questions they do not all go one way . See Gamachaeus in tertiam partem Tho. Quest. 62. Cap. 5. But that the Sacraments do work or give grace to all such as do not ponere obicem , they all hold against the Protestants . They dispute also whether all the Sacraments give the first grace , or whether Baptisme and Pennance onely give the first habitual grace , and the other five Sacraments ( as they make the number ) give increase of grace . But in this they all agree , that habitual grace is given in all the Sacraments of the New-Testament : the Thomists hold further , that the very first grace is de facto given in any of the Sacraments . See for the former o Becanus , for the latter p Tannerus . You will say peradventure ▪ that Protestant Writers hold the Sacraments to be 1. Significant or declarative signes . 2. Obsignative or confirming signes ▪ 3. Exhibitive signes , so that the thing signified is given and exhibite to the soul. I answer , That exhibition which they speak of , is not the giving of grace where it is not ( as is manifest by the afore quoted Testimonies ) but an exhibition to beleevers , a real effectual lively application of Christ and of all his benefits to every one that beleeveth , for the staying , strengthening , confirming , and comforting of the soul. Chamierus contractus . Tom. 4. lib. 1. cap. 2. Docemus ergo in Sacramentorum perceptione effici gratiam in fidelibus : & hactenus Sacramenta dicenda efficacia . Polan . Syntag. lib. ● . cap. 49. saith the visible external thing in the Sacrament , is thus far exhibitive , quia bona spiritualia per eam fidelibus significantur , exhibentur , communicantur & obsignantur . So that in this point Habenti dabitur is a good rule . For unto every one that hath shall be given , and he shall have abundance ; but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath . Maith . 25. 29. Our Divines do not say that the Sacraments are exhibitive Ordinances , wherein grace is communicated to those who have none of it , to unconverted or unbeleeving persons . By this time it may appear ( I suppose ) that the controversie between us and the Papists concerning the effect of the Sacraments ( setting aside the opus operatum , which is a distinct controversie ▪ and is distinctly spoken to by our Writers , setting aside also the casualitas phisica and insita , by which some of the Papists say the Sacraments give grace , though diverse others of them hold the Sacraments to be onely moral causes of grace ) is thus far the same with the present controversie between Mr. Prynn and me , that Protestant Writers do not onely oppose the opus operatum , and the casualitas physica & insita , but they oppose ( as is manifest by the Testimonies already cited ) all casuality or working of the first grace of conversion and faith in or by the Sacraments , supposing alwaies a man to be a beleever and within the Covenant of grace before the Sacrament , and that he is not made such , nor translated to the state of grace in or by the Sacrament . This the Papists contradict , and therein Mr. Prynn joyneth with them . When Bellarmine brings an impertinent Argument : The Sacraments ( saith he ) have not the same relation to faith which the Word hath : Nam verbum Dei praecedit fidem , Sacramenta autem sequuntur , saltem in adultis . The Word of God doth go before faith , but the Sacraments follow after it , at least in those who are of age . Dr. Ames Bell. enerv . Tom. 3. lib. 1. cap. 5. corrects his great mistake or oblivion . Hoc illud est quod nos docemus : Sacramenta confirmare fidem per verbum Dei prius ingeneratam , saltem in adultis . This ( saith he ) is that which we teach , that the Sacraments confirm that faith which was first begotten by the Word of God , at least in those who are of age . Mr. Prynns assertion is ▪ that the Lords Supper is a converting , as well as a sealing Ordinance ; for clearing whereof h● premiseth two distinctions . There are two sorts both of conversion and sealing , which he saith his Antagonists to delude the vulgar have ignorantly , wilfully , or injudiciously confounded . Whether such language beseems a man fearing God , or honouring them that do fear God , let every one judge who knoweth any thing of Christian moderation . See now if there be any reason for this grievous charge . First ( saith he ) there is an external conversion of men from Paganisme or Gentilisme to the external profession of the faith of Christ. This ( he saith ) is wrought by the Word or by Miracles , and effected by Baptisme in reference to infants of Christian Parents . But how the Baptism● of such Infants is brought under the head of conversion from Paganisme to the external profession of Christ , I am yet to learn. Secondly saith he , There is a conversion from a meer external formal profession of the Doctrine and Faith of Christ , to an inward spiritual embracing and application of Christ with his merits and promises to our souls , by the saving grace of Faith , and to an holy Christian real change of heart and life : In this last conversion , the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not onely a sealing or confirming , but likewise a regenerating and converting Ordinance as well as the Word . He might upon as good reason have made a third sort of conversion from a scandalous and prophane life to the external obedience of the will and commandements of God. But all this is to seek a knot in the rush ; for there is but one sort of conversion which is a saving conversion , and that is a conversion from nature to grace , from sin to sanctification , from the power of Sathan to God , whether it be from paganisme , or from prophanenesse , or from an external formal profession . Now that conversion which Mr. Prynn ascribes to the Sacrament is a true sanctifying and saving conversion . The other conversion which he ascribes not to the Sacrament , is not a saving conversion , for the external conversion of men from Paganisme or Gentilisme to the external profession of the faith of Christ , without the other conversion to an inward spiritual embracing of Christ , doth but make men seven ▪ fold more the children of Hell. So that Mr. Prynn hath more opened his sore when he thought to cover and patch it . The other distinction which he gives us , is of a twofold sealing . But by the way he tells us that Baptisme and the Lords Supper are termed Sacraments and Seals , without any Text of Scripture to warrant it . Hereby as he gratifieth q the Socinians not a little ( who will not have the Lords Supper to be called either seal or Sacrament , but an obediential act and a good work of ours , and tell us that we make the Lords Supper but too holy to delude the vulgar ) So he correcteth all Orthodox Writers , Ancient and Modern . The Apostl● ▪ describeth Circumcision to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a seal of the righteousnesse of faith , Rom. 4. 11. Whence Divines give the name of seals to all Sacraments Rectè autem ( saith Aretius Theol. Probl. Loc. 76. ) speciebus imis & intermediis generibus eadem ●…ssignantur in definiendo genera . Circumcision is a seal , therefore a Sacrament is a seal : as well as this , Justice is a habit , therefore vertue is a habit . Man is a substance , therefore a living creature is a substance . And further , if Circumcision was a seal ; the Lords Supper is much more a seal ; as we shall see afterwards . The honourable Houses of Parliament , after advice had with the Assembly of Divines have judged this point ( which Mr. Prynn so much quarrelleth ) to be not onely true , but so far necessary and fundamental , that in their Ordinance of October 20. 1645. for keeping back the ignorant and the scandalous from the Sacrament , this truth , That the Sacraments are seals of the Covenant of grace , is enumerate among those points of Religion , which all persons who shall be admitted to the Lords Supper ought to know , and of which whosoever is ignorant shal not be admitted to the Lords Supper . I hope Mr. Prynn shall not be willing to fall within the Category of ignorant persons , and such as ought not be admitted to the Sacrament : which yet by that Ordinance he must needs do ; if he will not know the Lords Supper to be a seal of the Covenant of grace . Wherefore though he leaneth much that way , both here , and pag. 30. yet I shall expect he will rectifie himself in this particular . His words are these . There is a double sealing ( if we admit this Sacrament or Baptisme to be seals , though never once stiled seals in any Scripture Text ) And in the Margent , they are termed Sacraments and seals of the Covenant , without any Text to warra●…t it . Now Quaeritur whether Mr. Prynn doth know that the Sacraments are seals of the Covenant of grace ; and if he doth not know this , whether doth not the Ordinance strike against him . And now to return , the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , a Seal ; ( which makes most to our present purpose ) is a Scripture word . As for the Word Sacrament , we need not seek it in Scripture , because it is a Latin Word , and there is not either in the Hebrew or Greek ( the languages in which Scripture was written ) any word which properly , closely and fully answereth to the Word Sacrament . Sure we have the thing Sacrament ( though not the name ) in Scripture . Peradventure Mr. Prynn is the more afraid of the Word Sacrament , because some derive it à sacramente which suteth not so well to his notion of a converting Ordinance . Well : But what are nis two sorts of sealing ? 1. A visible external sealing of the pardon of sin and Gods promises in the blood of Christ to our outward s●…nces . 2. An internal invisible sealing of them by the Spirit , working in , by the Word and Sacraments to our souls . In the first sence ( he saith ) this Sacrament is a seal to all receivers , even to those who are scandalous and unworthy , who receive onely the outward Elements . Again this first kind of sealing ( saith he ) seals all Gods promises and a free pardon of all our sins onely conditionally , if we truly repent , lay hold on Christ &c. The second which is an absolute sealing , he grants to belong onely to worthy penitent beleeving receivers . Who doth now delude the vulgar ? When the Lords Supper is called a sealing Ordinance ; did ever any man understand this of a sealing to our outward sences onely , or of receiving the outward Elements and no more ? Who can mistake the thing so far as to think that Christ hath instituted and ordained this Sacrament to be a meer external seal and no more ? When he grants that in the second sence this Sacrament is a seal , onely to worthy , penitent , beleeving receivers , who receive the inward invisible grace , as well as the outward signes : He grants that which I require , that is , that it is a sealing Ordinance intended for worthy penitent beleeving receivers , not for the scandalous and unworthy . God forbid we should make a sealing Ordinance to be an empty Ordinance . The truth is , his first kind of sealing without the second , is no sealing , yea worse then no sealing . Where there is no charter , how can there be a sealing , except we seal blank paper ? and as we shall hear anon from Chrysostome , we have not so much as the seal , except we have that which is sealed . I know it will be answered , there is somewhat to be sealed even to the scandalous and unworthy ▪ that is , the pardon of all their sins conditionally , if they truly repent , beleeve , lay hold on Christ. In this very place Mr. Prynn tells us , that all Gods promises and a free pardon is sealed , even to scandalous and unworthy receivers conditionally ; that is , as he explicates himself pag 37. upon condition that they become penitent and beleeving receivers . But then ( say I ) he must upon as good reason grant , that the Sacrament may be given to Pagans and Turks , at least the first day of preaching the Gospel to them ; May it not be said to Pagans and Turks , that if they repent and beleeve on Christ , they shall have pardon of sin ? Here is the thing to be sealed in Mr. Prynn's opinion . What then should hinder the sealing ? He shunneth to call the Sacrament a converting ordinance in reference to Pagans ; and now behold his principles will admit the giving of the Sacrament even to Pagans as a sealing Ordinance , how much more then as a converting Ordinance ? We have now heard his two distinctions , which if they have given any clearing to his assertion , it is such as is little to his advantage . I will now premise some distinctions of my owne to clear that which I hold . 1. The Question is not de potentia Dei absoluta , Whether God by his omnipotency can give the first grace of conversion in the instant of receiving the Sacrament . But the Question is of the revealed will of God , and the way of the dispensation of grace made known to us in the Gospel , which must be the rule to us to walk by . A peradventure it may be , and who knoweth but the scandalous sinner may be converted , is no warrantable ground to go upon in this case , as Mr. Prynn would make it pag. 47. for we may as well adventure to delay repentance , upon a peradventure it may be . There is an example in the New-Testament of one who got repentance and mercy at his end , and if we beleeve the Hebrews and divers Christian Interpreters ; there is another example of the same kind in the Old Testament , which is the example of Achan . Whereas there is no example in all the Scripture of any converted by the Sacrament . But if a thing be contrary to the revealed will and commandement of God ( as both these are , the delaying of repentance , and the admission of scandalous persons to the Sacrament ) we may not dare to go upon peradventures . To the Law , and to the Testimony . Search the Scriptures . If the Word do not shew us any thing of conversion by the Sacrament , we must not think of any such thing . 2. We must distinguish between the Sacrament it self , and those things that do accompany the Sacrament , powerful preaching , exhortation , prayer , or the like before or after the Sacrament . Put case a sinner be effectually converted by a Sermon or a prayer , which he heareth at the Ordination of a Minister , will any man therefore say that Ordination is a converting Ordinance ? So if by most serious powerful exhortations , convictions , promises , threatnings , by prayer , by Christian conference by reading or meditation before or after the Sacrament , the Lord be pleased to touch the Conscience and convert the soul of an impenitent prophane wicked liver , nothing of this kind can make the Sacrament a converting Ordinance . 3. We must distinguish even in conversion between gratia praeveniens & subs●…quens , operans & co-operans , excitans & adjuvans , or rather , between habitual and actual conversion . Habitual conversion I call the first infusion of the life and habits of grace ; actual conversion is the souls beginning to act from that life and from those habits . The first or habitual conversion in which the sinner is passive , and not at all active , it being wholy the work of preventing , exciting , quickning grace , is that which never is to be looked for in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , which is enough to overthrow that opinion , that scandalous impenitent sinners ( having an external formal profession , but known by a wicked abominable conversation to be dead in sins and trespasses , in whom the holy Ghost hath never yet breathed the first breath of the life of grace ) may be admitted to the Lords Supper ( if they desire it , not being excommunicated ) upon hopes , that it may prove a converting Ordinance to them . As for gratia subsequens co-operans & adjuvans , by which the sinner ( having now a spiritual life created in him and supernatural habits infused in his soul ) is said actually to convert , repent , and beleeve . I consider even in this actual conversion , repenting , beleeving , these two things . 1. The inchoation . 2. The progresse of the work . Where the work is begun , if it were but faith like a grain of mustard seed , and where there is any thing of conversion which is true and sound ; the Sacrament is a blessed powerful means to help forward the work . But I peremptorily deny that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is appointed or instituted by Christ as a regenerating converting Ordinance , as well as the word , or as a means of beginning actual , much lesse habitual conversion . 4. When I hold the Lords Supper not to be a converting but a sealing Ordinance , the meaning is not as if ▪ I beleeved that all who are permitted to come to the Lords Table are truly converted , or that they are such as the seals of the Covenant of Grace do indeed and of right belong unto ( for we speak of visible Churches and visible Saints ) But my meaning is that Christ hath intended this Sacrament to be the childrens read onely ( though the hired servants of the house have other bread enough and to spare ) and he alloweth this portion to none but such as are already converted and do beleeve : and that they who are the ministers of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God ought to admit none to this Sacrament , except such as are quallified and fit ( so far as can be judged by their profession , knowledge , and practice , observed and examined by the Eldership according to the rules of the Word , no humane court being infallible ) to have part and portion in the communion of Saints , and to receive the seals of the Covenant of Grace , at least that they may not dare to admit any man whose known and scandalous wickednesse continued in without signes of repentance , saith within their heart , that there is no fear of God before his eyes . These things premised ( which are to be remembred by the Reader , but need not be repeated by me as we go along ) I proceed to the Arguments which prove my assertion , that the Lords Supper is not a converting but a sealing Ordinance . And thereafter I shall answer Mr. Prynns Arguments brought to the contrary . CHAP. XIII . Twenty A●guments to prove that the Lords Supper is not a converting Ordinance . First , THat which is an institute significant signe , to declare and testifie the being of that thing which is thereby signified , is not an operating cause or mean which makes that thing signified to begin to be where it was not . But the Sacrament is an instituted signe to declare and testifie the being of that thing which is thereby signified . Ergo , This is an Argument used by r Protestant writers against Papists . The Sacraments being by their definition Signes , are not causes of that which they signifie , neither are the things signified the effects of the Sacraments . Wherefore the Sacrament of the Lords Supper being a signe of our spiritual life , faith , union with Christ , and remission of sins , is not instituted to convey these spiritual blessings to such as have them not . Significancy is one thing , efficiency another . You will say by this Argument there is no grace exhibited nor given to beleevers themselves in the Sacrament . Answ. Growth in grace and confirmation of Faith is given to beleevers in the Sacrament , which the significancy hinders not , because the Sacrament doth not signifie nor declare that the receiver hath much grace and a strong faith ; but that he hath some life of grace and some faith . The very state of grace or spiritual life , regeneration , faith and remission of sins are signified , declared , testified , and sealed , but not wrought or given in the Sacrament . The strengthening of faith and a further degree of communion with Christ is not signified in the Sacrament , I mean , it s not signified that we have it , but that we shall have it , or at most that we do then receive it . So that beleevers may truly be said to receive at the Sacrament a confirmation or strengthening of their faith , or a further degree of communion with Christ : but it cannot be said that the very Sacramental act of eating or drinking , being a signe of spiritual life and union with Christ ( as that which we have , not which we shall have , or at that instant receive ) is a mean or instrumental cause to make a man have that which it testifieth or signifieth he hath already . There is no evasion here , for one who acknowledgeth the Sacrament to be a signe , declaring or shewing forth that we have faith in Christ , remission of sins by him , and union with him . Mr. Prynn must either make blank the signification of the Sacrament à parte ante , though not à parte post , or else hold that the signification of the Sacrament , is not applicable to many of those whom he thinks fit to be admitted to receive it . Secondly , That which necessarily supposeth conversion and faith , doth not work conversion and faith . But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper necessarily supposeth conversion and faith . Ergo. The proposition is so certain , that either it must be yeelded , or a contradiction must be yeelded : for that which worketh conversion and faith , cannot suppose that they are , but that they are not . Therefore that which supposeth conversion and faith , cannot work conversion and faith , because then the same thing should be supposed both to be and not to be . The Assumption I prove from Scripture . Mark. 16. 16. He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved . Act. 2. 38. Repent and be baptized . vers . 41. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized . Act. 8. 36. 37. And the E●…nuch said , See here is water , what doth hinder me to be baptized ? And Philip said , If thou beleevest with all thin●… heart 〈◊〉 mayest . Act. 10. 47. Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the holy Ghost as well as we ? Now if Baptisme it self ( which is the Sacrament of our initiation ) supposeth ( according to the tenor and meaning of Christs institution ) that the party baptized ( if of age ) doth actually convert and beleeve , and ( if an infant ) supposeth an interest in Jesus Christ and in the Covenant of grace ( for if he be a child of an Heathen or an Infidel although taken into a Christian Family , yet the Synod of Dort. Sess. 19. adviseth not to baptize such a child , till it come to such age as to be instructed in the principles of Christian Religion . ) How much more doth the Lords Supper , necessarily , by Christs institution , suppose that the receivers are not unconverted and unbeleeving persons ? The previous qualifications which are supposed in Baptisme , must be much more supposed in the Lords Supper . Thirdly , That which gives us the new food , supposeth that we have the new birth and spiritual life , and that we are not still dead in sins and trespasses . But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper gives us the new food . Ergo it supposeth we have the new birth . The proposition I prove thus . s A man must first be born by the new birth , before he can be fed with the new food : and how can a man eat the flesh , and drink the blood of Christ , and yet be supposed not to have a spiritual life before that act , but to get a spiritual life in that very act ? Doth a man get life because he eats and drinks , or doth he not rather eat and drink because he lives ? The Assumption is a received and uncontroverted truth . And hence do Divines give this reason why we are but once baptized , but do many times receive the Lord● Supper ; because it is enough to be once born , but not enough to be once nourished or strengthened . See the Belgick confession . Art. 34. and D. Parei Miscellanea Catechetica pag. 79. I shall strengthen my Argument by the Confession of Bohemia Cap. 11. The Sacraments cannot give to any such ( which before was not inwardly quickened by the holy Ghost ) either grace or justifying and quickening faith , and therefore they cannot justifie any man , nor inwardly quicken or regenerate any mans Spirit : for faith must go before . And after . For if a dead man or one that is unworthy do come to the Sacraments , certainly they do not give him life and worthinesse . &c. See the Harmony of Confessions printed at London 1643. pag. 280. 281. To what end then is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper instituted ? For that , see the Confession of Belgia Ibid. pag. 320. We beleeve and confesse that Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour hath instituted the holy Sacrament of his Supper , that in it he might nourish and sustain those whom he hath regenerated and ingrafted into his Family , which is the Church . Both these Chapters did Mr. Prynn cite in the Question of Iudas ( which yet prove not what he affirmeth in that point , as I have noted before ) but it seems he did not observe these passages , which make directly against him in this Question of conversion or conferring of grace by the Sacrament . I add also Mr. Pemble in his Christian disections for receiving the Sacrament . The Sacrament saith he is appointed for our nourishment in grace ; where we grow not by it , it is a signe this food was not digested but vomited up again t Where faith , repentance , thankfulnesse , and obedience are not increased , there Christ crucified was not remembred . But how can there be any nourishment in grace , or any increase of grace in those who come to the Sacrament , without the first grace , or in the state of unregeneration ? Fourthly , That Ordinance which is instituted onely for beleevers and justified persons , is no converting but sealing Ordinance . But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is instituted onely for beleevers and justified persons . Ergo. The Proposition hath light enough in it self ; for converting Ordinances do belong even to unjustified and unconverted persons . Therefore that which is instituted onely for beleevers is no converting Ordinance . All the Question will be of the Assumption , which I shall the rather confirm , because it is the very principle from which Polanus and others argue for the suspension of scandalous persons from the Lords Table . Now I prove the Assumption thus . Every Sacrament , even a Sacrament of initiation , is a seal of the righteousnesse of Faith. If Circumcision was a seal of the righteousnesse of faith . Rom. 4. 11. then Baptisme ( which hath succeeded to Circumcision ) is also a seal of the righteousnesse of faith , and that more fully and clearly then Circ●mcision was : and if Baptisme be a seal of the righteousnesse of faith , much more is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper a seal of the righteousnesse of Faith ; which is also proved by Mat. 26. 28. For this is my blood of the new Covenant , which is shed for many for the remission of sins . Chrysostome on Rom. 4. considering those words vers . 11. a seal of the righteousnesse of Faith , hath this meditation upon it , that a Sacrament is no signe , no seal , except where the thing is which is signified and sealed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , For of what shall it be a signe , or of what shall it be a seal , when there is none to be sealed . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . For ( faith he ) if it be a signe of righteousnesse , and thou hast not righteousnesse , neither hast thou the signe . If therefore a Sacrament be a seal of the righteousnesse of faith , then it is instituted onely for beleevers and justified persons , because to such onely it can seal the righteousnesse of faith . Upon this ground saith u Ursinus that the Sacraments are to the wicked and unbeleevers no Sacraments : which agreeth with that Rom. 2. 25. If thou be a breaker of the Law , thy Circumcision is made uncircumcis●…on . Fifthly , The Apostle argues that Abraham the father of the faithfull , and whose justification is as it were a pattern of ours , was not justified by Circumcision , or ( as Aquinas confesseth upon the place ) that Circumcision was not the cause but the signe of Justification . Rom. 4. 9. 10. 11. We say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousnesse . How was it then reckoned ? When he was in Circumcision or in uncircumcision ? Not in Circumcision but in uncircumcision . And he received the signe of Circumcision , a seal of the righteousnesse of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised x If Abraham the father of the faithful , got not so much as the Sacrament of initiation , till after he was justified and sanctified , how shall we think of receiving , not onely the Sacrament of initiation , but the Sacrament of spiritual nourishment , while unjustified and unsanctified ? And if God did by his Word make a Covenant with Abraham , before he received Circumcision the seal of that Covenant , must it not much more be supposed , that they are within the Covenant of grace , who eat and drink at the Lords Table , and consequently , that those who are children of disobedience and wrath , and strangers to Christ and the Covenant of Grace ( apparently and manifestly such , though not professedly ) ought not to be admitted to the Lords Table under colour of a converting Ordinance , it being indeed a seal of the Covenant of grace . Sixthly , That Ordinance which is appointed onely for such as can and do rightly examine themselves concerning their spiritual estate , regeneration , repentance , faith , and conversation : is no converting Ordinance . But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is an Ordinance which is appointed onely for such as can and do rightly examine themselves concerning their spiritual estate , regeneration , repentance , faith , and conversation . Ergo , it is no converting Ordinance . The reason of the Proposition is , because unconverted persons cannot nor do not rightly examine themselves concerning their spiritual estate , regeneration , &c. For such are a generation pure in their own eyes , and yet not washed from their filthinesse . Proverb . 16. 2. and 21. 2. and 30. 12. and the natural man cannot know the things of the Spirit of God , because they are spiritually discerned , But he that is spiritual judgeth all things . 1 Cor. 2. 14. 15. The carnal mind is enmity against God. Rom. 8. 7. The Assumption is proved by 1 Cor. 11. 28. But let a man examine himself , and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that Cup. This self-examination ( Interpreters say ) must be concerning a mans knowledge , y repentance , faith , and conversation . The Apostle expounds himself 2 Cor. 13. 5. Examine your selves whether ye be in the Faith : prove your own selves , how that Jesus Christ is in you except ye be reprobates , or counterfeit , and unapproved . This self examination , as it is requisite at other times , so especially before our comming to the Lords Table ; and an unconverted man can no more do it truly and rightly ( according to the Apostles meaning ) then he can convert himself . And here that which Mr. Prynn did object , maketh against himself ; the Apostle saith , Let a man examine himself , not others ; for the examination there spoken of belongs to the Court of a mans own Conscience , and to the inward man saith Martyr upon the place , not to the Ecclesiastical Court. But a natural unconverted man may possibly examine others and espie a mote in his brothers eye , he cannot in any right or acceptable manner examine his own Conscience , nor go about the taking of the beam out of his own eye . z He therefore who either cannot through ignorance , or doth not through impenitency and hardnesse of heart , examine himself , and is known to be such a one by his excusing , justifying , or not confessing his scandalous sin , or continuing in the practice thereof , ought not to be admitted to that holy Ordinance which is instituted onely for such as can and do humbly and soundly examine themselves , and consequently not intended for unconverted impenitent persons . Seventhly , That Ordinance unto which one may not come without a wedding garment , is no converting Ordinance . But the Supper of the Lord , the marriage feast of the Kings son , is an Ordinance unto which one may not come without a wedding garment . Ergo. The Proposition hath this reason for it . If a man must needs have a wedding garment that comes , then he must needs be converted that comes ; for what-ever ye call the wedding garment , sure it is a thing proper to the Saints , and not common to unconverted sinners , and the want of it doth condemn a man into utter darknes , Matth. 22. 13. The Assumption is clear from Matth. 22. 11. 12. When the King came in to see the Guests , he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment . And he saith unto him , Friend , how camest thou in hither , not having a wedding garment ? and he was speechlesse . If he had been of Mr. Prynns opinion he needed not be speechlesse ; for Mr. Prynns divinity might have put this answer in his mouth . Lord I thought this to be a converting Ordinance , and that thou wouldest not reject those that come in without a wedding garment , provided that here at the marriage feast they get one . But we see the King condemneth the man for comming in thither without a wedding garment . Eightly , That Ordinance which is not appointed to work faith is no converting ordinance . But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not appointed to work faith . Ergo. The proposition must be granted , unlesse a man will say that conversion may be without faith . The Assumption is proved by Rom. 10. 14. men cannot pray if they do not beleeve , and they cannot beleeve if they do not hear the Word , v. 17. So then faith commeth by hearing , and hearing by the word of God. If faith commeth by hearing , then not by seeing ; if by the word , then not by the Sacrament . Ninthly , That Ordinance which hath neither a promise of the grace of conversion annexed to it , nor any example in the Word of God of any converted by it , is no converting Ordinance . But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper hath neither a promise of the grace of conversion annexed to it , nor is there any example in all the Scripture of any ever converted by it . Therefore it is no converting Ordinance . Tenthly , That Ordinance whereof Christ would have no unworthy person to partake is not a converting Ordinance . But the Lords Supper is an Ordinance whereof Christ would have no unworthy person to partake . Ergo. The proposition I prove thus . It is not the will of Christ that converting Ordinances should be dispenced to no unworthy person ( for else how should they be converted ) but onely he hath forbidden to dispence unto unworthy persons such Ordinances as belong to the Communion Saints . The Assumption I prove from 1 Cor. 11. 27. Whosoever ( though otherwise a worthy person & one converted to the state of grace ) shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily , shal be guilty of the body & blood of the Lord. v. 29. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily , eateth and drinketh judgment to himself , not discerning the Lords body . If the unworthines of that particular act , in respect of the manner of doing it , make a man so guilty and liable to such judgement , how much more the unworthinesse of the person that eats and drinks ? For a mans state , the course of his life , and the frame of his Spirit , is more then one single act . This therefore doth prove that he that is an unworthy person ( if he come to the Lords Table ) doth eat and drink unworthily ( Whence is that where the Apostle saith vers . 29. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily , the Syriack Interpreter hath it , he that eateth and drinketh thereof being unworthy , or indignus existens : ) Which may be also gathered from the interweaving of vers . 28. between vers . 27. and vers . 29. He that eats and drinks , not having before rightly examined himself , eats and drinks unworthily . But he that is an unworthy person , and comes to the Lords Table unworthily and unpreparedly , eats and drinks not having before rightly examined himself . Ergo. What of that ? will you say . a Much to the point . Every unconverted and unregenerate person is an unworthy person ( as the Scripture distinguisheth worthy persons and unworthy ) and comes unworthily and unpreparedly ( if he come while such ) to the Lords Table ; Therefore such a one if he come , eats and drinks unworthily , and so eats and drinks judgement to himself . b Augustine argueth promiscuously against those who come unworthily , and those that eat and drink unworthily , and applyeth the Apostles words of eating and drinking unworthily , to all who come with polluted souls , such as all unconverted have . And Gualther , Martyr , and other Interpreters upon the place , the Centurists also in the place last cited , reckon those to eat and drink unworthily , who come without the wedding garment , and without faith , and holinesse of conversation , which intimateth that they who live unworthily , do also eat the Lords Supper unworthily , which is most plainly intimate in the Directory pag. 50. where ignorant , scandalous , and prophane persons are warned not to come to that holy Table , upon this reason , because he that eats and drinks unworthily , eats and drinks judgement to himself , which necessarily implyeth that unworthy persons and prophane livers , if they come to the Sacrament , are not converted , but sin more in eating and drinking unworthily . I conclude therefore that the prohibition of eating and drinking unworthily doth necessarily imply a prohibition of unconverted , unregenerate , impenitent persons , to come to the Lords Table , and by consequence that it is no converting Ordinance . Eleventhly , That Ordinance which is Eucharistical and consolatory , supposeth that such as partake of it have part and portion in that thing for which thanks are given , and are such as are fit to be comforted . But the Lords Supper is an Ordinance Eucharistical and consolatory . Ergo. The Proposition needs no other proof but the third Commandement ; Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain . Shall a man be called to give thanks for redemption , reconciliation , and remission of sins , and to take comfort in Jesus Christ , even while he is such a one of whom God hath said , There is no peace to the wicked : High talk becommeth not a fool . Psal. 33. 1. Rejoyce in the Lord O ye righteous , for praise is comely for the upright . Psal. 50. 14. 16. Offer unto God thanksgiving &c. But unto the wicked God saith , What hast thou to do to declare my statutes , or that thou shouldest take my Covenant in thy mouth . c The Assumption is acknowledged among all ; for as it hath the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , so is the nature of it . It is also a consolatory Ordinance , in which we are called to spiritual joy and gladnesse , it being a feast of fat things full of marrow , and of wines on the lees well refined . At this Ordinance of the holy Supper Christ spake many a sweet and consolatory word to the disciples , and did not rebuke them nor chide them , as he had done at other times . Is it not then a healing slightly of the malady of impenitent unconverted sinners , yea a betraying of their souls to bring them to joy and comfort and thanksgivings and songs of praise , to eat of the marrow and fatnesse , and to drink of the rivers of pleasure which are in the house of God , when we ought rather call them to weeping and to mourning , to make their peace with God , and to flee from the wrath to come ? Twelfthly , That Ordinance unto which Christ calleth none but such as have spiritual gracious qualifications , is not a converting but a sealing Ordinance . But the Lords Supper is an Ordinance unto which Christ calleth none but such as have spiritual and gracious qualifications . Ergo. The Proposition I hope needs no proof , because unconverted persons dead in sins and trespasses , have no spiritual gracious qualifications . The Assumption may be proved by many Scriptures . If of any Ordinance , chiefly of this ; it holds true that Christ inviteth and calleth none but such as labour and are heavie loaden , Matth. 11. 28. such as are athirst for the water of life , Iohn 7. 37. Isa. 55. 1. such as have the wedding garment , Matth. 22. 12. such as examine themselves 1 Cor. 11. 28. such as are Christs friends , Cant. 5. 1. Eat O friends , drink yea drink abundantly O beloved . Thirteenthly , That Ordinance which is instituted for the Communion of Saints , is intended onely for such as are Saints , and not for unconverted sinners . But the Lords Supper is an Ordinance instituted for the Communion of Saints , and of those who are members of the same body of Christ 1 Cor. 10. 16. 17. compared with 1 Cor. 1. 2. Ergo. Martin Bucer de Regno Christi lib. 1. cap. 7. conceiveth that this Sacrament doth so far belong to the Communion of Saints , that wicked and unworthy persons are not onely to be kept back from partaking , but from the very beholding or being present in the Church at the giving of the Sacrament : which yet is more then we have affirmed . Fourteenthly , If Baptisme it self ( at least when ministred to those that are of age ) is not a regenerating or converting Ordinance , far lesse is the Lords Supper a regenerating or converting Ordinance . But Baptisme it self ( at least when ministred to those that are of age ) is not a regenerating or converting Ordinance . Ergo. The ground of the Proposition is , because Baptisme hath a nearer relation to regeneration then the Lords Supper , and therefore hath the name of the laver of regeneration . The Assumption I prove thus . 1. Because we read of no persons of age baptized by the Apostles , except such as did professe faith in Christ , gladly received the Word , and in whom some begun work of the Spirit of grace did appear ( I say not that it really was in all , but somewhat of it did appear in all . ) 2. If the Baptisme of those who are of age be a regenerating Ordinance , then you suppose the person to be baptized an unregenerated person ( even as when a Minister first preacheth the Gospel to Pagans , he cannot but suppose them to be unregenerated : ) But I beleeve no consciencious Minister would adventure to baptize one who hath manifest and infallible signes of unregeneration . Sure , we cannot be answerable to God if we should minister Baptisme to a man whose works and words do manifestly declare him to be an unregenerated unconverted person . And if we may not initiate such a one , how shall we bring him to the Lords Table ? Fifteenthly , If the Baptisme even of those who are of age must necessarily precede their receiving of the Lords Supper , then the Lords Supper is not a converting but a sealing Ordinance . But the Baptisme even of those who are of age must necessarily precede their receiving of the Lords Supper . Ergo. The Assumption is without controversie , it being the order observed by Christ and by the Apostles , and by all Christian Churches . The Proposition I prove thus . 1. d What better reason of the necessity of this precedency of Baptisme , than that Baptisme is the Sacrament of regeneration , the Lords Supper the Sacrament of our spiritual nourishment , and one must be borne before he eat and drink . 2. The Apostle saith Gal. 3. 27. As many of you as have been baptized into Christ , have put on Christ. Rom. 6. 4. We are buried with him by Baptisme into death . Col. 2. 12. Buried with him in Baptisme , wherein also you are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God. Therefore if the Sacrament of the Lords Supper be intended onely for the baptized , then it is intended onely for such as are supposed to have put on Christ , are buried and raised again with him through faith , and consequently , it is not intended for unconverted persons to convert them , but for converted persons to confirme them . Sixteenthly , The Method of the parable of the forlorne Son maketh very much against Mr. Prynns opinion . The Lord is indeed ready to forgive , and hath compassion upon the poor sinner , and falls on his neck and kisseth him , and saith to his servants , Bring forth the best robe and put it on him , and put a ring on his hand , and shoes on his feet , and bring hither the fatted calf , and kill it , and let us eat and be merry . Luke 15. 20. 22 , 23. And this is done in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , more especially and more manifestly then in any other Ordinance . But when ? not while the man is yet playing the prodigal , wasting his substance with riotous living , nor yet while he is filling his belly in a far Countrey with the husks which the Swine did eat . But it was when he came to himself , when he came to his Father and said , Father I have sinned against Heaven and in thy sight , and am no more worthy to be called thy Son. Then , and not till then , doth the father bestow upon him the best robe and the fatted calf . For this my son was dead ( saith the Father ) and is alive again , was lost and is found . Had the best robe and the fatted calf been given him before he repented and came to himself , he had ( belike ) been so much the more carelesse of comming home to his father . But we see these love tokens , this feast , and this mirth , is for entertaining a poor penitent , not for converting an impenitent sinner . Seventeenthly , I shall draw another Argument both out of the Directory for the publike Worship of God throughout the three Kingdoms , and out of Mr. Prynn himself . Thus it is . That Ordinance from which the Minister in the Name of Christ ought concionaliter or Doctrinally to excommunicate all impenitent prophane persons , is not a converting but a sealing Ordinance . But the Lords Supper is an Ordinance from which the Minister ought in the Name of Christ concionaliter or Doctrinally to excommunicate all impenitent prophane persons , Ergo. The Proposition ariseth from this ground , we ought not to dehort impenitent prophane men from converting Ordinances , but rather exhort them to come and partake thereof . The Assumption I prove , First , from the Directory in the head of the Lords Supper , which speaketh of the Minister thus , Next , he is , in the Name of Christ on the one part to warn all such as are ignorant , scandalous , prophane , or that live in any sin or offence against their knowledge or Conscience , that they presume not to come to that holy Table , shewing them that he that eateth and drinketh unworthily , eateth and drinketh judgement to himself . And on the other part he is in especial manner to invite and encourage all that labour under the sence of the burthen of their sins , and fear of wrath , and desire to reach out unto a greater progresse in grace then yet they can attain unto , to come to the Lords Tàble . Is it not here held forth as the will of Christ , that no prophane impenitent unconverted person ought or may come to the Lords Table , but onely such as have somewhat of the work of grace in them ? But let us hear Mr. Prynn himself . The seventh difference which he stateth between his Antagonists and himself pag. 28. is this . Whether the Minister hath not fully discharged his Duty and Conscience if he give warning to unworthy Communicants of the danger they incurr by their unworthy approaches to the Lords Table , and seriously dehort them from comming to it , unlesse they repent , reform , and come prepared . If this be a right stating of that difference ( and if it be true which Mr. Hussey in his Epistle to the Parliament pag. 7. saith , that it is a very great and dangerous sin , if they come without repentance , faith , and charity , wherein the Minister must instruct his people publikely and privatly . ) Then I suppose that Mr. Prynn will not deny that a Minister ought in duty and conscience to do all this , to admonish a scandalous unworthy person , and seriously dehort &c. Onely he contends that the Minister is not bound in duty and conscience after all this to keep back such from the Sacrament . Well : I take for the present what he grants : and even by that I prove the Lords Supper is no converting Ordinance ; for if it were . 1. How dare any Minister seriously dehort any unworthy person from approaching to it ? May we forbid sinners to use the means of their conversion , especially if they be such as are not excommunicated nor cast out of the Church , and do desire to receive the Sacrament ? ( which are the cases often put by Mr. Prynn . ) 2. How can the Minister warn such persons not to come to the Sacrament unlesse they repent , reform , and come prepared ? If it be not a sealing Ordinance intended onely for such as do repent and reform , the Minister may not say so . 3. And otherwise the sence were this , that such persons ought not to come to a converting Ordinance , unlesse they be converted ; for to repent , reform , and come prepared , are things which none can do who are not converted . Finally ▪ By Mr. Prynn his principles , we may as well ▪ yea rather , dehort men from comming to hear the Word unlesse they repent and reform . For pag. 44. he saith that the Sacrament is as converting , yea a more humbling , regenerating , converting Ordinance then the Word . Which if it be so , then we may more warrantably and with lesse danger to the souls of those who do not repent and reform , dehort them from comming to the Word , then from comming to the Sacrament . Eighteenthly , That Ordinance which is not communicable to Heathens or Pagans , nor to excommunicated Christians , for their conversion from darknesse to light , from the power of Sathan to God , from the state of sin to the state of repentance , is not a converting Ordinance . But the Lords Supper is such . Ergo. The Reason of the Proposition is , because converting Ordinances are communicable to Heathens : and thence proceeded the general Commission to preach the Gospel to every creature , and to teach all Nations Matth. 28. 19 Mark 16. 15. which accordingly the Apostles did , Rom. 10. 18. Col. 1. 6. And if the Sacrament be a converting Ordinance for known impenitent scandalous prophane persons within the Church , what reason is there imaginable why it is not also a converting Ordinance for Heathens , Pagans , Turks , Jews ? Or where have we the least hint in Scripture that an Ordinance which may convert the prophanest unexcommunicated person within the Church , cannot convert both Heathens and excommunicated Christians ? The Assumption I prove from Mr. Prynns own acknowledgement , pag. 38. though the Sacrament saith he must not be administred to Heathens , to whom the Gospel may and must be preached , before they beleeve and professe Christ : yet it must be administred to them as well as Baptisme , after their beleef and profession of Christ. Where he clearly grants both Sacraments , Baptisme and the Lords Supper , to be onely sealing and confirming ( not converting ) Ordinances to Heathens , and therefore not communicable to them , till after they beleeve and professe Christ. Nineteenthly , That Ordinance which is not communicable nor lawful to be administred to any known impenitent sinner under that notion , but onely as penitent sinners , truly repenting of their sins past , is not a converting but a sealing Ordinance . But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is such . Ergo. The Proposition I prove thus . A converting Ordinance may be administred to known impenitent sinners under that notion , or lookt upon as such , wallowing in their blood and filthinesse . Yea a converting Ordinance qua converting , is not ( nor indeed can be ) administred to penitent sinners qua penitent , or lookt upon as truly converted . For as every effect is in order of nature posterior to its cause , so a converting Ordinance being the instrumental cause of conversion , regeneration , and repentance , it must needs be supposed that conversion and repentance doth not in order of nature precede but follow after the administration of the converting Ordinance . The Assumption is granted by Mr. Prynn pag. 37. The Minister ( saith he ) doth not ( I suppose he will also say ought not ) administer the Sacrament to any known impenitent sinners under that notion , but onely as penitent sinners , truly repenting of their sins past , and promising , purposing to lead a new life for the future . Therefore yet again by some of his own principles , the Sacrament is not administred as instrumental to the first conversion of scandalous unworthy persons in the Church : for where there is in any Ordinance an instrumental causality toward the conversion of a scandalous person , that Ordinance must needs be administred to that person under the notion of an unconverted person , and the effect of conversion lookt upon as consequent , not as antecedent . The twentieth Argument and the last is this . As I have before shewed that Mr. Prynn in holding the Sacrament to be a converting Ordinance , unto which unregenerate impenitent and unbeleeving persons ( not being excommunicated ) ought to be admitted , doth joyn issue with Papists , and dissenteth from the Protestant writers in a very special point , and that the controversie draweth very deep : So I will now make it to appear that he dissenteth as much from the Ancients in this particular . Dionysius Areopagita de Eccles. Hierarch . Cap. 3. Part. 3. speaking of the nature of this Ordinance of the Lords Supper , tells us that it doth not admit those scandalous sinners who were in the condition of penitents , before they had fully manifested their repentance , much lesse prophane and unclean persons in whom no signe of repentance appeareth ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not admitting him who is not altogether most holy . Just in Martyr Apol. 2. lets us know that in his time the Lords Supper was given to none , but to such a person as was lookt upon as a beleever , and washed in the laver of regeneration , and lived according to the rule of Christ. Chrysostome Hom. 83. in Matth. Augustine de side & operibus Cap. 18. Isidorus Pelusiota lib. 1. Epist. 143. and others might be here added . But I shall bring their full testimonies chap. 17. where I will shew Antiquity to be for the suspension of scandalous persons unexcommunicated . Beside these , I add also e Beda upon 1 Cor. 11. who tells us both out of Augustine and Prosper , that none ought to come to the Lords Table but a justified person , and such a one as abideth in Christ and Christ in him . Isidorus de Ecclesiast . offic . lib. 1. Cap. 18. citing the Apostles words , He that eateth and drinketh unworthily , addeth . f For this is to receive unworthily , if any man receive at that time in which he should be repenting . The same words hath Rabanus Maurus de Instit. Cleric . lib. 1. cap. 31. Which plainly sheweth us that in their Judgement , the Sacrament of the Lords Supper doth suppose conversion and repentance to be already wrought , and if it be not wrought , the receiving is an unworthy receiving . Moreover that the Lords Supper was not anciently esteemed a converting Ordinance , but a sealing Ordinance , supposing conversion , is more then apparent by the distinction of Missa Catechumenorum and Missa fidellum : and by that proclamation in the Church before the Sacrament , Sancta Sanctis , the sence whereof Durantus de ritibus , lib. 2. cap. 55. num . 15. giveth out of Chrysostome and Cyrill , that Sancta Sanstis was as much as to say : Si quis non est sanctus , non accedat : If any man be not holy , let him not approach . Or as if it had been said to them , The Sacrament is a holy thing , sancti & vos cum sitis sancto Spiritu donati ; and seeing you also are holy , the holy Spirit being given unto you ; atque ita sancta sanctis conveniant , and so holy things agreeing to holy persons . If the Lords Supper be a holy thing intended onely for holy persons , then ( sure ) it is no converting Ordinance . I might also cite divers School-men against Mr. Prynn in this particular . I shall instance but in two for the present . Scotus in lib. 4. Sent. dist . 9. Quaest. 1. proveth from 1 Cor. 11. 27. that it is a mortal sin for a man to come to the Sacrament at that time when he is living in a mortal sin ; and that he who is not spiritually a member of Christ , ought not to receive the Sacrament , which is a signe of incorporation into Christ. Alexander Alensis part 4. Quaest. 11. Membr . 2. Art. 2. Sect. 2. saith thus . As there is a double bodily medicine ( curativa & conservativa ) one for cure , another for conservation , so there is a double spiritual medine , to wit ( curativa & conservativa ) one for cure , another for conservation ; repentance for the cure , the Eucharist for conservation . &c. CHAP. XIIII . Mr. Prynne his twelve Arguments brought to prove that the Lords Supper is a converting Ordinance , discussed and answered . IT shall be now no hard businesse to answer Mr. Prynns twelve Arguments , brought by him to refute my assertion , that that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is no converting Ordinance . See Vindic. pag. 41. to 45. First he tells us we grant that moral carnal Christians , and all such as are not convicted of scandalous sins , are to be admitted to the Sacrament . Thrrefore doubtlesse ( saith he ) it is and was intended by Christ for a converting Ordinance to all such as these , to turn them from their evil waies , and work saving grace within their hearts , since it can have no other proper primary effect in such . Certainly God and Christ bestow no Ordinances upon men in vain ; therefore their intentions in instituting this Supper , even for such visible , moral , unregenerate Christian , as well as real Saints , must necessarily be for their conversion , not their confirmation and sealing onely . Answ. Lapsus in initio mali augurii est . He confoundeth here things most different . 1. He confoundeth our admitting of Communicants , with Gods intention to do good to their souls : and his Argument runs upon this mistake , that God intendeth good to the souls of all who come to the Lords Table , though wicked close Hypocrites ; and since this good cannot be sealing onely , it must be conversion . But it is neither sealing , nor conversion , nor any good at all which God intends by that Ordinance to them that perish : yet it is not in vain : for he himself tells us pag. 34. that even in these , the Minister administring the Sacrament , is a sweet savour to God , who hath appointed the Sacrament secundarily and contingently , to be a means of aggravating mens sins and condemnation , to magnifie his justice . 2. There is a most dangerous mistake in that which he saith of the intentions of God and of Christ. If he mean of what God intendeth or purposeth in the Councel of his own will , that in this sence God intendeth the conversion of those that perish , is to make void and frustraneous the decree , will , and intention of God , which is grosse Arminianisme and Jesuitisme . But if he mean finis operis , the proper end for which the Sacrament was instituted , and the good which the Word of God tells us we ought to seek , and may through the grace of God find in the Sacrament : Then in that sence , to say that Christs intention in instituting this Sacrament was for conversion of moral unregenerate Christians , is meerly a begging of what is in question . The like I say of that proper primary effect of the Sacrament in such . If he mean the proper primary effect decreed in the secret counsel of God , he myres himself in Arminianisme . If he mean the proper primary effect of the Sacrament in respect of its own nature , this is but petere principium . 3. All who pretend right to the Sacrament are either visible Saints , qualified according to the rule of Christ , and such as the Eldership ( examining their profession and practice according to the rules of the word ) judgeth fit to be admitted to the Sacrament ; or they are not such . If they be such , then the end and use of the Sacrament in reference to them , is to be a sealing Ordinance . for the Eldership judgeth and supposeth them fit to be sealed and confirmed , so far as they can understand , and in that capacity do admit them : God onely being able to judge close Hypocrites . If they be not qualified , as I have said , then we do not grant that they ought to be admitted . His second Argument hath no strength at all . All Ordinan●es which strengthen grace do more or lesse begin or beget it , and the Directory it self calls the Sacraments means of grace pag. 52. What then ? The Directory calls this Sacrament means of grace , because by it Christ and all his benefits are applied and sealed up unto us , and we are sealed up by his Spirit to an assurance of happinesse and everlasting life . But ( saith he ) why may not the Sacraments convert as well as confirm . I have given many reasons for it . If he could prove that what confirms doth also convert , why did he not do it ? If he could not prove it , why brings he a strong affirmation instead of an Argument ? As for that which he addeth , that the Lords Supper is received not once as Baptism , but frequently . For this very end , that those who often fall into sin through infirmity , may likewise by this Supper often rise again , be refreshed , comforted , and get strength against their corruptions and sins : and is it not then a converting as well as a confirming Ordinance ? What a wavering is here ? Is the raising , refressiing , and comforting of those who often fall through infirmity , the conversion or first grace which now we dispute of ? Or whether doth he not here yeeld the cause ? For the refreshing and comforting and strengthening of those that fall through infirmity , is the effect of a confirming not of a converting Ordinance . And in this sence Divines have given a reason , why we are but once baptized , but do often receive the Lords Supper , because Baptisme is the Sacrament of our initiation , the laver of regeneration ; ( I mean not that which hath been called Baptismal regeneration , fancied to be common to all the baptized , but I mean that which is wrought in and sealed to the Elect baptized ) the Lords Supper is the Sacrament of our spiritual nourishment and strengthening : and it is enough to be once born , once regenerate , but we must be often nourished and strengthened . His third Argument is this . The very receiving of the Sacrament even in ●…nregenerate persons , is accompanied with such things as are most effectual to convert . As 1. With a previous external serious examination of their own hearts and estates between God and their own Consciences . 2. A solemn searching out of all their open or secret sins and corruptions , past or present , accompanied with a serious particular privat confession of them , a hearty contrition and humiliation for them &c. 3. Pious soul ravishing meditations &c. which make deep temporary impressions on their hearts 4. Flexanimous exhortations , admonitions , comminations , directions , prayers by the Ministers in the Congregation , before , in , and after this dutie . Whereupon he leaveth it to every mans Conscience to judge whether this Sacrament is not more likelie to regenerate and change their hearts , and lives , then the bare Word preached , or any other Ordinance . Answ. 1. Here is a lump of wild , uncouth , and most erroneous Divinity . Who ever heard of an external examination of mens hearts between God and their own Consciences ? Or 2. That unregenerate persons can and do seriously examine their own hearts , and search out all their sins with a hearty contrition and humiliation for them ? &c. Or 3. That deep temporary impressions on their hearts are most effectual to convert and regenerate ( for he doth enumerate all these as particulars most effectual to convert . ) Or 4. That in the very receiving of the Sacrament , men hear the Ministers prayers in the Congregation . 5. That this Sacrament is more likely to regenerate then the bare Word preached ( I suppose he means not the word without the Spirit ( for nobody holds the bare word in that sence to regenerate ) but preaching without other concurring Ordinance ) or any other Ordinance . Which if it be , he cannot choose but allow to give the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to excommunicated persons , and to the unbaptized , whether Heathens or Jews , being of age , and desiring to receive it . Secondly , If all the whole Antecedent part of his Argument were granted , the consequence is naught : for this must be the consequence , If examination of mens hearts , the searching out of all their sins , confession , contrition , prayers , vowes , meditations , exhortations , which do accompany the Sacrament , be most effectual to convert and to beget grace , then the Sacrament is a converting Ordinance . Which consequence he will never prove . Put the case that self-examination , confession , prayers , vowes , meditations , exhortations , at the calling of a Parliament , at the going out of an Army , at the choosing of Magistrates or Ministers , at the death of Parents , friends , &c. prove effectual to conversion ; Shall we therefore say that the calling of a Parliament , the going out of the Army , the choosing of Ministers or Magistrates , the death of Parents or friends , are converting Ordinances ? His fourth Argument alone is syllogistical ( I wish all his Arguments throughout his whole book had been such , that the strength or weaknesse thereof might the sooner appear ) That Ordinance where●…n we most immedietly converse with God and Christ , and have more intimate visible sensible communion with them , then in any other , is certainly the most powerful and effectual Ordinance of all others , to humble , regenerate , convert , and beget true grace within us . &c. But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper by our Antagonists own confession is such . Ergo. Answ. 1. I retort his Argument against himself . That Ordinance wherein we most immediatly converse with God and Christ , and have more intimate communion with them then in any other , is a sealing , confirming , but not a converting Ordinance . For they who are converting have not such intimate communion and immediat conversing with God and Christ , as they who are already converted and do walk with God as Enoch did and are filled with all joy and peace in beleeving , Rom. 15. 13. even with joy unspeakable and full of glory , 1 Pet. 1. 8. The daughters of Ierusalem being sick of love for Christ , yet are far from that communion with him , which his Spouse longer acquainted with him did enjoy , therefore they ask at her , whither her beloved was gone that they might seek him with her . Cant. 6 1. Hath the child fed with milk more communion and conversing with his father , then the son come to years , who eateth and drinketh at his fathers Table ? Do we not see often a servent convert like Apollos , whom an Aquila and Priscilla must take and expound unto him the way of God more perfectly . Act. 18. 25 , 26. 2. I deny his Proposition as he frames it , for the plain English of it is this ; If it be a sealing , comforting , confirming Ordinance , then it is a converting Ordinance , which I clear thus . He takes his Medium from his Antagonists concession , for they accord ( saith he ) that we have more immediate communion with God in this Ordinance then in any other , for as much as in this Sacrament Christ is more particularly applied , and the remission of our sins more sensibly sealed to us then in any other Ordinance : from whence I thus infallibly conclude against these opposites . Then follows his Argument , which is no other then a putting of the converted in the condition of the unconverted , or the unconverted in the capacity of the converted ▪ or to prove it converts , because it seals . 3. If this Sacrament be the most powerful and effectual Ordinance of all others , to humble , regenerate , convert , and beget true grace : it will follow that we ought ( at least may ) give the Sacrament not onely to the most ignorant and scandalous within the Church , but to Turks , Pagans , Jews , and to excommunicated persons , as I said before . 4. He challengeth his Antagonists for crying up and magnifying this Sacrament above the Word preached , and by way of opposition tells them that he hath in some former Tractates proved Gods presence and Spirit to be as much , as really present in other Ordinances as in this . Vindic. pag. 37 yet now I see no man who doth so much as himself , magnifie the Sacrament above the Word . 5. Whereas he brings this proof for his Major Proposition : because the manifestation , revelation , and proximity of God and Christ to the soul , is that which doth most of all humble and convert it . If this hold true in the generality as he propounds it , then the Spirits of just men made perfect and glorified , are converted by the revelation and proximity of God and of Christ , whereof they have unconceaveably more then the Saints on earth . But neither in this world doth the manifestation and revelation of God and of Christ , prove conversion and regeneration to be in fieri at that instant when God so manifesteth and revealeth himself , which is the thing he had to prove . I give instance in divers of those Scriptures cited by himself : Gods revealing of himself to Iob , chap. 38. and 42. to Isaiah , chap. 6. Christs manifesting of his power to Peter , Luke 5. was after , not at their conversion , so that Psal. 148. 14. But heteregeneous impertinent quotations of Scripture are usual with him : I am sorry I have cause to say it . Some other Scriptures which here he citeth may be expounded of Gods proximity to us , and ours to God in Conversion , Isa. 55. 6. Zeph. 3. 2. Eph. 2. 17. Iam. 4. 7. But that this kind of proximity which doth convert , is in the Sacrament , he hath supposed , but not proved . His fifth Argument is taken from the converting power of the Word : that which makes conversion by the Word is the particular application of Christ and the promises . Now the Sacrament doth most particularly and effectually apply Christ and the promises unto every Communicants eyes , ears , heart , and soul , far livelier then the Word preached . Answ. 1. This is a meer fallacy , à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter : and easily discovered . The Sacrament applyeth Christ , but to whom ? not to the unconverted and unbeleevers ( for that were to give a seal without a charter ) but to those that are supposed to be converted and beleevers . He had this to prove , That the Sacrament doth apply Christs death , passion , and merits to unconverted persons , and to unbeleevers , yea to their heart and soul. 2. That the Sacrament doth apply the death , passion , and merits of Christ to the Communicants ears , and that far livelier than the word preached , is to me a riddle which I think will trouble Mr. Prynn himself to expound . 3. A great controversie there hath been about the orall or corporal manducation of the body of Christ in the Sacrament . But Mr. Prynn out-runneth here all Ubiquitaries in the World , for he hath said no lesse then that every Communicant eateth spiritually and by faith the body of Christ , even unconverted persons , for he saith , that this Sacrament doth most particularly , fully , lively , and sensibly apply the promises , yea the death , passion , and merits of Christ unto EVERY Communicants eyes , ears , HEART and SOUL . Which is plainly universal grace to all who ever received this Sacrament ( and so to Iudas , according to his principles ) and to all who ever shall receive it . 4. Whereas he would confirm this which he saith , by his Antagonists Confession ; I do not think he can give any conscientious account of that word . Who said it , or where ? He must needs hold universal grace , hold it who will. 5. Here lies the strength of his Argument : The Word converts by applying Christ , therefore the Sacrament , which doth more lively apply Christ to every Communicant , must be a converting Ordinance . Which necessarily implyeth , that all who receive the Sacrament are converted . Yea if application inferre conversion , as the effect of the Application , the Saints and Beleevers themselves must be again constituted in the first Article of Conversion , and transition from the estate of nature and unregeneration . 6. The Application of Christ in the Word unto Conversion , is a thing of another nature than the Sacramental application of Christ , and therefore like effects ought not to be ascribed unto these Ordinances : For the Application of Christ made in the Word preached to the unconverted to convert them , is per influxum Physicum , by a most efficacious life-giving influence , as when Elisha applyed himself to the Shunnamites dead child , or like that Ezek. 16. 6. Iohn 5. 25. and 11. 43. But this manner of influence or causality is denied to the Sacrament by many of the Schoolmen and Papists themselves . So much of his fifth Argument which I thought to answer in two words , if the many absurdities in it had given me leave . His sixth Argument is this , All grant that God doth as effectually convert by the eye as by the ear . All grant . I deny it . and I verily beleeve he can produce very few Authors ( if any ) for it . He ought not to speak so great words without good warrants , which here I am sure he hath not . Well : but he will prove the thing it self . First he tells us of the book of Nature , and of the Creatures , by which we are instructed &c. But either he means that the very book of Nature can and doth effectually and savingly convert to Faith in Christ and to true sanctification , or not . If the affirmative , then the Heathens who lived and died in Paganisme had sufficient means and helps to conversion and faith in Christ : ( for those Pagans had the book of the Creatures to instruct them , as is expressed in some Scriptures cited by himself ) and so there may be salvation and the means thereof without the Church . If this be not his meaning , but that the book of Nature instructeth us concerning many things of God , yet doth not teach us to know Christ and all things necessary to salvation , far lesse doth effectually and savingly convert : then he hath said nothing to that point which he had to prove . 2. He saith that all the Sacrifices of the old Law , and Circumcision , and the Passeover did teach Gods people who participated of them , or were present at them , by the eye , and were converting Ordinances , as all do and must acknowledge . Answ. Here is another tinckling Cymbal . Do all acknowledge that the Sacraments of the Old Testament were converting Ordinances ? There can be no rational account given hereof . Certainly our Writers before cited , and diverse others who denie the Sacraments of the New Testament to be converting Ordinances , never meant to admit that the Sacraments of the old Testament were converting Ordinances . 2. How Circumcision did teach by the eye those who did participate of that Ordinance , and so Infants , is another riddle . 3. If Sacrifices under the Law had been converting Ordinances , yet that cannot be a just parallel to Sacraments , except seeking to make the Lords Supper a converting Ordinance we convert it self into a Sacrifice for sin , as Papists do . But neither doth he offer the least colour of reason to prove that all the external Sacrifices of the old Law were converting Ordinances , which here he affirmeth . The Apostle speaketh otherwise of the Legal Sacrifices , which he saith could not make him that did the service perfect , as pertaining to the Conscience : Heb. 99. and therefore calls all those rites carnal Ordinances , vers . 10. for though they were spiritual in respect of their signification and typifying of Christ , and sealing the Covenant of grace to the faithful in the Old Testament , yet they were not spiritual in regard of their giving of grace or working conversion or purging the Conscience , for they had no such operation nor effect . Fourthly , Mr. Prynn confirms his present Argument by the miracles of the Prophets , Christ and the Apostles , which ( saith he ) converted thousands without preaching , did convert and regenerate men by the eye without the ear . For proof whereof he cites abundance of Texts of Scripture which do not prove what he saith , nay some of them prove the contrary . Some of the Scriptures cited , do not prove conversion and regeneration by miracles , but either confirmation as Iohn 2. 11. after the miracle , it is added , and his Disciples beleeved on him . Or some preparatory initial work before regeneration , as that Iohn 3. 2. Mr. Prynn will hardly prove that Nicodemus was already regenerated at that instant , when he knew not what regeneration was : Or that those Iohn 2. 23. who beleeved on Christ when they saw his miracles at the feast , had any more then a temporary faith , it being said of them , that Iesus did not commit himself unto them , because he knew all men . Act. 2. 12. Luke 5. 25. 26. tell us of some who at the sight of miracles were stricken with fear and amazement , and gave glory to God , which proves not that miracles did convert , but convince . The like I say of 1 Kings 18. 38. 39. Other Texts cited by him make expresse mention of the Word as a mean of the conversion which was wrought , as Iohn 4. 50. the man beleeved the Word that Jesus had spoken , and this was before the miracle . Iohn 7. 31. many beleeved , but they heard Christ preach vers . 14. So Iohn 11. 45. those Jewes who beleeved on Christ after they had seen the miracle , did also hear that which Christ said , yea their beleeving is mentioned as an effect of their hearing , vers . 41. 42. So Act. 6. 8. Stephen did indeed great miracles , but the multiplying of the number of the Disciples , is referred to the Word , vers . 7. Act. 8. 6. it is expressely said , And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake , hearing and seeing the miracles which he did . Quâ fide hath Mr. Prynn cited this very Text to prove that men were converted by miracles without the Word , by the eye without the ear . Some other Scriptures by him quoted prove onely a popular confluence and the multitudes following of Christ. Having seen his miracles as Iohn 6. 2. and 11. 47. 48. Matth. 15. 30. 31. For the people were inclined to hearken to doctrine by miracles , which moveth natural men to flock together to see strange things saith Mr. Hussey . Plea for Christian Magistracy , pag. 30. which he is pleased to clear by peoples flocking to a Mountebank . Other Texts which he citeth , speak of miracles , but not a syllable of conversion or regeneration wrought by miracles , as Act. 15. 12. Act. 19. 11. 12. Among the rest of the Texts he citeth Iohn 6. 26. Ye seek me , not because ye saw the miracles , but because ye did eat of the loaves and were filled . And hence forsooth he will prove that miracles did convert and regenerate men . I had not touched these particulars , were it not that I desire Mr. Prynn himself in the fear of God may be convinced of his making too bold with the Scripture in citing and applying it very far amisse : and that for the future his Reader may be wary , and not take from him upon trust a heap of Scriptural quotations , such as often he bringeth . In the fourth place , he tells us , That the things we see with our eyes do more affect , and beget deeper impressions in our hearts , then the things we hear . He means ( I think ) do more effectually convert , for so he makes the Application , that the very beholding of Christs Person , passion , without the Word , were the most effectual means of working contrition , conversion , &c. Well : What is his proof ? He citeth Christs words to his Disciples , Blessed are your eyes for they see : ( without adding the rest , and your ears , for they hear ) and Simeons words , Mine eyes have seen thy salvation , as if forsooth either Simeon or the Apostles had been converted and regenerated by the seeing of Christs person . He cites also Luk. 23. 46 , 47 , 48. as if all who ( beholding Christs passion and death ) smote upon their breasts , had been by that sight converted and regenerated . That the things we behold with our eyes , if they be great or strange things work deep impressions , there can be no doubt of it . But that the hearing of great things may not work as deep impressions , or that seeing without hearing doth convert and regenerate , hath been strongly affirmed by Mr. Prynn , but not yet proved . I proceed to his seventh Argument which is this . The most melting soul-changing meditation is the serious contemplation of Christs death and Passion . No meditation comparable to this , to regenerate and convert a carnal heart . And is not this effectually represented to our eyes , hearts , in this very Sacrament in a more powerful prevailing manner then in the Word alone . Answ. That which he had to subsume and prove is , that this Sacrament worketh in a unregenerate carnal heart such soul changing meditations of the death and passion of Christ , as it never had before ( the soul having never before been regenerate ) Which being the point to be proved , why did he not prove it , if he could ? No doubt the Sacrament is a most powerful mean to beget in the hearts of beleevers and regenerate persons most humbling and melting meditations concerning the death of Christ. But that it begetteth any soul changing or regenerating meditations in those in whom the Word hath never yet begun the work of regeneration and conversion ; I do as much disagree in this , as I agree in the other . The eighth Argument which he brings is from comparing the Sacrament with afflictions . Our own corporal external afflictions are many times without the Word the means of our repentance and conversion unto God , &c. Then much more the Sacrament , wherein the afflictions of Christ himself are so visibly set forth before our eyes . Answ. 1. It is a very bad consequence , for the strength resolves into this principle , an unregenerate carnal man will be more affected and moved with the representation of Christs afflictions , than with the feeling of his own corporal afflictions . 2. Affliction doth not convert without the Word either going before or accompanying it ( unlesse we say that Pagans or Turks may be converted savingly by affliction before ever they hear the Word . ) Psal. 94. 12. Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest and teachest him out of thy Law. Job . 36. 9. 10. 11. And if they be bound in fetters , and holden in cords of affliction . Then he sheweth them their work and their transgression that they have exceeded . He openeth also their ear to Discipline , and commandeth that they return from iniquity . Behold conversion by afflictions , but not without the Word . While Mr. Prynn goeth about to prove that afflictions convert without the Word , the first Text he citeth is Psal. 119. 67. 71. where expresse mention is made of the Word . 3 As for Manasseh his conversion 2 Chron. 33. 11. 12. it was wrought by the means of affliction , setting home upon his Conscience that Word of God mentioned in the verse imediatly preceding , which saith and the Lord spake to Manasseh and to his people , but they would not hearken . Let him shew the like instance of the conversion by the Sacrament of such as would not hearken to the Word , and I shall yeeld the cause . The Word is expresse , that affliction is one special powerful mean of conversion , but it no where saith any such thing of the Sacrament . 4. It was also incumbent to him to prove that afflictions do convert without the Word , not onely at such times and in such places as do sequester a person from the liberty of hearing the Word preached , but also when and where the Word is freely enjoyed . Otherwise how far is he from concluding by Analogy the point he had to prove ? which is , that an unregenerate person living under the Ministery of the Gospel , and being an ordinary hearer , never converted by the Word , may neverthelesse ( according to the dispensation of the grace of God revealed in Scripture ) be converted by the Sacrament received ? His ninth Argument is this . That Ordinance whose unworthy participation is a means of our spiritual obduration , must by the rule of contraries when worthily received , be the instrument of our mortification , conversion , salvation . But the unworthy receiving of the Sacrament is a means &c. Answ. 1. This Argument doth necessarily suppose , that an unconverted , unmortified , unworthy person , while such , may yet worthily receive ( and so by that means be converted ) the contrary whereof I have demonstrated in my tenth Argument . 2. If the Sacrament be not worthily received , without repentance , faith , and self-examination ( for which cause men are dehorted to come , except they repent &c. ) then there is perfect non-sence in the Argument , for to say that the Sacrament when worthily received is the instrument of conversion , is as much as this ; The Sacrament is an instrument of conversion to those who are already converted . 3. That rule of Contraries is extremely mis-applyed . The rule is Oppositorum , quatenus talia , opposita sunt attributa , Contraries have contrary attributes . g The comparison must be made secundum differentias quibus dissident , Otherwise that old fallacy were a good Argument . A single life is good , therefore Marriage is evil ; Virginity is pure , therefore Marriage is impure : Whereas Marriage and single life are not opposed in the point of good and evil , purity and impurity , but in the point of immunity from worldly cares and troubles . So it is a bad consequence ( at least against us ) unworthy receiving of the Sacrament is an instrument of obduration , Ergo Worthy receiving of it is a mean of conversion . For we hold that worthy receiving and unworthy receiving are not opposed in point of conversion , but in point of sealing : the worthy receiving seals remission and salvation : the unworthy receiving seals judgement . But Mr. Prynn still takes for granted what he had to prove ; viz. That this particular is one of those differentiae quibus dissident ista Opposita . Come on to his tenth Argument . It s taken from the ends for which this Sacrament was ordained . 1. The keeping in memory Christs death . 2. The ratification and sealing of all the promises and Covenant of grace unto the receivers souls . 2. To be a pledge and symbole of that most neer and effectual communion which Christians have with Christ , and that spiritual union which they enjoy with him . 4. To feed the communicants souls in assured hope of eternal life . 5. To be a pledge of their resurrection . 6. To seal unto them the assurance of everlasting life . 7. To binde them as it were by an oath of fidelity to Christ , Whereupon he asketh how it is possible that this Sacrament should not both in Gods intention and Christs ordination , be a converting as well as a sealing Ordinance , since that which doth seal all these particulars to mens souls , &c. must needs more powerfully perswade , pierce , melt , relent , convert an obdurate heart and unregenerate sinner then the Word it self ? Answ. 1. His Argument may be strongly retorted against himself , divers of these ends of the Sacrament being such as are incompetent and unapplicable to obdurate and unregenerate sinners : How did he imagine that even to such as these , the Sacrament doth ratifie and seal to their souls all the promises and Covenant of grace , they not having yet closed with Christ in the Covenant ? Or how will he make it to appear , that this Sacrament is a pledge of a most neer union and communion with Christ , even to those who are yet far from any union with Christ ? Or how shall they be fed in hope and sealed in assurance of everlasting life , who are yet under the curse of the Law and state of condemnation ? Surely Master Prynne granting here that the Sacrament is ordained of Christ to seal , and that it doth seal all these particulars to mens souls , doth thereby yeeld the whole cause . For that which doth seal all these particulars to mens souls , most certainly doth not convert , but presuppose conversion . 2. If this Sacrament be by Gods intention a converting Ordinance , and Gods intention being by him distinguished from Christs ordination , whether doth it not necessarily follow both from this and from his first Argument ( unto which this gives more light ) that God did in the secret counsel of his Will intend and decree the Conversion of the flintiest heart and obdurest spirit , as he speaketh ; and that either this effect is wrought by the Sacrament in the flintiest heart and obduratest spirit ( which I believe he dare not say ) or that Gods decree and intention is frustrate ? 3. And if the Sacrament must needs more powerfully perswade , pierce , melt , relent , convert an obdurate heart and unregenerate sinner then the Word it self ; how then can he either seclude Pagans , or dehort impenitent unworthy persons from the Sacrament ? His eleventh Argument is the grossest and palpablest petitio principii of any that ever I met with , and to be offered to none except such as cannot distinguish between that which is affirmed , and that which is proved . First he tells us what true conversion is , and then asks if any thing be so prevalent to effect this as the Sacrament . This therefore I passe . His twelfth and last Argument is an appealing to the experience of Christians . But a part of his appeal is of no use ; that is , Whether this Sacrament doth not strengthen against corruptions and tentations , which doth not touch this present Controversie . It is as little to the purpose which he saith of conversion by preparations to the Sacrament , which may be by the Word , Prayer , &c. But that many thousands of converted Christians will experimentally affirm , that the receiving of the Sacrament was the first effectual means of their conversion , yea , that they had not been converted had they been debarred from it for their former scandalous sins , I do as confidently deny it as he affirmeth it : and if any who hath been a scandalous liver , whose heart was never yet turned , humbled , broken , changed by the Word , nor by any other mean of grace , should affirm that his very receiving of the Sacrament did effectually convert him , I durst not herein give credit to him . For to the Law and to the Testimony ; If they speak not according to this word , it is because there is no light in them . And whereas he concludes , For shame therefore disclaim this absurd irreligious paradox , for which there is not the least shadow of Scripture or solid reason : I shall wish him for shame to disclaim this and many such like expressions more bold and arrogant , then either prudent or conscientious . And the intelligent Reader who considereth my twenty Arguments for that which he calls so absurd , and my Answers to all his twelve Arguments , will easily judge where the shame and irreligiousnesse will lie . If at his door , let him look to it . Alba ligustra cadunt , vaccin●…a nigra leguntur . All that he addeth pag. 45 , 46 , 47 , being at best rhetorical , not rational , and a superstructure upon that foundation , that the Lords Supper is a Converting Ordinance ; it needs no battering , but falls of it self , the foundation being taken away . And as we ought not nor cannot without sin suspend scandalous sinners from the Sacrament , if it be a Converting Ordinance ( upon which supposition also both the Advice of the Assembly of Divines , and the Ordinance of Parliament concerning Suspension from the Sacrament , were most sinful and unlawful ) So if it be not a converting but a sealing Ordinance ( which I hope is now luce clarius ) there needs no other Argument for the suspension of scandalous sinners living in grosse reigning sins , but this , That the end and use for which this Sacrament was instituted , is not conversion which these need , but sealing and confirmation , of which they are incapable , they being such as ought to be kept back à signis gratiae divinae , as Divines speak . For how shall these that in words professe God , but in their works deny him , be sealed with the seals or marked with the marks of the favour and grace of God ? Most certainly this Question concerning the nature , end , and use of the Sacrament , casts the ballance of the whole Controversie concerning Suspension : which I have therefore been the larger upon . And whereas Master Prynne concludeth , pag. 47 , with a large citation out of Lucas Osiander Enchir. contra Anabapt . cap. 6. quaest . 3. for that he shall have this return . First , all that Osiander there saith , is brought to prove this point against the Anabaptists , quod et si unum aut alterum videamus in Ecclesia aliqua flagitiosum , propterea neque secessionem faciendam , neque à sacris congressibus , aut Coena Domini Christiano abstinendum . That although in some Church we see some one or other flagitious person , yet a Christian is not therefore either to make a separation , or to abstain from the sacred Assemblies or the Lords Supper . Which is not the Question now agitated between us . Secondly , after that passage cited against us , Master Prynne might have taken notice of another passage which maketh against himself . Where the Anabaptists did object to the Lutheran Churches , their admitting of scandalous persons to the Sacrament , Osiander denieth it : for ( saith he ) although we cannot help hypocrites their coming to the Lords Table ; nos tamen scienter neminem admittimus , nisi peccatores poenitentes , &c. Yet we admit none willingly , except penitent sinners who confesse their sins and sorrow for them . Thirdly , Osiander , ibid. Quaest. 2. holdeth Excommunication to be an Ordinance of God , and groundeth it upon Matth. 18. 15 , 16 , 17. Therefore Master Prynne must seek another Patron then Osiander . And now the nature of the Ordinance being cleared , there needeth no more to confute Master Prynne in that which he makes the eighth thing in controversie between him and his Antagonists , namely , Whether Ministers may not as well refuse to preach the Word to such unexcommunicated , grosse , impenitent , scandalous Christians , whom they would suspend from the Sacrament . Certainly it is not lawful but commanded as a duty to preach both to the converted and to the unconverted , without excluding the most scandalous impenitent sinners whosoever . But the Lords Supper being ( according to its institution and the minde of Jesus Christ ) a sealing or confirming Ordinance onely , it cannot without a violation of the Institution be given to known impenitent scandalous persons . Other particulars in his Debate concerning this eighth point of difference , which do require any Answer , I will take occasion to speak unto them in the next Chapter . CHAP. XV. Whether the admission of scandalous and notorious sinners to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , be a pollution and profanation of that holy Ordinance ; And in what respects it may be so called ? MAster Hussey in his Plea , pag. 2. doth very much mistake his mark , when in opposition to what I had said concerning the polluting of the Sacrament by the admission of the scandalous , he tells me out of Beza , that the Sacraments remain effectual to the good , though evil men come to them : and thereupon concludeth , that the Sacrament is holy and pure to the believer , notwithstanding the unpreparednesse of the wicked : Which is not the thing in question : much lesse is it the Question , Whether there be any such thing as a pollution of the Sacrament : for this Master Coleman hath yeelded ( though before he quarrelled that phrase of polluting the Ordinances ) giving instance in the using of Cheese instead of Bread , Male dicis , pag. 12. But the true state of the Controversie may be laid open in these few distinctions . First , as Scotus in lib. 4. Sent. Dist. 3. Quaest. 2. distinguisheth two sorts of things which may be called necessary to a Sacrament ; necessarium simpliciter , and necessarium aliqualiter : the former he calls that without which the Sacrament is no Sacrament : the later , that without which they that give the Sacrament cannot avoid sin , or the want whereof maketh the Ministery guilty ; so do I distinguish two sorts of pollution of the Sacrament , one which makes the Sacrament no Sacrament , but a common or unhallowed thing to those that do receive it , as ( for instance ) if the Sacrament were given by those that are no Ministers , o● to those that are no Church , or without the blessing and breaking of bread : Another which makes the ministration of the Sacrament hic & nunc , and with such circumstances to be sinful , and those that do so administer it to be guilty : and so whatsoever is done in the ministration of the Sacrament contrary to the revealed will of God , is a pollution of that Ordinance . The present Question is of the later , not of the former . Secondly , some wicked men by their receiving the Sacrament do onely draw judgement upon themselves , and these are close hypocrites : Others by their receiving of the Sacrament do involve not themselves onely , but others also into sin and Gods displeasure ; and these are scandalous notorious sinners . Thirdly , the sin of those who pollute the Sacrament by using it contrary to the nature and institution of it , may be the sin of others , and those others accessary to such pollution of the Sacrament two ways : either it is the sin of the whole Church , none excepted , so that none that communicateth then and there can be free of the sin , as where the bread is elevated and worshipped , all the communicants are eo ipso that they joyn in the Sacrament then and there , partakers of the sin of bread-worship , though perhaps some of them do not joyn in the act of worshipping the bread , but have done what they could to prevent or hinder it . Or it is the sin onely of so many as have not done what they ought and might have done for observing the Institution , rule and example of Jesus Christ. And of this sort is the sin of communicating with scandalous and profane men . If private Christians have interposed , by admonitions given to the offender , and by petitions put up to those that have authority and power for restraining the scandalous from the Lords Table , they have discharged their consciences , and may without sin communicate though some scandalous members be admitted : for such persons sin in taking the Sacrament , but worthy communicants are not partakers of their sin . But if Church-officers who have a charge and authority from Jesus Christ , to receive none whom they know to be unworthy , profane and scandalous , shall not withstanding admit such persons , they are thereby partakers of their sin , so that their receiving , or rather polluting of the Sacrament , is imputed not to themselves onely , but to the Church-officers who had authority to keep them back , and did it not . Fourthly , the suffering of a mixture of known wicked persons among the godly in the Church , doth sometime defile us with sin , sometime not . It doth not defile us , when we use all lawful and possible remedies against it , and namely , when we exercise the Discipline of Excommunication , and other Church-censures , saith Augustine , lib. contra Donatistas , post collationem , cap. 4. Tom. 7. But it doth defile us , and we do incur sin and wrath , when the means of redressing such known evils are neglected , indisciplinata patientia ( it is Augustines word ) so to bear with wicked men , as not to execute discipline against them , that certainly makes us partakers of their sin . I mean in a reformed and well constituted Church , where the thing is feasible . But where it cannot be done , because of persecution , or because of the invincible opposition either of authority , or of a prevalent profane multitude , in that case we have onely this comfort left us , Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousnesse ; and , in magnis voluisse sat est . Fifthly , neither doth this Question concerning the pollution or profanation , or abuse of the Sacrament , concern those peccata quotidianae incursionis , such sins of infirmity as all the godly , or at least the generallay of the godly , are subject unto and guilty of , as long as they are in the world ( for then the Sacrament should be polluted to all ; for , Who can say , I have made my heart clean , I am pure from my sins ? ) but onely grosse and scandalous sins , such as make the Name of God and the profession of Religion to be evil spoken of and reproached , those roots of bitternesse which spring up , whereby many are like to be defiled ; those that are guilty of such sins , and have given no evidence of true Repentance , if they be received to the Sacrament , it is a profaning of the Ordinance . Now that the admission of scandalous and notorious sinners to the Sacrament in a reformed and constituted Church , is a profanation or pollution of that Ordinance , may be thus proved . First , Paraeus upon the 82 Question in the Heidelberg Catechism , where it is affirmed , that by the admission of scandalous sinners to the Sacrament , the Covenant of God is profaned , giveth this reason for it , Because as they who having no Faith nor Repentance , if they take the s●als of the Covenant , do thereby profane the Covenant ; so they who consent to known wicked and scandalous persons their taking of the seals , or to their coming to the Sacrament , do by such consenting make themselves guilty of profaning the Covenant of God ( for the doer and the consenter fall under the same breach of law ) yea , so far do they sin by such consenting , as that they do thereby acknowledge the children of the devil to be the children of God , and the enemies of God to be in Covenant and to have fellowship with God. He distinguisheth these two things , who ought to come to the Sacrament , and who ought to be admitted . None ought to come , except those who truely believe and repent : None ought to be admitted , except such as are supposed to be believers and penitent , there being nothing known to the contrary . If any impenitent sinner take the Sacrament , he profanes the Covenant of God. If the Church admit to the Sacrament any known to live in wickednesse without repentance , the Church profaneth the Covenant of God. Secondly , that Ordinance which is not a converting but a sealing Ordinance , which is not appointed for the conversion of sinners but for the communion of Saints , is certainly profaned and abused contrary to the nature , institution , and proper end thereof , if those who are manifestly ungodly , profane , impenitent , and unconverted , be admitted to the participation thereof . But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not a converting but a sealing Ordinance , &c. which I have proved by infallible demonstrations . Ergo. Thirdly , That use of the Sacrament which is repugnant and contradictory to the Word truly and faithfully preached in the name of Christ , is a prophaning of the Sacrament . But to give the Sacrament to those who are known to live in grosse sins without repentance , is an use of the Sacrament which is repugnant and contradictory to the Word truly and faithfully preached in the Name of Christ. Ergo. I suppose no man will denie , that if we truly and faithfully preach the Word , we may and ought to pronounce and declare such as live in sin impenitent and unconverted , to be under Gods wrath and displeasure as long as they continue in that estate . Be not deceived saith the Apostle , neither fornicators , nor idolaters , nor adulterers , nor effeminate , nor abusers of themselves with mankind , nor theeves , nor covetous , nor drunkards , nor revilers , nor extortioners , shall inherit the Kingdom of God. 1 Cor. 6. 9. 10. See the like Ephes. 5. 5 , 6 , 7. Whence it is , that doctrinally we warn the ignorant and scandalous , and all such as live in known sins without repentance , that they presume not to come and prophane that holy Table . Of which Ministers are appointed by the Directory to give warning . How then can we by giving the Sacrament to such as these , give the lye to the Word ? h For what other thing shall we do ; if those whom the Word pronounceth to have no part in the Kingdom of God nor of Christ , shall be admitted as well as the Godly to eat and drink at the Lords Table , while known to continue in the committing of their damnable sins , or while it is known that they have not repented of the uncleannesse , and fernication , and lasciviousnesse which they have committed ? 2 Cor. 12. 21. What is this but to absolve in the Sacrament those who are condemned in the Word , and to open the Kingdom of Heaven in the Sacrament unto those on whom the Word shutteth it ? Fourthly , That use of the Sacrament which strengtheneth the hands of the wicked , so that he turneth not from his wickednesse , is an abuse and profanation of the Sacrament . But the giving of the Sacrament to any known prophane impenitent person is such an use of the Sacrament as strengtheneth the hands of the wicked , so that he turneth not from his wickednesse . Ergo. I appeal to the experience of all godly and faithful ministers , whether they have not found it a great deal more difficult to convince or convert such prophane men as have been usually admitted to the Sacrament , then to convince or convert such as have been kept back from the Sacrament ? No marvel that such prophane ones as have usually received the seals of the Covenant of grace , and joyned in the highest act of Church-communion , live in a good opinion of their souls estate , and trust in lying words , Have we not eaten and drunken at thy Table ? The Sacrament , The Sacrament , as of old The Temple , The Temple . Mr. Prynn thinks , that the Minister hath fully discharged his duty and conscience , if he give warning to unworthy Communicants of the danger they incurre by their unworthy approaches to the Lords Table . Vindic. pag. 28 , 29. But he may be pleased to receive an answer from himself , pag. 43. The things we see with our eyes do more affect and beget deeper impressions in our hearts , then the things we hear . The Word preached is Verbum audibile , the Sacrament is Verbum visibile . How shall prophane ones be perswaded by their ears to beleeve that whereof they see the contrary with their eyes ? they will give more credit in Mr. Prynns own opinion to the visible Word , then to the audible Word . Fifthly , If it were a prophanation of the Sacrament of Baptisme to baptize a Catechumene , a Jew , or a Pagan professing a resolution to turn Christian , he being manifestly under the power of abominable reigning sins , and being still a prophane and wicked liver , although he were able to give a sound and Orthodox Confession of Faith : then it is also a prophanation of the Lords Supper to admit unto it abominable and prophane livers . But it were a prophanation of the Sacrament of Baptisme &c. Augustine lib. de fide & operibus cap. 18. tells us , that the Church did not admit whores and such other scandalous persons to Baptisme . Et nisi egerint ab his mortuis operibus poenitentiam , accedere ad Baptismum non sinuntur . And except they repent ( saith he ) from these dead works , they are not suffered to come unto Baptisme . Divers Arguments he brings in that Book for this thing , as 1. That Peter saith ( Act. 2. 38. ) Repent and be baptized . 2. That the Apostle Heb. 6. 1 , 2. joyneth repentance from dead works with Baptisme . 3. That Iohn preached the Baptisme of Repentance . 4. That fornicators , adulterers , theeves , &c. shall not inherit the Kingdom of God : therefore such as are known to live in these sins without repentance ought not to be baptized . 5. He argueth from 2 Cor. 6. 14 , 15 , 16. &c. Now I offer this Quaere . Shall an abominable wicked life , murther , adultery , swearing , cursing , lying , or the like keep back a man from so much as entering into the visible Church by the door of Baptism , and shall not the like abominations keep back a man from Fellowship with the Saints at the Lords Table ? Is there more evidenc● of Saintship required in those who come to be baptized , then in those who come to the Lords Table ? If there be , let our Opposites speak it out , and open up the riddle . If there be not , then how can their Tenent avoid the prophanation of the Lords Table ? Sixthly , That Ordinance which is prophaned by admitting Infants and Idiots who can make no good use of it , is much more prophaned by admitting abominable and known prophane persons who make a very bad use of it . But the Lords Supper is prophaned by admitting Infants and Idiots who can make no good use of it . Ergo. Mr. Prynn pag. 29. yeeldeth that children , fools , and distracted men , are by a natural disability made uncapable of receiving the Lords Supper , because unable to examine themselves , to which ( saith he ) not withstanding they have been admitted in some Churches . In what Churches fools and distracted men have been admitted to the Lords Supper , I should have willingly learned from him , for as yet I know not any such thing Children I know were somtime admitted by the Ancients who did afterward discover their own great error in that particular . However , He yeelds as I take it , children and fools to be uncapable of the Lords Supper . And why ? because unable to examine themselves , in regard of natural disability . But where there is no disability in the natural faculties , may not a sinful disability which a man hath drawn upon himself ( as ignorance , drunkennesse , corrupt and atheistical opinions , presumptuous excusing or defending of sin ) make him unable to examine himself ? Shall men that are unable to examine themselves be admitted to the Sacrament , because not disabled by any natural disability ? Sure this was far from Pauls thoughts when he delivered that rule concerning examining our selves before the Sacrament . Whoever they be who are unable to examine themselves , whether naturally or sinfully , much more they who manif●stly appear unwilling to examine themselves , if they be admitted and allowed to come to the Lords Supper , it is a high and ha●nous prophanation of that Ordinance . Wherefore to prosecute my Argument , Why do we exclude Infants and Idiots ? because 〈◊〉 Apostle saith , Let a man examine himself , and so let him 〈◊〉 Bread , and drink of that Cup : but Infants and Idiots 〈◊〉 examine themselves . Now a positive prophanation of the Sacrament , is worse then a negative prophanation of it : abuti is more then non bene uti . We know that prophane impenitent sinners will not onely make no good use of the Sacrament , nor examine themselves aright , but will abuse it to the worst use that can be , even to slatter themselves in their wickednesse , and to harden themselves in sin and impenitency . Mr. Prynn will tell us , we know not but God may convert such at the Sacrament . But there is not the least hint in all the Word of God of any impenitent sinner converted by the Sacrament . And beside , it is as easie for God to give an Idiot or distracted man his right wits , and to illuminate him with a self-examining knowledge and light in the very instant of approaching to or sitting down at the Table ; And if a possibility , a per adventure it may be , and who knoweth but it may convert and do them good ; be a warrantable ground for Ministers to administer the Sacrament to prophane and scandalous persons as Mr. Prynn holds , pag. 47. why shall not the same ground be as warrantable for admitting Idiots . Seventhly , If the Temple was polluted and prophaned by the comming of prophane and abominable persons into it , then is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper also profaned by such persons their participation of it . But the Temple was polluted and prophaned &c. The reason of the consequence in the Proposition is , because as the Temple had a Sacramental signification of Christ , and a certain Ceremonial holinesse , as well as the Lords Table , so it will be dur●…s sermo ( and I presume none of our Opposites will adventure to say it ) that such prophanesse as did of old keep back men from the Temple , cannot now exclude them from the Sacrament . The Assumption is largely proved in the first Book , both from Scripture and from Jewish writers . That one place Ezek . 23. 38. 39. ( beside divers others ) cleareth it . Moreover this they have done unto me : they have defiled my Sanctuary in the same day , and have prophaned my Sabbaths ▪ For when they had slain their children to their Idols , then they came the same day into my Sanctuary to prophane it . You see the Temple was prophaned and polluted , not onely by those that were ceremonially unclean , but by Idolaters and Murtherers when any such presumed to come into the Temple . Eighthly , I desire the scope of that place Hag. 2. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14. may be considered . The Lord is teaching his people , that a thing legally holy , could not by the touch thereof sanctifie that which by the Law was common and not holy , yet he which was legally unclean , did defile whatsoever he touched , yea though it were legally holy . So is this people , and so is this Nation before me , saith the Lord , and so is every work of their hands , and that which they offer there is unclean . The legal holinesse and uncleannesse were significant ceremonies to teach the people the hecessity of moral holinesse , and the evil or danger of moral uncleannesse : Hence God himself argues from the significant ceremony to the morality , so as the place holds forth by necessary plain consequence these three propositions . 1. The ceremonial uncleannesse did signifie the moral uncleannesse , and the effect of the former did signifie the effect of the latter . 2. Unholy persons are not sanctified by their approaching to , or joyning in holy Ordinances : but he that is filthy will be filthy still , and he that is unjust ▪ unjust still . If God do not give them his Spirit to sanctifie them , the Ordinances cannot do it . 3. Yet unholy persons , while such , do defile holy Ordinances , and that by moral as well as by ceremonial uncleannesse : therefore the people themselves , and every work of their hands being evil , the Lord for that cause reckoneth their sacrifices to be unclean . Did prophane persons defile the Sacrifices of old , and do they not defile our Sacraments ? Nay , I should think this , much more then that , there being more of the communion of Saints in our Sacraments , then in their Sacrifices . The ninth Argument which alone may conclude the point , shall be taken from Matth. 7. 6. Give not that which is holy unto the dogs , neither cast ye your pearls before swine . If the Sacrament be a holy thing , and if prophane scandalous impenitent sinners be dogs and swyne , then to give the Sacrament to such , is to prophane and pollute the Sacrament , and indeed no better but worse then to give pearls to swine . Mr. Prynns ▪ reply vindic . pag. 39. doth not take off this Argument . For without any proof , he restricteth to certain particulars that which the Text saith generally both of the things and of the persons . First for the things , He saith the Text is principally intended of not preaching the Gospel to such , so that we must seclude them from the Word as well as from the Sacrament . But I ask , is it meant onely of the Word ? He hath not said so , nor will ( I think ) say so . Erastus himself pag. 207. confesseth it is meant also of the Sacraments . The Text saith not , the holy thing , and the pearl , but holy things , pearls . It must therefore be understood respective . Some are so vile , and so abominably prodigiously prophane , blasphe●ous , mockers , persecuters , that I ought not to preach to such , but to turn away from them to others , according to Christs direction , and the Apostles example . Others are such as I may preach unto , yet ought not to pray or give thanks with them , nor to admonish them ( and much lesse give them the Sacrament ) Others I may admonish and pray with them , yet ought not to give them the Sacrament . And all these by reason of that rule , Give not that which is holy to dogs , &c. So that we are not bound up by this Text , either to seclude men from the Word , or otherwise from no holy : thing . Next , The Argument holds à fortiori , from the Word to the Sacrament . For saith i Pareus . If Christ said this of the Word , which is common to the converted and to the unconverted , how much more must it be said of the Sacraments , which are instituted onely for such as are converted . As for that sort of persons which the Text speaks of , Master Prynne ( following Erastus , lib. 3. cap. 3. ) saith that these doggs and swine are onely such Infidels and Heathens , who refused to embrace the Gospel , and harbour the Preachers of it : Or pers●cutors of the Gospel , and of the Ministers of it : Or open Apostates from the Christian faith which they once embraced . And he citeth divers Scriptures , which he saith do expresly determine it . But he observes not that the most which those Scriptures prove , is , that such men as he speaks of are doggs and swine , which is not the Question : That which he had to prove , is , that the doggs and swine which Christ speaks of , are onely Infidels , or persecutors , or apostates from the Christian faith . This ONELY he hath boldly averred , but shall never prove it . It is one thing to prove that Infidels , persecutors and apostates are doggs and swine , another thing to prove that there are no other doggs and swine . That which the Apostle Peter saith , of such as having escaped the pollutions of the world , and known the way of righteousnesse , do afterward turn aside from the holy Commandment , namely , that such do with the dog ●eturn to the vomit , and with the sow that was washed to the wallowing in the mire , 2 Pet. 2. 18 , 20 , 22. doth belong to all scandalous and backsliding Christians , whether they be such in doctrine or in life onely ; and is generally so applied by Divines . Erastus himself , pag. 207. understandeth that vomit and puddle , 2. Pet. 2. to be the sinful pleasures of the world , relabuntur ( saith he , glossing upon the place ) ad voluptates moresque hujus seculi . And Solomon saith the same thing generally of an ungodly wicked person , Prov. 26. 11. As a dog returneth to his vomit , so a fool returneth to his folly . Nor is it to be forgotten that the Apostle using the words of Epimenides , calls the Cretians evil beasts , Tit. 1. 12. because they professed to know God , but in their works ▪ denied him , being impure , disobedient , and unto every good work reprobate . Wherefore the precept Matth. 7. 6. is rightly applied by Isidorus Pelusiota , lib. 1. Epist. 143. to the denying of the Sacrament to all persons of an unclean conversation , ▪ as well as to Jews and Hereticks . So Chrysostome doth apply this Text to the excluding of known unworthy men from the Sacrament ; and this he doth , Homil. 1. de compunctione cordis , as I remember . And Hom. 83 in Matth. he hath these words to the same purpose . If thou hadst a clear fountain committed to thy keeping , to be kept clean by thee , wouldst thou let filthy swine come and puddle in it ? how much more the fountain of the Blood of Christ ? Where by filthy swine he understandeth all unworthy and scandalous persons whatsoever , as is evident by that which follows , and by that also which went before , where he gives instance of the scandals in life and conversation . And upon the Text it self , Matth. 7. he applieth it to a suspension of all such as were not acknowledged for visible Saints , not onely from receiving but from beholding the Sacrament . Hence was that in the ancient Church , Sancta Sanctis ; at which word all others were dismissed before the receiving of the Sacrament , who were not accounted visible Saints . Hence came the distinction of duplex missa , that is , duplex dimissio . Missa catechumenorum , & missa fid●…lium . When the Catechumens were dismissed , then also together with them were dismissed all scandalous persons who had scandalized the Church , except such Penitents as ( having now in a great measure satisfied the Church-discipline , and manifested their repentance publikely , according to certain usual degrees of publike declaration of repentance ) were permitted to behold the giving and receiving of the Sacrament , after the Catechumens were gone ( which yet themselves were not admitted to partake of , till they had gone thorow all the degrees , and finished the whole course of publikely manifesting Repentance ; onely in the danger of death they were permitted to receive the Sacrament , before that course was finished , if they should desire it . ) Then last of all , after the Sacrament , was the missa fidelium , the dismission of the faithful . Augustine , lib. de fide & operibus , cap. 6. so applieth the prohibition of giving holy things to doggs , that he thence argueth against the administration of Baptism to persons living in adultery ( although such as have embraced the Orthodox Doctrine ) which is also the scope of that whole Book . Now if persons of a profane Conversation , though orthodox in their Judgement and Profession , be such doggs as ought to be refused Baptism when they desire it , surely they are also such doggs as ought to be refused the Lords Supper . Moreover , the onely seeming advantage which Master Prynne catcheth , is from the word doggs ( which yet is no advantage ; for that is applied generally to wicked and profane persons in the Scriptures above cited ▪ and so Revel . 22. 15. ) but he shall do well to observe the word swine too : for ( as Grotius upon the place , following Chrysostome , doth make the distinction ) the doggs are such as bark and contradict ; the swine such as do not bark and contradict , but by an impure life ( saith he ) declare how little esteem they have of the holy things . Which difference ( as he conceives ) the Text it self doth hint : for it mentioneth not onely the turning again to rent , which is the dogges part , but the trampling of Pearls under feet , which is the swines part . Finally , this Argument from Matth. 7. hath gained so much upon Erastus himself , lib. 3. cap. 3. that he restricteth himself to the admission of such onely to the Sacrament as acknowledge and confesse their fault , promise amendment , and desire to use the Sacraments rightly with the rest , so far as we are able to judge . Which concession will go far . CHAP. XVI . An Argument of Erastus ( drawn from the Baptism of John ) ●gainst the excluding of scandalous sinners from the Lords Supper , ●xamined . THe strongest Arguments of Erastus drawn from the Old Testament , I have before discussed . Another Argument of his which deserveth an Answer ( for I take him in his greatest strength ) is this . Iohn Baptist ( saith he ) did baptize all , none excepted , who came to him to be baptized ; yea , even the Pharisees and Sadduces , whom yet he called a generation of Vipers . Answer . 1. They that were baptized by Iohn , did confesse their sins , and professe Repentance ; and l Erastus himself brings in Iohn Baptist speaking to those Pharisees on this manner . I do not see into your hearts , but he that cometh after me , hath his fan in his hand , and will separate the chaff from the wheat : so that though ye may deceive me with a feigned repentance , yet you cannot deceive him . Hereupon Erastus concludeth , that the Ministers of the Gospel ought not to deny the Sacraments to those that professe repentance , and ought not take upon them to judge of mens hearts whether they do truely and unfeignedly repent . m Now all this maketh for the suspension from the Sacrament of all such as do not confesse their sins , nor professe repentance for the same : The drunkard that will not confesse his drunkennesse , the unclean person that will not confesse his uncleannesse , the Sabbath-breaker that will not confesse his breach of the Sabbath , are by this ground to be excluded ; and so of other scandalous persons . We are not to judge of mens hearts ▪ , but we are to judge of the external sign●s of repentance , whether sin be confessed , and repentance declared by some hopeful signes or not . 2. Neither doth his argument fully reach admission to the Lords Table , where some further and more exact proof must be had of ones fitnesse and qualification for the communion of Saints . Even those that are of age when they are baptized are but Incipientes : when they come to the Lords Table they are proficientes : There is some more required in proficients , then in Novices and beginners : as there is more required to fit one for strong meat th●n for milk . 3. It is also a question whether those Pharisees that came to the baptisme of Iohn were indeed baptized of him n Tostatus tells us some think they were not baptized , and they prove it from Luk. 7. 29 30. And all the People that heard him and the Publicans justifie●… God , being baptized with the Baptisme of John. But the Pharisees and Lawyers rejected the Counsel of God against thems●…lves , being not baptized of him . There is a controversie whether th●se be the words of our Saviour Christ , or of the Evangelist Luke . But there can be no controversie of this , that the Pharisees and Lawye●s were not baptized of Iohn , but the people and the pu●licans were . Which may very well be extended to those Pharisees of whom we read Matth. 3. 7. For the holy Ghost having said of the people , that they were baptized of Iohn in Iordan , confessing their sins , he saith no such thing of the Pharisees , but onely that they came to his Baptisme ( whether to see the fashion and the new Ceremony , or whether with an intention to be baptized ) after which we read no more but that Iohn gave them a most sharp admonition , and called them a generation of vipers , and told them that they should not glory in being Abrahams children : Whereupon it may seem they went away displeased and unbaptized . But when I compare the Evangelists together , that which appears to me to be meant Matth. 3. 7. concerning many of the Pharisees comming to the Baptisme of Iohn , is that they were sent from Ierusalem with a message to ask Iohn , Who art thou ? For they who were sent upon that message were of the Pharisees , Iohn 1. 24. and they were sent to Bethabara beyond Iordan where Iohn was baptizing , Iohn 1. 28. and a part of Iohns answer to them was , I baptize with water , but there standeth one among you whom ye know not : &c. Iohn 1. 26. In both passages Iohn speaks of him that was to come after him , whom he preferreth before himself . In both , he professeth that he could do no more but baptize with Water or Ministerially . In both , he saith he was not worthy to unloose the latchet of Christs shoe . So that many of the circumstances do agree with the story , Matth. 3. and the other circumstances are not inconsistent . In the other Evangelists it is , I baptize you with water : But that proves not that the Pharisees who were sent to Iohn , were baptized , for Luke doth plainly apply those words to the people Luke 3. 15. 16. 18. But when the Pharisees asked Iohn , Why baptizest thou &c. the answer to them was not I baptize you with Water , but I baptize with Water . o The Centurists think that the Pharisees who were sent from Ierusalem to Iohn to ask him Who art thou ? John 1. were not sent from any good esteem which was had of Iohn , but from malice , and an intent to quarrel with him . This they prove because Iohn saith to them O Generation of Vipers , who hath forewarned you to flee from the wrath to come ? Which insinuateth a coincidency of these two stories related Matth. 3. and Iohn 1. p Salmeron thinks that message was sent to Iohn out of honour and respect to him , and he endeavours to confute the Centurists , but among all his answers he doth not averre ( which had been his best reply , if he had thought it probable ) that those words O Generation of Vipers , were not spoken to the Pharisees that were sent from Ierusalem to Iohn . Yea q Salmeron himself doth in another place observe divers coincidencies between the story of that which passed between Iohn , and the Pharisees that came to his baptism ; and the story of that which passed between Iohn and the Pharisees that were sent to him from Ierusalem . 4. Erastus argueth from the admission of a generation of Vipers to Baptisme , to prove the lawfulnesse of admitting a generation of Vipers to the Lords Supper . But I argue contrariwise . Such persons as desire to be received into the Church by Baptisme , if they be prophane and scandal us persons , ought not to be baptized but refused baptisme , as Augustine proveth in his Book De Fide & Operibus . Therefore prophane and scandalous persons ought much lesse be admitted unto the Lords Supper . Of which Argument more before . I conclude with the r Centurists . Iohn did not cast pearls before swine : he did not admit rashly any that would to Baptisme , but such as confessed their sins , that is , onely such as were tryed and did repent , but the contumacious and the defenders of their impieties or crimes he did reject . CHAP. XVII . Antiquity for the suspension of all scandalous persons from the Sacrament , even such as were admitted to other publik Ordinances . MR. Prynn in his first Quaere would have us beleeve that in the primitive times scandalous sinners were ever excommunicated and wholy cast out of the Church , and sequestred from all other Ordinances , as well as from the Sacrament ; And since ( saith he ) in the primitive times ( as is evident by Tertullians Apologie cap. 39. De poenitentia lib. and others ) scandalous persons were ever excommunicated and wholy cast out of the Church ( extra gregem dati ) not barely sequestred from the Sacrament . But for further clearing of the ancient discipline concerning suspension , I have thought good here to take notice of the particulars following . First , That great Antiquary s Albaspinaeus , proving that Church communion or fellowship was anciently larger than partaking of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper ; he proves it by this Argument , because many of those who had scandalously fallen , were admitted to communion with the Church in prayer and all other Ordinances , the Eucharist onely excepted . Next , It is well known to the searchers of Antiquity , that there were four degrees of publike declaration of repentance , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : Which the Latines call fl●…us , auditio , substratio , consistentia : After all which followed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the participation of the Sacrament , which they were at last admitted unto , and is therefore mentioned by some as the fifth degree , though ( to speak properly ) it was not poenal , nor any degree of censure as the other four were . First , The penitent was kept weeping at the Church door , beseeching those that went in to pray for him : thereafter he was admitted to hear the Word afar off among the Catechumens : In the third place there was a preparatory reconciliation or reception into the Church , with prayer and imposition of hands , which being done , the man was in some sort admitted into Christian fellowship , and acknowledged for a brother , yet after the Word and Prayer . he went forth with the Catechumens before the Sacrament . But there was a fourth degree after all this ; he might stay in the Church , and see and hear in the celebration of the Sacrament , after the Catechumens and the three first sort of penitents were dismissed , yet still he was suspended from partaking of the Sacrament , for a certain time after he was brought to this fourth and last step : t So cautious were those Ancients in admitting of men to the Sacrament , till they perceived lasting , continuing , clear , and real evidences of true repentance . Three of the degrees above-mentioned are found in the Canons of the Councel of Ancyra . and of the Councel of Nice , namely the three last . The first which did not admit a man so much as into the Church to the hearing of the Word , as it was afterwards added , so it is not so justisicable as the other three . But here is the point I desire may be well observed , that of old in the fourth and fifth , yea in the third Century , u men were admitted not only to the hearing of the Word , but to prayer with the Church , who yet were not admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . x The Councel of Ancyra held about the year 308. Can. 16. appointeth some scandalous persons to shew publike signes of repentance for 15. years , before they be admitted to fellowship with the Church in prayer : and for 5. years thereafter to be kept off from the Sacrament . y The Councel of Nice doth plainly intimate the same thing , That some were admitted to Prayer , but not to the Sacrament . The different steps of the reception of those that had fallon may be likewise proved from z the Councel of Arles . I. Mich. Dilherrus Lib. 2. Electorum Cap. 1. After the mention of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth observe that as Antiquity did goe too far , so the later times have fallen too short . And this is a chief cause why Christian Religion doth hear very ill among many , because Ecclesiastical Discipline hath waxed cold * So much by the way . This of the several degrees of Penitents . I shall yet further insist upon , because this alone will prove that we have Antiquity for us . a Gregorius Thaumaturgus in his Canonical Epistle concerning those who in the time of the incursion of the Barbarians , had eaten things sacrificed to Idols , and had committed other scandalous sins ; doth plainly distinguish these five things thus . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The weeping is without the gate of the Church , where the sinner must stand , beseeching the faithfull that come in to pray for him . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The hearing is within the Gate in the Porch , where the sinner may come no nearer then the Catechumens , and thence go out again . &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The substration is that standing within the Church door , he go forth with the Catechumens . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The consistency is that he stand still together with the faithful , and do not go forth with the Catechumens . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , In the last place the participation of the holy Mysteries or Sacrament . He that will read the Epistles of Basilius magnus to Amphilochius will find these five degrees more particularly distinguished , applyed to several cases , and bounded by distinct intervalls of time . It were too long to transcribe all : b I shall onely give you some most plain passages to prove that there was in Basils time a suspension from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper alone , or that a man was suspended from the Sacrament , when he was not suspended from hearing and praying among the faithful . For further confirmation of the same thing , read Conc. Ancyr . Can. 4. Can. 5. Can. 6. Can. 7. Can. 8. Can. 9. Co●…t . Nican . Can. 11. Can. 12. Can. 13. Can. 14. I do not mean to approve the too great severity of this ancient Discipline , nor do I hold it agreeable to the Will of Christ , that such as give good signes of true Repentance , and do humbly confesse and really forsake their sin , having also made publike declaration of their Repentance to the Church for removing the publike scandal , ought notwithstanding of all this , to be suspended from the Sacrament when they desire to receiv● it . For the Word doth not warrant the suspending of scandalous sinners from the Sacrament , until such a set determinate time be expired , but onely till they give sufficient evidence of Repentance . But setting aside this and such like circumstances , the thing it self , the suspending of a scandalous person from the Sacrament , who is not nor ought not to be suspended from assembling , hearing , and praying with the Church , is the Will of Christ , as I have proved , and was the commendable practice of the Ancient Church , which is the point I now prove against Mr. Prynne . The Councel of Ancyra Can. 5. 16. doth also appoint the time of suspension from the Sacrament to be made shorter or longer , according as the signes of true Repentance should sooner or later , more or lesse appear in the offender . So doth the Councel of Nice Can. 12. And the Councel of Carthage held under Honorius and Theodosius the lesser . Can. 46. If any man shall obj●ct against me and say ; Peradventure the Penitents before spoken of , were onely such as did manifest their repentance after excommunication , and these several degrees afore-mentioned , were but the degrees of their reception or admission into the Church , so that all this shall not prove the suspension from the Sacrament of persons not excommunicated . I answer , he that will think so , will be found in a great mistake : and my Argument from Antiquity will yet stand good , for suspending from the Sacrament persons not excommunicated . For first , neither do the Canons of the Councels of Ancyra , and Nice , nor of Gregorius Thaumaturgus and Basilius magnus , nor yet the Commentators Zonaras and Balsamon , apply these five degrees above mentioned to persons who had been excommunicated , but they speak generally of persons who had committed scandalous sins , and afterward were converted and appeared penitent : for instance , those who did backslide and fall in time of persecution , as multitudes did under Licinius and other persecuters , when they converted and professed repentance , they were received again into the Church by certain steps and degrees , some more , some fewer , according to the quality of their offence ; No man that hath searched antiquity will say that all who did fall in time of persecution were excommunicated for that offence , nor yet that they were all put to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to the weeping at the Church door , but yet all of them , even those whose offence was least ( as the Libellatici who had taken Writs of protection from the Enemy or Persecuter ) were put to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or consistentia , which was a suspension or abstention from the Sacrament , even when the person was admitted to hear and pray with the Church . Wherefore the degrees afore-mentioned were degrees of receiving into the Communion of the Church scandalous persons professing repentance . Secondly , The 61. Canon of Basil to Amphilochius speaketh thus . He that hath stolen , if repenting of his own accord he accuse himself , shall be for a year restrained from the Communion of the holy Mysteries onely . But if he be convict , the space of two yeers shall be divided to him unto substration and consistency : then let him be thought worthy of the Communion . Will any man imagine that a penitent theef accusing himself , was excommunicated ? It is more then manifest that here was a suspension of an offender not excommunicated . For assoon as the offence was known by the offenders accusing of himself , he was suspended from the Sacrament alone for a year , and then admitted to the Sacrament . Yea he that was convict of theft , was not by this Canon excommunicated , nor yet put either to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but onely to the third and fourth degrees . Thirdly , By the 13th . Canon of Basil to Amphilochius , he that had killed another though in a lawful war , was ( for the greater reverence to the Sacrament ) suspended for three yeers ; and by the 55. Canon , he also that killed a Robber was suspended from the Sacrament . I do not justifie these Canons , but only I cite them to prove , that by the Ancient Discipline Persons not excommunicated were suspended from the Sacrament : for no man can imagine that a Souldier shedding blood in a lawful war , or a man killing a Robber on the high way was therefor excommunicated . Fourthly , The eighth general Councel called Synodus prima & secunds , held about the yeer 869. in the thirteenth Canon , speaking of certain turbulent Schismaticks ( not being of the Clergie as the Canon speaketh , but Laicks or Monks ) appointeth this censure , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Let them be totally or altogether separated from the Church . Which intimateth that there was a lesser degree of being separated or suspended from communion with the Church . Zonaras upon that Canon doth so understand it , and distinguisheth a double 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c For it is also a separation ( saith he ) to be excluded or restrained from the receiving of the Divine Mysteries onely . But there is another separation , which is to be cast out of the Church , which the Canon calleth a total separation , as being the heavier or greater Censure . Which is the very same distinction with that which was afterward expressed under the terms of major & minor , the greater and lesser excommunication . For which also I shall give you another proof as clear and older too , taken from the 61. Canon of the sixth general Councel , where it is decreed that those who resort to Magicians , Charmers , Fortune-tellers , and such others who professe curious and unlawful arts , shall fall under the Canon of six years separation . But as for those who per●…ist in such things , and do not turn away nor flee from these pernicious and Heathenish studies , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , We appoint them to be altogether cast out of the Church . Mark the gradation in the Canon , and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And hear Balsamon his explanation upon it . Note from this present Canon ( saith he ) that he who sinneth and converteth , obtaineth favour , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and is punished in a lesser measure ; But he who persevereth in the evil , and is not willingly reduced to that which is better , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is greatly punished . For here also he that commeth and confesseth the sin , is to be punished with six yeers segregation : but he that persevereth in the evil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is to be east out or expelled from the Church : adde what he had said before , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and shall not thenceforth converse with the Orthodox . Which intimateth as plainly as any thing can be , that there was an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a segregation or sequestration used in the ancient Church , which was a lesser censure than casting out of the Church and from the company of Church-members . Zonaras seemeth to understand the Canon otherwise . ( for he saith nothing of the offenders converting and confessing his sin before the six years segregation ; but that for the offence it self ( committed , not confessed ) a man was segregated six years , and afterward if he did not repent but continue in the offence , that then he was to be cut off , and cast out of the Church : wherein as I take it , he did explain the mind of the Councel , better then Balsamon . However in that point which I now prove , they are most harmonious , namely concerning a greater and lesser excommunication . Wherefore also the Fathers of this Synod ( saith Zonaras ) did ordain those who do such a thing , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to be segregated for six years , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but if they continue therein , to be also cut off from the Church . Fifthly , To suppose that there were no Poenitentes in the Ancient Church but such as were Excommunicati , were a greater error then that it should need any Confutation . Yea there were some poenitents who did of their own accord confesse their offences which could not have been otherwise known but by such voluntary confession : and those saith Zonaras Annot. in Conc. Carth. Can. 46. were most properly called Poenitents , I hope no man will imagine that such were excommunicated . But so it was that all the Poenitents ( even such as had neither been excommunicated nor yet forensically convict by proof of scandal , but did voluntarily confesse and convert ) were for some season kept back from the Sacrament , as is manifest by that instance given out of Basilius magnus , of theft voluntarily confessed , for which notwithstanding the offender was for a year suspended from the Sacrament . Sixthly , It is manifest that there were several degrees of censure upon Bishops and Presbyters . They were sometime suspended from giving the Sacrament , and as it were sequestred from the exercise of their Ministery , which suspension or sequestration is sometimes called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to be separate , sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to be sequestred from communion , to wit in the exercise of the Ministery , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not to minister There was a higher censure then this , which was deposition or degradation , called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the honour or degree of Presbytership to be taken away ; Basils phrase is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they are deposed from their degree . These two censures , a suspension or sequestration from the Ministery , and a total deposition from the Ministery are distinguished by the eighteenth Canon of the Councel of Ancyra , and the sixteenth Canon of the Councel of Nic●… , compared with the fifteenth Canon of those called the Apostles , ( which certainly were not the Apostles , yet are ancient ) See also Zonaras in Can. 11. Apost . Likewise both him and Balsamon in Conc. Nic. Can. 16. Again there was somthing beyond all this , which was excommunication or to be wholy cast out of the Church , a censure sometime not inflicted when the former were : For a Minister might be suspended , yea deposed from his Ministery , yet permitted to communicate or receive the Sacrament among the people , as is plainly determined Can. 15. Apost . and Can. 32 ▪ Basilii ad Amphil. If there were such degrees of censure appointed for Bishops and Presbyters , how shall we suppose that there was no lesse censure for Church-members then excommunication ? For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to a Minister , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to one of the people , were paralel . Whence it is that you will often find in the ancient Canons , and namely of the sixth general Councel , He that committeth such a fault , if he be one of the laity , let him be segregated , if one of the Clergie , let him be deposed . As therefore a further censure after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might fall upon a minister ; so a further censure after that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might be inflicted upon one of the people . I have now made it to appear that the Practice , Discipline , and Canons of the ancient Church , are for us in this present controversie about suspension from the Sacrament . In the next place I will produce particular Testimonies of Fathers . I shall take them as they fall to my hand without any curious order . I begin with Isidorus P●…lusiota who flourished about the year 431. or ( as others say ) 440. In the first Book of his Epistles , Epist. 143 , to Thalel●…us he disswadeth from giving the Sacrament to three sort of persons . 1. To Jews . 2. To Hereticks , of both which he saith that they had once received the doctrine of truth , but did after return with the dog to the vomit . 3. To persons of a prophane and swinish conversation . d Unto all or any of these he holds it unlawful to give the Sacrament , and that because of a divine prohibition , Give not holy things to dogs , neither cast ye pearls before swine . And he concludeth thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . For saith he the giving of the mysteries to such persons , is unto those who contemptuously give them , a breach out of which they are not awaked . Dionysius Areopagita ( whom I do not take to be that Areopagite converted by Paul ▪ Act. 17. But certainly he is an Ancient Writer as is manifest by the Scholia upon him , written by Maximus who flourished about the year 657. He is also cited by the sixth general Councel , and by some ancient writers ) de Ecclesiastica Hierarchia cap. 3. part . 3. Sect. 6. 7. having spoken of the exclusion of the Catechumens , Energumens , and Penitents from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , though all these heard the word read and preached , he addeth that unclean , carnal , prophane persons in whom Sathan reigneth by sin , are worse , and ought much lesse to be admitted to the Sacrament , then those who were bodily possessed of the divel . These therefore ( unclean and profane persons ) as the first , and much rather then those ( Energumens ) let them be suspended or sequestrate by the judicial or discriminating voice of the Minister : for it is not permitted unto them to partake of any other holy thing , but the Ministery of the Word , by which they may be converted . For if this heavenly celebration of the divine Mysteries , refuse or repel , even penitents themselves ( although they were sometime partakers thereof ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not admitting him who is not altogether most holy , &c. ( for that most pure voice doth also restrain those who cannot be joyned and knit together with such as do worthily communicate in those divine mysteries ) surely the multitude of those in whom vile lusts and passions do reigne , is much more prophane , and hath much lesse to do with the fight and communion of these holy things . The old Scholiast Maximus upon that place saith thus , Note that he reckoneth together with the Energumens those that continue without repentance in the allurements of bodily pleasures , as fornicators , lovers and frequenters of unlawful plaies , such as the divine Apostle having mentioned , doth subjoyn with such a one no not to eat . Where Mr. Prynn may also note by the way how anciently 1 Cor. 5. 11. was applied , so as might furnish an argument against the admission of scandalous persons to the Sacrament . Let us also hear the Paraphrast Pachimeres upon the place . For if the celebration of the divine mysteries refuse even those who are in the very course of repentance , not admitting such , because they are not throughly or wholy purified and sanctified , as it were proclaiming it self invisible and incommunicable unto all who are not worthy to communicate , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , much more they who are yet impenitent are to be restrained from it . If you please to search further , take but one passage of e Cyprian , which speaks plainly to me for suspension from the Sacrament , for he sharply reproves the receiving to the Sacrament such persons as were not excommunicate ( for if they had , most certainly he had mentioned that as the most aggravating circumstance ) but having committed smaller offences , had not made out the course of publike manifesting their repentance according to the discipline of the Church . If we shall require more , we have a most plain Testimony of Iustine Martyr , telling us that at that time they admitted none to the Lords Supper except those onely who had these three qualifications . 1. They must receive and beleeve the Doctrine preached and professed in the Church . 2. They must be washed or baptized unto the remission of sins and regeneration . 3. They must be such as live according to the rule of Christ. His words are these . This food is with us called the Eucharist , which is lawful for none other to partake of , but to him that beleeveth those things to be true which are taught by us , and is washed in the laver for remission of sins and for Regeneration , and liveth so as Christ hath delivered or commanded . g Walasridus Strabo ( a diligent searcher of the Ancients which were before him , and of the old Ecclesiastical Rites ) who died about the year 849. mentioneth this suspension from the Sacrament , as an Ecclesiastical censure received from the Ancient Fathers : and he gives three reasons for it , to prove that it is for the sinners own good to be thus suspended . 1. That he may not involve himself in greater guiltinesse . 2. That he may not be chastened of the Lord with sicknesse and such other afflictions as the profanation of that Sacrament brought upon the Corinthians . 3. That being terrified and humbled , he may think the more earnestly of repenting and recovering himself . It was truly said that this discipline was received from the Ancient Fathers , which as it appeareth from what hath been already said , so the Testimony of Chrysostome must not be forgotten . He in his tenth Homily upon Matthew expounding those words Matth. 3. 6. And were baptized of him in Jordan , confessing their sins : noteth that the time of confession belongeth to two sorts of persons : to the prophane not yet initiated ; and to the baptized : to the one that upon their repentance they might get leave to partake in the holy Mysteries : to the other that being washed in Baptism from their filthinesse they might come with a clean Conscience to the Lords Table . His meaning is , That neither the unbaptized nor scandalous livers though they were baptized , might be admitted to the Lords Table , whereupon he concludeth : Let us therefore abstain from this l●…ud and dissolute life . h The Latin Translation rendring the sence rather then the words , speaketh more plainly . But there is a most full and plain passage of Chrysostome in his 83. Homily upon Matthew , neer the end thereof , where he saith of the Lords Supper , Let no cruel one , no unmerciful one , none any way impure , come unto it . I speak these things both to you that do receive , and also to you that do administer . Even to you this is necessary to be told , that with great care and heedfulnes you distribute these gifts . There doth no small punishment abide you , if you permit any whose wickednesse you know , to partake of this Table : for his blood shall be required at your hands . If therefore any Captain , if the Consul , if he himself that wears the Crown come unworthily , restrain him , which to do thou hast more authority then he hath . And after . But if you say how shall I know this man and that man ? I do not speak of those that are unknown , but of those that are known . I tel you a horrible thing , it is not so ill to have among you those that are bodily possessed of the Divel , as these sinners which I speak of , &c. i Let us therefore put back not onely such as are possessed , but ALL WITHOUT DISTINCTION WHOM WE SEE TO COME UNWORTHILY , &c. But if thou thy self darest not put him back , bring the matter to me , I will permit no such thing to be done . I will sooner give up my life , than I will give the body of the Lord unworthily ; and sooner suffer my blood to be poured out , than give the Lords blood unworthily , and contrary to my duty ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) to such as are horribly scandalous . He concludeth that this discipline is medicinal and profitable in the Church , and that the keeping back of the scandalous , is the way to make many worthy Communicants . Can any man imagine that all such unworthy persons were excommunicate and wholy cast out of the Church ? Do not all Chrysostomes Arguments militate against the admission of any scandalous and unworthy person known to be such ? saith he not , that all simply or without distinction whom they perceived to come unworthily were to be put back ? If onely excommunicate persons were kept back from the Sacrament , what needed all this exhortation to those that did administer the Sacrament to be so careful , cautious , and heedful , whom they would admit ? And if none were to be excluded from the Sacrament but those that were branded with the publike infamy of excommunication , what needed this objection to be moved , how shall I know such ? Moreover , Both Cyprian and k Ambrose do most plainly and undeniably hold forth different degrees of Church censures , and l Cyprian is most full and clear concerning a suspension from the Sacrament of persons not excommunicated nor cast out of the Church . For answering a case of Conscience put to him concerning certain young women whose conversation and behaviour with men had been scandalous and vile , he resolveth that so many of them as did professe repentance , and forsake such scandalous conversing and companying together , if they were still Virgins , were to be again received to communicate with the Church ( namely in the Sacrament from which they had been kept back ) with premonition given to them , that if they should after relapse into the like offence , they should be cast out of the Church graviore censura with a heavier censure : but that if they were found to have lost their Virginity , they should make out the whole course of publike Declaration of repentance , and so not be so soon admitted to , but longer susspended from the Sacrament . Adde hereunto a passage in m Augustine plainly intimating that at that time , beside reprehension , degradation , and excommunication , there were other censures daily used in the Church according to the Apostles commandement , 1 Thess. 3. 14. 15. He is speaking of the mixture of good and bad in the Church , and that wicked men may be in some sort suffered in the Church , provided ( saith he ) that the discipline of Excommunication , and the other usual censures in the Church be not neglected , but duly executed where it is possible . But what were those other censures , if not the suspension of scandalous and prophane persons ( not excommunicated ) from the Sacraments : I appeal for further proof hereof to one passage more of Augustine de fide & operibus cap. 18. n Whores , Stage-players , and others whosoever they be that are Professors of publike filthinesse , except such bonds ( of Wickednesse ) be loosed and broken , are not permitted to come unto the Sacraments of Christ : which forsooth according to their judgment ( that is such as would have profane persons baptized as well as others ) should be all admitted , unlesse the holy Church should retain the ancient and vigorous custom , which commeth from the most clear truth , by which she hath it for certain , that they who do such things , shall not inherit the Kingdom of God. Whence it will certainly follow , that all who were excluded from the Lords Table were not excommunicated persons : For first , The Church did keep back such scandalous persons upon this ground , because those who are known to live without repentance in any of those sins , of which the Apostle saith that they who do such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God , are not fit to be admittrd unto the Sacrament ( for this were to give the Seals of salvation to those whom the Word pronounceth to be in a state of damnation . ) Secondly , Augustine is there confuting the opinion of some ( whom he calls Fratres qui aliter sapiunt , Brethren who otherwise understood themselves well ) whose Principles did admit to the Sacraments all uncleane and scandalous persons : which cannot be meant of excommunicated persons ; For there was never any such opinion maintained in the Church , that all excommunicated persons ought or may be received to the Sacrament . Lastly , Lest his meaning should be restricted to the Sacrament of Baptisme onely , ( of which principally and purposely he treateth in that Book ) he speaketh in the plural of the Sacraments of Christ. Observe also these passages of Gregory called the great , Epist. Lib. 2. Cap. 65. Sicut exigente culpâ , quis à Sacramento communionis dignè suspenditur , ita insontibus nullo modo talis debet irrogari vinaicta . Ibid. Cap. 66. Et si in vestra cognitione cujusquam ●…um facinorosi criminis reum esse patuerit , tunc ex nostra auctoritate non solum Dominici Corporis & Sanguinis communione privatu●… fit , verum●…tiam in Monasterium ubi poenitentiam agere debeat , retrudatur . And so much for Antiquity in this Question . CHAP. XVIII . A Discovery of the instability and loosenesse of Mr. Prynn his Principles , even to the contradicting of himself in twelve particulars . I Shall not need to insist upon his tenth point of difference Vindic. pag. 49. nor upon his four following Quaerees and Conclusion , in all which there is no new material point , but a repetition of divers particulars spoken to and debated else-where . As touching that hint of a new Argument pag. 56. Consider the Parabl●… of the mariage of the Kings son , where the King sent forth his servants to invite guests to the wedding Supper , who gathered together ALL they found , both BAD and good , that the wedding might be furnished with guests . Matth. 22. 1. to 11. I answer , 1. Some understand here by the bad vers . 10. those who had formerly ( before they were called and brought home by the Gospel ) been the worst and most vicious among the Heathens , so that the words both bad and good make not a distinction of two sorts of Christians or Church-members , but of two sorts of Heathens not yet called , some of them were good , some of them bad comparitively , that is , some of them much better then others , some of them much worse . So Grotius , and long before him Hierome and Theophylact upon the place . 2. Others ( as Bucerus , Tossanus , Cartwright , o Gomarus ) understand by the bad , close Hypocrites who appear good so far as the Ministers and Officers of the Church are able to judge of them . These by a Synecdoche of the Genus for the Species may be understood by the bad . And so the Text will not comprehend scandalous and known prophane persons . That Synecdoche generis , is often used in Scripture , is proved by Sal. Glassius Philolog . sacrae lib. 5. Tract . 1. Cap. 14. 3. I throw back an Argument from the same Parable against himself , for the King sheweth his servants that he will have unworthy persons kept back from the marriage feast , vers . 8. Then saith he to his servants , the Wedding is ready , but they which were bidden were not worthy , Luk. 14. 24. For I say unto unto you , that none of those men which were bidden shall tast of my Supper . The King makes it also known that he alloweth none to come in to this Mariage Feast , except such onely as have the Wedding garment ( or as the Syriak Wedding garments ) upon them . All which is inconsistent with Mr. Prynns principles concerning the admission of known scandalous unworthy persons to the Sacrament , as to a converting Ordinance . 4. And if all must be brought in or let in to the Lords Supper , both bad and good promiseuously and without distinction , then it should follow that the Ordinances of Parliament concerning the suspension of all sorts of scandalous persons from the Sacrament are contrary to the Will of Christ : And that Mr. Prynn himself in yeelding ●…ag . 50. and else-where , that scandalous impenitent obstinate persons ought to be not onely suspended but excommunicated , doth yeeld what his Argument concludes to be unlawful . And so I come to that which I have here proposed , viz. the instability and loosenesse of Mr. Prynns principles in this controversie . By comparing divers passages together , I find that he doth professe and pretend to yeeld the Question , which yet he doth not yeeld really and indeed . First , It is to be observed that he deserteth Erastus and that party in the point of Excommunication . For in the vindication of his four Questions pag. 2. he readily yeeldeth that grosse notorious scandalous obstinate sinners , who presumptuously persevere in their iniquities , after private and publike admonitions , without remorse of Conscience or AMENDMENT , may be justly excommunicated from the Church , the society of the faithful , and all publike Ordinances , after due proof and legal conviction of their scandalous lives : and that 1. Cor. 5. 13. warrants thus much . The Antidote animadverted by P. in the first page yeeldeth that excommunication is an Ordinance of God. And indeed 1 Cor. 5. 13. doth not onely warrant excommunication as lawful , but injoyn and command it as necessary ; for the Apostles words are praeceptive and peremptory : Therefore put away from among your selves that wicked person . The thing was not indifferent , but necessary and such as could not without sin be omitted . However Mr. Prynn his asserting from that place that it may be , is a deserting of the Erastian party . 2. In the 50. page of his vindication he professeth that his Antagonists do contend for that which he granteth them with advantage . They would have scandalous sinners suspended from the Sacrament . He will have them not onely suspended from the Sacrament , but excommunicated from all other publike Ordinances . 3. He confesseth ibid. that in some cases a person not excommunicated may be suspended from the Sacrament . But whatever his Concessions may seem to be , they are really as good as nothing . For 1. He will have none to be suspended from the Sacrament except such as are ripe for excommunication , and against whom the sentence of excommunication is ready to be pronounced as persons incorrigible . 2. He admitteth no suspension from the Sacrament till after several solemn previous publike admonitions , reprehensions , rebukes contemned or neglected . See both these pag. 50. Whence you see that with Mr. Prynns consent all the votes of Parliament concerning several causes of suspension from the Lords Table , shall be of no use to Presbyteries , until after a long processe of time , and after many previous publike admonitions , So that if one in the Congregation commit a notorious incest or murther a day or two , or a week before the celebration of the Sacrament , and the thing be undeniably certified and proved before the Eldership , yet the Eldership cannot suspend such an abominable scandalous sinner from the Sacrament , hac vice : but must first go through all those preparatory steps which are necessary and requisite before excommunication . Well : but after all those publike previous admonitions , shall the sentence of excommunication follow ? Nay , here also he will have Presbyteries to go through a very narrow lane : for in the same place he thus describeth the persons whom he would have to be excommunicated ; They are scandalous , obstinate , peremptory , incorrigible , notorious sinners , who desperately and professedly persevere in their grosse scandalous sins , &c. But I beseech you , what if they persevere in their grosse scandalous sins neither desperately nor professedly ? Must they not then be excommunicate ? Shall not the offender be cast out of the Church after clear proof of the offence , and several previous publike admonitions contemned or neglected ? Must we wait till the adulterer professe that he will persevere in his adultery ; and till the blasphemer professe that he will persevere in his blasphemy ? Nay further , What if the offender do neither 〈◊〉 nor actually persevere in his grosse scandalous sin ? Put case he that hath blasphemed once do not blaspheme the second time : and that he who grossely and scandalously prophaned the Lords day , did it but once , and hath not done it again since he was reproved . Must this hinder the sentence of excommunication , when that one grosse scandal is not confessed , nor any signe of repentance appearing in the offender ? Moreover whereas Mr. Prynn in his fourth Quare , and in several places of his Vindication seemeth to allow none to be admitted to the Lords Table except such as professe sincere repentance for sins past , and promise newnesse of life for time to come . If we expound his meaning by his own expressions in other places , that which he granteth bordereth upon nothing : for pag. 13. speaking of scandalous sinners their admission to the Sacrament , if they professe sincere repentance for their sins past , and reformation of their lives for time to come , he addeth , as all do at least in their general confessions before the Sacrament , if not in their private meditations , prayers , &c. and a little after he saith , that all who come to receive , do alwaies make a general and joynt confession of their sins before God and the Congregation &c. And then he addeth pag. 14. Yea I dare presume , there is no receiver so desperate , that dares professe when he comes to receive , he is not heartily sorry for his sins past , but resolves to persevere impenitently in them for the future , though afterward he relapse into them , as the best Saints do to their old infirmities &c. I know the best Saints have their sinful infirmities , but whether the BEST do relapse to their OLD infirmities may be a Question . And however he doth open a wide door for receiving to the Sacrament all scandalous sinners not excommunicated , if they do but tacitely joyn in the general Confession of sins made by the whole Church , or do not contradict those general Confessions , and professe impenitency and persevering in wickednesse , though in the mean time there be manifest real symptomes of impenitency , and no confession made of that particular sin which hath given publike scandal . Wherefore I say plainly with the Professors of Leyden , Synops. Pur. Theol. Disp. 48. Thes. 35. The administration of this censure of suspension from the Lords Table hath place in these two different cases , either when one that is called a Brother hath given some hainous scandal of life or Doctrine , who after admonition doth indeed by word of mouth professe repentance , but yet doth not sh●…w the fruits meet for repentance , that so the scandal might be taken away from the Church : or when he doth not so much as in words promise or professe repentance , &c. Martin Bucer hath a notable speech to this purpose de Regno Christi , lib. 1. Cap. 9. To hold it enough that one do professe by Word onely repentance of sins , and say that he is sorry for his sins , and that he will amend his life , the necessarie signes and works of Repentance not being joyned with such profession , It is the part of Antichrists priests , not of Christs . In the next place it is to be taken notice of , how palpably and grossely Mr. Prynn contradicteth himself in divers particulars : Which being observed , may peradventure make himself more attentive in writing , and others more attentive in reading such subitane lucubrations . The particulars are these which follow . 1. Vindicat , pag. 17. he saith , the Confession of sin which was made at the Trespasse offerings , was not to the Priest , Classis , or Congregation , but to God alone . 1. In the very same page he saith , None were kept off from making their atonement by a trespasse offering , if they did first confesse their sins to God , though perchance his confession was not cordiall , or such as the Priests approved , but external onely in shew . I beseech you how could it be at all judged of , whether it was external and onely in shew , if it was made to God alone ? Nay , if it was made to God alone , how could it be known whether he had confessed any sin at all ; and so whether he was to be admitted to the trespasse offering or not ? 2. Vindic. pag. 50. He freely granteth That ALL scandalous , obstinate , peremptory , incorrigible , notorious sinners , who desperately and professedly persevere in their grosse scandalous fins , to the dishonour of Christian Religion , the scandal of the Congregation , the ill example and infection of others , after several solemn previous publike admonitions , reprehensions , rebukes , contemned or neglected , and full conviction of their scandal and 2. Vindic. pag. 57. Certainly the speediest , BEST and ONLY WAY to suppresse ALL kind of sins , schismes , to reform and purge our Churches from ALL SCANDALOUS OFFENCES , will be for Ministers NOT to draw out the sword of Excommunication and suspension against them , which will do little good , but the sword of the Spirit , the powerful preaching of Gods Word , and the sword of the Civil Magistrate . impenitency , may and OUGHT TO BE EXCOMMUNICATED , suspended , &c. If this be the best and only way to suppresse sin , and to reform and purge the Churches , How is it that some scandalous sinners may and ought to be excommunicated ? 3. Vindic. pag. 50 Where the f●…ct is notorious , the p●…oofs 〈◊〉 , the sentence of excommunication ready to be pronounced against them as persons impenitently scandalous and in●…orrigible , ●…erchance the Presbyterie or ●…l ssis may order a suspension from the Sacrament , or any other Ordinances , before the sentence of excommunication solemnly denounced if they see just cause . 3. Yet all along he disputes against the su pending from the Sacrament of a person unexcommunicated , and not suspended from all other publike Ord nances and society of Gods people . And pag 50. arguing for the right of all visible members of the visible Church to the Sacrament , he saith that nothing but an actual excommunication can suspend them from this their rig●…t . 4. Vindic. pag. 17. He saith that a particular examination of the Conscience , and Repentance for sin , is no where required in Scripture of such who did eat the Passeover . And herein he distinguisheth the Trespasse-offerings , and the Passeover , that in bringing a trespasse offering men came to sue for pardon , and make atonement , and that therefore confession of sin was necessary . But in the Passeover 4. Ibid. pag. 24. He saith that the Passeover was the same in substance with the Eucharist under the Gospel , wherein Christ was spiritually represented and received , as well as in the Lords Supper . But how can this be , if repentance for sin was not necessary in the Passeover , and if it was onely a commemoration of a by ▪ p●st temporal mercy in sparing the first born of the Israelites ? there was r●… atonement &c. but ONELY a commemoration of Gods infinite mercy in passing over the Israelites first born when he sl●…w the Egyptians .   5. Vindic. pag. 18. He saith that immediatly before the institution of the Sacrament , Christ told his Disciples that one of them should betray him , and that Iudas was the last man that said Is it I ? immediately before the Institution . And pag. 27. he saith . That the other disciples did eat the Sacrament with Iudas , after Christ had particularly informed them and Iudas himself , that he should betray him . 5. Yet pag. 25. He reckoneth that very thing to have been after the Institution of the Sacrament : for to that Objection that Iudas went out before Supper ended , immediately after he received the sop , whereas Christ did not institute the Sacrament till after Supper : he makes this answer , that the dipping of the sop ( at which time Iudas said is it I ? ) was at the common Supper , which ( saith he ) succeded the Institution of the Sacrament , so that the Sacrament was instituted after the Paschal , not after the common Supper . And pag. 19. He argues that Iudas did receive the Sacrament upon this ground , that all this discourse and the giving of the sop to Judas was after Supper ended ; but Christ instituted and distributed the Sacrament ( at least the bread ) as he sate at meat , as they were eating , before Supper quite ended . 6. Vindic. pag. 42. Speaking of ungodly scandalous sinners , he plainly intimateth that the receiving of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is more likely to regenerate and change their hearts and lives then the Word preached . And in that same page , he holdeth that this Sacrament is certainly the most powerful and effectual Ordinance of all others to humble , regenerate , convert . The like see pag. 44 , 45. and pag. 52. Yea no doubt many debosht Persons have been really reclaimed , converted , even by their accesse and admission to the Sacrament . 6. Pag. 57. He ascribeth the power of godlinesse in many English Congregations to powerful preaching , and saith , that this sword of the Spirit , the powerful preaching of Gods Word , and the sword of the Civil Magistrate , are onely able to effect this work , to suppresse all kind of sinnes , schismes , to reform and purge the Churches . If this be the speediest , best , and onely way to suppresse all kind of sinnes , schismes , to reform and purge our Churches from all scandalous offences , as he there saith , and if the Word and the Magistrate are onely able to effect this work ; How is it that the Lords Supper doth change mens hearts and lives , and that more effectually then any other Ordinance ? Again pag. 37. he saith , he hath in other Treatises of his proved Gods presence and Spirit to be as much , as really present in other Ordinances , as in this of the Lords Supper . How then makes he this Sacrament to be the most powerful and effectual Ordinance of all others , to humble , regenerate , convert ? 7. Pag. 40. He makes the Sacrament to be a seal to the sences of unworthy persons , but not to their soules ; In this latter sence he saith it is a seal onely to worthy penitent beleeving receivers . 7. Yet Pag. 44 , 45. the strength of his tenth Argument lies in this , that the Sacrament sealeth unto the Communicants souls , yea to the flintiest heart , and obduratest spirit , the promises , an union with Christ , assurance of everlasting life , and therefore in regard of the sealing of all these particulars unto mens souls , must needs convert an obdurate unregenerate sinner . Which Argument were non-sence if it did not suppose the Sacrament to seal all these particulars even to the souls of unregenerate sinners . Mark but these words of his own ; since that which doth seal all these particulars to mens souls , and represent them to their saddest thoughts , must needs more powerfully perswade , pierce , mels , relent , convert an obdurate heart ▪ and unregenerate sinner , &c. 8. Vindic. Pag. 28. He admitteth that a Minister ought in duty and Conscience to give warning to unworthy persons of the danger of unworthy approaching to the Lords Table , and seriously dehort them from 8. Pag. 46. He tells us of an old error in forbidding drink to those who were inflamed with burning feavers , which Physitians of late have corrected by suffering such to drink freely . He desires that this old comming to it unless they repent , reform , and come prepared . error of P●isicians may not enter among Divines ; for as drink doth extinguish the unnatural heat which else would kill the diseased , so feaverish Christians burning in the flames of sins and lusts ought to be permitted freely to come to the Lords Table , because they need it most to quench their flames . Do these now repent , reform , and come prepared ? Yet here he makes it a sin to forbid them to come to the Lords Table . Though he applieth it against suspension : yet the ground he goeth upon makes it a soul murthering sin , so much as to dehort them from that which they need most to quench the flames of their lusts . 9. Vindic. Pag. 37. I answer , First ▪ That the Minister doth not administer the Sacrament to any known impenitent sinners under that notion , but onely as penitent sinners , truly repenting of their sins past . The meaning of which words cannot be that the Minister gives the Sacrament to known impenitent sinners , while known to be impenitent , and yet he gives the Sacrament to those known impenitent sinners , not as impenitent , 9. This as it casts down what himself hath built in point of the converting Ordinance ( for if the Sacrament be not administred to any known impenitent sinners , under that notion , but onely as penitent , then it doth not work but suppose repentance and conversion in the receivers , and so is not a converting Ordinance to any receiver : ) So also it is inconsistent with what himself addeth in the very same place . Secondly but as penitent : which were a mighty strong Bull. But the meaning bust needs be , that the Minister gives the Sacrament to such as have been indeed formerly lookt upon as impenitent sinners , and known to be such , but are now when they come to the Sacrament lookt upon under the notion of penitent sinners , and that the Minister gives the Sacrament to none , except onely under the notion and supposition that they are truly penitent . saith Mr. Prynn , He ( the Minister ) us●…h th●…se words , The body of Christ which was broken , and the blood of Christ shedd for you , &c. not absolutely , but conditionally onely , in case they receive the Sacrament worthily , and become penitent ▪ and beleeving receivers , as they all professe themselves to be ▪ just so as they preach repentan●…e and remission to their Auditors ; Therefore the case is just , the same in both ( the Word preached and the Sacrament ) without any difference : Here Christ is offered in the Sacrament , as well as to the Word , and accordingly the Sacrament administred to known impenitent sinners under that notion , and as still known to be impenitent upon condition that they become penitent . 10. Vindic. Pag. 52. It being onely the total exclusion from the Church and all Christian society ( not any bare suspension from the Sacrament ) which works both shame aud remorse in excommunicate persons , as Paul resolves , 2. Thess. 3. 14. 1 Cor. 5. 13. compared with 1 Cor. 5. 1. to 11. 10. Yet Vindic. pag. 4. and 10. he denieth that either 1 Cor. 5. 9. 11. or 2 Thess. 3. 14. can amount to any Excommunication or exclusion from the Church , and expounds both these places of a private withdrawing of Civil Fellowship , without any publike judicial Act or Church censure . 11. In his Epistle to the Reader before his Vindication , he disclaimeth that which some conceived to be his opinion , viz. that the Ministers and elders of Christs Church , ought not to be trusted with the power of Church censures , or that all of them are to be abridged of this power : and professeth that these debates of his tend onely to a regular orderly settlement of the power of Presbyteries , not to take from them all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction due by divine right to them , but to confine it within certain definite limits . 11. Diotrephes catechised , pag. 7. It is the safest readiest way to unity and Reformation , to remit the punishment of all scandalous offences to the civil Magistrate , rather then to the pretended disputable questioned authority of Presbyteries , Classes , or Congregations . 12. Vindic. pag. 2. He agreeth with his Opposites that scandalous obstinate sinners after proof and conviction , may be justly excommunicated from the Church &c. And that 1 Cor. 5. 13. warrants thus much &c. So that thus far there is no dissent on either part . Remember the present controversie which he speaks to , is concerning excommunication in England , and so under a Christian Magistracy . 12. Diotrephes catechised , pag. 9. 10. He plainly intimateth that 1 Cor. 5. 13. is no satisfactory Argument for the continuance and exercise of Excommunication in all Churches , and where the Magistrates be Christian. And that those who presse this Text , may as well conclude from the very next words , 1 Cor. 6. 1. to 9. that it is unlawful for Christians to go to Law before any Christian Judges now , &c. Where by the way it is also to be noted , that he should have said before any heathen judge●… . Otherwise the Argument cannot be parallel . I shall now close with four Counter-Quaeries to Mr. Prynne . 1. Since diu deliberandum quod semel statuendum , which is a received maxime , approved by prudent men , and God himself , as his Epistle to the Reader saith ; whether was it well done to publish his subitane lucubrations ( as himself in that preface calls them ) and upon so short deliberation to ingage in this publike and litigious manner against the desires of the Reverend and Learned Assembly , especially in a businesse wherein it is well known the hearts of godly people do generally go along with them ? 2. Whether Mr. Prynus language be not very much changed from what it was in the Prelats times : seeing Vindic. pag. 7. he hath these words , our opposites generally grant , &c. citing onely Cartwright ? And are the old non Conformists of blessed memory , now Opposites ? Where are we ? I confesse as he now stands affected , he is opposite to the old non-Conformists , and they to him . For instance . Mr. Hildersham Lect. 5. on Psal. 51. holdeth that all open and scandalous sinners should do open and publike repentance , and acknowledge their scandalous sins in the Congregation , otherwise to be kept back from the holy Communion . And while Mr. Prynn pleadeth that Matth. 18. 15 , 16 , 17. is not meant of a Presbyterie or of any Church-censure , he manifestly dissenteth from the non-Conformist , and joyneth issue with Bpp. Bilson de gubern . Eccl. c. 4. and Sutlivius de Presbyterio cap. 9. pleading for Prelacy against Presbyterie . 3. Seeing the businesse of excommunication and sequestration from the Sacrament , now in publike agitation , is a matter of great moment , much difficulty , and very circumspectly to be handled , established , to prevent pro●anation and scandal on the one hand ; and arbitrary , tyrannical , papal domineering power over the Consciences , the spiritual priviledges of Christians , on the other . ( These are his own words in the preface of his Quaeries ) whether hath he gone in an even path to avoid both these evills ? Or whether hath he not declined to the left hand , while he shunned the error of the right hand ! Whether hath he not so gone about to cure the heat of the liver , ▪ as to leave a cold and phlegmatick stomack uncured ? And whether doth he not trespasse against that rule of his owne last cited , when he adviseth this as the best and onely way to suppresse all kind of sins , and to reform and purge the Churches of this Kingdom , that the sword of excommunication and suspension be not drawn , but onely the sword of the spirit , and the sword of the Magistrate ? Vindic. pag. 57. Finally , Whether in this Kingdom there be more cause to fear and apprehend an arbitrary , tyrannical , papal domineering power over the Consciences of Christians , ( where Church discipline is to be so bounded by authority of Parliament , that it be not promiscuously put in the hands of all , but of such against whom there shall be no just exception found , yea are or shall be chosen by the Congregations themselves , who have also lately abjured by a solemn Covenant , the Popish and Pre●atical Government ? ) Or whether we ought not to be more afraid and apprehensive that the Ordinances of Christ shall hardly be kept from pollution , and the Churches hardly purged from scandals , there being many thousands both grossely ignorant , and grossely scandalous ? 4. I desire it may be ( upon a review ) seriously considered , how little truth , wisdom , or charity there is in that suggestion of Mr , Prynn , pag. 57. that the lives of the generality of the people are more strict , pious , lesse scandalous and licentious in our English Congregations ▪ where there hath been powerful preaching , without the practice of Excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament , then in the Reformed Churches of France , Germany , Denmark , or Scotland , for which I appeal to all Travellers , &c. I confesse it is a matter of great humiliation to the servants of Christ , that there is occasion to exercise Church discipline and censures in the Reformed Churches : yet this is no other then what was the condition of the Apostolique Churches . 2 Cor. 12. 21. I fear saith the Apostle l●…st when I come again , my God will humble me among you , and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already , and have not repented of the uncleannesse , and fornication , and lasciviousnesse which they have committed . And this is not the onely Testimony concerning scandals and disorderly walking in those primitive Churches . But as for those who are so rigid in their censures against the government of the Reformed Churches , I answer to them as Hierome did of the Montanists . They are rigid , not to the end that themselves also might not commit worse sins ; but this difference there is between them and us , that they are ashamed to confesse their sins , as if they were righteous : We while we repent , do the more easily obtain mercy . Mr. Prynn and others of his profession are not very willing that such an Ecclesiastical discipline be established in England , as is received and setled in Scotland and other Reformed Churches . But if once the like sin-searching , sin-discovering , and sin-censuring discipline were received and duely executed in England , then ( and not till then ) such comparisons may ( if at all they must ) be made , between the lives of the generality of the people in England , with those in other Reformed Churches , which of them is more or lesse licentious and scandalous . A Testimony of Mr. Foxe the Author of the Book of Martyrs , taken out of a treatise of his printed at London , 1551. entituled De Censura Ecclesiastica Interpellatio J. Foxi , the eighth Chapter of which Treatise is here translated out of Latin into English. What the are chief obstacles hindering Excommunication ? THat the thought and care of excommunication hath now so far waxed cold almost in all the Churches , is to be ascribed ( as appeareth ) unto three sorts of men . The first is of those whose minds the wealth of this world and high advancement of dignity do so lift up , that they are ashamed to submit the neck to the obedience of Christ. What ( say these ) shall that poor fellow lay a yoke on me ? What , should I be subject to this naughty and rude Pastor ? But let go , good Sir ▪ your vain swelling empty words ; how rude soever he be , yet if he be your Pastor , you must needs be a sheep of the flock , whom if he doth rightly instruct , so much the more dutifully you must submit . But if otherwise , it is the fault of the man , not of the Ministry ; To those at least yeeld thy self to be ruled , whom thou knowest to be more learned . But go to , thou which canst not suffer a man to be thy Pastor , to whom then wilt thou submit thy self ? unto Christ himself ( thou sayest : ) very well forsooth . This then is of such importance , that Christ for thy cause must again leave the heavens , or by his Angels or Arch-Angels feed and govern thee , whom these mean men the Pastors do not satisfie : But what if it so pleased the Lord by these mean Pastors , as thou callest them , to cast down and conf●und all the highest statelynesse and pride of this World , even as of old by a few and comtemptible Fishers he subdued not onely the high and conceited opinion of Philosophers , but even the Scepters of Kings also ? Now what will thy boasting magnificence say ? But hear what Christ himself saith of them , whom thou from thy high loftinesse look●st down upon as unworthy . He that despiseth you despiseth me ( saith he . ) And moreover who so despiseth Christ , despiseth him from whom he is sent , and who said unto him , Thou art my Son , this day have I begotten thee : Ask of me and I will give thee the Heathen for thine inheritance , and the utmost ends of the earth for thy possission : Thou shalt rule them with a rod of yron , and break them in pe●…ces like a p●…tters vessel . Wherefore seeing thou dost acknowledge so great a Lord , so many wayes above all Maiesty whatsoever can be named ; let it not be grievous to thee ( my brother whosoever thou art , or with how great power soever thou art highly advanced ) laying aside thy high looks and pride , to be humbled under his mighty hand ; And do not think it a light matter ( whereas thou entertainest with so great applause and honourable respect an earthly Kings Ambassadors ) that thou shouldest disdain the Ambassadors of him , who alone hath power over all Kings and Lords . If thou yeeldest unto a mortal Physitian thy wounds to be handled , yea to be cut also , and to be burned and seared ( if need be ) how commeth it , that thou canst lesse endure the same thing also in the curing of the diseases of the soul from the spiritual Physitian , especially seeing in so many respects better is the health of the soul then of the body ? Nor do thou so account any whit in this regard to be impared of thy honour , if unto thy Bishop or Pastor , yea rather herein to Christ thou be subjected . Yea contrariwise , so account as the thing is indeed , that there is no true glory but in Christ and in his sheepfolds ; that none do more prosperously reigne , then they which every way do serve him , without whom as there is no glory , so is there no safety and salvation . Neither let it seem disgraceful to thee , what so many ages ago the most high Monarchs of the world and most potent Emperors have done before thee : amongst whom Philip , as he was the first of all the Emperors who was made a Christian ; so I meet with no other more famous example , and more worthy of all mens imitation . He willing to be present at the solemn Assemblies of the Church on Easter , and to communicate of the Sacrament ▪ when as yet he was judged not worthy of admission ; It is reported that Fabian the Bishop withstood him , neither did receive him before he confessed his sins , and stood among the Penitentiaries . What would those our proud gyants , fighters against God do here , if they had stood in the like condition and high place ? But this no lesse mild then most mighty Emperor was nothing ashamed ( forgetting in the mean while his Imperial Majesty ) of his own accord to submit himself to the obedience of his Pastor , undergoing every thing whatsoever in the Name of Christ was imposed upon him . O truly noble Emperor , and no lesse worthy Bishop ! But these examples in both are too rare amongst us this day . Another ▪ sort is of those which would be Christians but in name and title onely , they promise an honest enough shew of Christian profession ; they dispute both learnedly , and every where with grea● endeavour , of Christ ; they carry about in their hands the Gospel ; they frequent sacred Sermons ; have cast off all superstition ; they feed with the perfect ; they marry , eat , and are clothed , so as they hold no difference either of times or of places . Finally , Whatsoever is pleasing in Christ they take and stiffely hold . But if ye look into their life , they are Epicures , Wasters , Ravenous , Covetous , Sons of Belial ; Not Christs servants , but slaves of their belly ; who according to the Satyrist , think vertue to be but words , as the wood to be but trees . And of these there is a great store every where , who seeing onely for their belly they follow Christ , they leave nothing undevised and uninterprised to hinder Excommunication , that so they may the more freely satisfie and serve their own lusts . So the Covetous man feareth that his Covetousnesse be called in question , which he will not forsake . The Adulterer , he that buyeth or selleth men into slavery , the dycer , the whoremonger , the drunkard would rather his intemperance to be concealed . So the Robber , the Murderer , the Incendiary is afraid to be laid open or made known . So he that delighteth to be fatted and enriched with the dammages of the Common ▪ wealth , is unwilling to have any bridle to curb and restrain him : The Cheater that with false wares beguileth the people ; the seller that with unjust gain outeth counterfeit wares ; the deceiver who cozeneth and circumventeth his Neighbour . Last of all whosoever are thus affected that they savour or follow nothing but their belly , their ambition , and the purse , they do not willingly endure that their liberty of sinning should be stopped to them . Moreover after these , others not much unlike them , come into the same account , which out of some places of Scripture perversely wrested , if they find out ought that may flatter their affections , hence forthwith do they promise a wicked liberty of sinning to themselves and others , whence follows a very great corruption of life , together with injury of the Scripture . While these men are not sufficiently shaken and stricken with the sence of their sin , and force the Scripture violently wrested to defend and maintain their perverse affections , from which Scripture it had been meet to seek all medicines of their vices . But little do these men in the mean while consider how dear it cost Christ , which they make so small account of . They do not mark and weigh how horrible a thing sin is before God , which no otherwise could be expiate and purged but by the death of his onely begotten Son ; which hath utterly rui●ated not whole Cities , but Kingdoms also and Monarchies . Which things if these and all other Epicures did more diligently think of , it would come to passe I suppose , that neither the custome of sin would so much like them , and withall the matter it self would so far draw them , that more willingly they would have recourse unto these so many waies wholsom remedies of the Church , as unto the onely medicine of mans life . FINIS . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A42757-e410 a Luke 23. 3. John 18. 33 , 36 37. b Luke 23. 2. John 19. 12 , 15. c Joh. 19. 12 , 13 d d John 19. 19. e De regno Christi lib. 1. cap 4 Non d●fuerunt quoque intra ●os triginta annos , praesertim in Germania , qui videri voluerunt just●m Evangelii praedi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. v●um perpauci adhuc repei ti sunt qui se Christi Evangelio & regno emuino subj●cissent : imo qui passi fuissent Christi religionem & Ecclesia●um Disciplinam restitui per omnia juxta leges Regis nostri . Et infra In Hungaria , gratia Domino , non-paucae jam existunt Ecclesiae quae cum p●â Christi doctrinâ , s●lidam etiam ejus discipl●nam receperunt , custodiunique religiosè . Rex noster Christus saxit ut ●arum Ecclesiarum exemplunt quàm plurimae sequantur . f De polit . Eccles. lib. 1. cap. 2. Politeia Ecclesiastica est pars regni Christi . g M Iohn Welseh his Letter to the Lady Fleemming , written from his prison at Blacknesse in January 1616. Who am I that he should first have called me and then constituted me a Minister of glad things , of the Gospell of salvation these fifteen yeeres already , and now last of all to be a sufferer for his cause and kingdome , to witnesse that good confession that Jesus Christ is the King of Saints , and that his Church is a most free Kingdome , yea as free as any Kingdome under Heaven , not onely to convocate hold and keepe her meetings , conventions , and assemblies , but also to judge of all her affaires , in all her meetings and conventions , among his Members and Subjects ! These two points , that Christ is the head of his Church , Secondly that she is free in her government from all other Jurisdiction except Christs ; these two points are the speciall cause of our imprisonment , being now convict as traytors for maintaining thereof . We have been waiting with joyfulnesse to give the last testimony of our blood in confirmation thereof , if it would please our God to be so favourable as to honour us with ●hat dignity . Thus he . h Discourse of the troubles at Frankeford first published in the yeere 1575 and reprinted at London in the yeere 1641. pag. 37. i Acts 17. 6 , 7. k Jude ep . v. 8. l Fr à S. Clara Apolog. Episcop . cap. 2. m The second booke of the Discipline of the Church of Scotland , cap. 1. n The confession of faith of the Church of Scotland Art. 25 o Ibib. p Ibid. q Ibid. r The Confession of Helvetia in the head of Magistracy . s The confession of Bohemia cap. 16. t The French confession Art. 39. u The confession of Belgia Att. 36. x The confesof Saxony , Art. 23. y Irish Articles of Religion Art. 61 , 62. z Matth. 16 , 19. & 18 18. which is meant ●t laying on or taking of Church censure . August . Tract . 50 in Jo. Si 〈◊〉 in Ecclesiâ fit , ut quae in terrd ligantur in caelo ligentur , & que solvuntur in terrd , solvantur in caelo : quiacum excommunicat Ec. clesia , in caelo ligatur excommunicatustcum reconciliatur ab Ecclesiâ , in caelo solvitur reconciliatus , &c. a The second Booke of the Discipline of the Church of Scotland , cap. 1. c See the Laws and Statutes of Geneva translated out of the French and printed at London 1643. pag. 9 , 10. d De corona orat . 5. in initio e In orat . contr● Ciesiphontem . f Matth. ● . 11. g Psalm 2. 3. Luke 1● ▪ 14. h Origen . in Levit . Hom. 3. Quid percu●it ? carnem . Quid sanat ? Spiritum . Prorsus ut illa deficiat , iste pro ▪ ficiat . i Hier. ad Marcellum . Notes for div A42757-e10590 a De Iure natur . & Gentium lib. 2. cap. 4. Prosely●us Iustitiae utcunque novato patriae nomine Iudaeus dice●etur , non tam quidem 〈◊〉 Iudaicus simpliciter censendus ●sset qu●m peregrinas semper , cui jura quamplurima inter cives . See the like lib. 5. c. 20. b Buxtorf . lexic. Chald. Talm. & Rabbin pag. 408 Proselyti justitiae sunt qui non rerum externarum , sed solius religionis causâ , & gloriae Dei studio , religionem Iudaicam amplectuntur , & totam legem Mosis dicto modo recipiunt . Hi natis Iudaeis habentur aequales : understand in an Ecclesiasticall , not in a Civill capacity . In which sence also Matthias Martinius in lexic. philol . pag. 2922. saith that these Proselytes , cum ad sacrorum Iudaicorum communionem admit●ebantur , &c. veri Iudaei censebantur : and that to be made a Proselyte , and to be made a Jew , are used promiscuously in the Rabbinicall writings . So also Drusius praet . l. 4. in Io. 12. 20. c Caete●ùm supremus Senatus cujus in hoc concl●visedes , duplex fuisse videtur , pro ●erum Ecclesi●ticarum & politicarum diversitate : quonia● Deut 17. 12. ubi de supremis Senatoribus agitur , manisestè Sacerdos d Iudice distinguitur ; ad sacerdotema●t ad Iudicem i. e. Sacerdotes aut Iudices , ut com . 9. inaicio est , ubi pro Sacerd●te ponuntur Sacerdotes . Adde Ieboshaphatum , cum Iudicia Hicrosolymis restaura●et , duos ordines conflituisse , Sacerdetes & Capita samilia●um , ad judicium Dei & ad litem : similiter duos praes●les com 11. un●m ad omnem causam Dei : alterum scilicet duce● Iudaeorum ad omne negotium Regis . Quibus succinunt verba Jerem. 19. 1. quibus Seniores populi● Senioribus Sacerdot●m distinguntur . Quocirca in N. T. sublato ( ut videtur ) per H●rodem , uno synedrio , sc. politico ; al●erum Apostolorum seculo supersuit , in quo politici etiam manebant reliqui● : nam ab Ecclesiasticis Seniores populi distinguntur , Matth. 26. 3. 59 & 27. vers . 1. Ni magis placeat , quod ab aliis observatum suit , Herodem , sublatis 70. Senioribus è familia Davidica , alios inseriores substitu●sse : quod judiciorum quibusdam excmplis firmari videtur . Adeo 〈◊〉 illis temporibus duplex quoque Synedrium suerit , quamvis utriusque Senatores subinde convenirent : qu● fortè reserendum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quod Matth. 26. 59. Marc 14. 55. & 15. 1. Acts 22. 30. occurrit . ( Quin etiam cap 1. cod . Iomae , eadem distinctio his verbis confirmatur ( ubi de 〈◊〉 Sacerdotis magni ad diem expiationis agitur ) tradunt eum Seniores d●mus Iudicii , Senioribus Sacerdotii . d Propter meritum assess●rum Sy●edrii , qui occupati sunt in lege , & illuminant Iudicium . Et descendit in Babyloniam ad concilium Sapientum . I● non fuit Synedrium Iudicum & Magistratus summi , sed collegium doctorum . f Iu Exod. 24. Quaest. 3. g In Exod. 18. Quest. 2. h Menocbius in Exod. 24. 14. redite ad populum , ut illum regatis , & in officio contineati● . Pelargus upon the place saith that Moses would not leave the Church without Rulers to avoyd the danger of popular anarchy . i Eros●…us Confirm th●…s . lib. 4 cap. 3 M●…ses 〈◊〉 ait , intersici ●…dum ●…sse illum , qu●… vel 〈◊〉 , sentemiae vel Judicis assentire nollet Non ergo liberum facit ab i●…lo ad 〈◊〉 pr●…vocare . k Me●ochius in 1. Paral. 23. 4. idem sunt praepositi & Iudices , quorum mun●s erat Israelitarum causas qu● juxta legem finiebantur , judicare , quod patet ex 2. Paral. 19. 8. ubi habemus constituit Jehosaphat in Jerusalem levi●…as & sacerdotes , & Princip s famil●…arum ex Is●…a l , ut judicium & causam domini judicarent . l Salmas . apparat . ad libros de Primatu p. 302. Quae ad ●es sacras ac divinas pertinebant , de his praecipue judicium Sacerdotum fuit , de ali● civilibus & regalib● , praesides 〈◊〉 rege constituti , ut patet ex lib. 2. Chro. cap. 19. Titinus in 2. Chro. 19. 11. Ubi not a distinctionem sori seu Magistratus Ec clesiastici & civilis , contra Anglo-Calvinistas & nostros Arminianos . m Magdeb Gent. 〈◊〉 . lib. 1. cap 6. Seniores populi videntu●… fuisse 〈◊〉 è populo lecti viri , aetate , d ctrina , & vitae p●…obitate spectati , gui simul cum Ecclesiasticis 〈◊〉 , Templi , 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 rerum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 habuerunt . n Antiq. Iud. lib. 20. cap 6. Ipsi 〈◊〉 pontifices dissiacre cae●erunt à Sacer●otibus & primatibus Hieroso● mi●anorum ●ivium , singuléque m●edebant stipati manu au ▪ dacissimorum & seditiosorum bominum , 〈◊〉 inter se mutu●S ce●tabant convitiis & 〈◊〉 : nec erat qui compesceret , quasi vacante urbe Magistratibus . In tantum autem exarsit summorum pontific●m impudentia , ut auderent servos suos in areas mittere , qui auf●rrent debitas Sacerdotibus decimas , aliquótque pauperiores è Sacerdo●um ordine alimentorum in●pia fame deficerent . Tantò plus ●um pol●ebat violentia sedi - tiosorum quam justitia . n Lexicon Chald. Talmud . & Rabbin . edit . 1639. pag. 8●7 , 828. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Excommunicatio , exclusio ● caetu sacro , ejectio ex syna ▪ goga &c. Cum tali excommunicato non licet edere nec bibert . Quo fortè respicit Apostolus 1 Cor. 5. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Nam admonitionem illam generalem facit , ex occasione incestuosi quem excommunicare jubet . o De Iure natur . & Gentium lib. 4. cap. 9. Atque is planè à communicatione orationis , & convenius , & omnis sancti commercii relegabatur , quemadmodum de bujusmodi anathemate sub initils Ecclesie Christianae loquitur Tertullianus . p Animad in Pirke pag. 169. Qu●… enim dicat apostatam , blashemum aliaque sacra capita intra templum suisse admissa ? &c. Certe si quibuslibet excommunicatis permissum suisset in trare Templom , tum 〈◊〉 mitior Judaicae Synagoga disciplina esset statuenda , quam veteris Christianae Ecclesiae . q Quest. & Resp. l. 1. quaest . 9 Solebant autem veteres ( I●der ) si qu● gravius deliquerat , primum eum movere caetu Ecclesiastico : si non emendabat se , tum feriebant 〈◊〉 : quòd si ne tum quidem redibat ad srugem , ultimo ac postremo loco samatizabant . r Annot. in Exc. Gemar . Sanhedrin cap. 1. Qui simpliciter excommunicatus est ( menudde ) est ille quidem separatus à caetu , ita ut pro vero membro Ecclesie non habeatur . s Lexicon pentaglot . pag. 655. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Excommunicatio , cum quis se non emendans catu Ecclesiastico ●ovetur , & ex populo suo excinditur . Where he also mentioneth the three distinct kinds of Excommunication Niddui , Cherem , and Schammata . Ibid. pag. 1076. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remetio , excommunicatio , ejectio ex caetu piorum , illa anathematis species , qua quis immundus ab bominum contubernio , aut qua aliquis ● caetu Ecclesiastico removetur ad tempus ▪ à lege praescriptum . t De arcano sermone cap. 47. Ejectio autem è Synagega , communicationis abnegatio est , & abalienatio a religiosa consuetudine , quae á nostris recepto jam verbo sixcommunicatio dicitur . u Magdeb. Cent. 1. ●…ib . 1. cap 7. Judicabant degmata & promulgobant eorum damnationes , unà cum personis : quae quidem res ▪ nihil aliud quam publica Excommunicatio erat Jo. 9. 22. & 11. 47. 48. & 1● . 4● . Et infra . Extra Synagogam fieret , ▪ hoc est excommunicaretur . x 〈◊〉 ▪ Ebr. cap 7. legis sanctio triplex &c. Prima est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aversatio , antolitio & amandatio &c. Secunda est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 devo●… extremo cuidam exitio . Excommunicatio : quando videlicet a●…quis excindi duebatur ex populo sue , & in eo amplius non censeri ( ut jam supra expo ▪ suimus ) ex majore aliquo delicto . atque hoc p●…to esse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fieri &c. Primae illae speciei respondet quod in Ecclesiis nostris vocamus prohibitionem seu suspensionem à Sacramentis : 〈◊〉 Excommunicatio publice facta . y Harum trium Excommunicationis specierum vel potius graduum , secunda primam , tertia utramque includebat . Prima piis quidem Iudaeis erat formidabtlis , quia per eam à sacrorum communione submovebantur , at qui minus pii erant eâ non magnopere movebantur . y Buxtors lexic. Rabbin . p. 2463 ex Pesachim fol. 50. Qui vesperâ sabbathi & aliorum dierum festorum operas serviles ●cit , infaustum illud quidem est , neque videt signum benedictionis , sed non schammatisamus eum : at qui vesper● pas ch●tis operas serviles facit , hîc verò omnino schammatisamus eum . They did also excommunicate an hereticall or Epicurean Israelite . Buxtorf ibid , pag. 195. z Lexicon . Chald. Talmud . & Rabbin . pag. 2468. Excom municatio siebat quandoque verbis expressis , quando excommunicandus erat praesens : quandeque scripto publicè affixo , quando absens erat . Hinc legitur in Majemone in libro Madda cop . 7. Sect. 2. Quomodo sit Niddui : dicit N. esto in excommunicatione . Si. excommunicant eum in faciem , id est presentem , dicit N. hic esto in excommunicatione sive banno . Ibid. pag. 2469. Nuncius vel minister publicus judicii câ side habetur , ut si dicat , N. à me citatus ad Judicium , contempsit me , aut vilipendit Judicem , aut dixit sa nolle comparere in Judicio , tunc sammatisent ipsum ad verba ejus , sed non scribunt super eo Schedam Excommunicationis Shammata , donec veuerint duc quo testentur ipsum noluisse comparere ad Judicium . a Lexicon Rabbin . p. 828. Ex sententia domini Dominorum , sit in Anathemate Ploni Filius Ploni , in utraque domo Judicii , Superiorum scilicet & Inferiorum , in Anathemate item Sanctorum Excelsorum , in anathemate Seraphim & Ophannim , in anathemate denique totius Ecclesiae , maximorum & minimorum &c. b Another forme more full and large see in Vorstius his Animadversions upon Pirke pag. 226. to 230. Decreto vigilum atque edicto Sanctotum anathemizamus . adju●amus , excommunicamus Schammatizamus , maledicimus , execramus ex sententia hujus loci atque ex scientia hujus coe●ûs , hoc libro legis , sexcentis tredecim praeceptis in illo conscriptis . Anathe . mate quo Joshua devo vie Jericho ; maledictione quâ maledixit Eliseus pueris , & maledictione quam imprecatus est Gichazi servo suo . Shammate quo Schammatizavit Barack Meroz , &c. Nomine Aebthariel Jah Domini Zehaoth . Nomine Michael Principis magni . Nomine Mathatheron cujus nomen est sicuti nomen Domini ejus . Nomine Sandalphon qui nectit coronas pro domino suo . Nomine Nominis 42. literarum . Nomine quod apparuit Mosi in Sinai . Nomine quo dissecuit Moses Mare . Nomine Ehieh ascher Ehieh , Ero qui ero . Arcano nominis Amphor●…sch . Scripturâ quae exarata est in tabulis . Nomine Domini exercituum Dei Israelis , qui sedit inter cherubim , &c. Maledictus ex ore nominis celebrandi , & tremendi , quod e●reditur ex ore Sacerdotis magni die expiationum , &c. Evellatur ipse è tabernaculo . Nolit dominus illi condonare , sed tunc sumet furor & indignatio contra virum illum . Incumbant illi omnes maledictiones conscriptae in hoc libro legis . Expellat nomen ejus sub caelo , & segreget illum in malum ex omnibus tribubus Israelis , juxta omnes execrationes hujus faederis consignatas in hoc libro legis , &c. Haec sit voluntas Dei & dicatur Amen . c Quid tum fec●runt Ezra , Zerobahel , & Jehoshua ? Congregaveront totam Ecclesiam seu caetum populi in templum dom ni & introduxerant 300. sacerdotes , & 300. adoles ▪ centes ( seu discipulos minores ) quibus erant in manibus 300. buccinae , & 300. libri legis . Hi clangebant ; Levitae autem cantabant & psallebant : & excommunicabant Cuthaeos per mysterium nominis Te r●grammati , & per scripturam descriptam in Tabulis legis , & per anathema fori superioris seu caelestis , & per anathema fori inferioris seu terrestris , ita ut nemo Israelitarum unquam in posterum comederet buccellam aliquam Cuthaeorum . Hinc dicunt Quicunque comedit carnem Cuthaei , is vescitur quasi carne poreinâ . Cuthaeus quoque ne seret proselytus , neque haberet partem in resurrectione mortuorum , juxta illud quod scriptum est . Non ad vos simul nobiscum attinet instauratio domus dei nostri : neque in hoc neque in suturo seculo . Praeterea quoque ne haberet partem in Jerusalem . hinc dicitur , Uobis non est pars neque jus , neque memoria in Jerusalem . Transmisetunt autem Anathema hoc ad Israelitas qui erant in Babylonia . d Annot Gem in Ex. Sanhedrin . p. 147. R. Simon , si●… . Lakisch custodiebat hortum . venit quidam & ficus caepit vovare . Ille inclamare : hic non nauci facere . Tum ille ▪ excommunicatus esto . Tu vicissim inquit alter excommunicatus esto . Nam si ad pecuniam tibi obstrictus sum , numquid anathemati obnoxius sum ? Adiit R. Lakisch super hoc Scholae rectores . Responsum est : Ipsius Anathema anathema est ▪ tuum nullum est . e Buxtorf . Lexion Chald. Talm. & Rab. p. 1305. 828. f De his meritò dubitari potest , num licuerit ipsis sacra adire limina , imprimis qui severi●…i ex communicationis genere vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 multati erant . Quis enim dicat Apostatam , blasphemum , al●…áque sacra capita intra Templum suisse admissa ? De 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alia ratio ●…sse potest , eum his spes veniae non fuerit adempta . g M. Selden de ●…ure natur . & Gentium lib. 4. cap. 8. Effectus ac finit excommunicationis hujusmodi , Jure communi erat , ut solitae popularium consuetudin●… libertate reu●… privaretur , usque dum panitentiâ ad bonam mentem rediens solveretur sententiâ . h Independency examined pag. 10. Vindic. of the 4. Questions p. 4. 5 i De gubern . Eccl. pag. 57. k Gen. 25 ▪ 17. l Lorinus in Psal. 31. 5. ex Plutarcho . m See Ainswarth upon the place . n Bucer . scripta Anglicana ▪ pag. 310. Nunc autem legimus ▪ Lev. 4 , 5. & 6. Deum populo suo ordin●sse ac mandasse : si quos de populo , de sacerdotibus , aut principibus , aut si etiam populus universus aliquid fortè deliquisset contra mand●a sua , seu ●aciendo quae ipse vetuerat , seu omittendo quae praeceperat ; ut tales ante se in ecclesia sua , & coram sacerdote comparerent , ibi peccatum suum confiterentur , veniam pererent , oblationes suas offerrent , & hoc modo per sacerdotem recoaciliationem consequerentur . idque haud dubiè non absque seria humiliatione , planctu , & jejunio . o Eximia l●us est paenitentiam agenti , ut publicè confiteatur , iniquitates suas toti caetui indicans , & delicta quae in proximum admisit , aliis aperiens hunc in modum . Revera peccavi in N. N. ( virum nominans ) & haec vell illa feci : Ecce autem me vobis nunc convertor , & me facti paenitet . Qui vero prae super●ia non indicat , sed abscondit iniquitates suas ▪ ill● perfecta non est paenitentia : quia dicitur , Qui abscondit scelera sua , non dirigetur . Haec dicta intelligenda sunt de peccatis quae in proximum admittuntur . Verum in transgressionibus quae sunt hominis in Deum , non necesse est cuiquam seipsum propalare : Quin imò perfrictae frontis est , illiusmodi peccata revelare : Sed in conspectu Dei paenitentiam agit , & coram illo peccata haec speciatim recenset . p Hanc 〈◊〉 confessionem Hebraei vocant confessionem super peccato singulari , quia in aliis sacrificiis siebat confessio peccatorum generalis , saith ●atablus upon the place . q Confirm . Thes. pag. 106. 113. r Ex ●o quod in libro Joma , id est , dierum , in capite , jom h●kippurim , id est , dies propitiationum , ita scribitur . Dixit Rab. Hunna : Omnis qui transgressione transgressus est , necesse est ut singulatim exprimat peccatum . s Seld. de jure nat . & Gentium lib. 4. cap. 8. Pro diversitate peccati & peccantis moribus , nunc citius nunc serius sequebatur absolutio . Sed ut plurimum excommunicatio fiebat in diem tricesimum &c. Intra hoc tempus exspectabat forum ut ad Bonam ●ediret . mentem , 〈◊〉 , & quae juberent ipsi praestaret &c. Post trignta di●um contumaciam , idem tempus semel i●erabatur &c ▪ At vero s● ▪ neque intra id spatii paenitens absolutionem pe●eret , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cherem seu Anathemate feriebatur . t Offerenti victimas le● praecipit , ut p●rus fiat corpore ac animo . Et infra . Necessum est igitur adituros Templum sacr●rum gratia , & corpore nitidos esse , & multo magis anima . ● &c. nam veri Dei Templum non patet prophanis sacrificiis . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) Et post . an dubium est , neque legem quicquam ab injustis , neque solem à tenebris accipere ? Et versus finem . Caeterum quia societatem humanitatemque ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) maximè docet lex nostra , utrique vir●ti honorem habet meritum , neminem deplorate malum ad eas admittens , sed quàm longissimè in rem malam ablegans . Cum igitur sciret concionibus ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) admisceri multos improbos , quòd se posse in turba latere autument , ut id caveret in posterum , omnes indignos à sacro caetu edicto prohibint ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) incipiens à semiviris obscaeno 〈◊〉 laborantibus , qui naturae monetam adulterantes , in impudicarum mulierum affectum & formam sponte degenerant . Spadones item & castratos arcet &c. Pariter repellit non tantum scorta , sed & natos è prostitutis , contactos materno dedecore propter natales adulterinos . &c. Alii vero quasi contendant hos in impietatis stadio post se relinquere , addunt amplius , ut non solùm ideas , sed & deum esse negent . Et post . Proinde omnes hi meritò pelluntur à sacris c●ibus , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) u Antiq. lib. 19. cap. ● . libenter & continuò degebat ( Agrippa ) Hierosolymis , institutorum ac rituum patriae servator religiosissimus ▪ 〈◊〉 enim ●rat â contaminamentis omnibus , nec ulla dies ei praeteribat absque sacrificio . Accidit aliquando ut quidam Hierosolymita legis peri●s , nomine Simon , advocata concione , per regis absentiam , agentis ●um Caesareae , crimina●etur illum ●t impurum & arcendum templi aditu , quod non ni●i dignis pateat . Id ubi praefectus u●bis illi significavit per literas , confestim accersivit hominem &c. Di● mihi inquit , quid ribi non probatur ex his quae ●acimus . x Annot ▪ in Luk. 6. 22. Qui hac nota ( minoris 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 five Niddui ) inusti erant , s●ante Templo , accedebant ad Templum , ut ex Hebraeis vir doctus notavit : sed haud dubiè consistebant extra ● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui distingueb●t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ ab Israelitis . Nam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 interim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . lo●o habebantur . y Confirm Thes. lib. 1. cap. 2. pag. 99. and elsewhere . z Nam mos id●●erebat ut Publicani in atrio . Gentilium , Pharisaei in atrio Israelitarum sta●nt , nec quicquam in ●o erat insolitum au● Pharisaeo imputandum . a Sanè cum Servator in Templo d●cuisse cap. 8. Joh. legitur , quò mulierem depraehensam Pharisaei ipsi adduxerunt ; alium locum praeter hunc qui ●at extra a tria , designati credere nequeo : quandequidem è Josepho obs●vatum jam suit , impu●is atria adire fa● non fuisse . b P. Cuneu● de ▪ repub . Hebr. lib. 1. cap. 12. Concilii magni sedes in ipso ●anctuario fuit . c De monarchia lib. 2. proinde rectè honesté que vetitum est alicubi , ne merce● meretrici● inferatur in sacratium . Atqui nummi per se carent crimine , sed quae hos accepit unà cum suo quaestu est abominabilis . d Lib. de Victimas offerentibus . Nam veri Dei Templum non pater profanis sacrificiis . Tali homini dicerem , obon● , non gaudet D●us centenis boum victimis &c. mavult pia● mentes &c ▪ * Haec porta &c. i. e. D●us hoc Templum sibi dicari voluit , hîc est sanctuarium ejus : debet pu●um esse ab omnibus sordibus , quemadmodum etiam lex severè jubet . Antehac impuri & scelerati ( quales Saul , & alii omnes impii qui primas tenebant , i●a ut nemo non 〈◊〉 ipsorum esse Templum ) co●ruperant hoc templum . Non fuit igitur tam domicilium ipsius Dei , quamlatronum ●verna . e Lib. 3. de vit●… Mos●…s : quem ne honoris quidem gratia ●…as est nominari ab omnibus●… sed à solis optimis & purificatis hominibus . f Vatablus in Num. 5. 2. T●ia secundum Hebraeos castra erant . Castra nempe Dei , id est Tabernaculum : Castra levitarum , & castra Israel . Leprosi ab omnibus arcebantur : Impuri per fluxum à primis duobus excludebantur . Pollutus vero propter cadaver solum à tabernaculo Ecclesiae arcebatur . Godwyn in his Moses and Aarom lib. 5. cap. 2. cit●th Paulus fagius for the same thing . See also Mr. Wee●…se his Christian Synagogue pag. 135. 136. g De tempfabrie . p. 15. in quod ( at●ium ) exte●i , id est Gentes , quae Israolis nomen non prosit erentur , conve nire ad orandum poss●nt : & Isr●elitae etiam qui caeremoniali ritu puri non essent : h Uide edit . lutin . Cantabr . a●…no . 1631. pag. 5. Eximia laus est paenitentiam agenti , ut publicè confiteatur , iniquitat●s suat toti caetui indicans , & delicta q●ae in proximum admisit , ●liis 〈◊〉 hunc in modum , ●evera pecca●i in N. N. ( vitum nominans ) & haec & illa seci 〈◊〉 Ecce autem me vobis nunc conv●rtor & me facti paenitet . Q●i verò prae superbia non i●dicat , sed abscondit iniquitates suas , illi perfecta non est paenitentia , Quia dicitu● , Qui abscondit scelera sua , non dirigetur . i R. Mosis canones panitentiae cap. 2. Quicunque verbis confitetur , & ●x corde non statuit peccacum derelinquere : ecce hic ei similis est qui lavat , & manu reptile immundum retinet : Neque enim quicquam prodest lavatio , donec reptile abjecerit . Et hoc illud est quod a Sapiente illo dicitur . Qui autem confessus fuerit & reliquerit ea , misericordiam consequetur . Quin & oportet ut pecca●um speciatim recenseat : Quia dicitur : Obsecro domine , peccavit populus iste peccatum maximum seceruntque sibi deos anreos . k Confirm . Thes. lib 1. cap. 3. & 4. l Lib. 2. cap. 1. m Pag. 106 , 107 , 148 , 149. n See Ainsworth ▪ annot . on Num. 5. 7. o Ainsworth on Lev●t . 6 4. p Pag. 106. 113. q Pag. 145. Cum ergo quaeritur cur ei qui semen praeter voluntatem noctu emisit , ad sacra adire non licuerit , priusquàm mundaretur , scortatori autem & concubinario licuerit ? respondeo , quia ille ad se appropinquantes contaminabat ; hic Deo & sibi immundus tantum erat : aliosque non magis inquinabat , quàm si cum uxore legitima cubavisset . r Pag. 140. Quocirca non fuit exclusio haec , qua propter legis immunditiam aliqui prohibebantur venire in caetus publicos , sigu●a rei cujuspiam in hoc seculo complendae , sed i●ago & simulacrum suit rei in altera vita persiciendae . s Tostatus in Levit. 12. quast . 21. t Tostatus in Matth. 26. quaest . 48. Etiam actus quidam praeter contactum , reddebant homines immundos ad manducandum agnum , vel quaecunque sanctificat● , sicut litigare judicialiter , vel intrare in locum Judicii ad litigandum , sic dicitut Io. 18. Lud. Capelli 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de ultimo Christi paschate p. 25. Cum itaque haec una fuerit illarum Traditionum , ut ne die festo capitali judicio vacarent , causa nulla est curex istimemus eos sine necessitate voluisse proprias constitutiones ita pedibus conculcare , & tam sole●is festi religionem prophanare . Casaubon Exerc. 16. Anno 34. num . 32. citeth a plaine passage in Maimonides declaring that they held it unlawfull to judge of capitall cases upon the perparation to the Sabbath or to a Holy-day . u L' Empereur annot . in cod . middoth . p. 40. Arcebantur autem hujusmodi contaminati , donec ca peregissent quae ad reatum caeremonialem quem contraxerant delendum facerent , atque hac ratione suis magistris morem gessissent . The unclean were not permitted to partake of the sacrifices . Iosephus de bello Iud lib. 7. c. 17. x Pag. 94. Huc ipso , quod ad expiandum peccatum jubetur adferre Sacrificium , non excluditur à Sacramentis , sed ad ea invitatur ; nam o●nnia haec Sacrificia etant vera Sacramenta , y Pareus in ●…evit . 4. differunt Sacrificium & Sacramentum ; quod Sacrificium est obedientia nostra Deoad mandatum ejus praestita , sive moralis five caerimonialis cum morali conjuncta ▪ Sacramentum est Signum gratiae dei erga nos in fide à nobis susceptum . z Lavater hom . 23. in Ezram . a Tostatus in Levit. 1. quaest . 15. Ainsworth on Levit. 1. 4. b Deinde nec Judaei confiteban● peccata omnia exactè , accuratè , sicut nos ; non enim peccata interna & mentalia , sed solùm externa , quae opere ipso consummata essent , & in exteriorem actum trans●issent &c. Tertiò , nec Judaei omnia externa peccata in confessione declarabant , sed praesertim notoria & publica , ut fert opinio probabilior . a S●…e A●…psiagius Di●…p : adv . Anabapt . pag. 276. Ioh. Cloppenburg . in Gangraena Theol. Anabapt . part . 3. Disp. 11. citeth these words out of a booke of the Anabaptists de Censur . Eccles. Ante adventum Christi tempore veteris Testamenti , unicum tantum institutum suisse regimen , ac non nisi unicam punitionem , videlicet d m●…gistratu exercendam secundum scriptam lagem à Mose traditam : quâ luendum erat vel in bonis vel in corpore , ●…c sustinenda aut Mors , aut carcer , aut muleta pecuniaria : quae omnia politici 〈◊〉 , non Ecclesiastici judicii . In opposition hereunto he addeth . In Ecclesiis reformatis creditur ex verbo Dei , fuisse à Deo jam olim in U. T. 〈◊〉 duplex regimen , duplici officio gubernátionis , qua politicae , qua Ecclesiasticae ; distinctum . b D. 〈◊〉 in Deut. 17. Judicia ecclesiastica ad Ecclesiam pertinent secundum verbum Dei. Magistratus nihil ominus est custos utriusque Tabulae , & ces●antibus Sacerdotibus vel degenerantibus , debet reformare secundum legem . c Lev. 20. 3● d Lev. 18. 24 ▪ e Num. 35. 33 , 34. f Quum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 legem interpretarentur , quod proprium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verò formulas juris praescriberent , & actiones civiles docerent , & forensia magis tractarent . Notes for div A42757-e41900 * See Nihil Respondes pag. 32 33. Male audis pag. 52. 53. a In alijs ( Ecclesijs ) ubi aut nulla est excommunicatio in usu , aut non lecitime administratur , ac nihilomirus absque omni convoversia , in consesso est ac palam docetur , eam merito in Ecclesia vigere debere , Et infra , Ne etiam Celsitudo tua se suasque Ecclesias ab alijs omnibus Ecclesijs , tain ab ijs quae nullam habent Excommunicationem , quam ab ijs quae habent , nova hac opinione sejungat : siquidem universae ac singulae uno ore confitentur , semperque confessae sunt , merito illam in usu esse debere . b Erast. praefat . Nos de illis solis loqui peccatoribus qui doctrinam intelligunt , probant amplectuntur : peccata sua se agnoscere vere atque edisse aiunt , & Sacramentis secundum Institutienem Christi uti cupiunt . Et lib. 6. cap. 2. faciunt praelerea nobis injuriam ( imo vera calumnia est ) cum dicunt nos omnes sine ullo examine velle admitti , quales quales sint ac esse velint . Quippe sic volumus unumquemque admitti , quomodo Ecclesiae nostrae consuetudo & regula jubet . Et intra . Sane ut Idololatram & Apostatam , negamus membrum esse Ecclesiae Christi , sic etiam Nequitiam suam desendentem negamus inter membra Ecclesiae censendum esse . Et quemadmodum illos ex Christiano coetu judicamus exterminandos , sic hos queque putamus in eo coeiu non esse ferendos . Verum neque de bis , neque de illis quaerunt nostrae Theses : sed disputatur in eis , de solis doctrinam amplexantibus , & Sacramentis rite cum Ecclesia uti cupientibus , hoc est poenit entiam eodem modo quo alij profitentibus . c Erastus ib. Equidem in Thesibus ab initi●… monui , me de sola illa excommunicatione apere , qua aliqui doctrinam intelligentes , probantes , amplexantes , & Sacramentis rectè uti cupientes , quod ad externum usum attinet ab eijsdem propter anteactae vitae turpitu linem a quibusdam Presbyteris repelluntur : quia scilic et non videtur eis serio dolere , qui lapsus fuit , ac sibi dolere id profitetur . Isa. 33. 2● . d Procul , hinc procul ite prophani , Conclamat vates , totoque absistite luco . Et illud , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et illud , Tu Genitor cape sacra manu patriosque penates . Me bello extento digressum & caede recenti Attrectare nefas , donec me flumine vivo Abluere — e Caesar lib. 6. de bello Gallico , Si quis privatus aut publicus eorum decreto non steterit , sacrificijs interdicunt . Haec poena est apud eos gravissima Quibus est interdictum , ij numeroimpiorum ac sceleratorum habentur . Ij omnes decedunt ( others read ) ab ijs omnes decedunt ) adinim sermonemque defugiunt , ne quid ex contagione incommodi accipiant . f Erastus lib. 4. cap. 7. Horum debetis vitam & mores observare , & quos impuros esse cognovistis vitare , ne vos quoque inficiamini ; ipsi autem pudefiant & in viam redeant . g Salmasius appar . ad lib. de prim . pag. 303. Cum sit ut jam vidimus duplex potestas Ecclesiastica , altera interna , external altera tam peccant qui utramque principi , vel magistratui civili tribuunt , quam qui utramque denegant ministre Ecclesiastico . h Erastus confirm . Thes. lib. 3. cap. 1. Veruntamen ut in rebus prophanis curandis ei ( Magistratui ) non licet terminos & fines aequitatis , justitiae ac honestatis , hoc est praescriptionem legum & statutorum Reiptranscendere . Sic in disponendis & ordinandis rebus sacris , vel ad cultum divinum pertinentibus , longe minus ei licet 〈◊〉 in parte , a praescripto verbi Dei discedere ; quod tanquam re gulam in omnibus debet sequi , ab eoquenusquam vel latum pilum deflectere . i Erastus ibid. Intelligi hoc debet de ea Repub. dictum , in quia Magistratus & subditi , eandem profitentur Religionem , eamque veram . In hac dico duas distinctis jurisdictiones minime debere esse . In alta , in qua videlicet Magistratus falsam tuetur sententiam , certo quodo●…modo toler abilis videri fortosse possit divisi●… rectionum . k Confirm . Thes. lib. 4. cap. 2. Quod addis non licere magistratui , re ita postulante , docere & Sacramenta administra re ( si modo per ne gotia possit utrique muneri sufficere ) idverum non est . l Bullinger de Conc. lib. 1. c. 8. Si turpe aut indignum quondam videbatur gentes inducere in templum Del : quare non videatur hodie sacrilegum , introducere in Synodum Ecclesiasticam canes & porcos . m Appar . ad lib. de primatu pag. 294. Ubicunque sane imperio opus est per vim agente ac jubenie , aut Jurisdictione cogente & cohercente , nihil istic habent quod agant verbi divini ministri , neque jus agendi ullum , etiamsi de re aut persona Ecclesiastica quaestio sit , aut de Religione agatur , sed ad principes out Magistratus ea vis coactiva , & il'ud jus imperativum & coercitivum pertinet . Ibid. pag. 295. Iurisdictionem ijdem ( pontificij Doctores ) porro interiorem ac exteriorem ita distinguunt , ut interior sit qua Sacerdos possit peccatorem confessum a peccatis absolvere & satisfactionem ponere : exterior autem qua peccatores adstringit 〈◊〉 Anathematis , aliasque publicas censuras irrc●…at , & abijsdem exsolvit . Verum hae duae Iurisdictiones un●…m faciunt , ean que solam interiorem . Nulla quippe exterior est , cum utraque respiciat & p●…o objecto habeat hominem interiorem , id est animam . lb. p. 297. Finis tantum respici debet . Aliquis suspenditur & excommunicatur ? Sane , sed ut per poenitentiam restitui possit , & Sacramenta corporis & sanguiris Christi iterum participare . Et poenitentia illa quam quis agit ut possit reconciliari , interioris est hominis . n Festus Honnius disp . 30. thes . 6. Circa bonum spirituale versatur potestas Ecclesi astica proprie ita dicta , cujus proprium officium est verbum Dei praedicare , Sacramenta administrare , disciplinam Ecclesiasticam exercere , Ministros Ecclesiae ordinare , de controversiis Ecclesi isticis quae circa doctrinam aut regimen Ec clesiae intercidunt , ordinarie judicare , & de ritibus adiaphoris ad ordinem , decorum atque aedificationem Ecclesiae pertinentibus , Canones seu leges Ecclesiasticas constituere . I. Gerard loc . com . Tom. 6. pag. 494. Distinguitur Christi regnum ad quod potestas clavium pertinet , ab imperiis mundanis quae gladio corporali in administratione utuntur . o Synt. Theol. lib. 6. cap. 29. Regnum Christi vel naturale est ▪ vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Regnum Christi naturale est quod Christus a natura hal et , estque communis totius Deita is &c. Hes Regnum etiam universale dicitur , quia est simpliciter in universa . At Regnum Christi donativum est qued Christus tradiium a Patre ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accepit &c. Hoc Regnum 〈◊〉 prium Christi , quod ut Rex Mediator obtinet in persona sua : ac Regnum etiam singulare di● quia est peculiare in Ecclesia &c. Utque naturale Regnum obtinet jure naturae , quia est naturalis filius Dei Patris : ita donativum Regnum obtinet jure donationis . p Synt. pur . Theol. Desp. 26. thes . 35. Ipsi ( Patri ) suum queque Sceptrum Mediatorium seu oeconomieum traditurus dicitur , ut imperium mere divinum eadem gloria ae Majestate cum Patre , erga suos electos in aeternum exerceat . Zach. Ursinus Tom. 1. pag. 398. Christus Patri tradet Regnum post glorificationem Ecclesiae , id est , desinet facere Officium Mediatoris . q Calv. in Col. 1. 18. Postquam generaliter de Christi excellentia disseruit , deque summo ejus in omnes creaturas principa●… : iterum redit adea quae peculiariter ad Ecclesiam spectant . In nomine capitis alii plura considerant &c. Hic vero potissimum , meo judicio , de guhernatione loquitur . r Greg. de Valenti● . comment . in Thom. tom . 4. disp . 1. quaest . 32. punct . 6. Si autem per omnem potestatem , secundo intelligamus ibi cum Hieronymo & Anselmo omnem potestatem necessariam quidem Christo ad gubernandam spiritualiter omnem Ecclesiam , tum in coelo , ubi est caput & rex 〈◊〉 ; tum in terra , ubi 〈◊〉 homines , quorum item est rex & caput : satis constat non inde sequi quod accepe●…it etiam potestatem pol●…ticam . Medina in tertiam partem , quaest : 59. a●t . 4. Dicendum quad omnis potestas & auctoritas tribuenda est Christo , si tamen decens sit ad efficium redemptionis ; at quod fuerit rex temporalis totius orbis minime decuit Christum , ●…b idque istam auctoritatem non accepit . s Calv. in 1 Cor. 12. 28. Aut certe tam munus quam domum olim suit , quod nobis hodie est incognitum : aut ad diaconiam pertinet , hoc est curam pauperum . Atque hoc secundum mihi magis arridet ▪ t Synop. pur . Theol. Disp. 26. Thes. 29. Tametsi ob istam mediationem filius Dei minor sit Patre , non propterea ipso minor est quoad Deitatem . u Synops. pur . Theol. Disp. 42. Coroll . 4. An Apostolus Paulus cum hominem incestuojum Satanae tra●…ret , quicquam peculiare habuerit ? Nos contra Socinianos Apostolum Paulum non ex jwe sibi peculiari , sed sibi cum omnibus Ecclesiae Preslyteris communi , incestuosum illum Satanae tradidisse , colligimus ex 1 Cor. 5. 4. Mat. 18. 17. 18. x Jo. Brentius Hom. in Luc. Tom. 1. Hom. 106. Quis me construit Judicem aut divisorem super vos ? hoc est , alia est civilis Magistratus voca to , alia mea vocatio . Ad illum pertinet ut dijudicet controversias de haereditatibus , & id genus ahis rebus . Ad me autem pertinet ut doceam Evangelion de remissione peccatorum , & vita aeterna . Ut igitur nollem quod magistratus meum officium temere usurparet , ita & mea interest , ne temere usurpem mihi vocationem magistratus . Observanda doctrina , qua non solum erudimur , quod sit proprium & legitimum officium Christi in hoc externo mundo , verum etiam admonemur exemplo Christi , ne quis alienam vocationem illegitime invadut . Jo. Winckelmannus in Luk. 12. 14. Negat se esse politicum Judicem herciscundae familiae , sicut nec adulteram damnet , Joh. 8. Ostendit enim esse discrimen inter Politicum magistraium , & munus Ecclesiasticum . y Greg. de Valentia comment . Theol. Tom. 4. Disp. 1 ▪ Quaest. 22. Punct . 6. Homo , quis me constituit Judicem aut divisorem inter vos ? Quasi diceret : Nemo plane , neque homo , & multo minus Deus . Si enim a Deo habuisset Dominium Jurisdictionis politicae , multo verius su sset censtitutus Judex politicus , quam si eam Jurisdictionem habuisset ab homine . Et tamen negat omnino se fuisse talem Judicem constitutum . Unde per hoc quod addit , Quis me constituit Judicem ? &c. Eum remisit ad alium qui haberet eam potestatem , qua ipse careret . See the like in Bellarmine de Pontif. lib. 5. cap. 4. z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Hier. Ru st co monacho . Etiam muta animantia & serarum greges ductores sequuntur suos . In apibus principes sunt . b Qui Mario , ipse Caio Caesari : qui Augusto , ipse & Neroni ; qui Vespasianis vel patri vel filio , suavissimis Imperatoribus , ipse & Domitiano crudelissimo . Et ne per singulos ire necessesit , qui Constantino Christiano , ipse Apostatae Iuliano . c Synops. pur . Theol. disp . 48. Thes. 19. E●…si vero hanc spiritualem p●…testatem a Christiani Magistratus inspectione , tanquam utriusque tabulae custode non eximimus , negamus tamen eam , aut ejus praxin a Magistratus suprema aucto●…itate pendere , sicuti quidam ●…ecentiores contendunt , cum a Christo solo pendeat , & ab ipso immediate Ecclesiae sit concessa ut loci an●…ea producti demon strant . Ac proinde nec per appellationem , aut provocationem proprie dictam , po●…estas haec ad Magistratus aut Principum tribunal deferr●… potest . quum ejus executio penes ipsos non sit . d Apparat. ad lib. de Primatu pag. 282 , 283. ●…lebs autem ipsa quam curan●… Pastores , quantum a●…tines ad animaecuram , Pastoribus suis subdita est . Si corporis ratio aga●…ur , summum in illud Imperium habent Principes ac Supremi Magistratus . Delicta igitur hominum dupliciter puniumur , aut in anima sola , aut in corpore . Poenae quae corporis necem aut noxam inferunt , aut bonorum amissionem , a Magistratu civili infliguntur : Quae vero animarum castigationem & emendationem spectant , per Ministrum Ecclesiae imponuntur . Summa earum poenarum excommunicatio est . Et in●ra . Idem peccatum in eodem homine ali●…er vindicat Magistratus civilis , aliter punit Minister Ecclesiae . e Praesunt in Domino . Hoc additum videtur ad notandum spirituale regimen . Tametsi enim Reges quoque & Magistrátus Dei ordinatione praesunt , quia tamen Ecclesiae gubernationem Dominus peculialiter vult suam agnosci , ideo nominatim praeesse in Domino dieuntur , qui Christi nomine & mandato Ecclesiam gu-bernant . f Et hoc nomine differt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quod haec praesidentiam cùm potestate , sive praeposituram cum jurisdictione ac coercitione ●ibuat , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vero ut in loco quis sit priore collocatus , tantum efficit . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesychius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 interpretatur gubérnationem vel administrationem . Et notum qui dicerentur proprie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Republica Atheniensium . g Aretius comment . in Hebr. 13. 14. Primum Apostolus salutat suo nomine ipsorum praepositos , hoc est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quo nomine intelligo tum Ministros , tum etiam Seniores , qui reliquos auctoritate regebant , & in officio detinebant . h Zach Ursinus Tom. 3. pag. 769. Object . 1. Tantum praecipit ministro ut eum sugiat ergo non excommunicantus . Resp. Negatur antecedens quia non vult de una & eadem re , vel persona , contraria judicia esse aut pugnantes sententias . Ergo dum vult ut Haereticum pro everso habeat minister , non vult ut reliqui in Ecclesia habeant eum pro stante . Object . 2. Sed non jubet excommunicari . Resp. Iubet , quia vult illum pro everso & suopte judicio condemnato haberi . Ergo non est Ecclesiae membrum , & alibi docet judicium hoc debere fieri ordinario & legitimo consensu Ecclesiae . i Aegid . Hunnius in 1 Cor. 14. 32. Paulus hanc regulam praescribit , ut spiritus Prophetarum Prophetis subjiciantur , id est ▪ ut is qui prophetas , non du●…itet , sermonem & concionem suam censurae judicioque reliquorum concionatorum subjicere . k Musculus upon the place . Habet Ecclesia quaelibet suos praesectos & Gubernatores &c. Isti sunt Seniores &c. Calv. ibid. Temporis illius conditio non de quibuslibet praefectis Paulum loqui ostendit , ( quia tunc nulli erant pii Magistratus ) sed de Senioribus qui morum erant Censores . Tossanus ibid. Id omne ad regimen & ordinem Ecclesiae & potestatem illam spiritualem de qua 2 Cor. 10. referri debet : & tribuitur praesidum appellatio quos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocat Apostolus 1 Tim. 5. omnibus in genere ministris & etiam senioribus Ecclesiae . l At Gubernatores vocavit Amb●osius qui spiritu ilibus retina●ulis docum●nto 〈◊〉 hominibus , quales sunt seniores , Pres●yteri , & disciplinae Christianae praesecti , morum censores . m Curabit denique ( oeconomus ) ut impuros & perdite viventes a familia excludat , eosdemque si poenitentiam egerins , rursus in eam recipiat . m Synod . Dord . sess . 18. Et quia vocati ad ministerium regimini Ecclesiae aliquando sunt praeficiendi : Ecclesiarum vero regimen in Scholis exacte non addiscitur , non abs re f●…ret si aliquot ante vocasionem mensibus , in urbibus 〈◊〉 us potestas His fiat ut inte●…sint Presbyter●…is , &c. n Annot. in Luc. 6. 22. Reperti sunt & qui Judicia ista Ecclesiae putarent inhibenda ; quoties Christiana●… potestates Deus concederet saeculo &c. At Christi leges multo plus exigunt , quam in commune civibus impe●…ii alicujus praescribi solet , aut etiam potest , semper enim magna pars hominum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Quare civiles quidem leges suo funguntur officio , si graviora & societati maxime no●…entia delicta coerceant : at quae contra dilectionis , contra mansuetudinis , contra patientiae leges pec●…antur , extra communes leges sunt posita : non etiam extra eas leges ▪ quas se sectantibus Christus praescribit , & secundum quas ▪ judicare debet ille selectus ex mundo coetus . o Et hodie e●iam disciplina Ecclesiastica opus est , quae in reforma●is Eccles●is instituta diligenter servari debet , ne Magistratum indulgentia quae ubique sere regnat , Evangelii doctrinam exteris suspectam reddat , & ut ipsi quoque in officio contineantur , nec sibi quidvis in Ecclesia licere putentt . Matth. 16. John 20. Matth. 16. 1 Cor. 5. 2 Cor. 2. Matth. 18. Cons. Theol. pag. 586. Gubernatio Ecclesiae in quibus consistat . * He wrote from Basil. Notes for div A42757-e72300 a Aug. Tom 10. bom . 50. Nos vero à communione prohibere quenquam non postumus , quamvis haec prohibitio nondum sit mortalis , sed medicinalis , nisi aut spōnte confessum , aut in aliquò sive seculari five Ecclesiastico judicio nominatum atque convictum . b Theol. probl . loc . 132. Interea non desperandum esse libenter fateor , dabit posterior aetas tractabiliores fortè animas , mitiora pectora , quàm nostra habent saecula . c Concil . Nicaen . can . 11. Ab omnibus verò illud praecipue observetur , ut animus eorum & fructus paenitentiae at●endatur . Quicunque enim cum omni timore & lachrymis perseverantibus , & operibus bon●s conversationem su●m , non ve●bis soli● , sed opere & veritate demonstran● , cum tempus statutum etiam ab his fuerit imple●um , & orationibus jam caeperint communicate , licebit etiam Episcopo humanius circa eos aliquid cogitare . Qui vero indifferenter habnerint lapsum , & sufficere sibi quod Ecclesiam introierint , arbitrantur , ipsi omnimodo tempora statuta complebunt . d A full answer to a Printed Paper entituled foure serious Questions concerning Excommunication and Suspension &c. Consirm . Thes. lib. 2 p. 134. non tamen pro non Judaeo , vel non circumciso , aut pro improbo damna●…vór habeba ●…ur Cogebatur inhilominus secundùm ritus patrios vivere , Sabbatum custo dire , aliáque talia sacere . Quinetiam a Sacramento expiationis generalis , quae die 10. ●…eni îs Septembris per agebatur Lev. 17. & 23. immundi nulli excludebantur . e Ibidem etiam exhortationes , castigationes , & censura divina . Nam & judicatur magno cum pondere ut apud certos de Dei conspectu : summumque futuri judicii praejudicium est , si quis ita deliquerit , ut a communicatione orationis , & conventus , & omnis sancti commercii releget●r . f De Iure natur . & Gent. lib. 4. cap. 8. * Yea now also it appeareth by his Diotrephes catechised that he denieth and opposeth Excommunication it selfe , at least under a Christian Magistrate . g Steph. Restringitur & 〈◊〉 m●…do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad synedrium seu Presbyterium , id est seniorum collegium , ut Matth. 18. So Marlora●… in Thesaur●… saith that the word Ecclesia is taken prosenatu Ecclesiastico Matth. 18. 17. h Sed solùm exempli causa attulit tale genu● peccati , de quò maximè poterat dubitari , an in ejus correptione hic ordo servandus sit , & in quò difficillimè servetur , ob innatam multis cupiditatem vindictae . i Consirm . Thesium lib. 2. cap. 2. Quis nescit illo tempore Judaeos sub Romanis vixisse , ac praesidem eorum p●rentibus omnibus jus dicere solitum suisse ? Civilem potentiam ad se omnem f●rè per●raxerant , relicta potestate ipsis de rebus sacris judicandi , & secundum legis ceremonias vivendi . Idem lib. 3. cap. 1. In●erim tamen pa●ebant Romanis : neque in aliis rebus potestatem servaverant integram , quàm in rebus ad religionem morésque patrios pertinentibus . b Iosephus an-tiq . lib. 20. cap. 8. Suasit ( popu lus ) regi ut orientalem instauraret porticum . Ea templi extima claudebat , profundae valli & augustae imminens , &c. Opus Solomonis , regis , qui primus integrum Templum condi●it . l Erast Cousirm . Thes. lib. 2. pag. 158. Quod uni dictum est , dictum toti est ecclesiae . At uni dictum est ut septuagies in die culpam deprecanti remit●at . Ergo tota Ecclesia deprecanti ignoscore debet , quo●iescunque in die sibi ignosci petot Nulla enim justa causa proferri poterit , cur tota Ecclesia non debeat facere in hac causa , quod singulis ejus membris praeceptum est . m Quod si hos contemn●t , indicetur Ecclesiae ejus pervicatia . Et si ne Ecclesiam au dierit , monitus scilicet à multis , habeatur ab eis veluti ethnicus & publicanus . Et quaecunque illi sic ligave in t , ligata habebuntur in caelis , hoc est , quos ita monitos ejecerint è suo consortio , ●i etiam apud patrem ejecti habebuntur . n Martyr in 1 Cor. 5. ult . loc . de excom . Verum si hoc pro suo arbitrio cuique permittatur , ut facultatem habeat discedend● & separandi se à quibus voluerit , simultates , contentiones , & discordiae , longè graviores orientur , quàm si publicâ excommunicatione ut●remur . o Cartwright Histor. christi ex 4. Evang. pag. 354. Hoc loco ( Mat. 18 ) notandum , singulotum in Ecclesia civium munus esse , ut deiinquentem s●rm corpaint . p Si peccaverit in te frater tuus ] Eadem habentur in libro Musar 221. quan ▪ quam paulò aliter , Qui arguit socium debet primùm hoc sacere placidè interse & ipsum solùm verbis mollibus , ita ut non pude saciat eum Si respiscit ▪ bene est ●… sin , debet eum acriter arguere , & pudefacere inter se & ipsum . Si non respiscit , debet adhibere socios , ipsumque coram illis pudore afficere : si nec hoc mod●… quicquam prosecit , debet eum pudesacere coram multis , ejusque delictum publicare . Nam certè detegendi sunt Hypocritae . q Confirm . Thes. lib. 3. cap. 3. p 188. Ideo dicit Christus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Math. ut intelligamus cum erroris & iniquitatis convincendum esse , ut eam agnoscat ac deprecetur non apud nos tantum , sed multò magis apud Deum . r Confirm . Thes. lib. 3. cap 2 pag. 184. Habitant nunc sub Turca & pontifice Romano fideles ; Si quis assiciatur ibi à fratre injuriâ , nec audire injuriosus suum coetum velit , quid aliud potest offensus facere quàm ejus implorare Judicis opem , qui facultatem habet coercendi ? s Sutliviks de Presbyteri● Cap. 9 deindelo●…uitur Christus de Ecclesia , quae cogendi potestarem non habuit , c ▪ j sque sententiam impunèlic●…it contemn●…re . Nam si cogendi po●…statem habuisset , srustra i●…la verba addita sunt , fi Ecclesiam audire noluerit : nam Ecclesia coegisset , & sententiam suam executioni mandasset . This he objecteth against the Presbytetian Interpretation . But in truth it helpeth us and strongly mili tateth against the Erastian Interpretation . t Pag. 158. Proinde impunè poterat , qui volebat judicium Synedtii contemnere in civilibus rebus . u Sutcliv de Presbyt . cap. 1. x De actib . super●…at . Disp. 28. D●…b . 9. Item qua●do peccatum corripiendi p●aeter me est uni vel alteri notum , etiam facile mihi est hos post primam correp ionem adjungere mihi socios ac testes secundae 〈◊〉 . Cum eni● hi non minus quàm ego ejus pecc●tum noverint , aequaliter poterunt ipsum de hoc corripere , illudúe poste● , si opus 〈◊〉 , coram Superior● testari . Quare communiter omnes censent in eo casu testes ●sse adhibendos , si prima correptio non suerit efficax . Sed tota difficultas est quando pecca●um est mihi soli notum . Qua in re triplex est 〈◊〉 . Prima docet quando tunc proximus non ●mendatur secreta me admonitione , non esse ulterius p●ogrediendum , &c. y Ignoscendi autem misericors mansuetudo , &c. non ad hoc valet ut sit iniquitas impunita , aut torpens & dormiens disciplina , quod potius obsit quam dil g ns vigilansque vindicta . Claves quippe ●egni caelorum sic dedit Christus Ecclesiae , ut non solùm diceret Quae solveritis super terram , c●unt solu a & in caelis : ubi apertissim è bonum , non malum pro malo reddit Ecclesia : verùm & adjungeret : Quae ligaveritis in terra erunt ligata & in caelo . quia bon● est & vindicandi justitia . Illud enim quod ait , Si nec Ecclesiam audi●rit , sit tibi tanquam ethn●cus & publicanus , g●avius est quam si gladio soriretur , si flammis absumeret●r , si feris subrigeretur . Nam ibi quoque subjunxit , Amen dico vobis quae ligaveritis super te●tam erunt ligata & in caelis : ut intelligeretur quanto gravius sit punitus qui velut relictus est impunitus . z Hior . in Matth. 18. 19 , Quia dixerat , Si autem Ecclesiam non audierit , sit tibi sicut ethnicus & publicanus , & poter●t contemptoris fratris haec occulta esse responsio vel tacita cogitatio : si me despicis & ego te despicio : si tu me condemnas & meâ sententiâ condemnaberis : potestatem tribuit Apostolis , ut sciant qui à talibus condemnantur , humanam sententiam divina sententia roborari , & quodcunque ligatum sucrit in terra , lig●ri pariter & in caelo . Hier. Epist. 1. ad Heliod . Absit ut de his quicquam sinist um loquar , qui apostolico gradui succedentos , Christi corpus sacro ore conficiunt , per quos & nos Christiani sumus . Qui claves regni caelorum habentes , quodammodo ante Judic●i d●em judicant , &c , Mihi ante Presbyterum ( legendum fortasse Presbyterium ) sedere non licet : illi si peccavero , li●et tradere me Satanae in interitum catuis , ut spiritus salvus fit . Et in veteri quidem lege , quicunque sacerdotibus non obtemperasset , aut extra castra positus , lapidabatur à populo , aut gladio cervice subjecta , contemptum expiabat c●uore : Nunc ve●ò inobediens , spirituali mucrone truncatur , aut ejectus de Ecclesia , ●abido daemonum ore discerp●tur . a Sutlivius de presbyt . cap. 14. p. 107. Apostoli religionis & fidei à Christo cognitionem acceperunt : haec enim pars est maxima clavium quas ille Apostolis suis commisit . b M●…gdeb . Cent. 1 lib. 2. cap. 4. pag. 275. edit . 1624 giving the sence of this very place , they say . Atque ita excludantur a communione Ecclesiae , ut non modo arceantur ab usu sacramen : orum , sed etiam à commerció , ne cibus quidem cum iis capiatur . Novariuus upon the place expreseth the Apostles meaning in these words of Ambrose . Cum fraire in quo vi●…ia haec reperiuntur , non solùm Sacramenta non edenda , sed nec communem escam docet , ut erubescat quum vitatur & se currigat . c Gualther archel . in 1 Cor. 5. 11. Catalogus eorum qui debent excommunica●i . Tossanus ibid. Quod cibum non vult sumi cum iis , pertinet id quidem ad disciplinam excommunica●ionis . Martyr ibid. Notandum praeterea , non esse privatorum hominum ut quisque pro sus libidine ab hoc vel ab illo , quem peccasse fortè suspicatus fuerit , sese disjungere velit . Ad commune judicium Ecclesiae pertinet . Angust . Hom. 50 joyneth 1 Cor. 5. v. 11. with v. 12 , 13. and then saith , Quibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oftendit non ●…emerè aut quomodolibet , sed per judicium ●…uferondos esse 〈◊〉 ab Ecclesiae communione , ut si per judicium auferri non possunt , tolerentur potius , ne perverse malos quisque evitando , ab Ecclesia ipse discedens , eos quos fugere videtur vinci●…t ad gehennam . The same hath Bed●… upon the place out of Augustine ▪ So likewise Ambr●…se and the Centurists before cited ▪ * The 13 verse he yeeldeth to be a warrant for Excommunication : yet he 〈◊〉 concerning that also , in Diotre●… catechised . 1 Cor. 11. 21 , 22. Ter●…ul . apolog . d 〈◊〉 . ce●… . 1. lib. 2. cap. 6. cap. 384. edit . 1624. apud Corinthios invalu●rat ●lle abusus , ut an●e caenam Dominicam inter se concertarent ; & alii ibi suas coenas instruerent & benepoti caenam Domini acciperen● . e ●…od . c●…non . eccl . Afri●… . can . 41. Ut Sacramenta altaris 〈◊〉 ni●i à jejunis hominibus celebrentur , excepto uno die anniversario , quo caena dominica celebratur . f August . epist. 118. cap. 7. Sed nonnullos probabilis quaedam ratio delectavit , ut uno certo die per annum quo ipsam caenam Dominus dedit , ●anquam ad insigniorem commemorationem , post cibos offerti & accipi liceat corpus & s●nguinem Domini &c. hoc tamen non arbitror institu●um , nisi quia plures & propè omnes in plerisque locis eo die caenare consueverunt . g Walafridus Strabo de reb . eccl . cap. 19. Hoc qu●que commemorandum videtur , quod ipsa Sacrament● quidam interdum jejuni , interdum pransi perc●pisse leguntur . He tels us out of Socrates that the Egyptians ne●re Alexandria , as likewise those in Thebais did often take the S●crament after they had eaten lib●rally . h Cum sero factum esset , recumbebat cum duodecim , & manducantibus ois dixit ▪ Quoniam unus ex vobis me tradet . Post enim tradidit Sacramentum . i Gerhard . loc . com . tom . 5. pag. 186 , 187. Petrus Hinckelmannus de Anabaptismo . disp . 5. cap. 2. b Hilarius Can. 30. in Matth : Post quae Judas proditor indicatur , sine quo pascha accepto calice & fracto pane conficitur : dignus enim aeternerum sacramentorum communione non f●erat &c. Neque sanè bibere cum eo poterat , qui non erat bibeturus in regno . l Lib. 4. de myster . Misse cap. 13. Patet ergo quod Judas prius exiit quàm Christus traderet Eucharistiam . Quod autem Lucas post calicem commemorat traditc●…em , per recapitualtionem potost intelligi : Quia saepe ●…it in Scriptura ut ' quod prius sactum sserat posterius enarretur . That whole Chapter is sp●nt in the debating of this questio● . m In I●…h 6. de participatione autem co●po r●s & sanguinis ejus , potest aliquis opinari quod ille ( Judas ) intersuerit . Sed profecto diligentius Evangelistarum natratione , doctorumque ●nsiderata diversitate , citius deprehendi , huic quoque Sacramento illum nequaquam inter● Nam cum accepis●et buccellam , qua traditor designatus est , exivit continuo . n Idem in Io. 13. Sciendum 〈◊〉 ò est , quia , sicut & ante nos dictum est , si post bucellam continuo Judas ●xivit , sicut paulò post Evangelista dicit , procul●ubio nequaquam Discipulis tunc interfuit , quando Domirus noster Sacramentum illis corporis & sanguinis sui distribuit . Et paulo post . Igitur exemplo Domini , tolerate quidem malos boni debent in Ecclesia , don●c ventilabro Judicii granum à palea , vel à tritico separentur zizan●a : 〈◊〉 e● non ●o usque indis● eta debet esse patientia , ut indig●is , quos noverunt , Sacrosancta Christi tradant mysteria . o Beza i●… Jo. 13. 30. certa videtur esse corum sententia ●ui existimant Judam institutioni sacrae caenae non interfuisse . p Tessanus in Joh. 13. ita ut Judae qu●dem laverit pedes Christus , sed postea egres●us caenae Sacramentali non interfuerit , sicut ●ruditi multi ex hoc capite colligunt . q Musculus in loc . com . de can●… Dom. p. 352. M●hi sanè dubium non est , egressum ad perficiendum traditionis scelus fuisse Judam , priusquam Sacramentum hoc à Domino Disscipul is traderetu● . r Diodati upon Ioh 13. 30. We may gather from hence that he ( Judas ) did not communicate of our Saviours Sacrament . s Grotius annot . in Mat. 26. 21 , 26. Luk 22. 21. ●…ch . 13. holds that the Supper at which the sop was given to Iudas , and from which he went forth , was the common supper , and that it was before the Lords Supper , and that Luke doth not place Christs words concerning Iudas Luke 22. 21. in the proper place . t Gerhard . Har●… Evang. cap. 170. Quidam statuunt pedum lotionem ips● etiam legali caenae sive agni pasch●lis esui praemittendam esse . w Non dimittunt ( caetum comedentium ) post esum ( agni ) paschalis cum bellariis ( Hoc est non sinunt caetum comedentium post esum agni paschalis comedere secundarum mensatum delitias ) Ibid. v●…rsus finem . Comedentium caetus sic dimittitur , ut nihil amplius cibi aut bellariorum aut similes secundarum mensarum delitias , quae ad commessationes pertinent , illis comedere aut quicquam bibere permissum sit : non enim in more habent post sacram hanc caenam indulgere commess●tionibus & 〈◊〉 , imo ne minimum quidem ▪ gustant . x Matth. Martini●… lexic. philol . pag. 25 29. Nam sanè Canon paschali●… diser●…e interdicebat , post poculum la●…dationis , aliquid cibi aut p●…tus sumere . Interdicitur comedere aliquid post poculum hymni . Hic fuit verus ritus celebrat●…nis pascha temporibus Messiae , &c. * Durantus de ritibus lib. 2. cap. 38. num . 16. Ipsi tamen ( Judae ) corpus & sanguinem suum dedit , ne occultum peccatorem sine accusatore & evidenti probatione , ab aliorum communione separarot . Et insra num . 17. Nam etsi Christo nota crat Judae iniquitas , sicut Deo : non tamen ei cognita crat co modo , quo hominibus innotescit . x Gerhard . Har. Evang cap. 172. Christus his verbis Judam quasi excommunicat , & ex Apostolorum coll●gio disc●dere jubet , cum se totum Diabolo tradidisset . Quod facis fac citius , id est , cum ali● Magistro te addixeris , & me audire pertinaciter renuas , abi ex meo & apostolorum meorum conspectu , &c. Ambros. lib. 2. de Cain & Abel cap. 4. Quod facis fac cele●…ius , quid illud ? ut quia introie●at in illum Satanas , ipse abiret à Christo. Ejicitur itaque & excluditur , ●o quod jam cum Domino Jesu esse non posset , qui caeperat es●e cum diabolo . Estius in lib. 4. Sent. dist . 19. sect . 9. Qui● & ipse Christus hanc potestatem qua traduntur homines Sathanae , exercuisse videtur , quando Iudam à suo consortio removit , atque abire jussit dicendo , Quod facis , fac citius . Chrysostome Hom. 71. in Joh. ( according to the Greek Hom. 72. ) making a Transition unto that Text , That thou dost , doe quickly , he useth these words , to expresse what Christ was at that instant doing to Iudas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and againe , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Christ did separate him from the rest of the Apostles , and cast him out . Theophy lact . upon the same place : illum divisit Domin●…s & separavit ab alils discipulis . y Respondemus id nobis revera esse illicitum , & peccare Ministros qui dant Sacramenta indignis , quando fine scandalo denegare possunt , attamen Deum his legibus non teneri , cum sit supremus Dominus , qui suis donis utitur , prout voluerit , quemadmodum etiam Deus non peccat permittendo hominum peccata , imò & ad peccati substantiam concurrendo ; nobis verò , nec concurrere licet nec permittere aliquod peccatum , quando sufficienter & moraliter id impedire possumus . * Si verò peccatum est manif●stum , tun● verò sive in occulto sive in manifesto petat , debot ei denegare . z C●…nfirm , Thes. p●g . 120. a Tom. 10. hom . 50. Et cum in se protulerit severissimae medicinae sententiam , veniat ad antistites , per quos illi in Ecclesiâ claves ministrantur , & tanquam bonus incipi●s jam esse filius maternorum membrorum ordine custodito , à praep●sitis sacrorum accipiat satisfaction s suae modum , ut in offe●ndo sacrificio cordis contribulati devotus & supplex , id tamen agat , quod non solum illi p●osit ad recipiendam salutem , sed etiam caeteris ad exemplum . Ut si peccata ejus non solum in gravi ejus malo , sed etiam in scandalo est aliorum : atque hoc expedire videtur utilita●i Ecclesiae , antistiti in notitia multorum , vel etiam totius plebis agere paenitentiam non recuset . b I●stit . pag. 301. edit . 1539. Cum hoc tantum in ministerio habeant ( Sacramenta ) testificari nobis ac confirmare Dei in nos benevolentiam &c. Ut quae 〈◊〉 largiantur quidem aliquid gratiae , sed renuncient & ostendant quae divina largitate nobis data sunt . c Decad. 5. Serm. 7. Docuit vulgus Sacerdotum & Monachorum Sacramenta novae legis non tantum esse signa gratiae , sed simul etiam gratiae causos , hoc est qu●… habeant virtu●…m conferendi gra●…iam . And after . Sancti & electi Dei non tum primum gratia Dei donisque coelestibus participant , cum Sacramenta percipiunt . Etenim rebus prius quam fignis partic●…pant . And after . Pro●…nde in Coena 〈◊〉 non primum accipiuntur divi●…a 〈◊〉 , sed pro acceptis aguntur gratia . Effec●… his opinor , eviciqu●… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . d Ursin. Tract . Theol. pag. 350. Sicut verbum est conversionis & confirmationis organum : sic 〈◊〉 Sacramenta sunorgana confirmationis &c. Non res accipimus ideo quia signum accipimus : sed signum nobis tribuitur quia res habemus : idque ita , ut non cur habeamus causa , sed quod eas habeamus testimonium sit . Ibid. de Sacram. def●ns . quinti Arg. Pag. 557. Nos vero supra hoc discrimen verbi & Sacramentorum non dis●…imulavimus , quod fides per verbum inch●…atur : Sacramentorum usu autem confirmatur , exercetur , fovetur , augetur jam inchoata . Sacramenta enim ne docent quidem , nedum confirmant , nisi praeeunte verbo & addente explicationem typorum . Ideirco etiam Sacramenta iis instituta sunt , quos Deus jam pro membris Ecclesiae a nobis vult agnosci . Inchoatio igitur fidei ordinaria verbi propria est ; confirmati●… inchoatae , Sacramentis cum verbo communis est . Judicium de disciplina Ecclesiastica ad finem Tom. 3 pag. 89. Quasi non pueris jam no●…um , verbum & conversis & non conversis esse annuncia●…dum , quo illi quidem confirmentur , hi vero convertantur . Sacramenta autem iis esse instituta qui jam sunt conversi & membra populi Dei facti . e De Coena Dom. pag. 350 Quis non videt quales nos ad mysticam hanc Domini mensam accedere oporteat ? nempe non tales qui fruiti●…nem corporis ac sanguinis Domini primum in ea ●…aeramus , tanquam illius adhuc expertes : sed qui per fidem illius jam antea participes , gratiam semel acceptam , communicatione hac Sacramentali corporis ac sanguinis Domini , & mortis ipsius rememoratione , in cordibus nostris magis ac magis corrob●…rare , redemptorique gratias agere cupiamus . f Adhaec praedicandum iis quoque est , qui nondum audierunt , aut certe nondum perceperunt . Attame● utcunque feratur impuritas con●entuum ubi verbum praedicatur , quam Christus & Apostoli quoque tulerunt : Coenae tamen communio ( ut dixi ) purior esse debet . Nam publica est eorum qui palam se Christianos profitentur , de redemptione gratiarum actio ●ideo circa hanc , ut communionem Christi solemmiter sancti percipiunt , ita excludendi inde sunt qui vita sua se extra ●anc communionem esse , ma●ifesto probant . g Fideles enim ante usum Sacramentorum hanc gratiam omnin● habe●t : neque ad Sacramentorum usum accedere debent qui ea● gratiam pro aetatis modo non habeat , neque admittendi sunt qui eam non habere meri●o praesumuntur . h Quemadmodum autem Sacramenta duplici nomine praesiant verbo , itidem verbum duobus nominibus praferendum Sacramentis . Vno quod verbum in adultis & generet fidem , & genitam foveat atque alat : Sacramenta vero ●am non gignant , sed tantum genitam conserve●t atque augeant . Altero quod absque verbo non salv●mur . &c. i Credimus & confit●mur Iesu● Christum servatorem nostrum sanctae Coenae Sacramentum ●rdinasse & instituisse , ut ea nutriat & sustentet eos , quos jam regeneravit , &c. At vero , ad conservationem vitae sp●ritualis & c●estis , quam fideles jam habent , Deu● illis pane● 〈◊〉 misit &c. k Quem ad modum autem Deo placuit opus hoc suum gratiae per predicationem Evangelii in nobis incho●re , ita p●r ejusdem auditum , lectionem , meditationem , adhortationes , minas , promissa , nec non per usum Sacramentorum , illud conservat , continuat et persicit . l Explic. Catech. Quaest. 67. Verbum est instrumentum Spiritus sancti , per quod incl●…oat & confirmat in nobis fidem ideoque verbum debet praeire . Sacramenta sunt organa Spiritus sancti per quae fidem inchoatam confirmat : ideoque Sacramenta debent sequi . Ibid. Quaest. 81. Art. 1. Sacramenta tantum sunt instituta fidelibus & conversis , ut his promissionem Evangelii obsignent , & fidem confirment . Verbum quidem est conversis , & non conversis commune , ut conversi confirmentur , nondum conversi convertantur : Sacramenta vero ad solos fideles per●…inent . m Loc. com . Tom. 5. pag. 1. Per Baptismam regeneramur ac re●…ovamur : per Sacramentum Coenae alimur ac nutrimur ad vitam aeternum . In Baptism●… praesertim Infan●…um , per Spiritum S. fides accenditur : in usu sacrae Coenae augetur , confirmatur , & obsignatur . Per Baptis●…num Christo inserimur , in quo spirituale incrementum salutari Coenae usu accipimus . n Tom. 1. pag. 477. At an non per Sacramenta etiam fides & regeneratio exhibetur ? Resp. Distinguendum inter primum fidei & resipiscentiae initium , & confirmationem ejus ac augmentum . Nemo admit●…tur ad Sacramenta nisi pro fideli & poenitente habeatur ; quemadmodum verba clara sunt , Quisquis crediderit & baptizatus fuerit . In●…ntes habentur pro foederatis , ac proinde etiam pro iis qui Spiritum fidei acceperunt , sed de hac repostea . Sic in Coena requiritur , ut 〈◊〉 probet se an sit in fide , & ut digne manducet : infidelibus enim vel nondum credentibus nullae fiunt promissiones , ac proinde nec obsignantur . Perperam ergo statuunt ipsa Sacramenta esse caus●… primae regenerationis aut justificationis , tum Pontificii , tum Lutherani quidam . Sed si fidei & regenerationis conf●…atio & augmentum spectetur , recte tribuitur Sacramentis ut causis instrumentalibus . o Becanus Theol. Schol. part . 4. Tract . de S●cram . Quaest. 7. Omnia Sacramenta ●…ovae legis s●…mper conferunt gratiam habitu●…lem seu 〈◊〉 , non ponentibus obicem , ac proinde gratia habitualis est communis quidam esfectus om●…ium Sacramentorum : Est communi●… sententia . p Tannerus in Thomam . Tom. 4. Disp. 3. Qaest . 3. Dub. 5. ●…mo omnia Sacramenta de facto nonnunquam possunt ex opere operato ( how much more if there be also opus operantis ) confer●…e primam gr●…am . Haec est sententia magis pia & probabilior ; quam docet S. Thomas &c. eandem communiter sequuntur T●…omistae . He confirms it thus . Quia quaedam Sacram●…nta per se pro●…riesolum instituta ad dindam prima●… gratiam , tossunt conserre 〈◊〉 . Ergo etiam per se instituta ad honc toterunt conferre primam &c. Atque hoc etiam sensu admitti potest quod nonnulli dixeru●…t , omnibus Sacramentis sub ratione saltem generica Sacramenti novae Legis , etsi non specifica , per se co●…venire ut gratiam primam conferant . q Faustus Socinus de Coena Dom. Tract . brev . terum , quod omnes fere opinantur , hoc ritu , quem Sacramentum appellant , confirmari saltem fidem nostram , ne id quidem verum censeri debet ; cum nec ullo sacro testimonio comprobetur , nec ulla ratio sit , cur id fièri possit . Quomodo enim potest nos in fide confirmare id quod nos ipsi facimus , quodque licet a Domino institutum , opus tamen nostrum est . Smalc . Disp. 12. de Coena . Vox Sacramenti in hac significatione barbara vel saltem sacris liter is incognita est , ●…b hominibus vero otiosis , qui ceremoniis hujusmodi nescio quid praeter sacram Scripturam superstiti●…sum aut eti●…m Idololatricum ex parte , 〈◊〉 non sunt 〈◊〉 , ad 〈◊〉 dolum 〈◊〉 . r Chamier . contract . Tom 4. lib. 2. cap. 9. Quia ut efficientia toto genere suo differt a significatione : ita diversa ratio est instituendi in st●…umenta efficientia , & significantia &c. 2. prob . inductione . Quia nulla signa sive miraculosa , sive alia sunt efficientia . Polanus Synt. lib. 6. cap. 49. Elementum Sacramentale significat , testatur , & obsignat ●…redentibus rem verbo Dei promissam , eam autem nequaquam causat , efficit , aut producit . s Synops. Pur. Theol. Disp. 43. Thes. 35. Duo tantum esse & non plura ( Sacramenta ) affirmamus : quoniam unum est initiationis , seu regenerationis , alterum nutritionis seu alimoniae . So Matthias Martinius lexic. Philol. pag. 3272. makes this distinction between baptisme and the Lords Supper : that is a Sacrament of initiation and ●…doption : this of confirmation and ●…urishment . t Polan . Synt lib. 6. cap. 56. He holds that omnes illi qui scandala praebent & non resipiscunt serio , a mensa Domini sunt arcendi . 1. Quia si infideles & impoenitèntes ad Coenam Domini admitterentur , profanaretur foedus Dei , tam communicando Symbola foederis iis quibus Deus nihil promittit , quam usu●…pando Symbola sacra sine fide & resipistentia . 2. Quia polluerent & contaminarent eibum & potum consecra●…um , quem Christus non destinavit nisi suis domesticis & fidelibus &c. 6. Quia incredulos & manifeste impios Christus prohibuit admitti ad sacram Coenam : nam instituit illam solis fidelibus . u Ubi supra pag. 395. x Bullinger Decad. 5. serm . 7. Quis praeterca i●…de non colligat , nos qui filii Abrahae sumus , non alia ratione justificari , quam p●…trem justifica●…um constat , ac Sacramenta nostra in nobis non aliud ●…fficere , quam quod in ille 〈◊〉 ? 〈◊〉 cum eadem sit ratio Sacramentorum veterum & nostrorum . y Synops. pur . Theol. Disp. 45. Th●s . 83. Dignus ejus usus praeeu●…te probatione sui cujusque definitur : scilicet an sit in fide 2 Cor. 13. 5. & s●…ria resipiscentia afficiatur , secundum illud Pauli , Probet vero seipsum homo . &c. z Ursinus Tract . Theol. pag. 650. edit . 1584. Ad Coenam Domini autem nulli nisi adulti , qui & probare seipsos possunt , & hanc probationem confessione & vita ostendant . Quid porro de his faciendum qui vitam Christianis indignam agunt ? Ecclesiastica disciplina coercendi sunt . a Magdeb. Cent. lib. cap. 4. pag. 278. Indigne eos uti docet ( Paulus ) qui sine vera poenitentia & fide accedunt . &c. Oecumenius upon 1 Cor 11. fixeth the sin of eating and drinking unworthily upon the Corinthians , in regard of their contempt of the ●… poor , and their other sinnes : supposing all such to eat unworthily who are under any wickednesse unrepented , when they come . b De Tempore Scrm. 244. Et cum nullus homo velit cum ●…unica sordibus plena ad Ecclesiam convenire , nescio qua Conscientia cum anima per luxuriam sit inquinata , praesumit ad altare accedere : non timens illud quod Apostolus dixit : Qui enim manducat Corpus & sumit sanguinem Domini indigne , reus erit corporis & sanguinis Domini . c Zuinglius Tom. 2. de verâ & falsâ Religione cap. de Sacram. Coena Dominica d●…nus experimentum , quod morte Christi fidamus , quum gratulantes & laeti adsimus in eo coe●…u , qui Deo gratias agit pro beneficio redemptionis . d Hutterus Disp. 17. de Coena Dom. Thes. 1. Sacramentum initiationis novi Test. puta Baptisinum , ordine convenientissimo excipit Sacramentum confirmationis , quod est sacra●…ssima Coena Domini & Servatoris nostri Jesu Christi : tum ob causas alias , tum quod ea est fidei nostrae , in baptismo nobis collatae , respectu nostri infirmitas , ut nisi subinde confirmetur , mo●… penitus fatiscat & intereat . e Si itaque in me manet , & ego in illo , tunc manducat , tunc bibit . Qui autem non in me manet , nec ego in illo , & si accipit Sacramentum , magnum acquirit tormentum . Et infra . Ad altare Dei invisibile ( quo non accedit injustus ) ille pervenit , qui ad hoc praesens justificatus accedit . f Hoc est enim indignè accipere , si eo tempore quis accipiat , quo debet agere poenitentiam . g Vide Kekerm . System . log . lib. 3. cap. ●0 . h Z●ch . Ursin . Judicium de disciplina Ecclesiastica . Tom. 3. pag. 806. Haec enim Dei voluntas non erit in aeternum , ut Ecclesia Christiana alicui gratiam Christi & remissionem pec catorum , annun ciatione verbi divini deneget , & eidem exhibitione Sacramentorum spondeat . i Explic. Catech. q●aest ▪ 84. Si enim Christus hoc di xit de verbo audibili ▪ quod ta●…men institutum est conversis , & n●…n convers●…s vel convertendis : 〈◊〉 magis 〈◊〉 dic●…uy d●… verbo visibili hoc est de Sacrame●…tis , quae tantum conversis sunt institut●… . ( 8 ) Pag. 107. Sermo noster de illis est , qui crimen agnoscunt & con●…itentur : qui emendationem promi●…tunt : qui Sacramentis rectè cum cae●…eris u●…i , quantum judicare nos possumus , desiderant . l Pag. 12. m Medina in tertiam partem , quaest . 38. Verum cum non sit idem , agnoscere se peccatorem , & con●…iteri peccata sua , recte intelligimus cos sua peccata saltem majora indicasse , & confessos esse D. Johanni , sic●…t & Act. 19. multi creden●…ium dicuntur venisse ad Paulum confitentes & annuntiantes actus suos . n In Matth. 3. quaest . 64. So Salmeron ▪ Tom. 4 Part. 1. Tract . 5. Narrantur venisse ad Jo●…annem & ad baptis●…um su●…m . Non ●…onstat autem an baptisati su●…rint : n●…m Luc. ▪ 7. dicuntur sprevisse consilium Dei in seme●… ipsos , non baptisati a Johanne . o Cent. 1. lib. 1. cap. 10. p Tom. 4. part . 1. Tract . 15. q Ibid. Tract . 6. r Cent. 1. Lib. 1. Cap. 10. Nequaquam margaritas anie porcos proi●…cit : non quoslibet temere ad Baptismum admisit , sed consitentes peccata sua , hoc est , exploratos , & agentes poenitentiam tantum : con●…umacos vere , ac defensores suarum impietatum aut scelerum , reprobavit . s Observat. lib. 1. cap. 1. Nam eorum in lapsos Judicium ad Eucharistiam referri nequit , quibus post aliquod tempus omnia cum 〈◊〉 fratribus volunt esse communia , praeter Eucharistiam , cui enim cum fidelibus supplicationes facere & orare liceret , is ad omnia quae eram in societate Christiana , una excepta Eucharistia , jus habere censebatur . t Albaspinaeus Observ. lib. 2. Observ. 25. Quod si quaeratur quam ob rem antiqui quartum illum gradum posuerint &c. Nulla potest c●…ngruentior commodio●… que 〈◊〉 ratio , quam quae ex reverentia ac Religiene petitur , qua adversus , sanctam Eucha●…istiam fe●…ebantur : detetestabile q●…ippe Deo & hominilus , non solum existurabant hominem , vel levissima macula inquindium , aut maculae nebula ●…ffusum , ad E●…haristiam accedere , sed etiam periculosum absolutes poeni●…entes eam tangere & a●…ectare , quo●…●…on satis sancti & sanctificati censebantur , quibus tanta res committeretur . u Causabon Exerc. 1● . pag. 397. edit . Francof . 1615. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 igitur c mysteriis Genti●…m vox accepta , appellabatur statio inter fideles : ibi poenitentes duos persape annos agebant ; quod ad caetera ejusdem conditionis cum fidelibus ; neque jam cum Catechumenis exibant ; sola participatione mysteriorum caeteris fra●…ribus inferiores . x Conc. Ancyr . Can. 16 De his qui irrationabiliter versati sunt sive versantur . Quotquot ante vicesimum ae●…atis suae annum , tale crimen commiserint , quindecim annis exactis in poenitentia , communionem mereantur orati●…num . Deinde quinquennio in hac communione durantes , tunc dentum oblationis Sacramenta contingant . Discutiatur autem vita eorum , quales tempore poenitudinis extiterint . &c. y Conc. Nicaen . can . 11 Duobus autem annis iidem sine oblatione in oratione sola participent populo . z Conc. Arelat . 2. Can. 11. Si qui vero dolore victi & pondere persecutionis negate & sacrificare compulsi sunt , duobus annis inter Catechumenos : triennio inter poenitentes habeantur a communione suspensi . Of these Poenitentes we read also in Codice Canonum Ecclesiae Africanae Can. 43. & Can 102. And it is certain they were admitted to the Word , and some to Prayer , but not to the Sacrament , till the Church was abundantly satisfied with the signes and proofs of their true repentance . * Et causa non est postrema cur apud multos pessime audiat Christianismus : quod disciplina Ecclesiastica refrixerit . a Vide apud Theod. Balsam . Can. Greg. Thaumat . Can. 11. Fletus seu luctus est 〈◊〉 p●…rtam 〈◊〉 : ubi peccato●…em stantem opo●…tet fideles ingredientes orare ut pro se precentur . Auditio est intra portam in porticu , uhi oportet eum qui peccavit stare , usque a●… Catechumenos , & illinc egredi . audiens enim , inquit , scriptaras , & doctrinam , ejiciatur , & precatione indignus censeatur . Subjectio autem seu substiatio est , ut intra Templi portam stans cum Catechumenis egrediatur . Congrega●…o seu consistentia est , ut cum fidelibus consistat , & cum Catechumenis non egrediatur : ●…ostremo est participatio Sacramentorum . b Vide apud Theod. Balsam . Canonic . Epist. Basilii ad Amphil. Can. 4. Oportet autem non eos ( Trigamo●… ) omnino arcere ab Ecclesia , sed dignari auditione duobus vel tribus annis : & postea permitti quidem consistere , seu in fidelium esse Congregatione , a boni tamen communione abstinere , & sic postquam poenitentiae fructum ullum ostender●…nt , communionis loco restituere . Ibid. Can. 61. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , anno a sola Sacramentorum commun●…one arcebitur . Ibid. Can. 82. Qui autem sine necessitate suam fidem 〈◊〉 . cum duobus annis defleverint , & duobus annis audiverint , & in quinio in substratione fuerint , & in duobus aliis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sine oblatione in orationis communionem suscepti extiterint , ita tandem condigna scilicet poenitentia ostensa , in corpo●…is Christi communionem recipientur . The like see Can. 56. Can. 64. Can. 66. Can. 80. c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . d Margaritas item ne ante porcos projiciamus , divino interdict● prohibemur , hoc est ante e●s qui in vitiosis affectibus volutantur , ac porcinum vitae genus sequuntur : ne forte conculcent eas pedibus , nimirum in sceleratis suis studiis divino nomini contumeliam inferentes : & conversi disrumptant vos . e Cypr. lib. 3. Ep. 14. Na●… cum in mi●…oribus peccatis agant peccatores poenitentiam justo tempore , & secundum disciplinae ordinem a l exomologesin veniant , & per manus impositionem Episcopi & Cleri jus communicationis accipiant ; Nunc ●…udo tempore , persecutione adhuc perseverante , nondum restituta Ecclesiae ipsius pace , ad communicationem admittuntur , & 〈◊〉 nomen ●…orum , & nondum poenitentia acta , nondum exomologest facta , nondum manu eis ab Episcopo & Clero imposita , Eucharistia illis datur , cum scriptum sit , Qui ederit l'anem aut biber●…t Calicem Domini indigne , reus erit Corporis & sanguinis Domini . Just. Marty● Apol. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( c ) De rebus Eccles. cap. 17. Unde etiam criminum foeditate capitalium , a membris Christi deviantes , ab ipsis Sacramentis Ecclesiastico suspenduntur judicio . Et infra . Sciendum enim a sanctis Patribus ob hoc vel maxime constitutum , ut mortaliter peccantes a Sacramentis Dominicis arceantur , ne indigne ea percipientes , vel majore reatu involvantur , ut Judas , &c. Vel ne ( quod Apostolus de Corinthiis dicit ) infirmitatem corporis & imbecillitatem , ipsamque mortem praesumptores incurrant . Et ut a communione susperst , terrore ejus exclusionis , & quodam condemnationis Anathemate compellantur , studiosius poenitentiae medicamentum appete●…e , & avidius recuperandae salutis desideriis inhiare . h Tempus quidem confessionis , aeque & lotis baptismate , & illotis prophanisque incumbit : illis quidem ut post patentia criminum vulnera poenitentia inter veniente curentur , & ad sacra Mysteria redire mereantur : his vero ut ablutis in Baptisino maculis , ad Dominicam mensam munda jam Conscientia accedant . i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . k Ambros. lib. 2. de offic . cap. 27. cui titulus : De be ▪ nignitate & quod excommunicatio tardius sit exerenda ; saith thus Sic Episcopi affectus boni est ut 〈◊〉 sanare infirmo●… , serpentia auserre ulcera , ADURERE ALIQUA NON ABSCINDERE : postremo quod sanari non potest , cum dolore abscindere . l Cypr. lib. 1. Epist. 1● or according to Pamelius his Edition Epist . 62. Quod si poenitentiam hujus illiciti concubitus sui egerint , & a se invicem recesserint , inspiciantur interim Virgines ab obstetricibus diligenter , & si Virgines inventae fuerint , accepta communicatione ad Ecclesiam admittantur , hac tamen interminatione ut si ad eosdem masculos postmodum reversae suerint , aut si cum eisdem in una domo & sub eodem tecto simul habitaverint , GRAVIORE CENSURA ejiciantur , nec in Ecclesiam postmodum facile recipiantur . Si autem de eis aliqua corrupta fuerit deprehensa , AGAT POENITENTIAM PLENAM . m Aug. lib. contra Donatist . post collationem cap. 4. Ita sane ut nec emendationis vigilantia quiescat , corripiendo , degradando , excommunicando , cae●…erisque coe citionibus licitis atque concessis , quae salva unitatis pace in Ecclesia quotidie fiunt , secundum praeceptum Apostolicum charitate se●…vata , qui dixit , Si quis autem non obaudit verbo nostro . &c. n Meretrices & hist●iones & quilibet alii publicae turpitu dinis professores , nist solutis out di●uptis talibus vinculis , ad Christi Sacramenta non permittun●ur accedere : qui utique secundum istorum sententiam omnes admitterentur , nisi antiquum & robustum morem sancta Ecclesia retineret ex illa scilicet liquidissima verita●e venientem , qua cer●um habet , quoniam qui talia agunt , Regnum Dei non p●ssidebunt . o In Matth. 22. Neque enim apertos ac palam malos , Apostoli aut ulli sancti Evangelii praecones congregare , & Ecclesiae communioni per Sacramenta aggregare potuerunt aut congregarunt , quod tales a communione Ecclesiae tanquam pestes illius sint arcendi , sed congregarunt opertos ac●…ectos , quos quia sub ovina pelle sunt lupi & sub externa fidei & vitae ●…bristianae specie , internam fraudem ac impietatem tegunt ( atque ita vere bonis exterius pares , imo interdum superiores apparent ) idcirco ab Apostolis aliisque Evangelii praeconibus dignosci non potuerunt . &c. Rigidi autem sunt , non qu● & ipsi pejora non peccent : sed hoc inter nos & illos interest , quod illi erubescunt confiteri peccata , quasi justi : nos dum poenitentiam agimus , facilius veniam promer●mur . 
A92138	----	The divine right of church-government and excommunication: or a peacable dispute for the perfection of the holy scripture in point of ceremonies and church government; in which the removal of the Service-book is justifi'd, the six books of Tho: Erastus against excommunication are briefly examin'd; with a vindication of that eminent divine Theod: Beza against the aspersions of Erastus, the arguments of Mr. William Pryn, Rich: Hooker, Dr. Morton, Dr. Jackson, Dr. John Forbes, and the doctors of Aberdeen; touching will-worship, ceremonies, imagery, idolatry, things indifferent, an ambulatory government; the due and just powers of the magistrate in matters of religion, and the arguments of Mr. Pryn, in so far as they side with Erastus, are modestly discussed. To which is added, a brief tractate of scandal ... / By Samuel Rutherfurd, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. Published by authority. Rutherford, Samuel, 1600?-1661. 1646 Approx. 2290 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 407 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2008-09 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A92138 Wing R2377 Thomason E326_1 ESTC R200646 99861333 99861333 113466 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A92138) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 113466) Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 53:E326[1]) The divine right of church-government and excommunication: or a peacable dispute for the perfection of the holy scripture in point of ceremonies and church government; in which the removal of the Service-book is justifi'd, the six books of Tho: Erastus against excommunication are briefly examin'd; with a vindication of that eminent divine Theod: Beza against the aspersions of Erastus, the arguments of Mr. William Pryn, Rich: Hooker, Dr. Morton, Dr. Jackson, Dr. John Forbes, and the doctors of Aberdeen; touching will-worship, ceremonies, imagery, idolatry, things indifferent, an ambulatory government; the due and just powers of the magistrate in matters of religion, and the arguments of Mr. Pryn, in so far as they side with Erastus, are modestly discussed. To which is added, a brief tractate of scandal ... / By Samuel Rutherfurd, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. Published by authority. Rutherford, Samuel, 1600?-1661. [28], 656, 103, [1] p. Printed by John Field for Christopher Meredith at the Crane in Pauls Church-yard., London: : MDCXLVI. [1646] Annotation on Thomason copy: "March: 3"; the I in imprint date crossed out. Reproduction of the original in the British Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Church of England -- Customs and practices -- Early works to 1800. Church polity -- Early works to 1800. Presbyterianism -- Early works to 1800. Excommunication -- Early works to 1800. 2007-04 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2007-06 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2007-08 Mona Logarbo Sampled and proofread 2007-08 Mona Logarbo Text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion THE DIVINE RIGHT OF Church-Government AND Excommunication : OR A peaceable DISPUTE for the perfection of the holy Scripture in point of Ceremonies and Church-Government ; IN WHICH The removal of the Service-book is justifi'd , The six Books of Tho : Erastus against Excommunication are briefly examin'd ; with a Vindication of that eminent Divine Theod : Beza against the Aspersions of Erastus , The Arguments of Mr. William Pryn , Rich : Hooker , Dr. Morton , Dr. Jackson , Dr. John Forbes , and The Doctors of Aberdeen ; Touching Will-worship , Ceremonies , Imagery , Idolatry , Things Indifferent , An Ambulatory Government ; The due and just Power of the Magistrate in matters of Religion , and The Arguments of Mr. Pryn , in so far as they side with Erastus , are modestly discussed . To which is added , A brief Tractate of SCANDAL ; with an Answer to the new Doctrine of the Doctors of Aberdeen , touching Scandal . By SAMUEL RUTHERFURD , Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland . Not by might , nor by power , but by my Spirit , saith the Lord of hosts , Zach. 4. 6. Veritas claudi & ligari potest , vinci non potest . Hieronymus comment . ad Ierem. in Prefati . ad Eusebium . Occultari ad tempus potest veritas , vinci non potest , florere potest ad tempus iniquitas , per manere non potest . Augustinus ad Psal . 61. Published by AUTHORITY London ▪ Printed by JOHN FIELD for Christopher Meredith at the Crane in Pauls Church yard . MDCXLVI . TO The Right Honorable and Noble Lord , The EARL of LOVDEN , Chancellor of Scotland ; AND Chancellor of the University of St. Andrews , Grace , Mercy and Peace . RIGHT HONORABLE , AS Jesus Christ the wonderful , the Counsellor , the mighty God driveth on his great State-design in the whole Earth , and now in these Kingdoms , to to save an afflicted people , to dye his Garments in the blood of his Enemies , and to build the Tabernacle of God amongst men , and cause the wildernes blossome as a Rose , that the glory of Lebanon , and the excellency of Carmel and Sharon may in a spiritual manner be given to Zion ; So he still acteth in his own sphere of Righteousnes , and all inferior wheels in their revolutions move toward his most eminent end ; for the Courtiers and Royal Attendants of his Throne are Righteousnes and Judgement . And he desireth that the motions and wayes of his people may be concentrick to his own heart , and move in the same Orb with himself ; we must either walk , or be drawn to the end of Jesus Christ , his end cannot come down and comply with our policy . When men go with one head , and two faces , and two hearts , Providence can beguil them : we are then safe , and do sail at the Haven of the Sea when we walk with God , and our way draweth a straight line to the heart of Jesus Christ . These two Kingdoms have before them an end ▪ the Covenant to be a people to God ; this we did Swear with our Hands lifted up to the most High ; the stones of the field shall witnes against us , and the Sword of the Lord avenge the quarrel of his Covenant , if we dally with the Lord , as if the Vow of God , that the Lord may be one , and his Name one in both Kingdoms had been on us , when we were low only , and our Oath had a date only till the Year 1645. and then our Vow must exspire , as did the Law of shaddows , when the Body Jesus Christ came . As successe is a poor and waxy Kalender for Religion , so the low condition of our Kingdom , I hope , shall not move us to forsake the Lords cause , or to blame God , because good causes have sometimes sad events ; for beside that Heathens said , that God cannot erre , because Marius ex culpâ gloriam reportavit , Marius was made glorious by ill-doing , and one hath a Crosse , another a Kings Crown for a reward of wickednesse , we know that God , however it be , is good to Israel . If that which was intended for Vnion , shall by mens wickednesse , turn to a sad Division between the Kingdoms , I shall believe , that the truly Godly of either Kingdoms , can scarce be capable of such bloody intentions , as shall leave a Legacy of perpetuated blood to the Posterity ; and sure , though for the present guiltinesse , strength prevail , yet habent Deum ultorem , men on Earth cannot long be strong against Vengeance from Heaven . As successe doth inebriate , so extremity of a low condition is a wicked Counsellor ; and evil Iealousie , as Hell , thinketh alwayes evil . All whose bowels are moved for the Desolation , Graves , multiplied Widows and Orphans of both Kingdoms will not dare ( Judgement from the Almighty being a terrour to them ) to adde affliction to the people of God already afflicted . Blessed shall they be of the Lord , who mediate for preventing of National ruptures , and for the continuance of the Brotherly Covenant . Christ Jesus is a uniting Saviour , one God , one Faith , one Lord Jesus , one Religion should be , and I beseech the God of Peace , they may be Chains of Gold to tie these tipo Nations and Churches together in uno tertio , that they may be concentered and united in one Lord Jesus . O that that precious Dew of Hermon , that showers of Love and Peace may lie all the night upon the Branches of the two Olive Trees , that the warmnesse , heat , and influence of one Sun of Righteousnesse with healing in his wings , may make the Lilly amongst the Thorns , the Rose of Sharon , that is planted by the Lord , the Spouse of Jesus Christ in both Kingdoms to spred its Root , and cast its Smell , as green and flourishing to all the Nations round about . The Kingdom of God is Peace . The Lord is about a great work in Britain , why should Divisions that proceed from the lusts of men ▪ and the enemies of the Lord retard the wheels of the Chariot of Christ ? Let us not water the Lilly with blood again . The Sons of Babel have shed our blood in great abundance , for the which doth the Church of God in the three Kingdoms stand , and Pray and Prophecy in sackcloth . The violence done to me and to my flesh be upon Babylon , shall the Inhabitants of Zion say : And my blood upon the Woman arrayed in Purple and Scarlet , the Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth , shall Ierusalem say . Happy we , if we could for the second Temple builded , and the Lord repairing the old waste places , and the Gentiles beholding the Righteousnesse of the Elder Sister the Church of the Jews , and both as a Crown of Glory in the hand of the Lord , and as a Royal Diadem in the hand of our God. I shall not need , I hope , either of an Apology for Intituling this Piece , such as it is , ( others can , and I hope will adde riper Animadversions to Erastus ) to Your Honours Name , or of a word of incitement , that Your Lordship co-operate with Your serious Endeavours , for a right understanding between both Kingdoms , and for the carrying on the work of the right arm of the Lord , the Lords creating of glory on every Assembly on Mount Zion , ( for we are witnesses of Your Honours Travels for both ) that glory may dwell in our Land. Your Honours at all respective observance in the Lord , S. R. To the Ingenuous and Equitable Reader . IT lieth obvious to any ordinary underderstanding ( worthy Reader ) that as alwayes we see a little portion of God ; so now , the Lord our God in his acting on Kingdoms and Churches , maketh Darknesse his Pavilion , to finde out the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Demonstrative Causes and true Principles of such bloody conclusions and horrible vastations , as the Soveraign Majesty of Heaven and Earth hath made in Germany , Bohemiah , and the Palatinate , as if they were greater sinners then we are ; and why the windows of Divine Justice have been opened to send down such a deluge of blood on Ireland ; and why in Scotland the Pestilence hath destroyed in the City , and the Sword of the Lord , not a few in the fields , ( their Lovers and Friends standing aloof from their calamities ) is from the Lord who is wonderful in Counsel ; but to finde reasons to quiet the understanding , is not an easie scrutiny : matters are rolled on invisible wheels . It is enough to us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no Men , no Angels can hunt out the tracings of Divine Providence ; Nor can we set a day of Law , nor erect a Court to implead this Lord , who is not holden in Law , to answer for any of his matters : It were our wisdom to acknowledge that the actions of our Lord , ad extrà , are so twisted and interwoven thred over thred , that we can see but little of the walls and out-works of his unsearchable counsels ; sure , Divine Providence hath now many irons in one fire , and with one touch of his finger he stirt●●h all the wheels in Heaven and Earth . I speak this , if happily this little piece may cast it self in the eye of the Noble and Celebrious Judges and Senators who now sit at the ●e●m ▪ for I hope they consider , it is but a short and sorry Line , or rather a poor Circle , Job 1. 21. Gen. 3. 19. between the Womb and the Grave , between Dust and Dust ▪ and that they then act most like themselves ( Psal . 82. 6. I have said ye are Gods ) when they remember they are sinful men , and when they reckon it for gain , that the King of Ages gives them a Diurnal of 24 hours to build the House of the Lord , to cause the heart of a Widow Church ( though her Husband live for evermore ) to sing for joy , and are eyes to the blinde , and legs to the lame ; and withall do minde , that when the Spirit is within half a Cubit , or the sixth part of a Span to Eternity , and Death cannot adjou●n for six hours ▪ to repent ▪ or do any more service to Christ in the body , the welcom and testimony of God , shall be incomparably above the Hosanna's of men . Undeniable it is , that we destroy again what we have builded , if we behead the Pope , and divest him of his Vicarious Supremacy , and soader the Man of Sins head , in the Ecclesiastical Government , to the shoulders of any Man , or Society of men on Earth . It is not an enriching spoyl to pluck a Rose or Flower from the Crown of the Prince of the Kings of the Earth . Diamonds and Rubi●s picked out of the Royal Diadem of Jesus Christ , addeth but a poor and sorry Lustre to Earthly Supremacy ; it is Baldnesse in stea● of Beauty . An Arbitrary power in any , whether in Prince or ● relats , is intolerable . Now to cast ou● Domination in one , and to take it in in another , is not to put away the Evil of our doings , but to Barter and Exchange one sin with another , and mockingly to expiate the Obligation of one Arrear to God , by contracting new Debt . Again , how glorious is it , that Shields of the Earth lay all their Royalty and Power level with the dust before him that sitteth on the Throne , and to make their Highnesse but a Scaffold to heighten the Throne of the Son of God ? Yea , if Domination by the Sword be the Magistrates Birth-right , as the Word of Truth teacheth us , Luke 22. 25 , 26. Psal . 82. 1 , 6. Rom. 13. 4. and the Sword can never draw blood of the Conscience ; It is evident that the Lord Jesus alloweth not Carnal weapons to be used within the walls of his Spiritual Kingdom ; and if Power be an enchanting Witch , and like strong Drink , which is dolosus luctator , a cosening Wrestler , we are to be the more cautelous and circumspect , that it incroach not upon Jesus Christ , for fear that we provoke the eyes of his glory , and cause Jerusalem to be plowed , and Zion become heaps , and many houses great and fair , desolate . Let the Appeal be to the Spirit that speaketh to the Churches in the Word : The Golden Reed can measure every Cubit of the Temple ; as well the outer Porch , as the Holy of Holiest , and all the dimensions , the length and bredth of the City which is named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ The Lord is there . If the Scripture be no Rule of Church Government , but the Magistrates Sword be upon the shoulders of Christ , as the prime Magistrate ; we come too near to the Jewish , Earthly , and Temporary Mes●iah . And if Excommunication and Censures , and that Ministerial Governing which was undeniably in the Apostolick Church , be Fictions , we are in the dark . I confesse , we know not whether the Vessels of the House should be of Gold and Silver , or if they should be but Earthen Pitchers . It is said , That all this is but a Plea for a Dominion of an higher Nature , even over the Consciences of men by Censures . But why a Dominion ? Because a power of Censures ? Surely , if they were not Spiritual Censures , and such as hath influence on the Conscience , we should yield a Domination were the businesse . But this power of Censuring Spiritually , is as strong as Authoritative in Dispensing Rebukes , Threats , Gospel-charges and Commands in the Word Preached , as in Censures ; The power is Ministerial only in the Word , not Lordly ; and why should it be deemed a Dominion , and an Arbitrary power in the one , and not in the other ? If the will of the Magistrate may carve out any Government that seems good to him , and the Word of God in this plea be laid aside , as perfect in Doctrine , but imperfect and uselesse in Government , we fall from the Cause . But if the Word of God stand as a Rule in matters of Church-Government ; then the Question is only , on whose shoulders the Ark should be carried ; and by whose Ministery doth Jesus the Lord and King of the House punish ( if I may use this word ) Scandalous men ? And whether doth the Head of the Church Christ , in laying Judgement to the Line , and Righteousnesse to the Plummet , use the Magistrates Sword for a Spiritual and Supernatural end of the Service and Ministery of his Church ; or doth he send Pastors and Teachers as his Ambassadors for this end ? But if you were not Disputing your self , and not Christ ( say some ) to make Preachers the Alpha and Omega of mens Consciences , and the Circle which beginneth and endeth at it self , you would be satisfied , if Scandals be punished by the Magistrate : Is not the Magistrate a Christian as you are ? Paul was glad that the Gospel was Preached , he made no account by whom . But I should be grieved that such a hard conclusion should be drawn out of such innocent Principles : This were to extract Blood out of Milk , a Domination out of a meer Ministery ; and I confesse , Self is a great Sophist in Debates , and that any man is inclinable to miscount himself , and to think he may stand for an hundred , when the product is scarce one , if not a cypher . I conceive nothing is here taught , that may reach a blow to the Honour and Majesty of the Godly Magistrate . The Magistrate is a Christian as well as the Preacher ; and in some sense , so all the People were holy , as were Moses , Aaron and the Levites . Uzziah who burned Incense was a Member of the Church of the Jews , and Circumcised no lesse then the Sons of Aaron : Yet I hope these stretched themselves beyond their line , when they usurped what was due to the Priests and Levites . It s another thing to punish evil doing with the Sword , the Magistrate is to do this . But there is a Spiritual removing of Scandals , by the saving of the Spirit in the day of the Lord , 1 Cor. 5. 5. Matth. 18. 15. 2 Cor. 10. 8. and a gaining of the Soul of an Offender . This Spiritual removing of Scandals , doth only bring Christ and the Gospel in request , in the hearts of both such as are within and without the Church ; as Scandals raiseth up an evil report of Christ and the Truth . Now the Sword can never this way remove Scandals ; and because Christ hath appointed Spiritual means , and Spiritual Censures , to restore the Lord Jesus to his Honour , 2 Cor. 2. It is presumption ( with all submission I speak it ) for men to horse out , and decourt such Censures Spiritual as the Apostles in the Spirit and Wisdom of Christ used as most sutable to that end , and which the Lord commandeth in the second Command , and to substitute in their room , nothing but a Sword void of all activity on the Conscience . I do also here plead for the perfection of the Word of God against Humane Ceremonies , which are deservedly by the Honorable Houses of Parliament , and Reverend Assembly laid aside ; Religion needeth not any such Ornaments , except men would make the Worship of God , when naked , under shame , and so under sin ( for Justice Married shame and sin once . ) But as Roses , Lillies , the Sun , and other glorious Creatures , are most beautiful without Garments , and not capable of shame ; so is the Worship of God. I confesse , Ceremonies were the Seas and Rivers that Prelats delighted to swim in ; and if their Element be dried up , they have the lesse pleasure to live : But if they would repent of their bloody Persecution , that their Souls might be saved , no matter . Ceremonies , as they have nothing of Christ in them , so have they been injurious to Magistrates . It is but a Ceremony that the Emperour kisse the sole of the Popes foot , because there is indented on it a curious Crucifix . And when Prelacy was yong , and its beard not grown , a Deacon was sent to Theodosius the Emperor by the Prelats to chide him , because he presumed to sit in the Chancel , a place too holy for Lay-men . What I have here said against Erastus , a friend too dear to worthy Bullinger and Rodolp . Gualther , ( often we love both the Friend and his Error ) I humbly submit to the Judgement of the Godly and Learned : But I conceive , I am unwilling that Error should lodge with me willingly ; and I professe I am afraid , that wrath is gone out from the Lord against the Rulers , if they shall after a Reformation obtained with the Lives , Blood , Tears and Prayers of so many of the Saints , whereof a great number are asleep in the Lord , rear up a building to the Lord so maimed and lame , as Jesus Christ shall say , Offer it now to your Governour , will he be pleased with you , or accept your persons ? But it is a Controversie ( say some ) whether the Government of the Church of the New-Testament belong to the Magistrate or to the Church ? to which I say ; 1. It was a Controversie created by men willing to please Princes , with more power in the Courts of Christ , then ever the Law-giver and Apostles gave them , and that against the minde of glorious Lights , the first Reformers , and the whole Troops of Protestant Divines , who Studied the Controversie against the usurped Monarchy of the Man of sin , more exactly then one Physitian , who in a cursory way , diverted off his road of Medicine of which he wrote Learnedly , and broke in on the By upon the deepest Polemicks of Divinity , and reached a Riders blow unawares to his friends . 2. In things doubtful , Conscience hath refuge to the surest side : Now it s granted by all , and not controverted by any , That in the Apostolick Church , the Government of the Church of the New Testament was in the hands of Apostles , Pastors , Teachers ; and therefore Conscience would sway to that in which there can be no Error , except on supposal of abuse ; and Christian Rulers would not do well to venture upon Eternity , Wrath , the Judgement to come , confiding on the poor Plea of an Erastian Distinction , to incroach upon the Prerogative Royal of Jesus Christ . This very God of Peace build Zion , and make her an Habitation of Peace ▪ Yours in Jesus Christ , S. R. A Table of the CONTENTS of the Book . Introduction , SECT . 1. CHrist hath not instituted a mutable Church-Government , Page 1 , 2 Some things moral , some things natural in Gods worship , Ibid. Physical Circumstances are all easily known and numbred , p. 2 Circumstances , and such and such Circumstances , p. 3 Time and place of Ceremonies need not be proved by Scripture , as being supposed , p. 4 , 5 1. Argument to prove , that the platform of Ch. governm●is not mutable at mens wil , p. 7 The Script . way of teaching that indifferent things are alterable , is it self unalterable , p. 8 2. Argument , p. 9 The Scripture shall not teach when we sin , in Church-policy , when not , if the platform be alterable at mens will , Ibid. There is no reason why some things positive are alterable in Ch. -policy , some not , p. 10 3. Argument , ibid. The place 1 Tim. 6. 13. touching the unviolable cōmand given to Timothy discussed , p. 10 , 11 , 12 Pauls cloak of lesse consequence then Positions of policy , p. 11 Widows , p. 12 SECT . 2. 4. Argument , p. 13 Christ is the head of the Church , even in the external policy thereof , p. 13 , 14 A promise of pardon of sin made to the right : use of the Keys , proveth Discipline to be a part of the Gospel , p. 15 , 16 The will of Christ as King , is the rule of the Government of his house , p. 17 , 18 Things of policy , because lesse weighty then the greater things of the Law , are not therefore alterable at the will of men , p. 19 , 20 Order requireth not a Monarchical p●elate , p. 21 , 22 How the care & wisdom of Christ hath left an immutable platform of Discipline , p. 22 , 23 Christ the onely immediate King , Head , and Law-giver of his Church , without any deputy heads or Vicars , p. 24 , 25 SECT . 3. 5. Argument , p. 26 , 27 Moses and David might not alter or devise any thing in Worship or Government , nor may the Church now , p. 27 , 28 Two notes of Divinity ought to be in the New Testament . Ceremonials , as were in the Old , p. 29 , 30 How Moses his doing all according to the patern , proveth an immutable platform . The Objections of Mr. Hooker and Mr. Pryn answered at length , p. 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , &c. Gods care to us leadeth us to think he hath given us a better guide thē natural Reason in all morals of Church-Discipline , p. 33 , 34 The occasional writing of things in Scripture , no reason why they are alterable , p. 35 , 36 Papists pretend , as Formalists do , that things are not written in the Word , because of the various occurrences of providence , p. 36 , 37 That there was no uniform platform of Government written in the time of Moses and the Apostles , is no Argument that there is none now , p. 39 , 40 Fundamentals , because successively delivered , are not alterable , p 41 , 42 The Church of Ierusalem , as perfect in Doctrine and Discipline , is our patern , p. 42 , 43 The indifferency of some things in the Apostolick Church , cannot infer that the Government is alterable , p. 45 , 46 The Argument of Moses his doing all in the Tabernacle , to the least pin , according to special direction , further considered , p. 47. 50 The Ark of Noah proveth the same , ib. Formalists acknowledge Additions to the Scripture , contrary to Deut. 4. 2. & 12. 32. the same way that Papists do , p. 51 , -56 , &c. Moses and Canonick Writers are not Law-givers under God , but Organs of God , in writing , and meer reporters of the Law of God , p. 62 , 63 Papists say that the Church is limited in the making of Ceremonies , both in the matter and the number , and so do Formalists , p 62 , 63 , 64 Four wayes Positives are alterable , but by God onely , p. 64 All things , never so small , are alike unalterable , if they be stamped with Gods authority , speaking in the Scripture , p. 64 , 65 By what authority Canonical Additions of the Prophets and Apostles were added to the Books of Moses , p. 65 Canonick Writers how immediately led by God , p 66 The Characters of Formalists Ceremonies & Papists Traditions one and the same , p. 67 What is it to be contained in Scripture , and how far it maketh any thing lawful , according to Hooker , p. 68 The Fathers teach , that all things are to be rejected that are not in Scripture , p. 69 , 70 ●t derogateth nothing f●om the honour of God , in Scripture , that hee be consulted in the meanest things , p. 70 How things are in Scripture , p. 71 Some actions are supernaturally moral , some naturally or civilly moral , some mixt . p. 72 Some habitual reference to Scripture is required in all our moral actions . p 73 Works of Supererogation holden by Hooker , p. 77 Whether our obedience be resolved , in all Church policy , in This saith the Lord in his Word , or in This saith the Church . p. 79 Two thing● in the external worship , 1. Substantials . 2. Accidentals or Circumstantials , p. 80 SECT . 5. The question who should be judge of things necessary or indifferent , in Church-policy , not to purpose , in this question . p. 81 , 82 , &c. SECT . 6. What are Honour , Praise , Glory , Reverence , Veneration , Devotion , Religion , Service , Worship , Love , Adoration . p. 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 Two acts of Religion imperated and elicite . p. 83 Honouring of holy men is not worship , p 84 The Religions object with the act of reverencing , maketh adoration to be Religious ; but a civil object , except the intention concu●s , maketh not religious adoration of a civil object . p. 85 , 86 What Worship is . p. 86 , 87 Worship is an immediate honouring of God , but some worship honoureth him more immediately , some lesse . p. 87 , 88 A twofold intention in worship . p. 88 , 89 Vncovering the head is veneration , not adoration , p. 89 Consecration of Churches taken two wayes condemned . p. 90 Master Hookers moral grounds of the holinesse of Temples , under the N. T. answered . p. 92 The place 1 Cor. 11. Have ye not houses to eat and drink in , &c. maketh nothing for hallowing of Churches . p. 93 Nor the place Psa . 74 8. p. 94 The Synagogue not Gods house , as the Temple was . ib. Question 1. The negative argument from Scripture valid . p 95 Not to command is to forbid . p. 96 How far Davids purpose to build the Temple was lawful . p. 97 Of additions to the Word . p. 98 Even perfecting additions of men are unlawful . p. 99 Every moral action is to be warranted by the Word . p. 102 What is man's , in worship , is not lawful p. 103 Not all actions in man , as actions of meer nature , of arts or trades of sciences , but only moral actions are regulated by Scripture . p 104 Helps of faith , and the formal object of faith are different . p 105 What certitude of saith is required in all our actions of our daily conversation . p. 107 The Scripture a Warrant for the morality of our acts , of the second Table . p. 107 Many actions of the second Table are purely moral , all actions of the first Table are purely moral . p. 107 , 108 What ever is beside the Word of God , in morals , is contrary to it . p. 109 The vanity of the perfection of Scriptures in Essentials , not in Accidentals . p. 110 Whatsoever is not of faith , how true , p. 110 , 111 Doubting condemneth . p 113 Papists say ▪ the Scripture in general is perfect , but not in particulars , and so Form lists . p 114 What is onely negative in Gods worship , cannot be commanded . ibid. Opinion of sanctity and divine necessity , not essential to false-worship . ibid. The distinction of worship , essential , and accidental , of Gods general and particular will , is to be rejected . p. 118 , 119 The distinction of divine and apostolike traditions rejected . p. 125 , 126 Circumstances not positive , religious observances , as ceremonies are . p. 127 Ceremonies usurpe essential properties of divine Ordinances . p. 128 , 129 , 130 We owe subjection of conscience collateral onely to Gods Ordinances . p. 135 The spirit worketh not with Ceremonies . p. 136 The place Matth. 15. concerning the traditions of the Elders , discussed . p 137 , 138 Ceremonies Magical . p. 141 If the third command shall enjoyn decency in general , then must it enjoyn this special decency , Crosse and Surplice . p. 141 , 142 Iewish and Popish Ceremonies , are fruitlesse professions of unlawful worship . p. 142 , 143 Whether the Ceremonies be Idolatry . p 144 Of religious kneeling . ibid. Four things in adoration . ibid. Intention of worship , not essential to worship . p. 145 Religious bowing , of its nature , and not by mans arbitrary and free intention , signifieth divine adoration . p. 147 , 148 Objections of Swarez contending , that intention of adoration is essential to adoration , removed . p. 148 , 149 Of the Idolatrous worship of the Iews and Papists . p. 150 The relative expressiō of God in the creature , is no ground of adoring the creature , p. 151 The Iews beleeved not the Golden ca lt to be really God. p. 151 , 152 The adoring of Images not forbidden by the Ceremonial law , but by the Moral law . p 154 The evasions of Bellarmine and Swarez answered . p. 155 Papists did of old adore before , or at the presence of the Image , as a memorative signe and yet were Idolators . p. 158 Two sort of signes . ibid. Divers evasions of Papists touching the adoring of Images . p. 161 , 162 , scq . Swarez is not content at the hungry expressions of Durandus , Mirandula , Hulcot , in the worshipping of Images . p. 165 , 166 The place ( worship at his footstool ) discussed , Psal . 99 , ibid. Prayer may as lawfully be given to the creature , as Adoration . p. 169 , 170 Divers Fables touching Images . p. 179 , 180 The original of Images , p. 181 Images not in the ancient Church , neither worshippe● therein , p. 182 , ●83 , 184 , &c. Vasquez will have all things to be adored . p. 190 Joan. d● Lugo proveth the same by four Reasons . p. 191 Whether sitting or kneeling , be the most convenient and lawful gesture , in the act of receiving the Sacrament of Christs Body and Blood. p. 192 Sitting the onely convenient and lawful gesture . p. 193 What is occasional in the first Supper . ibid. Christ sate at the first Supper . p. 194 , 195 Sitting a sign of our coheirship . p. 197 , 198 , 199 A signe of our coheirship may well consist with our inferiority in worshipping Christ , p. 198 Ceremonies fail against the Authority of Rulers . p. 201 Whether humane Laws binde the conscience , or not . p. 201 , 202 , seq . How civil positive Laws binde not the conscience : p. 202 , 203 A twofold goodnesse . p. 207 The will of created Authority cannot create goodnesse in things . p. 204 , 205 Humane Laws obli●ge onely in so far , as they agree with the Law of God. p. 206 A twofold consideration of Humane Laws . p. 208 How Rulers are subordinate to God in commanding . p. 209 Humane authority is not the nearest , nor the instrumental cause of Laws . p. 208 , 209 A double obedience due to Rulers , objective , and subjective . p. 210 Objective obedience no more due to Rulers , then to equals . p 210 , 211 False Rules of obedience to Rulers , proposed by D. Jackson , refuted . p. 212. The goodnesse of supposed obedience to Rulers , cannot countervalue the evil in the sinful manner of doing , with a doubting conscience . p. 214 Other arguments for the obligation of humane Laws answered . p. 216 What it is to resist to Ruler . p. 217 Why men cannot make Laws that layeth a tie on the conscience . p. 219 That Christ hath a spiritual Kingdom , not onely in the power of Preaching , but also in the power of the Keys , by censures . p. 220 That there is such a divine Ordinance as Excommunication . p. 223 Objections against Excommunication removed . p. 224 How we are to rebuke our Brother . p. 225 The Church , Matth. 18. is not the civil Sanedrim . p. 226 , 227 , 229 How Heathen and Publicans were excluded from the Church . p. 230 Binding and loosing acts judicial , p. 235 , 236 Excommunication is a divine Ordinance , proved by 1 Cor. 5. p. 238 , 239 , & seq . fuse . To deliver to Satan , is not miraculous killing , p. 238 , 239 The essentials of Excommunication , 1 Cor. 5. p. 238 , 239 , &c. Whether the Word doth warrant censures , and exclusion from the Seals ? ibid. Cutting off , not alwayes killing . p. 241 Moral scandals excluded men from holy things , amongst the Iews . p. 243 The prophecy , Ezek 44. 11 , 12 , &c. to be fulfilled under the New Testament . p. 244 , 245 Ceremonial exclusion from holy things under the old , did typi●ie exclusion for moral uncleannesse under the N. Test . p. 247 , 248 The Churches exclusion from the Seals declarative , non coactive by violence . ibid. Censures applyed to some by name . ibid. Eschuing the society of scandalous Church-members , must be a Church-censure , p. 249 The hindering of Jezabel by preaching , not sufficient . p. 251 Debarring of the scandalous from the Seals , proved . p. 252. seq . It belongeth not to the Magistrate to debar from the Seals . p. 253 Erastus against exclusion from the Sacraments refuted . p. 253 ▪ seq . fuse . By Erastus his way , we cannot deny the Seals to a Turk . p. 258 , 259 To exclude from the Kingdom of Heaven not one with Excommunication . p. 260 Excommunication is no real separation of one from Christs invisible body . p. 261 , 262 , 264 Though Excommunication be onely declarative , yet it s not empty . p. 266 Putting out 1 Cor. 5. p. 269 Whether Erastus doth prove , that none were excluded amongst the Iews , for moral uncleannesse , from the holy things of God. p. 271 A twofold forgivenesse . p. 273 All are invited to come to the Sacraments , but not that they come any way . p. 274 The question whether all should be admitted to the Lords Supper , perverted by Erastus . p. 275 Two sort of signes amongst the Iews , some purely holy , some partly holy , partly necessary for the bodily life ; the latter clean and unclean might eat , but not the former . p. 277 All are commanded to hear , but not to ●ome to the Supper . p. 280 Whether Erastus doth justly deny Excommucation to be typified of Old. p. 281 Ceremonial uncleannesse typified exclusion out of the visible Church for scandals , not out of the Kingdom of Heaven ▪ p 287 , 288 Legal uncleannesse was sin , p. 289 The scope and sense of Matth. 18. perverted by Erastus , p. 290 Our Saviour speaketh of all , not of private or lesser scandals onely , p. 291 By the word ( Brother ) is not meaned a Iew onely , ib. Christs speaking in the second person , argueth not the privacy of the scandal , p. 294 A twofold forgiving , p. 295 Christ speaketh not of such sins as private men may forgive , as Erastus dreameth , p. 297 Christs scope spiritual , Erastus his way carnal , p. 298 A Publican most odious to the Iews , p. 305 It s not private forgivenesse which is holden forth , Matth. 18. 17. p. 308 Binding and loosing proper to Stewarts , p. 309 To excommunicate is not formally to debar from the Seals , p. 311 Christ might well give directions touching a Church not yet erected , p. 314 , &c. The place 1 Cor. 5. vindicated from Erastus his glosse , p. 316 , 317 , &c. The prayers of the Church intervene not for this particular miracle , p. 318 , 319 Faith of miracles not in all the faithful at Corinth , p. 320 Delivering to Satan not miraculous , p. 321 The Church , not Paul alone , had hand in delivering the man to Satan , p. 326 What delivering to Satan is , p. 327 The destruction of the flesh , what it is , p. 328 Hymeneus and Alexander not killed by Satan , p. 332 Delivering to Satan not miraclous , p 336 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to put away , not alwayes to kill , p. 337 To eschew the scandalous , a mean to save them , p. 339 The similitude of a cut off member to hold forth Excommunication vindicated , p. 340 No warrant that the Apostles killed any , by the ministery of Satan , p. 341 No miraculous faith required in the Corinthians , to pray for the killing of the man , p. 342 , &c. Of the Leaven , 1 Cor. 5. p. 344 What it is to purge out the Leaven , none killed for eating Leavened Bread , p. 346 To eat the Passeover with Leavened Bread , a violation of that Sacrament , p. 348 , &c. Putting away of Leaven , p. 349 What is meaned by the whole lump , and what by leaven . p. 352 , 533 Hymeneus and Alexander , not miraculously killed by Satan . p. 354 , 355 Erastus his expositions , all without ground in Scripture . p. 354 Withdrawing from scandalous Brethren , argueth Excommunication . p. 357 How eschewing intimate fellowship with a scandalous Brother is a Church-Censure , p. 357 , 358 , 359 Sacraments , though helps of piety , yet not to be given to all . p. 361 , 362 Erastus his contradiction in excluding both some , and none at all from the Sacraments , p. 363 How withdrawing from scandalous Brethren , may infer Excommunication . p. 365 The scandalous are forbidden to come to the Sacraments , p. 368 An evident contradiction in Erastus thorow his whole Book . p. 369 Whom Erastus excludeth from the Sacraments , p. 370 Some on earth must try who are to be admitted to the Sacrament , who not , p. 371 Other arguments for Excommunication vindicated , p. 37● The place Gal. 5. 12. vindicated . p. 373 Paul did not judicially condemn the incestuous man , 1 Cor. 5. p 374 To eschew the scandalous is materially to excommunicate them ▪ p. 377 What Presbyteries Erastus yeeldeth . p. 379 A Presbytery at Corinth . p. 380 Erastus granteth an Examination of such as are admitted to the Sacraments , and yet denieth that any should be debar'd , p. 382 , 383 The places Deut. 17. and 2 Chro. 19. do prove two different Iudicatures , p. 383 , 384 How the Kingly and Priestly office are different . p. 384 , 385 Erastus denyeth the Ministery to be peculiar to some , but proper to all under the New Testament . p. 385 , 386 Two distinct Iudicatures , 2 Chron. 19. page 386 , 387 The Magistrates are not to dispence the Word and Sacraments , as Erastus saith . p. 391 , 392 The Magistrate is not to judge who is to be admitted to the Sacrament , who not ; nor hath he power of Church Discipline , page 394 , 395 How Erastus confuteth a Presbytery . p. 398 A Church Iudicature in the Iewish Church , Deut. 17. ibid. The ●●iest put no man to death . p. 401 Teaching and Judging not one . p. 406 The Civil Iudge as a Iudge , cannot teach , p. 406 , 407 Erastus maketh the Magistrate or Priest , and Pastor , formally one , p. 406 What are the Matters of the Lord , and of the King , 2 Chro. 19. p. 411 , 412 Levites sometimes imployed in civil businesses , p. 414 The power of the civil Magistrate , p. 417 Men haue need of two sort of Governors , ib. Magistracy and Ministery both Supreme in their own kinde , p. 417 , 418 Erastus alloweth no Government , but Popedom and Monarchy , p 418 , 419 Christs kingdom , how not of this world , p. 421 Moses , David , Salomon , appointed to the Priests nothing as Kings , p. 423 The Priests onely judged de questione juris , of the questiō of law in matters of death , p. 424 The Priests and Levites had no Law-power , by Gods Law , or from Caesar , to put Christ to death , p. 426 , 427 The Sanedrim had no Law-power against Stev●● to stone him , p ▪ 427 The like of their dealing with Paul , true , ib. How the Christian Magistrat is to be acquainted with Excommunication , p. 429 , 430 A Colledge of Church rulers in the New Testament , p. 431 The place , 1 Cor. 5. again vindicated , no miraculous killing , 1 Cor. 5. p 435 , 436 Cap. 19. Quest 15. Of the use of Excommunication , p. 437 Erastus yeeldeth there is a Presbytery , p. 43● The Magistrate under Church-discipline , ib. The Magistrate not a Church-officer , p ▪ 440 A Iudicature proper to the Priest as Priest , ib. The Magistrate under Ch. -discipline , p. 443 How the Magistrates consent is requisite in Excommunication , ib. The Magistrates Sword no kindly mean of gaining souls , p. 445 The Scandalous are forbidden to partake of holy things , p. 448 The morally unclean debarred out of the Temple , 452 , 453 No price of a Whore to be offered to God , and what is meant , p. 454 , 455 Our chief Argument for Excommunication not answered , p. 456 The place , Mat. 5. When thou bringest thy gift , &c. discussed , p. 457 How men do judge of inward actions , p. 460 A frequent contradiction in Erastus , p. 462 What it is to be cast out of the Synagogue , p. 464 Christ and the Apostles not cast out of the Synagogue that we read , as Erastus dreams , 467 Ministers subject to the Magistrate , 471 , 472 Morally unclean debarred from the holy things , ibid. Tell the Church discussed , p ▪ 476 , seque Though there was no Christian Church , yet Christ might say , Tell the Church , p. 480 There was no more a right consti●uted Sanedrim in Christs time then a Christian Church , ibid. External Government of the Church not in the hands of the Magistrate , 481 , 482 Rebuking of Princes argue no lesse ●u●isdiction then all that the Presbytery doth , p. 484 Whō Erastus e●cludeth from the Sacrament , ib Magistrates , if Scandalous , are to be debarred from the Sacrament , p. 487 Every profession maketh not men capable of the holy things of God , p. 492 All sins punished with death in the Old Testament ▪ are not therefore so punished under the New Testament , p. 493 How great sins debar men from the Sacrament , p 497 The Scandalous among the Iews , debarred from the holy things , p. 498 The Magistrate cannot admit to , or debar from the Sacraments , 499 The Sword no intrinsecal and kindly mean of gaining souls , p. 500 Of the power of the Christian Magistrate in Ecclesiastical Discipline , p. 503 , &c. Idolaters and Apostates are to be excommunicated , as Erastus saith , ibid. The Church as the Church , not subordinate to the Magistrate , ibid. Government peculiar to Church-officers , as to Priests and Levites , p. 506 The Epistles to Timothy & Titus must chiefly be written to the Emperor and Magistrate , if Pastors be but servants of the Magistrate , p. 507 , 508 Civil and Ecclesiastical powers immediatly from God , p 510 , 511 The Magistrate not subordinate to Christ as Mediator , ibid. The patern-Church of the Apostles , not ruled by the Magistrate , p. 513 Erastus and Mr. Pryn grant there is such an ordinance as Excommunication , ibid. Suspension , ex naturá rei , may be where there is no Excommunication , ibid. Christs admitting Judas to the Supper no rule to us , p. 516 , 517 The Gospel preached to those to whom the Sacraments cannot be dispensed , ibid. The Sacrament a confirming ordinance , p , 518 We partake of the sins of many , in dispensing to the unworthy the Sacraments , and not in preaching the Word to them , p. 520 We know no extraordinary ▪ conversion by miracles , without the Word , p. 522 The Sacrament not a first converting ordinance , yet a confirming one , ibid. The Lords Supper presupposeth Faith and Conversion in the vvorthy Receiver in a Church-profession , p. 523 , &c. The Magistrate subject to the Church , p. 528 The Church a perfit society without the Magistrate , p. 529 , 530 God efficacious by Preachers , not by Magistrates . p. 532 Differences between the Preachers , and the Magistrate , p. 532 , &c. The Magistrate cannot limit the Pastors in the exercise of their calling , p ▪ 535 That Magistrates are more hot against the Churches punishing of sin , then against sinful omissions , argueth that they are unpatient of Christs yoke , rather then that they desire to vindicate the liberty of the Subject , p. 536 , &c. Of the Reciprocation of the Subordinations of Magistrates and Church-Officers to each other , ibid. Not any power or office subject to any , but to God immediately subjection is properly of persons , p. 538 A Magistrate and a Christian Magistrate , different . p. 539 Two things in a Christian Magistrate , jus , authority , aptitudo , hability , p. 539 , &c. Christianity maketh no new power of Magistracy . p. 542 A fourfold consideration of the exercise of Ministerial power most necessary , upon which , and the former distinction followeth ten very considerable assertions , page 542 , &c. The Magistrate as the Magistrate , commandeth the exercise of the Ministerial power , but not the spiritual and sincere manner of the exercise ▪ p. 544 Magistrates as godly men , not as Magistrates command sincerity and zeal in the manner of the exercise of Ministerial power , p. 545 , &c. A twofold goodnesse in a Christian Magistrate , essential , accidential , p. 548 The Magistrate as such , commandeth onely in order to temporary rewards and punishments , nor holdeth he forth commands to the conscience . p. 549 , &c. Magistrates as Magistrates , forbid not sin as sin , under the pain of eternal wrath , p. 550 Two sorts of Subordinations , Civil , Ecclesiastick , p 553 Subordination of Magistrate and Church , to each others , p. 554 , &c. Church Offices as such , not subordinate to the Magistrate , ibid. What power Erastians give to Magistrates in Church matters . p. 557 The minde of Arminians touching the power of the Magistrate in Church matters , ibid. A threefold consideration of the Magistrate in relation to the Church . p. 558 Reciprocation of subordinations between Church and Magistrate . p. 560 The Ministers as Ministers , neither Magistrates nor Subjects . p. 564 , &c. The Magistrate as such , neither manageth his office under Christ as mediator , nor under Satan , but under God as Creator . ibid. The Prince as a gifted Christian may Preach , and spred the Gospel to a Land where the Gospel hath not been heard before , page 570 , &c. The King and the Priest kept the Law , but in a far different way , p. 572 , &c. The Pastors and the Iudges do reciprocally judge and censure one another . p. 574 , &c. God hath not given power to the Magistrate and Church , to Iudge contrary wayes justly and unjustly in one and the same cause , p. 577 Whether Appeals may ly from Church-assembles to the Civil Magistrate , p. 578 Of Pauls appeal to Caesar . ibid. Divers opinions of the Magistrates power in Causes Ecclesiastical . p. 579 , &c. It is one thing to complain , another thing to appeal , p. 580 What an appeal is , ibid. Refuge to the Magistrate is not an Appeal , p. 581 A twofold appeal , p. 582 The Magistrates power of punishing or his , interest of faith proveth him not to be a Iudge in Synods . p. 585 , &c. Pauls appeal proveth nothing against appeals , for appeals from the Church to the Christian Magistrate . p. 587 Paul appealed from an inferiour Civil Iudge , to a superior Civil Heathen Iudge in a matter of his head and life , not in a controversie of Religion , p. 588 What power a conqueror hath to set up a Religion in a conquered Nation . p 590 There were no appeals made to the godly Emperours of old . p. 594 To lay bands on the conscience of the Magistrate , to ty him to blinde obedience , the Papists , not our Doctrine . p 595 Subjection of Magistrates to the Church , no Papal tyranny , p. 600 , &c. The Magistrate as a Magistrate , cannot forbid sin as sin , ibid. The Magistrate pomoteth Christs mediatory Kingdom . ibid. The Magistrate as such , not the Vicar of the mediator Christ , p. 601 The Adversaries in the Doctrine of the Magistrate Popish , not we at all , ibid. Pastors are made inferiour Magistrates in their whole Ministery , by the Adversaries , p. 603 , &c. Christian Magistracy no Ecclesiastical Administration , p. 604 The Magistrate as such , not the Vicar of the mediatory Kingdom , ibid. Heathen Magistrates as such , are not oblieged to promote Christs mediatory Kingdom , p. 606 Magistracy from the Law of Nations , p. 608 The Adversaries must teach universal Redemption , p 610 Magistrates as such , not members of the Church , p. 613 Christ mediator not a temporary King , p 614 The Magistrat not the servant of the Church , p. 616 The adequate and complete cause why the Magistrate is subject to the Church , p. 617 That the Magistrate is subject to the Rebukes and censures of the Church , is proved from the Word , p. 618 , &c. The supreme and principal power of Church-affairs not in either Magistrate or Church , p 620 Though the Magistrate punish Ecclesiastical scandals , yet his power to Iudge and punish is not Ecclesiastical and spiritual , as the Church censureth breaches of the second Table , and yet the Churches power , is not Civil for that , p. 622 People as people may give power to a Magistrate to adde his auxiliary power to defend the Church , to judge and punish offenders therein , p. 625 A Governour of , or over the Church ; a Governour in the Church , a Governour for the Church , different , p. 628 The distinction of a Doctrinal or Declarative , and of a Punitive part of Church-Government , of which , the former is given to Pastors , the latter to the Magistrate , a heedless● and senselesse notion , p. 629 , &c. That the Magistrates punishing with the sword scandalous persons , should be a part of Church-government , a reasonlesse conceit , p. 631 There is neither coaction nor punishment properly so called in the Church , p. 632 Bullinger not of the minde of Erastus , p. 634 The Iudgement of Wolf●ag , Musculus , Aretius , and Gualther , p. 634 , &c. The Errour of Gualther to please the usurping Magistrate , p. 638 Their minde different from Erastus , p. 639 The Christian Magistrates sword cannot supply the place of Excommunication in the Church , p. 640 The confessions of the Protestant Church for this way , p. 642 , &c. The testimony of Salmasius , p. 644 Of Simlerus , p. 645 Lavater , Ioan. Wolphius , ibid. Of R●b . Burhillus . 646 The Contents of the Tractate or Dispute touching Scandal . WHether things indifferent , can be commanded . Introduction , p. 1 Indifferent things as such , not the Matter of a Church-constitution . Introd . Actions are not indifferent because their circumstances are indifferent . Introd . Marrying not indifferent , Introd . Indifferency Metaphysical and Theological , Introd . Necessity of obeying the Church in things onely necessary for the Churches Commandment , is neither a lawful nor obliging necessity . Introd . Actions meerly indifferent , cannot be done in faith . Introd . The unlawfulnesse unseparably adhering to actions indifferent , maketh them unlawful , Introd . How exsuperancy of goodnesse is to sway the will of Rulers and people . Introd . The will of Rulers not a law to us , in things indifferent , Introd . The definition of a Scandal , p. ● Propositions touching Scandal from Rom. 14. p , 4 , 5 , 6 Propositions and Rules touching Scandal , from 1 Cor. 7. and 8 , and 10. p. 7 , 8 , 9 An object scandalous two wayes , p. 9 Four things may be scandalous objects . ibid. What is malum aparens , appearance of evil , p. 11 Rules touching Scandal , p. 12 , 13 , 14 Whether or no we may deny obedience to the Laws of Superiors for fear of Scandal causelesly taken , p. 15 , 16 , 17 Whether Information can remove Scandal from things not necessary , but only through the necessity of mans commandment , p. 20 , 21 Whether the precept of obedience to superiors , or the precept of eschewing Scandal be more obligatory , p. 28 , 29 , &c. The essence of an active Scandal , p. 36 , 37 How the fifth Commandment is more obligatory then following precepts , and how no● , p. 46 , 47 , &c. Whether or not in every indifferent things we are to eschew the Scandal of all , even of the malicious ? Affirmatur , p. 53 , &c. Occasions of sins as occasions , are forbidden , p. 56 What is Christian liberty in things indifferent , p. 57 , 58 A further consideration of things not necessary , how they he scandalous , p. 60 Of the necessity of things which remove Scandal , p. 61 , 62 Some things necessary from the onely p●●i●ive Will of God , some thing necessary from something in the things themselves , p. 62 Two sorts of monuments of Idolatry , p. 63 We cannot devise the use of any thing in worship , when we cannot devise the thing it self , p 63 The place Deut. 7. 25. The graven Image of their gods , shall ye burn with fire cleared , p. 64 How House● and Temples builded to Saints , are not to be demolished , p. 65 Temples and Houses have a like physical use in Gods worship ; as out of Gods worship , p. 65 , 66 No Houses , no Temple , no Creatures , are now unclean under the New Testament , p. 67 How things not necessary are to be abstained from , or used , in the case of Scandal , p 67 , &c Things scandalous under the New Testament are forbidden in a far other sense ; then meats , dayes , and other things in the Ceremonial Law , p. 73 How far a Moral , and perpetual reason maketh a Law perpetual , p 74 , 75 Difusing of houses because abused to idolatry a Iudaising , p. 75 , 76 , 77 Bells for convening of the people to publike worship , not to be abolished , though they haye been abused to superstition , p. 77 , &c. A most necessary rule to be observed in the doctrine of Scandal , That emergent providences of natural necessity , are to us in place of divine commands in some cases . p. 81 Eight considerable Rules touching the kindes and degrees of necessity in eschewing Scandal , p. 82 , 83 , 84 The 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 Rule , p. 82 , 83 , the 6. Rule , ib. A scandal may flow from ignorance and corruption , and so be taken , when it also kindly issueth from the sinful or unseasonable fact of another , and so is also kindly given , p. 84 , 85. the 7. Rule 84 A false rule of Papists that men may co operate in a sinful act , and be free of scandal , because of some necessity , p. 85 No relation of servant or c●ptive can render it lawfu● : to cooperate with sin , p. 86 What things not necessary are to be removed from the worship of God as scandalous , p. 87 , the 8. Rule , ibid. Ceremonies not so much as necessary by way of disjunction , which necessity agreeth to many circumstances of worship in the Directory , p. 8● Religious monuments of Idolatry are to be removed , p. 89 , 90 , &c. What conformity with Idolaters is unlawful , p 93 Conformity with Idolaters in things , in Gods worship not necessary , unlawful , p. 94 , 95 The same Ceremonies in Idolaters , and in the true Church , may be judged the same three wayes , p. 96 Formalists grant conformity with Heathen and Idolaters in Ceremonies , cloathed with a scriptural signification , p. 96 , 97 , 98 How the Scripture is a Rule , p. 99 Church-Government properly an Institution , ibid. The worship of God needeth no religious Ceremonies , but what God hath himself prescribed , p. 100 , 101 We need not say , that conformity with Idolaters , was the onely cause why God forbad his people heathenish rites , p. 102 , 103 ❧ Places of Scripture cleared in both these ●REATISES . Gensis . Ch. Ver. Page . 6. 14. 51 17. 11 129 9. 13 ibid. Exodus . Ch. Ver. Page . 32. 22 117 20. 4 130 32. 4 , 5 151 , 152 12. 8 , 15 347 , 348 18. 15. 16 404 , 405 , 406 Leviticus . Ch. Ver. Page . 4. 5 , 6 439 , 440 6. 4 , 5 , 6 289 , 290 8. 6 , 7 , 8 , 384 , 385   9 , &c.   10. 11 398 , 399 10. 10 379 , 380     453 , 242 9. 13 347 , 348 16. 2 , 3 , 285 4 , 5 , &c.     18. 3 , 4 94 , 9● 19. 19 ibid. 22. 20 , 21 455 22. 10 470 21. 2 , 3 , 288 , 289   4 , 5   23. 27 , 28 286 , 287 19. 11 282 , 283 13. 3. 4 386 Number Ch. Ver. Page . 5. 1 , 2 41 , 242 9. 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ●48 9. 6 , 7 ●53 8. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 391 , 39● 11. 16 , 17 ●04 , 405 16. 9 91 , 392 25. 7 , 8 ●28 35. what ●76 , 477 , 478 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●● 12   31 21 , 22 ●7 , 78 Deuter. Ch. Ver. Page . 1. 16 404 , 415 ● ● 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , &c. 98 , 99 , 100 4. 5 155 , 156 , 157 12. 32 51 , 52 , 53 , &c. 7. 25 , 26 64 , 65 , T● . of Scan. 66 , 67 , 74 14. 1 , 2 362 , 363 17. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 383 , 384 , 385 , 386 , 387 , 388 , 389 , 340 , 402 , 303 , 404 , 405 , 406 , 407 , 408 , 409 , 410 , 411 , 505 17. 18 , 547 , 548 , 571 , 572 19 , 20.   20. 19 66 , 67 22. 9 ibid. 23. 18 455 , 456 32. 2 455 Jeshua . Ch. Ver. Page . 1 2 507 22. 15 , 16 ibid. Judges . Ch. Ver. Page . 18. 17 567 1 Sam. Ch. Ver. Page . 8. 7 208 , 209 , 210 3. 13 453 , 454 15. 1 , 2 , 3 65 , 66. 1 Kings . Ch. Ver. Page . 8. 17 96 , 97 , 98 11. 12 571 , 572 12. 27 127 18. 40 , 41 428 2 Kings . Ch. Ver. Page . 11. 1● , 18 572 1 Chron. Ch. Ver. Page . 26 ● , &c. 410 , 411 28. 11 27 , 28 26. 30 , 31 414 , 415 29. 20 159 , 170 2 Chron Ch. Ver. Page . 10. 8 468 , 469 15. 12 , 13 463 , 464 19. 9 545 23. 19 241 , 242 19. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 386 , 387 , 388 , 389 , &c. 405 , 406 , 408 , 409 , 410 , 411 , 412 , 507 30. 6 , 7 346 , 347 30. 18 , 19 348 Ezra . Ch. Ver. Page . 9. 21 , 22 242 , 243 6. 9 290 10. 11 , 12 ibid. Psalmes . Ch. Ver. Page . 2. 8 , 9 605 , 606 , 607 ▪ 610 , 611 34. 11 202 50 1● 272 , 368 79. 8 93 , 94 99. 5 171 , 172 106. 19 , 20 152 , 153 115 8 159 , 160 119. 105 9 Proverbs . Ch. Ver. Page . 2. 9 9 , 104 4. 11 ibid. 12 ▪ 6 , 23 ibid. Isaiah Ch. Ver. Page . 22. 2● 14 , 15 , 61● 31. 3 156 , 158 ●● ▪ 18 129 , 130 , 157 , 158 , 164 , 165 , 153 , 15● ▪ 6. ●● , ● 155 49. 23 547 , 572 , 573 52. 11 136 Jeremiah . Ch. Ver. Page . 2. 27 158 , 159 , 173 5. 31 387 7. 8 , 9 246 , 272 10. 8 129 , 158 , 159 26. 7 , 9 , 10 387 , 424 , 425 22. 2 , 3 388 , 389 ▪ Ezekiel . Ch. Ver. Page . 3. 13 , 19 252 14. 15 24● 22. 25 , 26 247 , 347 , 34● 23. 39 452 , 453 , 496 34. 1 533 40. 41 , 42 28 44. 8 , &c. 244 , 245 , 194 Daniel . Ch. Ver. Page . 3. 18 147 , 148 , 17● Hosea . 6. 6 449 , 450 , 451 8. 6 103 , 104 13. 2 ibid. Habbakuk . Ch. Ver. Page . 2. 18 , 19 129 , 154 Haggai . 2. 11 , 12 272 , 347 , 348 , 387 Zechariah Ch. Ver. Page . 3. 7 4●9 Malachi . Ch. Ver. Page . ● . 2 , 7 572 , 583 Matthew . Ch. Ver. Page . 5. 23 448 , 450 , 458 , 459 ● . 6 254 , 255 , 476 , 638 , 477 , 478 15. 14 , 15 103 , 104 , 137 , 138 , 139 16. 17 , 18 , 19 4●● , 14 , 15 16. 19 308 , 309 , 310 , 311 , 235 , 236 , 295 10. 5 , 6 , 10 518 , 519 12. 5 , 6 51 18. 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 290 , 291 , 292 , 293 , 294 , &c 476 , 477 , 478 , 479 , 480 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 127 ▪ 128 , 129 , 465 , 466 , 467 , 396 , 397 , 611 , 612 , 635 , 636 , 637 , 638 ▪ 23. 3 19 28. 18 , 19 393 , 396 , 397 Mark. Ch. Ver. Page . 7. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 137 , 138 , 139 Luke . Ch. Ver. Page . ● . 1 , 2 , 3 361 12. 13 , 14 428 , 602 , 603 , 392 , 393 17. 3 223 , 224 , 297 , 298 22. 21 197 , 198 ib. 24 428 , 602 , 603 ib. 26 617 John. Ch. Ver. Page . 9. 22 464 , 465 , 466 , 467 15. 22 606 , 607 18. 31 , 36 ●25 , 426 , 421 , 422 , 510 , 511 , 603 20. 23 235 , 236 , 293 ●●●s . Ch. Ver. Page . 4. 1 , 20 558 5. 31 612 6. 6 12 7. 1 , 2 , 51 , 52 426 , 427 10. 15 67 , 68 14. 11 , 12 , 13 146 , 147 , 148 15. 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 8 , 45 , 251 , 25● , 581 , 586 , 92 , 2●2 17. 29 , 30 162 , 155 , 158 , 159 , 162 , 168 , 170 20. 28 , 29 431 , 533. 534 , 569 25. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 587 , 588 , 589 26. 10 427 , 428 Ro●ans . Ch. Ver. Page . 12. 8 433 13. 4 ●06 , 407 b. 4 , 5 541 , ●16 , 217 , 534 , 547 , 549 , 630 , 631 14. 14 , 20 8 , 1 b. 14 , 23 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 14 , Introduction to Scandal . 16. 17 249 , 269 , 356 , 336 , 337 ● Corinth . Ch. Ver. Page . 5. 1 , 2 , 3 , ● , 5 , 6 , 7 , ● , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 238 , 239 , 240 , 250 , 255 , 256 , 268 , 269 , 317 , 318 , 319 , 320 , &c. 337 , 338 , 339 , 340 , 341 , 34● , 344 , 345 5. 1 , 2 , 3 , &c. 346 , 347 , 356 , 366 , 367 , 374 , 375 , 376 , 380 , 381 , 382 , 431 , 43● , 436 , 636 , 637 , 638 6. 1 , 2 , 3 , ● ▪ 299 , 210 9. 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ●r●●●ise of 〈…〉 , 39 , 40 , 41 〈…〉 45. 10. 27 , 28 Of Scand . 3. 11. 29 , 30 346 , 347 10. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 276 , 277 , 278 11. 27 , 28 278 , 279 , 280 , 458 , 459 14. 31 385 , 386 16. 22 372 , 373 2 Corinth . Ch. Ver. Page . 2. 6 221 7. 17 281 , 282 10. 4 , 5 393 , 406 , 603 , 604 12. 20 , 21 333 , 334 Galath . Ch. Ver. Page . 1. 8 57 , 58 4. 6 430 5. 12 336 , 337 5. 11 , 12 353 , 373 , 374 , 416 Ephesians Ch. Ver. Page . 4. 11 , 12 , 13 24 , 44 , 393 , 431 , 508 , 609 , 610 , 619 , 620 5. 21 , 22 24 Philip. Ch. Ver. Page . 1. 15 , &c. 460 , 462 2. 9 612 , 613 Col●ssians . Ch. Ver. Page . 1. 17 , 18 14 ●b . 18 586 , 587 , 613 2 Thessal . Ch. Ver. Page . 3. 14 , 15 250 , 256 , 258 , 259 , 360 , 36● , 378 56● ▪ 1 Tim. Ch. Ver. Page . 1. 19 , 20 354 , 355 , 2. 2 543 , 552 , 573 4. 4 65 , 66 5. 17 432 , 434 , 534 5. 19 , 20 222 , 223 6. 3 , 4 , 5 378 , 379 2 Tim. Ch. Ver. Page . 2. 15 253 , 547 5. 21 11 Titus . Ch. Ver. Page . 1. 10 533 3. 10 378 , 379 Hebrews . Ch. Ver. Page . 3 ▪ 1 , 2 , 3 26 5. 4 253 , 391 , 39● ▪ 61● ▪ 8. 2 , 3 48 , 49 8. 5 26 , 27 9. 8 129 13. 7 , 13 628 ib. 17. 533 , 560 , 57 , 571 , 5●3 1 Pet. Ch. Ver. Page . 2. 13 ▪ &c 609 , 610 ib. 2● 202 5. 1 , 2 , 3 534 5. 4 552 1 John● . Ch. Ver. Page . 4. 1 587 2 John. Ch. Ver. Page . 2 Ioh. 10 358 Revelat. Ch. Ver. Page . 2. 14 , &c. 9 ib. 14 , 20 250 , 251 ib. 22 245 , 246 19. 10 167 , 168 ERRATA . PAge ●● ▪ L●●●●4 . for puring , read ●●rim , p. 37. read ●ullis in Marg. p. 46. l. ●8 . for Nor ● . But , p. 50 l. 10. ● . patrons , p. 51. l. 1● . 1. Answered , p. 96. r ▪ a D●o in marg . p. 1●7 . l. 5. for rellgiously r. religious , p. 121. l. 1. for antecedent r. assumption , p. 139. l. ●0 . delenor , p. ●●6 . l 24 for 37. r. ●● , p. 210 l. ● . dele then they are bou●● to beleeve and obey me , p. ●13 . l 22. for ar● r. ●● , p 227. l 10. for o●● . are , p. 267. l. 2 for 5 ●0 . ● . 108. p 274. l. ●● . dele is , p. 289. l. 34. for 99 ▪ r. 8 , ● , p. ●86 . l. 8. adde be , p 399. l. 6. r. 19 , p. 521. l. 1. for 5. r. 7 , p. 53● . l. 2. for ● , ●● . r. 13. ● , p. 533. l. 14. for ha●● dominion r. hath no dominion , p. 537. l. 23. ● . reciprocation , p. 548. l. 8. dele not , l. 3● . dele ● Tim. 5 17. Matth. 10. 10. p. 571. l. 26. for Walens , p. 588. l. 34. for of life and death r. in a matter of religion , p 63● ▪ l. 2● . r. rebuke . In Treatist of Scandal , p. 15. l. ●9 for ●●andalously r. causelesly ▪ p. 2● . l 3. ● ▪ also ▪ p. 78. l. 24. for to eat ▪ r. not to eat . The Introduction . SECTION I. Certain Introductory Conclusions , tending to clear the perfection of the Scriptures in all things , as well Ceremoniall , as Non-Ceremoniall . 1. Conclusion . CHrist Jesus hath so far forth set down , and stablished a perfect Plat-forme of Church-Government in all Morals , not only both for the inward , but also for the outward , and externall Government of his House , that he hath left no Liberty or Latitude to Magistrates , or Churches whatsoever to choose and settle such an orderly Forme of Church-Government or Discipline , as is most suitable to their particular Civill-Government , Laws , Manners , and Customes , so this Forme be not repugnant to the Word of God. I shall first explaine the Tearmes of the Conclusion : 2. Confirme it : 3. Vindicate it from the objections of Adversaries . 1. The Church-Government of which I here speak , is a Church-Government in its Morals : To exclude those things that are meerly Physicall and Humane in this Government , as a Pulpit of this or that matter , Stone or Timber , or of this Timber , or of any other kinde ; a Communion-Table of this , or that forme ; a Cup of wood , or of metall , as Silver , Tin , &c. It is a Morall thing , either Morally good or evil , that there be an Officer in the Church that Christ hath not appointed , or that there be none but such as Christ hath appointed : yet is it not Morall that a Pastor be such or such a Country man , so he be apt to teach , and holy ; Crossing , signifying the dedication of the Baptized Childe to the service of Christ must be Morall , but what sort of River the ●●ter of Baptisme be , is meerly Physicall , not Morall . So there be two sort of things in Gods Worship , things either meerly Morall , or meerly Naturall . And here also we consider things Circumstantiall , as Time , Place , &c. And circumstances are either meerly Physicall , or 2. meerly Morall , or 3. mixt , partly Morall , partly Physicall ; Circumstances meerly Physicall are such adjuncts of divine worship , as are common and unseparable concomitants of both civil , naturall , and Religious or Sacred actions performed by men , and as they are such , contribute no Morall goodnesse , or badnesse to the action or Agent in the performance thereof , such as I take to be the seven individuall proprieties of every man ; Forma , figura , locus , tempus strips , patria , nomen , under Forme and figure : The first two , I comprehend , such a proportion of body , a man of a high stature , or low ; a man beautifull , or not beautifull , to which I crave leave to reduce all externall Formes of habites , as cloathes , the head covered , or not covered , the situation of the body , as as they are in themselves , meer Physicall acts ; kneeling , sitting , standing ; the eyes cast down to the earth , or lifted up ; the hands lifted up , or not lifted up , the knocking on the breast , or not knocking , motions of the soul , that are naturall Time , Place , Family , Country , Name , as such a person , Thomas , not Iohn : the son of such a man , not of such a man ; 1. All these are common concomitants of Civill , Naturall , and Religious actions , for all actions performed by man of what kinde soever , as naturall , to eat , sleep ; or civill , to declaime an oration before the people ; or religious , to preach or pray , must be done by some persons , Iohn or Thomas , men of some Family , in some time , in some place , for they are not actions eternall , and so must be done in time and place so ▪ the Agents must , have some habite , some gesture in the doing of all these actions , and they are unseparable Adjuncts of all these actions because neither actions naturall , civill , nor Religious , can be performed , but by some persons , in some habite and gesture , in some time , in some place : and lastly , they are meere circumstantials , and contribute no Morall goodnesse or badnesse to the actions , as they are but common and unseparable circumstances ; for because he preacheth in time , or in place simply , the preaching is neither Morally good , nor ill , better or worse , because Thomas prayeth in Gown or Cloak in this place , rather then that place ( so it be not , Locus ut sic , of intention , such a Religious place , before the Image of Christ , or the Father , or the Virgin Mary ) the praying is neither the more , or the lesse acceptable to God because of these common and unseparable adjuncts : Hence there can be no such force in these circumstances , as to make the actions indifferent : Such as contend for the lawfulnesse of Ceremonies , say our circumstances of time , place and the like , is nothing but a meerblinde ; for we cannot ( say they ) enumerate all these circumstances , for habite , gesture , person , are not meer circumstances and they mustcome in under the lap of this general , &c. or the like : To which I answer , that to my knowledge all these that are meer Physical circumstances , are particularly enumerated , such as are , 1. Time : 2. Place , 3. Person , or Agent : 4 ▪ Name . 5. Family : 6. Condition , as Country , Family , House : 7. Habits or Garments : 8. Gestures , as sitting , standing , lifting of the eyes or hands , knocking on the breast , kneeling , and there is no blinde in this enumeration , for there be no other particulars that can be enumerated , except this time of the day , eight or ten of clock , this place , not any other , this person not another , and these are only considered here as circumstances , not as such and such circumstances , but the truth is , the enumeration of Symbolicall Rites , as Crosse , Surplice , and the like , is really a blinde , and is an enumeration with a wide belly , and includeth species , and not individuals only , as Symbolicall Ceremonies , such as are Crossing , Bells , Oyle , Salt , Spettle , Milk , turning to the East , toward the people , from the people , toward the Altar , with a high voice , with a low voice , and a thousand the like ; yea , all the old Ceremonies of Moses with a new face , all the toyes of the Masse , of the Dedication of Churches , which would fill a Volumne like the Rationale of Durandus : 2. Some Circumstances are meerely Morall , for as Divines distinguish Time and Place ; in Time as Time , and as such a Religious Time , the Lords Sabbath , Tempus , & tempus ut sic , and Place as Place , or such a Religious place , Locus , & locus ut sic ▪ So we may distinguish here , between circumstances in common or in grosse , and such and such circumstances ; As time is a common adjunct of Divine Worship : But such a time , to wit , the Lords-day , is both the time of Worship , and Worship it self . So there is place of Worship , and there is such a Religious place , The holy of holiest , the Temple . A habit is a meer accident of Worship , the person , John or Thomas , is also an accident ; but if God command such an Ephod as Aaron and the Priests were to wear , this is not a meer circumstance ; that the person who administreth the Lords-Supper , be John or Thomas , is a meer circumstance ; but that this person be a called Pastor , not a private man , is more then a circumstance . And therefore these circumstances , taken in common and their Universall nature , are meerly Physicall circumstances ; but taken in their particular and determinate restrictions , as such circumstances , they may be meerly Morall circumstances , such as are the common adjunct of the time of Worship , the place , and the Sabbath time and the Temple for Iewish Worship . The former are circumstances meerly Physicall , the latter meerly Morall ; I mean , as they are restricted other wayes : The Temple of Jerusalem served as our meeting places do , to sence off the injuries of Heaven and Sun ; but that is as a place , not as such a place . 3. There be some mixt circumstances , as these same Physicall circumstances , clothed with their own seasonable conveniences ; so time for Worship , and due and convenient time is required , there may be some Scandalous and Superstitious time for Worship . A habit in the Preacher is required , and that a grave one ; a place is required for private Worship , and a fit place , such as is not the Market-street for private Praying ; the inconveniency of the circumstance may vitiate the Worship . I did say that Christ Iesus hath set down in the Word , a perfect Plat-form of Church-Government , in all Morals ; I say in all Morals , because the Word doth not teach us any thing of circumstances , Physicall as Physicall . Scriptura talia non ponit , sed supponit : The Scripture saith not , That the Worship of God must have a time , a place , when , and where it s to be performed , a person , who is to perform it , a habit , or garments on the person that Worshippeth ; the Scripture teacheth none of these , but supposeth that they are and must be ; because nature teacheth , that without time , place , person , habit , gesture , its unpossible that these or any humane actions can be ; and therefore Prelaticall Formalists , do without all sense or reason , require that we should prove by Scripture , the lawfulnesse of time , place , person , habit , gesture in Gods Worship ; for these are presupposed in all actions , Naturall , Civill , Religious , Private , Publike , Lawfull , unlawfull , in acts of Arts , Sciences , of Morall conversing and all ; yea , there is as good reason , that they demand Scripture to prove he must be a living man , who hath a reasonable soul , and senses , and is born of a woman , who Preacheth and Administrateth Sacraments , which is presupposed by nature . When the Heretick willeth me to prove from Scripture that Christ is very man ; it is a vain thing he should demand of me beside to prove by Scripture , that Christ is such a one also as can laugh , weep , admire , sing , sigh , &c. for these are presupposed to follow mans nature ; and if Scripture prove Christ to be a true man , it presupposeth by natures light , that he can laugh , he can weep , and that in some time , some place , in some habit , in some gesture , so he be a man ; for that is presupposed by the light of nature , and known by the most Barbarous who never heard of Scripture ; and therefore there is no greater reason to put us to prove all the naturall and unseparable circumstances of Worship , such as time and place , without which it is impossible any action at all can be performed ; then that we should presse Prelats to prove by Scripture , that Iames Vsher is born of English or Irish Parents , for sense and nature can prove all these without Scripture : But because their Ceremonies of Crossing , bowing to Altars , Festivall dayes , Oyl , Salt , Spittle , Masse ▪ clothes , are nothing warrantable by natures light , and must have Morall and Symbolicall influence in Worship , as positive Religious observances , having some spirituall signification and use , ( except they be reasonlesse fancies ) we have just reason to demand a warrant and speciall Charter for all Morals , and so for their Ceremonies in the Scripture , and to call their &c. humane Ceremonies and the like , a blind : For if Prelats can prove these Ceremonies to be from Christ , and warranted by his Testament , we shal yield that their natural circumstances of time , when you should Bow to Altars , and Crosse a Baptized Infant , and where , or in what place you should wear Surplice ; and that the person that useth Oyl , Spittle , Salt , in Baptisme , must do it in some habit , and with some gesture , either sitting , standing , lying , or kneeling , are all warrantable and lawfull from the light of nature ; for if Gods light of Scripture , warrant wearing of a Surplice , as it doth warrant Sacramentall eating and drinking , the light of nature must warrant these concreated , naturall , and unseparable circumstances of time , place , person , habit , gesture used in both the former and the latter . But because I said that circumstances of time and place have a threefold consideration , Physicall , Morall , and Mixt : and I have spoken onely of these circumstances in a Physicall or naturall consideration ; therefore in the other two considerations there being involved some Morall goodnesse , and because there is no Morall goodnesse imaginable , but it must have its essentiall form and being from a Law or word of God ; therefore all the former circumstances , as they are clothed with either morall conveniency and expediency , or with some Religious positive goodnesse , must be warranted by the Word of God , or the Rules of sinlesse and spirituall Prudence , which cannot deviate from the word of God : For circumstances clothed with Religious Positive goodnesse , such as are the Sabbath day , the holy of Holiest , the Temple ; these are not meer circumstances , but worship it self : So a Religious habit , as an Ephod or a Surplice , is not a meer circumstance , or a meer habit , but a worship , or such a part or limb of worship as must be warranted by the word of truth , else it is nothing but a will-device , and a forgery , and so to be rejected . And as touching things of Prudence , they are things properly mixt , as at what hour Sermon shall begin in such a Church , at eight , or nine , or ten of the clock ; how the worship shall be ordered , whether you should begin the Worship with a word of Prayer , or a word of Praising , or a word of Exhorting to stir up for the duty of the day , is a matter of Prudence ; and because God hath not laid the band of a Precept on us , to begin with either of the three ; therefore it would seem , that though the things themselves be Morall , and must be warranted by a Word of God ; yet the order is not Morall , but Prudentiall , and so cannot fall under a command of the Church ; for to me it is hard , that men and the Church should lay on a tie or bond of a Precept where God hath laid on no such bond ; The Church , in these mixt things , where the Morality is not clear , at farthest , can but go on to directive advises , as Paul doth , 1 Cor. 7. 6. 12. Not to imposing of Laws , nor to injunctions or Commandments under the pain of Church-censures ; for Christ must bind and ratifie in Heaven , all Church-censures on earth , and so the Church cannot command nor censure , but as Christ himself would command or censure . Now because the rest of the conclusion shall be farther cleared ; I prove that Christ hath so far forth set down a perfect Plat-form of Church-Government in the Scripture , as he hath not given a liberty to Rulers , Prelats , or to the Church her self , to set up a variable Plat-form sutable to their particular Civill Government , Laws , Manners and Customes . 1 Arg. What ever maketh the man of God perfect , thorowly furnished unto all good workes , and is written for this end , that any Timothy or Faithfull Pastor , might know how he ought to behave himself in the House of God. That must make the man of God perfect in this good work , of holy walking , as a perfect Governour , or a perfect Church-member , to be governed in all Morall acts of Discipline and godly behaviour , according to the spirituall policie of the Lords house , and so must hold forth a perfect Plat-form of Discipline , which doth not varie , ebbe and flow , and alter according to the Civill Government , Laws , Manners and Customs of men : But the Scriptures of God doth so instruct all Members of the visible Church , both Governours and governed , 2 Tim. 3. 16 , 17. 1 Tim. 3. 14 , 15. Ergo , the Scripture must hold forth a perfect form of Discipline which doth not varie , ebbe , flow , and alter according to the Civill Governments , Laws , Manners and Customes of men . The Proposition is made good : Because , 1. to walk according to the spirituall Policie of the Lords house , must be a good work , and so a Morall and Lawfull work , and a due conversing in the spirituall Society of the Church , according to the Rule of the Word . 2. If this Morall walking be according to a Rule that may crook , bow and varie according as Civill Customes of men and Cities alter and varie at mens pleasure , It is a Morall walking , no more according to the Rule of Scripture , then the contradic●nt thereof is according to this Rule , but falleth and riseth , hath its ups and downs at the meer nod and pleasure of men , who may change Customes and Manners every year twice , if so it please them . For what Scripture teacheth me a Civill Custome of a City , as not to carry Armour in the night , to take up the Names of all between sixteen years of age and sixty ? Or what Scripture teacheth me , a Bishop may be above the Pastors of the Church , or a Bishop may not be ? Surplice , Crossing , Bowing and Cringing to wooden Altars , may be or may not be ? Deacons may be , or may not be ? even as customes and guises of the Civill State , appear as Meteors in the Aire , and in the fourth part of a night , disappear and vanish to nothing ; to say , that the word teacheth the Church to abstain from blood , is a part of the perfection of the Scripture , and yet the Scripture teaches that abstinence from blood , not as an eternall , and unalterable Law , for we are not now tied to abstain from blood , therefore the Scripture may make the man of God perfect in some works that are alterable and changeable : This ( I say ) is no Answer , for saying that God should now make abstinence from blood , and things strangled , indifferent , as he made them in that intervall of time , Acts 15. When the Ceremonies were mortall , but not deadly and unlawfull , as is clear in that Paul , Act. 16. 1 , 2 , 3. circumcised Timothy , that Rite being then indifferent ; and yet he writeth in another case , when the Gospel is now fully promulgated , that to be circumcised maketh a man a debtor in conscience , to keep the whole Law of Moses , and so to abstaine from eating of blood , and things strangled , must be a falling from the Grace of Christ , and an Apostacy from the Gospel , Gal. 5 ▪ 1 , 2 , 3. 4 , 5 , 6 ▪ 7. The like I say of observing of dayes , which , Rom. 14. 5 , 6. were indifferent , and in another case , Gal. 4. 9 , 10. Col. 2. 16 , 17. Deadly , unlawfull , and not necessary , so the matter , Acts 15. which in the case of scandilizing the weak , is abstinence from things indifferent , say that they are indifferent , bindeth as a perpetuall Law to the end of the world , and bindeth us this same very day , Rom. 14. 20. In the Morality of it , as abstinence from murthering , One for whom Christ died , Rom. 14. 15. 1 Cor. 8. 12 , 13. 1 Cor. 10. 26 , 27 , 28. And upon the ground laid by Prelates , which is most false and untrue , to wit , that many Positive things in Church-Government , such as are Prelats deemed to be warranted by Apostolick , though not by Divine right : Ceremonies , and Crossing , kneeling to bread , Altars , Surplice , Rochet , corner-Cap , yea , and Circumcision , a Passeover-Lambe , and all the Jewish Ceremonies , though with another spirit and intention , then to shadow forth Christ to come in the flesh , imagined to be indifferent , and alterable things , we hold that all these are to be abstained from , as eating of blood , and things strangled of old were , if you say they are as indifferent , as blood , and some meats were in the case , Act. 15. Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. 1 Cor. 10. It s a most false principle as we shall hear , and therefore the Scripture , if it make the man of God perfect to every good work , as the Apostle saith , it must teach us to abstain from all these as scandalous , and must set down as perfect and particular directions for Church-Government , as Paul doth , Rom. 14. Set down a particular Platform , how we shall eschew Murther ; for scandalizing our Brethren in the use of things indifferent , is spirituall Murther , Rom. 14. 15. 20. 2. Arg. That which is a lamp to the feet , and a light to the path , Psal . 119. 105. And causeth us understand Equity , Iudgement , Righteousnesse , and every good way , Prov. 2. 9. And to walk safely , so that our feet stumble not , Prov. 3. 25. Prov. 4 , 11 , 12. Prov. 6. 23. That must be a lamp and light to our feet , and walking in a Platform of Church-Discipline , so as we shall not erre , sin or stumble therein : But if the light be so various , doubtfull , alterable , as we may walk this way , or the contrary way , according to the Civill Laws , alterable Customes and Manners of the people , we shall not so be guided in our path , as our feet shall not stumble ; the Church might then suffer Jezabell to Prophecie , and these that hath the Doctrine of Balaam , or not suffer them , as the Civill Laws , and alterable Customes of the people should require : Now the Scriptures doth clearly insinuate , that the Law and will of God revealed in the Word , is a Rule of walking straightly and of declining sin , and any stumbling in our way , which deserveth a rebuke and a threatning , such as Christ uttereth against the Church of Pergamos , Rev. 2. 14 , 15 , 16. And of Thyatira , v. 17 , 18. Now if these Churches had no certain Rule or Word of God , from which they should deviate and erre in their path of Discipline , but the Customes and alterable Civill Laws and Manners of men , they were unjustly rebuked by Christ , which to aver were Blasphemy . Prelats say , Some things in Church-Policie , are Fundamentals , not to be altered ; but there be other things alterable . And of things of Policie of the former notion , we have a certain Platform in Scripture ; but of the latter , not any at all is necessary ; and the not suffering of false Teachers in the Church , is of the former sort . But I Answer , some Scripture or reason ought to be given of this distinction : If all be Morall and unalterable that are necessary to Salvation , its good ▪ But to suppresse Jezabell and false teachers , is not necessary , Necessitate medii ; for then the Salvation of that Church were desperate , and past remedy , which should suffer false teachers ; surely then Pergamos and Thyatira , were in a certain irremed●l●sse way of Eternall Damnation , as are these who are void of all Faith and knowledge of Fundamentall Articles ; I conceive Prelats will hold their hand , and not be so rash as to say this ; If these other things of Policie be necessary , necessitate precepti , in regard that Iesus Christ hath commanded them to be observed , why then are some things alterable which Christ hath commanded to be observed some things unalterable ? Crosse & Surplice , which Prelats say have been in the Church these twelve hundred yeers , are in themselves as positive , & have as small affinity with the Civil Laws , Customes & Manners of Nations ( except they mean sinfull Customes ) as Sacramentall eating and drinking . And the like may be said of all the alterable Ceremonies sometimes in use , in England , and now in force amongst Papists . 3. Arg. That Commandement which Timothy is ●o keep without spot unrebukeable , untill the appearing of our Lord Iesus Christ 1 Tim. 6. 13. is no alterable command that falleth and riseth with the Customes , Civill Laws and Manners of men . But Paul commandeth under that , every Positive Law of Church-Discipline to be thus kept , of which he speaketh in these Epistles to Timothy . Mr. Hooker denyeth the assumption ; For Paul ( saith he ) restraineth the words to one speciall Commandment amongst many ; and therefore it is not said , keep the Ordinances , Laws , Constitutions , which thou hast received ; but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that great Commandment , which doth principally concern thee and thy calling , that Commandment that Christ did so often inculcate unto Peter ( Feed my sheep ) and that Act. 20. Attend to your selves and all the flock , &c. And that , 2 Tim. 4. 1. I charge thee in the sight of God , &c. Preach the word , and teach the Gospel without mixture , &c. And these words ( till the appearance of Christ ) doth not import the time wherein it should be kept ; but rather the time whereunto the finall reward for keeping it was reserved according to that , henceforth is laid up for me a crown of Righteousnesse . It doth not import perpetuall observation of the Apostles Commandment , for it bindeth not to the Precept of choosing of Widows , as the Adversaries grant . We do not deny , but certain things were Commanded to be , though Positive , yet perpetuall in the Church . Ans . 1. If Paul restrain this to one speciall Commandment , sure it is so generall and comprehensive a Commandment of feeding the Flock , as taketh in all the speciall Positive Commandments belonging to feeding , by both Word and Discipline , which is enough for the perpetuity of all Positive precepts of Discipline and Policie , even till Christs appearance to judge the world ; and I wonder that Hooker expoundeth this by 2. Tim. 4. 1. As if Paul did mean the precept of Preaching only , and that soundly and without mixture ; and yet passe by the Parallel place , 1 Tim. 5 21. A●lmostin the same stile of Language , in which place he speaketh of many speciall Positive precepts and Rules of Policie , as of poor widows , the Almes to be given to them ; the not rebuking of an Elder , the office of Elders Governing , and of Elders labouring in the Word and Doctrine , the not receiving an accusation against an Elder , but under two or three Witnesses , the publike rebuking of those who offend publikely , the not admitting to the Ministry raw and green souldiers not tryed , and many other particulars of Policie , of all which he saith gravely , v. 21. I charge thee before God and the Lord Iesus Christ , and the Elect Angels , that thou observe these things &c. Certainly , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , these things was not one Commandment , but all the precepts of Faith , and of Church-Government spoken of in this Epistle ; and truly ● shall think that Paul who particular●z●th that Timothy should not drink water , but a little wine because of his infirmity , and of bringing with him the cloak that he left at Troas , and the parchments , 2 Tim. 4 doth far more spec●fi● all the positives of policie , and writ , how all the Timothies and Pastors are to behave themselves in the Church of God : If Ceremonies and all these alterable trifles had not been excluded out of the Platforme ; for a Religious Masse-Surplice , is of far more consequence then Pauls old cloak , and yet Paul spake of the one in Canonick-Scripture , never of the other ; and Oyle , Spittle , Salt , Crosse in Baptisme being positive significant Rites , and having continued in the Church so many hundred years , should far rather have been specified in Scripture then Timothies drinking of water : yea , and if all the alterable positive things of Policy , as Crosse , Surplice , be commanded as necessary in the generall , though not in this or that particular , as Hooker and other Formalists do teach , then sure the meaning must be : I give to thee , O Timothy , charge in the sight of God who quickeneth all things , and before Christ Jesus , &c. That thou ▪ keep this Commandment of Crossing , Surplice , bowing to Altars , of corner-Cap , or of the equivalent of these , without spot irrebukeable to the appearance of Jesus Christ ; for the precept of feeding the Flock , must include all these ; and though Ceremonies in particular be alterable , and not commanded in Hythothesie ; yet that in generall there should be such positive Ceremonies is necessary , and the Apostle ( say they ) commandeth them , 1 Cor. 14. 40. Yea , ( as Dunam saith ) humane Holy-dayes , are commanded in the fourth Commandment , and Burges saith , all the Ceremonies are commanded in the third Commandment , and Formalists ; who denyed the Prelate to be of Divine institution , made a Ceremony of him , and made him a decent and orderly thing ; which as the Poet said , to me is like the act of death , that brought Great Alexander , to whom the whole world was not sufficient , in small bounds , in the Grave under two foot of earth , and this maketh the great Pope , the Catholick Bishop of the earth a little Ceremony : But this little Ceremony hath these many hundred years infested the whole earth . 2. If this precept be not a perpetuall binding precept till Christs second appearance , but only rewarded with life eternall at Christs appearance , yet shall it follow that all things included in the precept of feeding the flock , and so all the Surplice , Crossing , Will-worship or their equivalent , without which , feeding cannot be in a decent and orderly way ( as they say from , 1 Cor. 14. 40. ) must be rewarded with life eternall : let Formalists wait at the day of judgement for a reward , of a Garment of glory for wearing a linning Surplice , my faith cannot reach it . 3. For the choosing of Widovves that are poor to take care of the poor and sicke in Hospitals ; we think it just as necessary now as then , though no wayes , if there be none sick , and poor in the Church : But that Widows were Church-Officers ordained , as were Deacons , Act. 6. 6. we never thought , and therefore we do not see that the wanting of such Widows , is the want of a Positive institution of Church-Policy ; for other positive things of policy that should be of perpetuall use , and not all of the same kinde , and of equall necessity : I see no reason ( which I speak for Apostles ) which were necessary then , and not now ; But if from thence Formalists infer , that many positive things of policy are alterable , I can infer with equall strength of reason , that then Pastors , and Teachers are alterable by the Church , for if the one have a Divine institution to warrant it , Eph. 4. 11 , 12 , 13. so hath the other ; and if Prelates may come themselves into the Church without any warrant but this , that Apostles are alterable , and may put out Pastors and Teachers , because God hath put out Apostles ; we have a new world of alterable Church-Policy . 5. Reverent Beza referreth the Commandment to the Platforme of Discipline : So Ambrose in Loc. and Chrysostome Homil. 18. so Diodat . This Commandment which is , ver . 11 , 12. Or generally all other Commandments , which are contained in this Epistle ; Popish Writers confesse the same , though to the disadvantage of their Cause , who maintain unwritten Church-Policy and Ceremonies : So Lyra and Nicol. Gorran . Mandatum quod Deus , & ego mandavimus , the Commandment of the Lord , and of me his Apostle , Corne●a lapide : Quicquid tibi , O Episcope , hac Epistolâ prescripsi , & demandavi , hoc serva : Salmeron , alii per mandatum intelligunt , Quecunque mandavi spectantia ad munus boni Episcopi . SECT . II. THE Adversaries amongst these things of Church-Policy , do reckon such things as concerne the outward man , and externals only ; and therefore Bilson , Hooker and the rest , as Cameron and others , will have Christs kingdom altogether Spirituall , Mysticall , and invisible , and Christ to them is not a King to binde the externall man , nor doth he as King take care of the externall government of his own house , that belongeth ( say they ) as other externall things to the Civill Magistrate , who with advise and counsell of the Church , Bishops and their unhallowed Members , may make Lawes in all externals , for the Government of the Church , and all these externals though Positive , are alterable ; yea , and added to the word , though not as additions corrupting , but as perfecting and adorning the word of God and his worship . In opposition to this , our fourth Argument shall be , he who is the only Head , Lord , and King of his Church , must governe the politick , externall body his Church , perfectly by Laws of his own spirituall policy , and that more perfectly then any earthly Monarch , or State doth their subjects , or any Commanders , or any Lord or Master of Family , doth their Army , Souldiers , and members of their Family . But Christ is the head and only head of the Church , for by what title Christ is before all things , he in whom all things consist , and is the beginning , the first borne fram the dead , and hath the preheminence in all things ; and he is onely , so●ely and absolutely all these , by the same title he is the Head , and so the onely Head of the Body the Church , Col. 1. 17 , 18. And he is the head of his Politick body , and so a head in all externals , as well as of mysticall and inv●sible body , for if his Church be an externall Politicall body , and ruled by Organs , Eyes , Watchmen , Rulers , Feeders , and such as externally guideth the flock , as it is , Eph. 4 ▪ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Matth. 16 ▪ 17 , 18. A society to which Christ hath given the keys of his House , and so externall power in a visible Politick Court on earth to binde and loose , to take in and put out , to open and shut the doors of his visible Politick house ; then this Politick body must have a head in externall policy , and this head in externals must as a head governe by Laws all the members in their externall society ; for a body without a head is a monster , and a Politick body , without a head Politick , and one that ruleth Politically , is a Monster . And Christ is the King , yea the only King of his own Kingdom , either as this Kingdom is mysticall and invisible , or as it is Politick , externall , and visible on earth , as these Scriptures proveth , 1. Mat. 28. 18. Iesus ●aith unto me , is all power given in Heaven and in earth : I hope this power is only given to Christ , not to Pope or earthly Prince : It is the name above all names , Phil. 2. 9. King of Kings ▪ Rev. 17. 14. And upon this Kingly power , Christ doth an ex●ernall Act of Royall power , and giveth not only an inward but also a Politicall , externall power to his disciples , ver . ●9 . Go Teach , and Baptize all Nations : Is this only inward and heart-●eaching , and inward Baptizing by the spirit ? I think not , God hath reserved that to himself only , Isa . 54. 13. Ioh. 6 44. 45. Joh. 1. 33. and Ioh. 20 , 21. 22. Upon this that the Father sent Christ , and so set him his King upon his holy hill of Zion , Psa . 2. 6. Christ performeth an externall Politick mission , and sendeth his disciples with power in a Politick externall way to remit and retain sins , in an externall way , for there is clearly two remittings and retainings of sins in the Text : None can say of the Church , it s my Church , but he who is King of the Church ; and Christ saith , Matth , 16. 18. that it is his Church , and upon this it is his Kingdom , and the keyes are his keys , and they are keys of a Kingdom visible and Politick on earth , as is evident , ver . 19. I will give unto thee , the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven , and whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth , ( in an externall Politicall court of Church Rulers , as it is differenced from an internal , and mysticall binding in Heaven ) shall be bound in Heaven , &c. For it is clear that there is an internall binding in Heaven , and a Politicall and externall binding on earth , and both are done by the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven : But Christ can have or give no Politicall or ex●ernall keys of an externall and Politicall King , but as he is a King : Yea , and Excommunication doth not only binde the inward man in Heaven , but also the externall man on earth , excluding him from the Society of the Church as a Heathen , and a Publican , and purging him out from the externall communion of the Church , as if he were now no brother , Matth. 18. ●7 ▪ 18. 1 Cor. 5. 7. 10 , 11 , 12. Now this externall separating and judging of an offender by the Church is done by the keys of the Kingdom ; Ergo , by Christ as a King , ruling the externall man Politically , and so by the key of the house of David , which is laid upon Christs shoulder , Isa . 22. 22. And by a Royall Act of him , upon whose shoulder is the Government , Is ▪ 9 6. Who sitteth upon the throne of David to order the kingdom , & to establish it with judgement & justice . For the Church doth bind and loose in the externall Court , either by a Commission from him who as head of the Church , and who as King gave to her the Keys of the Kingdom ; or by a generall Arbitrary power given to the Magistrate and Church , to do in these things as they please ; so they do nothing contrary to the Word , though not according to the Word , as they are to do in Doctrinals ; if the former be said , then must the externall Government be upon the shoulder of Christ as King , which is that which we teach : If the latter be said , then might the Magistrate & Church appoint such an Ordinance as excommunication , and so they may by their Artitrary power , make a Gospel Promise of ratifying an Ordinance in heaven , and of pardoning sins in heaven ; for he that can make the ordinance , can make also the Gospel-Promise , and he that can by an Arbitrary power make one Promise or part of the Gospel , may make all . And if either Magistrate or Church can appoint such an Ordinance as hath a Promise of b●nding & loosing made good in heaven , they may also take away such Ordinances and Gospel Promises ; for it is the same power to make and adde , to unmake and destroy Ordinances . Hence also I argue for the Immutabili●y of a Scripturall Platform , that the Church cannot alter at her will : thus , That must be of Divine institution which is an essentiall part of the Gospel ; but the Platform of Church-Government in the word is such , and so must be no lesse Immutable then the Gospel . I make good the major Proposition thus : That which essentially includeth a Promise of the New Testament , that must be a part of the Gospel which consisteth especially of Promises , Heb. 8. 6. 2 Cor. 7. 1. Gal. 3. 17. Gal. 4. 23 , 24. But there 's a Promise of forgiving sins in Heaven made to the Church , using the Keys aright , and of Christs presence in the excercise of the Keys , as walking amongst the golden Candlesticks , Matth. 18. 18 , 19. 20. Math. 16. 18 , 19. Iob. 20. 23. Rev. 2. 1. Now if any shall object , this Argument proveth only that which is not denyed , to wit , that some part of Discipline only , is of Divine institution which is not denyed , for a power of binding and loosing , of remitting and retaining sins , is of Divine institution : But hence it is not concluded that the whole Platform , and all the limbs , joynts , bones , and toes are of Divine institution , they being matters of smaller concernment . I Answer , As from a part of the Doctrine of the Law and Gospel that is of Divine institution ; for Example , that I keep , observe and do the Law , that I believe and repent , which are things of Divine institution : I infer that the whole Platform of Law and Gospel , is of Divine institution , and the particulars of Obedience and Faith , are not Arbitrary to the Church ; just so in Discipline , I say the like , there is no more reason for one part written by God , then for another . Farther , if the Church be a visible Politick Kingdom , as it is , Mat. 13. v. 45 , 46 , 47 , 48. Matth. 16. 19. Matth. 8. 12. And if the Word be the Word , Scepter and Law of the Kingdom , as it is , Matth. 6. 10. Matth. 13. 11. Luk. 4. 43. Matth. 4. 23. Mark 13. 8. Luk. 21. 10. 14. Luk. 8. 10. Yea , the Sword and Royall power of the King , Rev. 1. 16. Rev. 19. 15. By which he Ruleth and Raigneth in his Church , Isa . 11. v. 4. Psal . 110. 2. Heb. 1. 8 , 9. Psal . 45. 3 , 4. 5 , 6 , 7. Isa . 61. 1 , 2. 2 Cor. 10. 4 , 5 , 6. 1 Pet. 2. 4 , 5 , 6 , 7. And if by this Word the King Raigneth , bindeth , looseth , and conquereth souls and subdueth his Enemies , Matth. 18. 18 , 19 , 20. Matth. 16. 19. Rev. 6. 2. Then certainly Christ must Raign Politically , and externally in his Church , and walk in the midst of the golden Candlesticks , Rev. 2. 1. And if Christ Ascending to Heaven as a Victorious King , Leading Captivity Captive , gave gifts to men , and appointed an externall policie , for the gathering of his Saints by the Ministery of certain officers of his Kingdom , as it is , Psal . 68. 18. Even that the Lord God might dwell amongst them , Eph. 4. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16. Then he must Raign in the externall Policie of Pastors , Teachers , Elders , by Word , Sacraments , and Discipline . Now the King himself , the Lord who Raigneth in this externall Policie , must be the only Law-giver , Iam. 4. 12. Isa . 33. v. 22. There can be no Rabbies or Doctors on earth , who as little Kings can make Laws under him , Mat. 23. v. 8 , 9 , 10. Yea , not Apostles who can teach how the Worship should externally be ordered , but what they receive of the King of the Church , 1 Cor. 11. 23. Act. 15. v. 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18. How the house should be Governed , Heb. 3. 1 , 2. 4 , 5. Yea , nothing more reasonable , then that Whatsoever is commanded by the God of Heaven , should be done in , and for the house of the God of Heaven , under the pain of his Wrath , Ezr. 7. 23. 1. That there should be Officers in a Kingdom , and Laws to Govern the Subjects , beside the will of the Prince or Judges of the Land , or that the Members of a Family , or Souldiers in an Army should be Governed by any Rule , Custome , or Law , beside or without the will of the Master of the House , and of the Generall & Commanders , is all one , as if Subjects , Families and Souldiers , should be Ruled and Governed by their own will and wisdome , and not by their King , Iudges , Masters and Commanders ; for the question is upon this undeniable supposition , that Christ is the only Head and King of his Church , and so the Head and King of Prelats ( if they be of the body ) and of the Rulers , Guides , and Pastors of the Church , which are to be Governed and Ruled by certain Laws , no lesse then the people , whither or no this Representative Church of Rulers , being Subjects and Members of the Head and King of the Church , are to be Ruled by the wisdome , Laws , and Commandments of this King the Lord Jesus ; or if they have granted to them a vast Arbitrary power to Govern both themselves and the people , by adding Positive Mandats of Arbitrary Commanders , such as Prelats are ( in the minde of those who think they have no patent of any Divine right ) and of Surplice , Crossing , kneeling for reverence to wood , to bread and wine . The matter cannot be helped , by saying that Christ is the Mysticall , Invisible King , ( some doubt if he be the only King of the Church , which is too grosse to be resuted ) of the Church in things spirituall , and in regard of the inward operation of the Spirit ; but he is not a Politicall and visible Head in regard of externall Policie ; this distinction must hold also in regard of the people , who as Christians and believers are rather under Christ as a Mysticall and invisible Head , then the Rulers who are not as Rulers , but only in so far as they are believers , Mysticall Members of the Head Christ ; for Christ exerciseth no Mysticall and Internall operations of saving Grace upon Rulers as Rulers ; but upon Rulers as believers , then he cannot be the Mysticall and invisible King of Rulers as Rulers , to give them as a King , an Arbitrary power to be little Kings under him , to Govern as they please ; and the truth is , Christ is a Politicall Head and King of his Church , not properly a visible Head , 2 Cor. 5. 16. Except that he is a visible Head in this sense , in that he Raigneth and Ruleth , even in the externall visible Policie of his Church , through all the Catholick visible Church , in his Officers , Lawfull Synods , Ordinances , giving them Laws in all Positive externals , which place the Beast , the King of the Bottomlesse Pit , the Pope usurpeth : But I would gladly be informed of Formalists , how the King is the Head and Vicegerent of Christ over the Church ; if Christs Kingdom be only spirituall , Mysticall Internall , not Politicall , not externall ; for sure the King as King , exerciseth no internall and Mysticall operations upon the consciences of men under Jesus Christ , his power is only Politicall and Civilly Politicall , about , or without the Church , not properly within the Church : Surely if Rulers be Subjects and Members under Christ the Head and King : I shall believe that Christ must in all Positive things of externall Policie , give to them Particular Laws in the Scripture , and Rule them ; and that they being Members , not the Head , must as particularly be Ruled in all externals Positive , by the will and Law of the Head Christ , and that they are not Kings , Heads and Law givers , and Rulers to themselves : And especially upon these considerations . This King and Head must be particular in an immutable , perpetuall , and unalterable Platform of Church-Government . 1. Salomon for wisdome in the order , degrees , number , attire of his servants and Policie of his house to the admiration of the Queen of Sheba , in this we conceive was a type of a greater then Salomon . 2. The Positives of the policie of Christs house , must be congruous to a supernaturall end , the edification of souls , and that Symbolicall Rites of mens devising , speak supernaturall duties , that Christ hath already spoken in the Scripture , as that Crossing spell out Dedication to Christs Service , Surplice , pastorall holinesse , which both are Gospel truths , 1. Pet. 1. 18. 1 Pet. 2. 24. Isa . 52. 11. Is as supernaturall a mean for edification , as that bread and wine signifie Christs body and blood ; & therefore the one more then the other ought not to be left to humane reason , but must be expresly set down in Scripture . 3. All these must lay a tie upon the conscience ; but if they have their rise from the vain will of Prelats and men , they can never bind my conscience ; for how can they bind my conscience as the Scripture bindeth them on me , and yet Rulers as Rulers in the name of Christ the King , cannot presse them upon me ? Formalists give divers Replies to this : As , 1. Hooker : You are constrained to say that of many things of Church-Policie , some are of great weight , some of lesse , that what hath been urged of immutability of Laws , it extendeth in truth no farther then only to Laws , wherein things of greater moment are prescribed ; as Pastors , Lay-Elders , Deacons , Synods , Widows ; else come to particulars , and shew if all yours be perpetuall , and our particulars unlawfull . Ans . 1. Things of greater and lesse weight , we acknowledge in Church-Policie , and in Doctrinals too ; but in this sense only : 1. That they be things Positive . 2. They be both things that are unchangeable by any , except by God himself , and oblige us Necessitate precepti , by the necessity of a Divine Commandment , as Matth. 23. 23. To pay tythe of Mint , Annise , and Cummin , is a lesse matter then the weightier duties of the Law , Iudgement , Mercy , and Faith : But there is nothing so small in either Doctrinals or Policie , so as men may alter , omit , and leave off these smallest Positive things that God hath commanded ; for Christ saith , Paying of tythe of Mint , ought not to be omitted , though the Church of Pharisees should neglect it , and command some other petty small things in place thereof : If therefore Prelats should obliterate the Office of Ruling Elders which Christ the Lord instituted in his Church , and put themselves in as Governours in their Room , they may put out Pastors and Sacraments , and take in for them , Turkish Priests , and Circumcision , with a signification that Christ is already come in the flesh : We urge the immutability of Christs Laws , as well in the smallest as greatest things , though the Commandments of Christ be greater or lesse in regard of the intrinsecall matter , as to use water in Baptisme , or to Baptise is lesse then to Preach Christ , and believe in him , 1 Cor. 1. 17. Yet they are both alike great , in regard of the Authority of Christ the Commander , Matth. 28. 18 , 19. And it s too great boldnesse to alter any Commandment of Christ , for the smallnesse of the matter , for it lieth upon our conscience , not because it is a greater or a lesser thing , and hath degrees of obligatory necessity , lying in it for the matter ; but it tyeth us for the Authority of the Law-giver : Now Gods Authority is the same when he saith , ( You shall not Worship false Gods , but me the only true God ) And when he saith , ( You shall not adde of your own one ring or pin to the Ark , Tabernacle Temple ) yea , either to break or teach others , to break one of the least of the Commandments of God , maketh men the least in the Kingdom of God , Matth. 5. 18. And to offend in one is to offend in all , Iam. 2. 10. 2. That our things of Church-Policie are perpetuall , we prove , and that what we hold of this kinde , we make good to be contained in the Scripture , either expresly , or by due consequence ; and , so the Church and their Rulers , act nothing in our way , but as Subordinate to Christ as King and Head of the Church , and Surplice , humane Prelats , Crossing , we hold unlawfull in the house of God , because they are not warranted by the King and Head Christs word ; and because the devisers and practisers of these do neither devise nor act , in these , as Subordinate to Jesus Christ as King , Priest , or Prophet , by the grant of our Adversaries . Hooker , l. 3. Eccles . Pol. pag. 124. The matters wherein Church-Policy are conversant , are the publick Religious duties of the Church , as administration of the Word , Sacraments , Prayers , spirituall censures of the Church and the like , to these the Church stand alwayes bound ; and where Policy is , it cannot but appoint , some to be leaders of others , and some to be led ; If the blinde lead the blinde , they both perish : and where the Clergy is any great multitude , order requireth that they be distinguished by degrees , as Apostles and Pastors were in the Apostolick Church : And number of specialities there are which ▪ make for the more convenient being of these principall parts of Policy . Ans . 1. If Christ as King have appointed word and Sacraments in generall , and Censures ; he hath appointed the Word , Sacraments and Censure in speciall ; to wit , such a word , such Sacraments , Baptisme , the Lords-Supper , such Censures , Excommunication , admonition , or then he hath left the Specialities of written and unwritten Word , to the arbitriment of men , and that there be Excommunication , or no Excommunication ; and this Doctrinall and the like he hath left to mens devising ; to wit , ( Crossing is a Dedication of the childe to Christ ) now Jerome Advers . Helvid . saith Vt hec que scripta sunt non negamus , ita ea quae non sunt scripta re●nuimus , and August . Lib. de pasto . c. 11. Quicquid inde ( è scriptura ) Andieritis , hoc nobis bene sapiat , Quicquid extraest , respuite , n● erretis in nebulâ . Now to say , we may receive some truths of things Arbitrary or mutable , crosseth Cyrill . Allexand . Glaphyre in Gen. l. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That which the holy Scripture hath not said , by what means should we receive , and account it amongst these things that be true ? Cyrill would deny all your Ceremonies to speak any thing , but lies ; and so would I : Yea , to bring in any thing that is not written , Basilius saith , it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a demonstration of Pride , and Origen in Levit. Hom. 5. Si quid autem , superfuerit , quod non Divina Scriptura decernat , nullam aliam debere tertiam Scripturam ad autoritatem scientiae suscipi ( licet ) I think some third Scripture which is neither the old or the New-Testament must be sought to make good the Doctrines , that dumbe humane Ceremonies teach us : 2. That the blind lead the blinde is not safe ; but it is no Argument to prove that this is an immutable thing in policy , that there should be Leaders , and some that are led , except you suppose the Prelates to be the seeing men , and the Pastors and People to be blinde . 3. I utterly deny this consequence : The Clergy is a great multitude ; Ergo , order necessarily requireth , that by degrees they be distinguished in Prelates and Pastors ; for the Prelats are a multitude ; Ergo , order requireth that one be Pope to command all the rest : The Apostles were a multitude ; Ergo , There was a necessi●y of a Monarch-Apostle , the Prelaticall Government is Monarchicall ; doth order require in all multitude no Government but a Monarchy ? Nor do we finde any warrant that Apostles had jurisdiction over Pastors in the Scripture , nor in any Ecclesiasticall Records ; but where Papacy was working ; Paul , as if he had been to go out of this life , and never to see the faces of the Elders of Ephesus , Act. 20. 25. Left unto them as Elders all of equall degrees of power of jurisdiction , the feeding and Governing of the Church of God , Act. 20. 28 , 29 , 30. 4. The particulars of Policy , as Surplice , Crossing are no more circumstances of Worship then Aarons Ephod , a vesture is a circumstance , but a Religious vesture teaching us of Pastorall holinesse , is worship , not a Circumstance : Men can place no Religion in Circumstances . Hooker , Eccle. Poli. l. 3. p. 125. It is in vain to argue from Christs office , if there be an immutable Platforme in Scripture , it is as if one should demand a Legacy by vertue of some written Testament , wherein there being no such thing specified ; he pleadeth that there it must needs be , and bringeth Arguments from love and good will , which awayes the Testator bore him , imagining that these or the like proofes will convict a Testament to have that in it , which other men can no where by reading finde , it s our part to admire what he hath done , rather then to dispute what he in congruity of reason , ought to do : how unsearchable are his judgements ? Ans . 1. It is very true , a Platforme of discipline is questio facti , A question of Fact , rather then Law ; we hear nothing in this comparison , but what Papists with equall strength of reason do bring for their unwritten Traditions ; for they say Protestants are to prove a fact and deed of Jesus Christ , that he hath left in his written Testament a perfect and immutable Platforme of Doctrine and manners , to which nothing can be added ; and this they prove from the care , wisdom and love of Christ to his Church , for he ought to reveale his will perfectly , and compleatly in his Scripture , otherwise he hath not the love , care , and wisdom of a Law-giver to his own people , if he leave them in the mist , and in the dark , and write not down all things touching Faith and manners : Now we can no where finde by reading Scripture , any thing for the Baptizing of Infants , or a remedy for women to be cured of Originall sin in the Old-Testament in lieu of circumcision ; we finde no warrant for the Feast of Dedication , in the Law of Moses , nor for the dayes of puring , observed by the Iewes , nor for Images , invocation of Saints , Prayer for the dead , the perpetuall Virginity of the Virgin Mary , and many such Doctrines which the Church believeth . But we answer , because these vain doctrines ( we except the Baptizing of Infants , warranted by Scripture ) are not in Scripture , they are the vaine and saplesse doctrines of men , and will-worship : But to presse the comparison , If any should demand a Legacy by vertue of a Testament , in which the Testator hath testified his good will , wisdom , care to his Brethren in such a manner , that he had said ; I have left in my Testament to my Brethren , my mind to instruct them , for every good worke , to lead them in all truth , to teach them every good way , to understand equity , judgement and righteousnesse , to cause them walke safely , so that their feet shall not stumble , and I have left them my word to be a Lamp , and light to their feet in walking : Then I would inferre from this Testament two things : 1. That the love and care of our Testator Christ , so revealed , warranteth us to plead for light in Christs Testament , how to walk in every good way , and so how to walk in all the wayes of the orderly worship of God , and of Governing of Gods house , by Pastors , Teachers , Elders , Deacons , by their Lawfull calling , qualifications , duties ; by the Churches Courts in admonition , excommunication , by the use of the keys : 2. Because the Testament is perfect to instruct in every good way , particularly , and in all duties of worship , and this Testament forbiddeth all adding and diminishing , and speaketh not one word of Crossing , Cringing , and bowing to Altars , of wearing of Surplice : Therefore these are not Gods Lawfull wayes , and if I walk in them , I can do nothing but fall and stumble : 3. We do not here argue simply from the wise , and congruous dealing of God , what he ought to do , nor from the love of Christ , as a King and he●d simply , but from the love , care and wisdom of Christ , as he is such a King and Head , upon whose shoulder is the whole Government , and upon whom are all the vessels of the house , great and small : 4. It is no lesse then blasphemy to ascribe the not particularizing of Ceremonies , such as Crossing , Surplice , humane Feasts to the unsearchable Wisdom , and wayes of God , to which Paul , Romanes 11. referreth the great deeps of Supernaturall Providence in Gods Election and Reprobation , his calling of the Gentiles and rejecting of the Iewes ; and observe ( I pray ) this consequence ; the wayes of the Lord past finding out ; Ergo , The Lord hath set down no Platforme of Church-Policy in his Sons Testament ; but hath left it to the wisdom of the Church to devise , Crossing , kneeling to Creatures , Surplice , or some such like : But since we have a pattern of perfectly formed Churches in the Apostles times , who had power even , In actu excercit● , of Discipline and Church-worship , and the Apostles mention things of an inferiour nature : How is it that we have no hint of Crossing , Kneeling , Surplice , corner . Cap , nor any such , like unto these ? And yet they were as necessary for decency then , 1 Cor. 5. Col. 2. 5. 1 Cor. 11. 20. &c. Rev. 2. 1. 2 , 14 , 18 , 20 , 21. 1 Cor. 14. 40. as now , Others of great learning reply , that Christ is not the only immediate Head , King , Law-giver , and Governour of the Church , for that is quite contrary to Gods Ordinance in establishing Kings , Magistrates , higher powers , nurse-Fathers , Pastors , Doctors , Elders ; for by this , there should be no Kings , Parliaments , Synods , no power of jurisdiction in them to make Lawes , to suppresse and punish all manner of Idolatry , Superstition , Heresies . But I answer , that Christ is the only immediate Head , King , Law-giver , and Governour of his Church , as upon his shoulder only is the Government , Isa . 9. 6. And the key of the house of David , Isa . 22. 22. And by what right he is the head of all things ; and set above all ▪ principalities and power , and might , and dominion , and every name that is named , not only in this vvorld , but also in that vvhich is t● come ; He is the head of the Catholick Church which is his body , Eph. 1. 21 , 22 , 23. And he is such a head even in externals , in giving Apostles , Prophets , Evangelists , Pastors , and Teachers , who for the vvork of the ministery , perfecteth the Saints , in vvhom the vvhole body ( of the Church ) is fitly joyned together and compacted by that which every joynt supplieth , according to the effectuall vvorking , in the measure of every part , maketh increase of the body , to the edifying of it self in love , Ephes . 4. 11 , 12 ▪ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16. Now these places maketh Christ the only immediate head in externals , and internall operation of that body which is the fulnesse of Christ : Let any of the Formalists , if Christ be not the only immediate Head , Shew us of King or Bishop who is the Mediate , Ministeriall , inferior Head of the Catholick Church , even in externall Government : For Iohn Hart in his conference with D. Roinald , saith , Christ is the only principall , imperiall , and invisible Head ; but the Pope ( saith he ) is the visible and Ministeriall Head ; So do all Papists say ; but our Protestant Divines Answer , That it is a repugnancy that a Subject or a Member of the King and Head , should be in any sense both a Subject and a King , a part or Member and a Head ; and Roynald saith , This name to be Head of the Church is the Royall Prerogative of Jesus Christ ; Yea , the head , in externals , must be with the Catholick body , as Christ hath promised to be with his Church to the end of the world ; neither King nor Pope can in the externall Government be with the particular Churches to the end : It is true , the King may be with his Church by his Laws and power ; yea , but so may the Pope be , if all Pastors on earth be but his Deputies , and if Pastors be but the Kings Deputies , and sent by the King , so is the King the Head of the Church ; but then the Catholick Church hath as many heads , as there be lawfull Kings on earth ; But we desire to know , what mediate acts of Law-giving which is essentiall to Kings and Parliaments in civill things , doth agree to Kings , Parliaments , and Synods ; Christ hath not made Pastors under-Kings to create any Laws morally obliging the conscience to obedience in the Court of God , which God hath not made to their hand ; if the King and Synods only declare and propound , by a power of jurisdiction , that which God in the Law of nature or the written word hath commanded ; they are not the Law-makers , nor creators of that morality in the Law , which layeth bonds on the conscience ; yea , they have no Organicall , nor inferiour influence in creating that morality , God only by an immediate act as the only immediate King , made the morality , and if King , Parliaments , and Synods , be under Kings and under Law-givers , they must have an under-action , and a Ministeriall subservient active influence under Christ in creating as second causes , that which is the formall reason , and essence of all Lawes binding the conscience , and that is the morality that obligeth the soul to eternal wrath , though King , Parliament , Pastors or Synods , should never command such a Morall thing : Now to propound , or declare , that Gods will is to be done in such an act , or Synodicall Directory or Canon , and to command it to be observed under Civill and Ecclesiasticall paine , is not to make a Law , it is indeed to act authoritatively under Christ as King : but it maketh them neither Kings , nor Law-givers , no more then Heralds are little Kings , or inferiour Law-givers , and Parliaments , because in the name and Authority of King and Parliament they Promulgate the Lawes of King and Parliament : the Heralds are meer servants , and do indeed represent King and Parliament , and therefore to wrong them , in the promulgation of Lawes , is to wrong King and Parliament ; but the Heralds had no action , no hand at all in making the Laws , they may be made when all the Heralds are sleeping , and so by no propriety of speech can Heralds be called mediat Kings , under-Law-givers , just so here , as touching the morality of all humane Laws , whether Civill or Ecclesiasticall , God himself immediatly ; yea , from Eternity by an Act of his free-pleasure made that without advice of men or Angels , for who instructed him ? neither Moses , nor Prophet , nor Apostle ; yea , all here are Meri precones , only Heralds ; yet are not all these Heralds who declare the morality of Lawes , equals may declare them charitative , By way of charity to equals , but these only are to be obeyed as Heralds of Laws , whom God hath placed in Authority , as Kings , Parliaments , Synods , the Church , Masters , Fathers , Captains ; And it followeth no wayes that we disclaime the Authority of all these , because we will not inthrone them in the chaire of the Supreame and only Lawgiver , and head of the Church , they are not under-Law-givers and little Kings to create Laws , the morality of which bindeth the conscience ( for this God only can do ) Ergo , there be no Parliaments , no Kings , no Rulers , that have Authority over men , it is a most unjust consequence ; for all our Divines against Papists , deny that humane Laws as humane , do binde the conscience ▪ but they deny not , but assert the power of jurisdiction in Kings , Parliaments , Synods , Pastors . SECT . III. IF Iesus Christ be as Faithfull as Moses and above him , as the Lord of the house above the servant , Heb. 3. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. Then as Moses was admonished of God , when he was about to make the Tabernacle , for ( saith he ) See thou make all things according to the pattern● shewed unto thee in the mount , Heb. 8. 5. And was not to follow his own spirit , but was to follow the patterne that God shewed him in the Mount , then far lesse hath Christ the Apostle and high Priest of our Profession giving us a Platforme of the Church and Government of the New-Testament variable , & shaped according to the alterable laws , customes & manners of divers nations , for as Moses though a Prophet was not to make one pin of the Tabernacle , but according to the samplar & patern that God did shew him , so Christ manifested to his Disciples , all that he had heard , and seen of the Father , Ioh. 15. But it is not to be supposed , that the Father shew to Christ an alterable tabernacle in the new Testament , that men might alter , chop and change at their pleasure , as the customes of Nations are changed : If God thought Religion should run a hazard , if the greatest of Prophets ( except Christ ) might have leave to mold and shape all the Leviticall Service , and Ceremonies , ( for as the judicious and Learned Interpreter Mr. David Dickson saith , all the Leviticall Service is comprehended under the name of the Tabernacle , Exod. 25. 40. ) according as he pleased , far more should all be corrupted , if erring men , far inferior to Moses , Prelats and Pastors , should have leave to draw the Lineaments of the New Testament , Tabernacle , Church , Service , Officers , Censures , and all the Positives of Policie according to no patern shown by Christ ; but only the Fashions , alterable Laws , Customes , & forms of nations : Now all the pins of the Tabernacle were but shadows , and Types of Morall and Heavenly things , Heb. 8. 5. Heb. 10. 1. Heb. 9. 9. And they were to be changed and done away by Christ , Col. 2. 17. Heb. 7. 12. 2 Cor. 3. 11. Yet could neither be devised by Moses , nor altered by any mortall man , Church or Priests ; how can we imagine that men may now devise and set up an alterable and changeable New Testament-frame , of Prelats , Altars , Religious dayes , Surplice , Crossing , or any the like toyes ? And though David was a Prophet , and a man according to Gods heart ; yet in the externals of the Temple , nothing was left to his spirit ; he might neither in the least jot adde or omit , 1 Chron. 28. 11. Then David gave to Solomon his Son , the patern of the Porch , and of the houses thereof , and of the Treasuries thereof , and of the upper Chambers thereof , and of the inner Parlors thereof , & of the place of the Mercy-Seat . Here be many particulars ; But whence had David all these ? From the patern according to which , Crosse , Surplice , Altars , and humane Prelats are shapen ? Alas , no ; therefore it is added , v. 12. And ( he shewed ) the patern of all that he had by the spirit , of the courts of the house of the Lord , and of all the chambers round about v. 19. All this ( said David ) the Lord made me understand in writing by his hand upon me , even all the works of this patern . I see no reason to deny , that the form of the Temple was written by the hand of God ; as the Ten Commandments were written in two Tables of stone by him ; the Text seemeth to say no lesse , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pagni , and Ar. Mont. render it , Omnia in Scriptura , de manu domini , super me intellegere fecit . So Jerome , Omnia venerunt , Scripta manu domini ad me . Vatablus in notis , Omnia ista dominus Scripsit manu , su● et digito , ●u● ut me familiarius do●eret : We shall not contend with Tostatus , who saith , It might have been written by Angels ; though we go not from the letter of the Text , we have from this Papist Tostatus , all we desire ; for he saith : We must say that it was not by Davids own thought , that he builded all ; for David durst not build a Temple to the Lord of his own heart ; because he knew not if that would please God , but by Divine Revelation : And therefore the old Translation is corrupt in this , as in many things , which rendreth , v. 12. Thus : Dedit David , Salamoni descriptionem p●rti●us , &c. Nec non et omnium que cogitaverat : As if Davids thought had been his guide ; for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the spirit , by Tostatus , Corneli . a Lapide , Lyra , is meant , not Davids spirit , but the spirit of Revelation from the Lord ; and Lyra saith , on v. 12. Per hoc designatur ; quod deus pater dedit homini Christo notitiam omnium agendorum in ecclesiâ . And Pet. Martyr , our own Doctor saith , on 1 King. 8. It cannot be told how unpleasant the institution of new worship is to God : And , there should be nothing in Baptisme but the Word and the Elements ; any thing added ( as Crossing , Oyl , Salt , ) came from the Prelats : Lavater , in 1. Par. c. 28. ver . 14. condemneth all additions , even though Solomon should have added them , Ezech. 43. 11. Thou Son of man , shew the house to the house of Israel , — 12. And if they be ashamed of all that they have done , shew them the form of the house , and the fashion thereof , and goings out thereof , and the comings in thereof , and all the forms thereof , and all the Ordinances thereof , and all the forms thereof , & all the Laws thereof ; And write it in their sight , that they may keep the whole form thereof , & all the Ordinances thereof , and do them . Now it is most considerable , that the Form , Fabrick , and Structure of the Temple , Ezech. c. 40. In the visions of God , is shewn to the Prophet by a man , by Christ the great Angel of the Covenant ; who with a measuring reed of six cubits , measured the Temple ; and in these chapters , c. 40 , 41 , 42. Christ sheweth to Ezekiel all the patern and form which evidently typifieth the Church of the New Testament , the Bride the Lambs Wife in the Kingdom of Grace , and glorified in Heaven , revealed by the Angel to John , Rev. 21. 9 , 10 , 11. It may be thought that the Porches , Chambers , length and bredth of them East , West , South , and North , the Laws about the Priests , their linnen garments , Sacrifices , washing and the like , are of lesse concernment then the Doctrine of Christs nature , person , offices of Faith , Repentance , Iudgement , Heaven &c. And therefore being not so necessary , nor so weighty ; there was no necessity that all the like Positive externals of Church-Policie , written to a rude and carnall people , should be written to us , who are now more spirituall , and upon whom the day-spring from above doth shine , the shadows now being past ; and who have greater liberty then they had , who were as children under Tutors . Ans . 1. I do not deny , but all Ceremonials are of lesse weight then the Morals ; but the question is , if they be of lesse Divine authority , so as we may devise of our own Spirit such Ceremonials , and may alter , omit , or remove these , or any new Ceremonials in the Sacraments under the New Testament ; for New Testament Ceremonials , as to take Bread , Eat and drink , are not so necessary , nor so weighty to us under the New-Testament , as the precept of believing in Christ , and of repentance from dead works , yet I hope it shall be a weak inference , from thence to inser , we may therefore alter and change any thing of the Sacrament , for the same Christ who commanded us to believe in him , said also , Drink ye all of this ; and if we may not remove drinking from the last Supper , because injoyned by Christ upon the authority of the Law-giver , as signifying the spirituall drinking of Christs Blood , how can any dare to adde Crossing to Baptisme , which signifieth the dedication of the Baptized to Christs service ? But 1. Divine Ceremonials , and positives which were to be changed , have these notes and impressions of God , which Surplice , Crosse in Baptisme , Corner-cap , ( which by Analogie answereth to Moses his Ceremonies ) hath not ; and yet if they be of the New Testament , and so of a more excellent spirits devising then the people of the Iews were capable of , in regard of their Bondage under Carnall Precepts , they ought to have them in a more excellent manner : As 1. In regard of the manner of Revelation ; all the Laws and Ceremoniall Ordinances were revealed to Moses when he was forty dayes in the Mount with God , and was in Heaven and above men , Exod. 25. 40. Heb. 8. 5. The length measure and patern of the Temple was revealed to Ezechiel when he was in the spirit , and saw the Visions of God , Ezech. 40. 2 , 3. And a writing of the form of the Temple by Gods hand , was delivered to David , 1 Chro. 28. 19. Now if a more free and glorious spirit teach the Positives of policy , under the New-Testament , such as Surplice , Crossing , then Prelates must be in a higher mount with God , then Moses was , and in a deeper extasie of the visions of God , then Ezechiel was in , Ezec. 40. 1 , 2 , 3. When they are in the childe-birth pain of devising , and bring forth such defaced and dirty whelpes , as Surplice , Crossing , Altars , &c. 1. I should think it blasphemy so to think : 2. In regard of the Doctrine revealed : When I read the 40 , 41 , 42. Chapters of Ezekiel touching the forme of the Temple , and the Antitipe , Chapters the Revelation , c. 21. c. 22. Yea , and the very Ceremoniall Laws of Moses , as the scape-goats going to the wildernesse with the sins of the people of God , and all the rest of the Lawes that pointeth at Christ to be slain for us , and the heavenly mysteries of the Gospel explained especially in the Epistle to the Hebrews : when I read these , I finde a strong smell of the ointments of a precious Redeemer , the extream love of God to man : the Majesty , the divinity and efficacy of divine power in these , as in other Scriptures : But should our Prelats , put in Print by the spirit of the new Testament , some Epistles touching Ceremonies in Generall , or of Surplice , Corner-cap , Crossing , and their heavenly relation to the mysteries of the Gospel in particular , I should not think men would dare to say a nobler spirit speaketh like God and heaven in these then in the other . It is without all Warrant to expound Christian Liberty of a power of devising a mutable Church-Policy , and lawes not warranted in Gods word , seeing Christian Liberty expresly exempteth us altogether from obedience to mens Laws not warranted by Christs word , Gal. 5. 1. Col. 2. 20 , &c. Let us hear what Hooker saith , for his mutable Policie under the New Testament : Christ is not lesse faithfull then Moses , because Moses delivered to the Iewes some Lawes that were durable , and Christ some Laws that are changeable , otherwayes by this reason Christ shall be lesse faithfull then Moses ; for Moses erected in the wildernesse a Tabernacle , which was moveable from place to place ; Solomon a stately Temple , which was not moveabl● : Therefore Solomon was faithfuller then Moses , which no man indued with reason will think : Christ was faithfull , and saith , I have given to them the words that thou gavest me : He concealed not any part of his Fathers will : But did any part of that will require the immutability of Laws concerning Church-Policy ? Ans . I answer , as Christ did to the Jews in another case , Ioh. 6. 32. Moses gave you not that bread from heaven , but my Father giveth you that true bread : So in this , neither Moses nor Solomon erected either that Tabernacle or Temple , as Law-givers , but the Father of our Lord Iesus , as the true Law-giver : Now both were but meer servants and Heralds in all that they did , for God shewed to Moses the pattern of the Tabernacle , and to David and Solomon the forme of the Temple , in all the pins , rings , chambers , cubits , length and breadth , Exod. 24 40. 1 Chron. 28. 11 , 19. And the question is not if ever the Lord himself delivered mutable or immutable Laws , either in Doctrine or Policy : We grant he did , and may deliver Laws changeable and to indure for a time only in both the old and new Testament , Heb. 7. 18. Col. 2. 17. Act. 15. 28 , 29. But the question is , if Moses as a man , if Christ as a man only , if the Church of Prelates , yea , or of Lawfull Officers can be faithfull , if they deliver lawes to the Church , which may be altered , without the expresse will of God , speaking in his word at the pleasure of men , and which are positives of worship and Policy , such as humane Prelates , Surplice , Crosse , &c. which varieth , dieth and liveth , falleth and riseth with the climate , Nation , civill-Government , Lawes , Manners , and customes of People ; and this is all one , as to move the question , whither the Ambassadour as a man , may alter the Articles of his Commission , according to his own private lust , without an expresse and evident Warrant of the Prince and State , whose servant and Messenger he is in all that he doth , and if he be a faithfull Ambassadour , who doth his own will , and not the will of those that sent him , and if Christ be as faithfull as Moses , if he had given Laws of policy under the New-Testament to be altered without an expresse and evident Warrant from the will of the Father , at the pleasure and will of men ? This we deny ; and certainly , say that Moses had erected a changeable Tabernacle at the will of man , and Solomon a Temple unchangeable at the will , and expresse Commandment of God , then had Solomon been faithfuller then Moses ; our Arguments nerves do not consist in the immutability , or the mutability of things themselves , or of the Laws , but on the immutability or mutability of things positive , or Laws positive , under this reduplication , so as they be immutable or mutable at the pleasure and will of men , without and beside the word of God , such as Crosse and Surplice , and such like Romish stuffe are pretended to be . 2. Certain it is , that Christ concealed not any part of his Fathers will , Ioh. 17. 8. But delivered all , and this place , with the place , Ioh. 15. 15. We urge against the traditions of Papists , and say , because Christ spake nothing from his Father either in his own person , or his Apostles in the New-Testament , or in the old by Moses and the Prophets , of invocation of Saints , Purgatory , Worshipping of Images , and Reliques and the rest of their unwritten Traditions , these being positives of worship , and more then unseparable , and connaturall attendants , such as are common , Time , Place , Person , Name , Country , Habite , Gesture , are therefore unlawfull , because Christ neither heard them of the Father , nor spake them to the Apostles , and just the like say we of Surplice , Crosse , &c. That they are no part of the will of God , which the Father revealed to Christ , and these same Texts Papists use , to prove that the Scriptures are not perfect , because they speak nothing of the Traditions of the Church ; so Bellarmine , Because the Counsell of Trent , Andradius , Stapleton , and all the rest , and they prove as well , if Crosse and Surplice , and humane Offices , as Prelates , stand good and lawfull , that yet the Scriptures are unperfect : 3. We say that the whole will of God revealed by the Father to Christ , and by Christ to the Prophets and Apostles , requireth the immutability of all Laws of Church-Policy in this sence , that men should not dare to make and unmake , erect , command , alter , and injoyne positive Laws , of doctrine or policy at their pleasure . Hooker , ibid. p. 113. There is more reason to say that God hath a lesse care of the Church under the New-Testament , then under the Old ; then a Philosopher had to say , because God hath provided better for beasts that are born with hornes , skins , hair and garments by nature , then man who is born without these , that therefore nature is a carefull mother to beasts , and a hard-hearted Step-dame to man : for Gods affection consisteth not in these , for even herein shineth his wisdom , that though the wayes of his providence be many , yet the end which he bringeth all at the length unto , is one and the self same : yea , it should follow that because God hath not prescribed Rites , and Laws of civill Policy to us , as to the Iews , that he hath lesse love to us , and lesse care of our Temporall estate in the world then of theirs . Ans . 1. It s true indeed , God should have lesse care of man , who is born naked , then of beasts born with hair in lieu of garments , if God had not given reason to man according to which by nature , he may provide garments for himself , and the comparison should go aptly on four feet , God should have lesse love , and should declare lesse love to some of mankinde , if he gave some naturall reason to devise a Bible and a Religion of their own that they might walk to heaven in the light of a fire of their own kindling , without the Scriptures of God ( which is a false supposition ) and if he had denied reason to another part of mankinde , surely all would say , God had so far forth been more carefull of the salvation of the former , as he should have willed their salvation , and loved those in a higher measure to whom he gave reason on these termes , and should have been lesse carefull of the salvation of those to whom he denied reason , as he he had no more created such capable of salvation and of his love for the saving of them , then brute beasts are : and this answer layeth down a ground that naturall reason is sufficient without the light of Scripture to guide us in all these things of policy that are alterable , then ( say I ) God did take a great deal of needlesse and superfluous pains in setting down so many particular Laws of Ceremonies and Civill Policy , for the Iews , if with the help of reason , they might have steerd their course to Christ and salvation , by the help of the star light of reason , as a man though born naked may by help of reason , make shift for garments to infants , which beasts void of reason cannot do : for thus the comparison must run , and it shall be indeed a cavilling at Gods wisdom , as Papists do calling the Scriptures inky Divinity : 2. The word of God maketh it a great love of God , and a work of Free grace , that the great things of Gods Law are written to Ephraim , Hos . 8. 12. And their sin the greater , that they should dare to multiply Altars , v. 11. without warrant of Gods word , as Formalists multiplied , Altars , Saints-dayes , Surplices , &c. And it is an act of singular love , that God gave his judgements , Word , and Statutes , even of Ceremonies , and policy to Israel and Iacob , and did not so to every Nation , Psal . 149. 19 , 20. Ezek. 20. 11 , 12 , 13. This was Israels excellency above all Nations on earth , Deut. 4. 6. Deut. 20. 33. Rom. 3. 1 , 2. Rom. 9. 4. that God gave them particular Lawes , Iudgements , Statutes , not only in Morals , but also in Ceremonials , and Policy : yet Hooker dare say , We may not measure the affection of God towards us , by such differences . 3. It shall not hence follow God hath a greater love to the Iews then to us , because he gave them Laws , concerning civill policy , which he gave not to us . Except the Lord had given us power to make civill Laws , which laid Morall obligation on our consciences , even in civill things , which morality He expressed in particular Laws written to them , and not to us , as Formalists teach , for then he hath left us in Moralls , to the darknesse of naturall reason , in which condition we could not but erre and sin , and make that morally good and obligatory of conscience , which is morally evil , for reason knoweth not what is positive Morally good , except the light of Gods Word teach us ; and in Morals , such as judiciall Laws were to the Jews , the Lord should have been more carefull in his particular directing of them , then of us , and more tender to have them preserved from the sin of will-worship , then us , which cannot consist with the Dispensation of lesse light ; greater obscurity in regard of types and shadows toward them , and of the Day-light of the Gospel , and the arising of the Day-star , and the filling of the earth with knowledge of the Lord toward us , under the New Testament : But the comparison must go upon this supposition , that the Lord purposed to make Politick Laws in their Positives , Morall and Obligatory of the Conscience of the Jews , and the Civill Laws of the Gentiles under the New Testament in their Positives ( such as is not to carry Armour in the night , and the like ) not to be Morall nor Obligatory of the Conscience . But as touching that which is Morall in all Civill Laws , the Lord is as carefull of our Temporall state , as of theirs , in condescending to particularize all Morals to us , as well as to them . Hooker , That Christ did not mean to set down particular Positive Laws for all things , in such sort as Moses did ; the very different manner of delivering the Laws of Moses and the Laws of Christ , doth plainly shew , Moses had Commandement to gather the Ordinances of God together distinctly , and orderly to set them down according to their kindes , for each Publique duty and Law : But the Laws of Christ we rather finde mentioned by occasion in the writings of the Apostles , then any solemn thing directly written to comprehend them in a Legall sort . 1. The Law Moral and Ceremonial were not delivered one & the same way ; the former was uttered by the Voice of God , in the hearing of six hundred thousand . 2. Written with Gods finger . 3. Termed●a Covenant . 4. Given to be kept without time , how long , or place where . The latter not so , and restricted to the Land of Jury , Deut. 4. 5. 12. Deut. 5. 22. And if God had respect in Positive Laws , to time and place , and the Manners of that Nation , seeing Nations are not all alike , then the giving of one kinde of Positive Laws unto one only people , without any Liberty to alter them , is but a slender proof , that therefore one kinde should be given to serve everlastingly for all . Ans . This Argument reduced to form , shall want both matter , and form , and reason . If the Laws of Moses be distinctly and orderly set down , and gathered together according to their severall kindes for each Duty ; and the Laws of Christ be occasionally only written ; then Christ did not mean to set down particular Positive Laws , for all things in such sort as Moses did . But this difference is true , Ergo , &c. Both the Major Proposition and the Assumption are false , and neither of them can be proved : For the occasionall writing of some Articles of Faith , and of Dogmaticall points , should then prove that Christ meant not to set down all Articles of Faith particularly ; for Christ , Matth. 22. upon occasion of the Saduces tempting ; Paul , upon occasion of some at Corinth who denied the Resurrection , 1 Cor. 15. And of some that mourned for the dead , 1 Thess . 4. Set down and proved an Article of Faith , to wit , the Resurrection of the dead : By this Argument the Scripture is not full and perfect , in Fundamentals , as Moses is in Ceremonials , but hath left such and such Fundamentals to be altered , added or omitted by the Church , in that way , that Surplice , Crosse , and Altars , are alterable things . Most of Dogmatick points concerning Christs sufferings , are occasionall , as his taking , his betraying by Judas , who knew the place he was in , the valuing of him at Thirty pieces , the giving him Gall and Vinegar , a punishment not intended by the Iudge , but occasionall , in that Christ said he thirsted ; Yea , the Crucifying of him rather then Barrabas , upon occasion of the malice of the people , when Pilate had scourged him upon a Policie , to see if the people would demand he might be released , the casting Lots for his garment , the Crucifying of him between two Theeves , the not breaking of his bones upon occasion he was dead , the piercing of his side ; all which in regard of second causes , were occasionall , and so though Dogmaticall and Doctrinall , these must be all such alterable and Ambulatory points of Doctrine , as the Church and Prelats may change at their godly discretion , and Christ meant not in these , to set down particular Positive Laws in such sort as Moses did . Yea , the Evangel according to Luke , is set forth occasionally ; because many have taken in hand to set forth in order a Declaration of these things which are most firmly believed ; therefore is seemed good to Luke also to write , Luk. 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. Upon occasion of Onesimus his fleeing from his master ; The Epistle to Philemon was written upon occasion of the unconstancy of the Galathians , whose faith was perverted by false teachers , that of Iustification by Faith , without the works of the Law : And the Epistle to the Galathians was written , most , if not all the Canonic● Epistles were written either upon occasion of false Teachers , or for fear they should be scandalized at Pauls bonds . By this vain Argument , the most part of Canonick Scripture should be alterable , imperfect , not particular in most Doctrinals , no lesse then in Ceremonials ; And so the Major Proposition is most false , for its a vain thing to Collect Christs meaning , to set down particulars of either Doctrine or Ceremonies , from occasions of Providence ; for most of the Scripture is penned upon occasions from men , and from second causes , shall these things leave off to be of Divine Institution , that hath their rise from occasions , even sinfull occasions ? Yea , the death of Christ is occasioned from mans fall in sin . What then ? Is it an alterable Doctrine left to the determination of the Church that Christ died ? But this is no other then the shift of Papists for their unwritten Tradition . Sanderus de Visib . Monarch . Lib. 1. c. 5. pag. 13. Si ergo per solas conscriptas leges dei civitas gubernaretur in valdè magnâ parte corum que passim contingunt , quid faceret , nesciret , quia legem de his loquent●m non haberet ; Imo si tantum una Lex toti reipub : necessaria esse posset , eaque ipsa scriberetur a prudentissimis viris , ac singulis annis ab orbe condito novae interpretationes eidem adderentur : tamen nunquam eveniret , ut ea lex tam plenè interpretata foret , quin causae novae possent intervenire ▪ ob quas lex et legis interpretatio novam iterim postularet interpretationem , adeo et foecunda est natura in suis eventis , et Angustum ingenium humanum , et varia surisperitorum sententia , et verba tum pauca , tum ambigua . All cometh to this , that this Papist saith , That there cannot be one written unchangeable Law that is necessary for the whole Church , for new events , occasions and occurences of Providence , should so change the case , that there should be a necessity of a new interpretation , and of a new Law. 2. Nor can we say that Laws made upon occasion , as that Law of transferring the inheritance to the Daughter , made upon occasion of the Daughters of Zelophehad , are in this sense occasionall , that the Iews might at their pleasure alter , or change a Law made by God , and substitute one of their own in place thereof ; for then might the Iews change all the Ceremonies and Iudgements that God gave them for a time and occasionally : Now then they might have abolished Circumcision , the passeover , and substitute other Sacraments in their place , for these Sacraments were not given by Gods own voice . 2. Nor written by Gods own finger . Nor , 3. Are they termed a Covenant , in that sense that the Morall Law is termed a Covenant . 4. Nor are they given without limitting of time and place , expresly when and where : Now if the Church of the Iews could change Sacraments at their pleasure , because their Sacraments were no part of the Eternall Law Morall , they might alter all Gods Law , as the Church may alter Surplice , Crossing ; and I see not , but the Church of the New Testament upon the same ground , may alter the Sacraments of the New Testament . Papists , as Vasquez Becanus , and others say , that neither the Pope nor the Church can adde or devise a new Article of Faith : Yet doth Horantius Loco Catholice . l. 2. c. 11. fol. 129. teach , That Christ hath not taught us all fully in the New Testament , but that the holy spirit , shall to the end of the world , teach other new things as occasion shall require . And this he bringeth as an Argument to prove , that there must be unwritten Traditions , not contained in Scripture ; even as the Formalists contend for unwritten Positives of Church-Policie . 3. Morals of the Law of nature and the Morall Law , do more respect occasions of Providence , customes , Laws , and the manners of people ( they doing so nearly concerne our Morall practise ) then any Ceremonies of Moses his Law which did shadow out Christ to us , and therefore this reason shall prove the just contrary of that for which its alledged ; for the Morall Law should be rather alterable at the Churches lust , then Ceremonials , for there be far more occurrences of Providence in regard of which the Laws Morall touching , what is Sabbath breaking , whether is leading an Ox to the water on the Sabbath a breach of the Sabbath ? ( the Jews held the affirmative , Christ the negative ) touching obedience to Superiors , Homicide , Polygamie , Incest , Fornication , Oppression , Lying , Equivocating : Then there can be occasions to change the Law of sacrificing , which clearly did adumbrat Christ , who was to be offered as a sacrifice for the sins of the world ; yea , all significant Symbolicall Ceremonies have their spirituall signification independent from all occasions of Providence , and depending on the meer will of the Instituter ; Surplice , or white linnen , signifieth the Priests holinesse , without any regard to time , place , or nationall customes ; for Christ might have made an immutable Law , touching the Symbolicall , and Religious signification , and use of Saints-dayes , white linnen , Crossing , and all the rest of humane Ceremonies , which should stand to Christs second coming , notwithstanding of any occurrences of Providence , no lesse then he made an immutable Law , touching the Sacramentall obsignation of water in Baptisme , and of Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper , if it had not been his will never to burden his Churches with such dumb and tooth-lesse mysteries as humane positives : 4. The assumption is false , for divers Ceremoniall Laws now altered were made without any regard to occasions of Providence , and many Doctrinals that are unalterable were made with speciall regard to such occurrences : 5. If positives of Policy be alterable , because the occasions of such are alterable by God ; it shall follow that God who hath all revolutions of Providence in his hand , must change these Positives , and not the Authority of the Church : and thus Doctrinals are alterable by God , not by men , which is now our question ; for Christ hath given a Commandment ; Take ye , Eat ye , Drink ye all of this : Yet hath he not tyed us in the time of persecution to conveen in publick , and Celebrate the Lords Supper ; but the Church doth not then change the Law , nor liberate us from obedience to a Command given by God , but God liberateth us himself . Hooker . But that which most of all maketh to the clearing of this point , is , that the Iews who had Laws so particularly determining , and so fully instructing them in all affairs what to do , were not withstanding continually inured with causes exorbitant , and such as their Laws had not provided for , and so for one thing , which we have left to the order of the Church ; they had twenty which were undecided by the expresse word of God ; so that by this reason , if we may devise one Law , they may devise twenty : Before the Fact of the sons of Shelomith , there was no Law that did appoint any punishment for blasphemers , nor what should be done to the man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath . And by this means God instructed them in all things from heaven , what to do : Shall we against experience think that God must keep the same , or a course by Analogy answering thereunto with us as with them ? Or should we not rather admire the various and harmonious dissimilitude of Gods wayes in guiding his Church from age to age ; Others would not only have the Church of the Iews a pattern to us , but they would ( as learned Master Prynne with them saith ) take out of our hand the Apostolick Church , that it should be no rule to us ; for saith he , There was no Vniforme Church-government in the Apostles times , at the first they had only Apostles and Brethren , Acts 1. 13. no Elders , or Deacons : Their Churches increasing , they ordained D●acons , Act. 6. And long after the Apostles ordained Elders in every Church , after that widowes in some Churches , not at all . In the primitive times some Congregations had Apostles , Acts 4. 11 , 12. 1 Cor. 12. 4. to 33. Evangelists , Prophets , workers of miracles , Healers , &c. Other Churches at that time had none of these Officers or Members , and all Churches have been deprived of them since those dayes . Ans . 1. What Hooker saith , is that which Bellarmine , Sanderus , Horantius , and all Popists say , for their Traditions against the perfection of the word , to wit , that the word of God , for 2373. years between Adam and Moses ( saith Horantius ) was not written , so Turrianus , Bellarmine , and the reason is just nothing , to say the Jews might devise twenty Laws , where we may devise one , because the Jews were continually inured with causes exorbitant , such as their written Laws had not provided for . This must be said which is in question , and so is a begging of the controversie , that the Iews of their own head , and Moses without any speciall word from God , or without any pattern shown in the mount , might devise what Laws they pleased , and might punish the blasphemer , and the man that gathered st●cks on the Sabbath , and determine , without God , the matter of the Daughters o● Zelophehad , as the Formalists teach , that the Church without any word of God or pattern from the word , may devise humane Ceremonial Prelats , Officers of Gods house shapen in a shop on earth , in the Antichrists head , and the Kings Court , the Surplice , the Crosse in Baptisme , and the like . Now we answer both them and Papists with one answer , that it is true , there was no written Scripture between Adam and Moses which was some thousands of years : Yea , nor a long time after till God wrote the Law on Mount Sinai : But withall , what God spake in visions , dreams , and apparitions to the Patriarchs , was as binding and obliging a pattern interditing men then to adde the visions of their own brain to what he spake from heaven , as the written word is to us , so that the Iews might neither devise twenty Laws nor any one of their own head , without expresse warrant of Gods immediate Tradition , which was the same very will and truth of God , which Moses committed to writing ; if then Formalists will assure us of that which Papists could never assure us , we shall receive both the unwritten Traditions of the one , and the unwritten Positive inventions of Crosse and Surplice , devised by the other : as 1. Make us sure , as God himself immediatly spake to the Patriarchs , and to Moses , nothing but what after was committed to writing by Moses and the Prophets at Gods speciall Commandment , as Papists say , their unwritten Traditions are agreeable to the word , and though beside Scripture , yet not against it : And the very will of God no lesse then the written word ; and let Formalists assure us , that their positive additaments of Surplice and Crosse are the same which God commandeth in the Scriptures , by the Prophets and Apostles , and though beside , yet not contrary to the vvord : But I pray you what better is the distinction of beside the vvord , not contrary to the vvord of God , out of the mouth of Papists , to maintain unvvritten Traditions , which to them is the expresse word of God , then out of the mouth of Formalists , for their unwritten Positives , which are worse then Popish Traditions in that they are not the expresse word of God , by their own grant ? 2. Let the Formalist assure us , that after this , some Moses and Elias shall arise and write Scripture touching the Surplice and Crosse , that they are the very minde of God , as the Lord could assure the Church between Adam and Moses , that all Divine truths which he had delivered by Tradition , should in Gods due time be written in Scripture , by Moses , the Prophets and Apostles : I think they shall here fail in their undertakings . Hence the Argument standeth strong , the Jevvs might devise nothing in doctrine , Worship , or Government ; nay , neither the Patriarchs nor Moses , nor the Prophets of their own head , without Gods immediate Tradition , or the written Scripture ( which are all one ) Ergo , Neither can the Church , except she would be wiser then God in the Scriptures . 2. Hookers Various and Harmonious Dissimilicude of Gods g●iding his Ch●rch , is his fancy : This variety we admire , as it is expressed , He● . 1. 1. But Hooker would say ( for he hath reference to that place ) God at sundry times , and in divers manners , spake in time past unto the Fathers by the Prophets , and now to us by hi● Son : But test of all , he hath revealed his Will , by the Pope of Rome , and his cursed Clergy , that we should Worship Images , pray to Saints , and for the dead , beleeve Purgatory , &c. and now by humane Prelates , he hath shown his will to us , touching Crossing , Surplice : Now Papists , as Horantius , Sanderus , Malderus , Bellarmine , and others say , Most of the points that are in Question between them and Protestants , and particularly Church-Ceremonies , are unwritten Traditions delivered by the Church ; beside the warrant of Scripture ▪ 3. We grant that there was no Uniform Church-Government in the Apostles time , Deacons were not at the first , Elders were not ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in every Church : But this is nothing against a Platform of Vniform Government ▪ which cannot be altered in Gods Word . For by this reason the Learned and Reverend Mr. Prynne , because points of Government did grow by succession of time ; cannot infer therefore that Government which the immediately inspired Apostles did ordain in Scripture , is alterable by men ; then because , 1. Fundamentals of Faith and Salvation , were not all delivered at first by God ; there is no Uniform , no unalterable Platform of Doctrinals and Fundamentals set down in Scripture . For first , the Article of Christs death and incarnation , was obscurely delivered to the Church in Paradise : Sure the Article of Christs making his Grave with the wicked , of his being put to death for out Transgressions , though he himself was innocent ; his justifying of many by Faith , were after delivered by Isaiah , Chap. 53. And by succession ●f time , many other Fundamentals , as the Doctrine of the written Moral Law , in the Moral Positives thereof , were delivered to the Church : But I hope from this successive Addition of Fundamentals , no man can infer ▪ 1. There is no Uniform Platform of the doctrine of Faith , set down in the Old Testament . 2. None can hence infer , because all points ▪ Fundamental were not delivered to the Church at first ; the refore the Church ▪ without any expresse warrant from God , may alter the Platform of Fundamentals of Faith , as they take on them to adde Surplice , Crossing , &c. and many other Positives to the Government of Christ without any expresse warrant of the Word . 3. Our Argument is close mistaken , we argue not from the Patern of Government , which was in the Apostles times , at the laying of the first stone in that Church ; then the Apostolike Church had indeed no Officers ; but the Apostles and the seventy Disciples we reason not from one peece , but from the whole frame , as perfected by the Ministery of the Lords Apostles . 2. We argue not from the Apostolike Church , as it is such a Church ; for Apostles were necessary then , as was community of goods , miracles , speaking with tongues , &c. but we draw an argument from the Apostolike Church ; as the first Christian Church , and since the Law was to come from Zion , and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem , Isai . 2. 3. And the Lord was to reign in Mount Zion , and in Jerusalem before his Ancients gloriously , Isai . 24. 23. And the Lord was to reign over his people in Mount Zion , from henceforth and for ever , Micah 4. 2 , 7. And Christ for that gave a special command to his Disciples , not to depart from Jerusalem , but wait for the promise of the Father , which they had heard from Christ ; therefore this Church of Jerusalem was to be a rule , a patern and copy for the Government of the Visible Kingdom and Church of Christ , in which Christ was to reign by his own Word ▪ and Law , Mi● . 4. 2 , 7. And so the Spirit descended upon the Apostles in the framing and Governing of the first Church , in so far , as it was a Christian Church , and they were to act all , not of their own heads , but as the Holy Ghost led them in all Truth , in these things that are of perpetual necessity ; and in such as these , the first Church is propounded as imitable : Now we do not say in Apostles , which had infallibility of writing Canonick Scripture , in Miracles , speaking with Tongues , and such like , that agreed to the Apostolike Church , not as a Church , but as such a determinate Church in relation to these times , when the Gospel and Mystery of God , now manifested in the flesh , was new taught , and never heard of before , did require Miracles , gift of Tongues , that the Gospel might openly be preached to the Gentiles , we do not ( I say ) urge the Apost●like Church and all the particulars for Government in it , for a rule and patern to be imitated . And if Master Prynne deny , that there is an Uniform Government in the Apostles times , because God himself added to them Deacons & Elders , which at first they had not , & removed Apostles , miracles , gifts of healing , and tongues : then say I ; First , the Canonick Scripture is not Uniform and perpetual : Why , for certainly once there was no Canonick Scripture but the Books of Moses , and after the holy Ghost added the Book of the Psalmes , and the Prophets ; and after the Nativity and Ascension of our Lord to Heaven , the Apostles did write Canonick Scripture : I hope , this is but a poor Argument to infer , that there is no Vniform and unalterable Platform of Divinity in the Old and New Testament , and yet the Argument is as concludent the one way , as it is the other : 3. We do not so contend for an Vniform and unalterable Platform of Church-Government in the Word ; as it was not free to the Lord and Law-giver to adde , and alter at his pleasure , only we hold it so Vniform and unalterable , that this Platform is not shaped like a coat to the Moon , or alterable at the will of men , without expresse warrant of the Lords Word , and to rise and fall with the climate , and the elevation of Nationall customes ; and therefore the Argument is nothing concludent , and judge what can be made of these words of the learned Mr. Prynne : The Government and Officers of all Churches , not being De facto , one and the same in all particulars in the very Primitive times , as well as since , it can never be proved to be of Divine right , and the self same in all succeeding Ages , without the least variation , ●inee it was not so in the Apostles dayes : For this is all one as to say , the Canonick Scripture was not one and the same , in the Apostles and Prophets times , but admitted of divers additions ; Ergo , now in our daies Canonick Scripture is not one and the same , but may also suffer the like additions : 2. Because God himself added to Canonick Scripture , and to the Government of the Church in the Apostles dayes ; Ergo , men may without Warrant from God , adde in our dayes to Canonick Scripture , and to the Government and Officers of the Church : 3. The Government and Officers in the Apostles time were not of Divine right , but alterable by God ; Ergo , Apostles , Evangelists , Pastors , Teachers , Workers of miracles were not of Divine right in the Apostles times , but might have been altered by men , without the expresse Warrant of God : But will any wise man believe that Pauls Apostleship was alterable , and might be changed by the Church ? Since he saith , Gal. ● . 1. Paul an Apostle , not of men , neither by men , but by Iesus Christ , and 1 Cor. 12. 28. When Paul saith , And God hath set 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or instituted some in the Church ; first , Apostles , secondly , Prophets , thirdly , Teachers , after that miracles , then gifts of healing , &c. and Eph. 4. 11. When Christ ascended on high , he gave some Apostles , some Prophets , and some Evangelists , and some to be Pastors and Teachers , 12. For the perfecting of the Saints , &c. Can it enter into the head of any man to say , some Churches had Apostles and Evangelists , and Pastors , and miracles , and some not ; Ergo , Apostles , and Pastors , are not by Divine right ; Ergo , because they were not in all Churches , therefore they were alterable at the will of men ? and a Surplice , and Crosse in Baptisme hath as much of Divine institution , as the calling of the Apostle , or of a Pastor , and truly to me , it is bold Divinity to say , that Pastors set over the flock by the holy Ghost , Act. 20. 28. and whos 's due qualifications are so specified , 1 Tim. 3. and Elders , 1 Tim. 5. 17. and Teachers placed by God in the Church , 1 Cor. 12 28. may be all turned out of the Church , by men , as having no Divine right to be there , and that men may set up other alterable Officers in their place ; for by this reason the Apostles , by that ordinary spirit , that is now in Church-Rulers , might without their Apostolick spirit , or any immediate Warrant from Christ , have altered the whole frame of Apostolick-Government , and Church-Officers , as the Church may upon motives from themselves not warranted from the word , turne out Surplice , Crosse , and all such stuffe out of the Church . Master Prynne . The Apostles speech , 1 Cor ▪ 12. 4 , 5 , 6. There are diversity of gifts , but the same spirit , there are diversity of operations , but the same God , compared with chap. 8. to 13. and c. 9. v. 19. to 24. I made my self a servant to all , that I might gain all , &c. parallel'd with Act. 15. 1 , 2 , 5 , 6 , 10. to 32. and chap. 21. 18. to 30. The Churches of Judea did retain the use of Circumcision , Purification , and other Iewish Rites , which the Gentiles by the Apostles resolution were not to observe , and Act. 2. 22. The Apostles frequented the Iewish Temple , and Synagogues ( conforming themselves to the Order and Discipline thereof ) and their own private Christian Assemblies ; all this will clear , that all Churches had not one and the self same Church-Government . Ans . If diversity of Gifts , as to be a speaker with Tongues , a Prophet , a Pastor , will prove the Discipline to be alterable at the Churches will , as are Surplice , Crosse , &c. I shall think men may infer any thing they please out of the Scripture ; and that to be Apostles , Past●rs , are as indifferent and variable as eating of meats , 1 Cor. 8. and Pauls taking of wages at Corinth , 1 Cor. 9. Which none can say ; for if the Church should now command us to abstain from such and such meats , as the Apostle doth , 1 Cor. 8. We should call that , and do call it , in the Romish Church , a Doctrine of Devils , 1 Tim. 4 ▪ 1 , 2 , 3. All brought for this , from Act. 15. Act. 21. tendeth to this , the Lord himself for the then weaknesse of the Jews , of meer indulgence appointed some things to be indifferent , and abstained from , in the case of scandall : Therefore Circumcision , Purification , Sacrifices of Bullocks , and sheep ; And all the Ceremonies of Moses his Law , may be commanded by the Church , so they have another signification then they had before , and shadow out Christ who is already come : But because God hath made some things indifferent , shall it follow that the Pope , yea , or any Church on earth can create an indifferency in things ? they must then take from things their Morall goodnesse or conveniency with Gods Law , and take from them their moral badnes , & disconveniency to Gods Law , which to me is to change the nature of things , and to abrogate and change Gods Laws : it is true , P. Martyr , 1 Cor. 9. 19. saith , Paul was made all things to all men , Quoad Ceremonias , & res medias , in that he Circumcised Timotheus : The Law ( saith he ) was abrogated , V●rum id non adhuc Judaeis liquebat ; The Jews were to be spared for a time , but only for a time , and therefore when the Gospel was sufficiently promulgated ; Paul said , Gal. 5. to be Circumcised was to lose Christ , and he refused to be a servant to Peter in his sinful Iudaizing , Gal. 2. And withstood him in the face : Now , certain it is , Peter knew Christ was come in the flesh , and that his Iudaizing did not lay bands on his conscience , he preached the contrary , Act. 11. And if Peter did Iudaize , as Formalists observe Ceremonies , and the Galathians were circumcised the same way ( for they knew Circumcision had no Typicall Relation to Christ to come , they believed he was already come ) then without cause , Paul , Gal. 2. and 5. did rebuke , and argue either Peter or the Galathians of sinfull Iudaizing ; which to say , were to speak against the Gospel . But certainly the Vniformity , and immutability of all these Ceremonies was , that then when the Gospel was sufficiently Proclaimed to all , to be under the Law of Ceremonies in any sort was damnable , and so is it now : And as the Apostles and Church then set up no Ceremonies , no Surplice , no Crossing , because they had no word of Christ to warrant them , neither can we do the like now ; and they complyed for a time with the Iewish Ceremonies , being yet indifferent , but not but by warrant of the commandment and resolution of the Apostles , and the like are we obliged unto now , had we a Warrant of the like indifferency of Prelates , Surplice , Crosse , and that we were obliged to use them to gain the weak , in regard : 1. They were once obligatory Ordinances of God : 2. And if the day light of the Gospel were not yet sufficiently risen to shine upon those who are not wilfully ignorant , and had not yet acknowledged the Gospel to be Gods word , we should also be obliged to Ceremonies ; yea , we durst not yield to any Law to lay them aside , as many Formalists , who hold them lawfull , have done . Mr. Prynne . From the Creation till Moses , there was no one Vniversall set Form of Church-Government , to be observed in all the world : Nor one Form of Discipline under the Tabernacle , another under the Temple . Ans . All this concludeth not what is in question ; it s but the Popish Argument : This is to be concluded , that Enoch , Seth , Noah , Abraham , the Patriarchs and Moses did set up a Church-Government of such timber as Humane Prelates , Crosse , Surplice , without any expresse Warrant from Gods mouth , and which they might alter by their own spirit ; for this Argument is , God might alter ; Ergo , The Church now may alter without a warrant from God. And shall we believe that the Patriarchs and Moses by their own spirit without any Commandment of God , might at their pleasure set up , and put down Prophets , Circumcision , Tabernacle , Temple , Laws for Sacrifices , Priests , Levites , Arke , putting the Leaper in , or putting him out of the Campe , cutting any soul off from the Congregation of the Lord , as our men will cry up , and down Ceremonies , and put on them the weight of a Talent , or a Feather , without any word of God ? The Scripture cryeth the contrary so often , saying , And the Lord spake unto Moses , saying , speak thou unto the children of Israel : Could Formalists say that , and Christ spake unto the Prelats , and the Church , and said , Command the Pastor to crosse the Infant , and appoint unto your selves a Prelate over the Pastors : I should gladly agree to the mutable frame of humane Government . Mr. Prynne . There are but for the most part , generall rules prescribed to us for the very ordering and regulating of our thoughts , words , actions , lives , apparell , Children , servants , families , calling , &c. in the Word ; Ergo , there be but generall rules for Discipline and Church-Government , which admit variety ; the former do more immediately concern every man , the other more remotely . Ans . If the Word of God do not more particularly regulate our thoughts , as , Psal . 10. 4. Psal . 5. 9. Isa . 55. 7. Ier. 4. 14. Act. 8. 22. And our words and actions by which we must be judged , Isa . 3. 8. Ier. 8. 6. Mal. 3. 13. Ier. 9. 3. Matth. 12. 36 , 37. Rev. 22. 12. Rev. 20. 13. 2 Cor. 5. 10. Prov. 5. 21. 1 Sam. 2 , 3. Psal . 119. 9. Prov. 3. 23 , 24. Then the Scripture doth warrant Surplice , and Crossing , and kneeling to Creatures , and humane Prelats , which are changeable , and alterable circumstances and adjuncts of Worship , that may be , and may not be , and things indifferent ; it shall follow , that for the most part , it is indifferent to do evil or well , sin or not sin , in thought , word and actions ; and we have no warrant in Scripture for eschewing sin , or not eschewing it in the most of our actions . I confesse there is little need to walk , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accurately , Eph. 5. 15. And to cleanse our wayes , Psal . 119. 9. according to the Word ; If words , thoughts and actions , may go at random , as if they were variable and indifferent Ceremonies , God throweth not men in hells torments , to be eternally miserable , for circumstances ▪ 2. For the acts of our calling , if they be Morall , they are regulated as particularly by the word , as to believe , love and fear God , or the creature ; if artificiall , they are not of our consideration . 3. That Morall acts of decent usage of the Ordinances , do not immediately concern men , is admirable to me . Mr. Prynne : To the Argument of Moses his doing all according to the patern shown in the Mount , It is Answered : 1. The Tabernacle wa● no part of the Church of the Israelites ; but only the place of meeting for Worship , answerable to our Churches and Chappels , and so was the Temple ; But I pray you , God prescribed the height , length , bredth , form of Tabernacles , Ark , Altar , of every Pin , Ergo , Hath Christ as punctually prescribed to all Christians , and Nations , in expresse words , the form , matter , dimensions of all Christian Churches , Temples , Chappels , Tables , Challices , Pulpits , Pews , not varying in one pin . 2. God named the men , Bezaliel , and Aholiah , who should make the Tabernacle and all the implements thereof . 3. God expressed the frame , fashion , colours , of the holy Garments of Aaron and his sons : shall it follow , Ergo , only the Artificers whom God nameth , immediately , and none but Embroyderers , Goldsmiths , Carpenters , &c. Not Pastors and Elders are to build up the spirituall Churches of Christ , Ergo , The form , matter and colour of Ministers , and Elders garments are particularly set down in the New Testament . 4. The Tabernacle and Temple were corporall things made by mens hands , not spirituall buildings of mens spirits . 5. All these of the patern were delivered to Moses the Temporall Magistrate , not to Aaron the Priest ; Ergo , the Church under the Gospel is not a spirituall building , whose maker and builder is God ; and all is to be ordered by the Civill Magistrate , and Lay-Artificers , not by Pastors : I wonder also you alledge not Noahs Ark : And all in the New Testament , are not so particularly set down , as in the Old. Ans . The Tabernacle was no part of the Church ; but being a Type and the implements of it , to the least pin , particularly expressed by God to Moses ; far more must we have from God an expresse for every Ceremony , not to retort this also , that a Corner-Cap , or a Surplice , is no part of the Church , and is indeed a teaching sign , and so should not be counted a Positive of Church-Policy . 2. Most false it is that the Tabernacle and Temple were nothing but a meeting place of the people for Worship , as our Churches or Chappels , are , 1. Because it is to Argue the Holy Ghost of want of wisdom , to spend so much Canonick Scripture in setting down things idely , not tending , at all to edification , and teaching us nothing of God , and in specifying the Form , Height , Length , Bredth , Curtains , Candlesticks , Sockets , Rings , of naturall places that contained their bodies ; for what should it edifie us , if God should describe so particularly all the Churches and meeting places of the people under the New Testament ? Now certain it is , Whatsoever things were written afore time , were written for our Learning , Rom. 15. 4. 2. Many things in the Tabernacle , as Candles in day light , Rings , Sockets , Shew-bread , belonged nothing to a naturall place , as our Chappels , or Meeting houses do . 3. Expresly the Scripture maketh them more then places ; to wit , Holy , Religious , and Typicall signes of Divine institution ; as the Tahernacle was a Type , Heb. 8. 2. 5. Heb. 9. 1 , 2. &c. Heb. 10. 1 , 2 , 3. And the Temple a Type of Christs body , Ioh. 2. 19. Ioh. 1. 14 , 15. And all these were Types and shadows of Heavenly things , Heb. chap. 8 , 9 , 10. Gal. 4. 1. 2. &c. Col. 2. 16. 17. Which our Churches and Chappels are not , being only places common to sacred and Civill actions . 2. God therefore can no more in expresse words set down , the form , matter , dimensions of Christian Churches and Chappels , then of the Synagogues of the Iews which had no Morall use for edification and instruction . 3. Yea , because the Tabernacle and Temple and their implements , were teaching shadows of good things to come , and our Churches and Chappels are not so , nor have they any Morall or Religious use or influence on our spirits as the Tabernacle and Temple had ; therefore the Lord , who is expresse in all Morals , which of their own nature do teach and edifie ; he behoved to name Bezaliel , and Aholiah , and the form and colour of the Priests garments , which also are Typicall , and could not name our Elders , or the colour or form of their Garments . 4. All these weak retortions , suppose that the Tabernacle and Temple were types of our meeting houses for Worship , which is a meer conjecture ; they were no more types of our Chappels , then of the Iewish Synagogues ; we may not expound types at will , but as the Holy Ghost expoundeth them to us in the New Testament : And this is a conjecturall Exposition , and a dream to make Bezaliel and Aholiah , types of Embroyderers and Tradesmen . 5. We know the Tabernacle and Temple were corporall things made with hands , and that they are things different from the spirituall things that they signifie ; as the sign and the thing signified ; as therefore the Lord is expresse in the elements and Rites of the Supper of the Lord , because all of them , Bread , Wine , taking , eating , breaking , pouring out the Wine , drinking , are teaching and edifying signes ; and our Lord never left it to the wisdom of men , to devise signes to teach themselves : so in like manner , should the Lord expresly specifie all the teaching and signifying signes in the Old Testament ; and as Moses might devise none of his own , but was tyed to follow the patern , which the Lord himself shewed to him in the Mount : So are we now under the New Testament , tyed to the patern of that same will revealed in the Word ; and it is laid on us , Not to be wise above that which was written ; and it is of perpetuall equity : The supream Law-giver , never left it to the wisdom of Angels , or Men , or Prophet , Apostle or Church , to serve and Worship God as they thought good : But he himself particularly prescribed the way , signes , and means : And because God hath not been pleased in the New Testament to specifie types of Christ incarnate , and come in the flesh already ; therefore are we obliged in Conscience to believe , and practise no more , either in Doctrinals , or teaching types , or Positives of Church-Policy , then our Patern in the Mount , the Scripture hath warranted to us , to be the will of God , and in this and this only , standeth the force of the present Argument unanswered by paterns of unwritten Traditions , and not in these loose consequences , that we under the New Testament should have these types and Policy that the Church of the Iews had , which is the Doctrine of Papists and Formalists following them , not ours ; for they prove their Pope and Prelat from the Iewish High Priest , their Surplice , from the linnen Ephod of Jewish Priests ; their Humane Holidayes , from the Iewish dayes ; their kneeling to bread , from their bowing toward the Ark. 6. It is not true , that the Tabernacle and Temple were meer corporall things , no more then bread and wine in their spirituall relation , are meer corporall things : The Lords end , use and intent , in the Tabernacle and Temple , was , that they should be to the people Images , and shadows of heavenly and spirituall things , Heb. 8. 5. Heb. 10. 1. 7. That all the things of the Tabernacle , were delivered to Moses as a King , and not as a Prophet and writer of Canonick Scripture , Heb. 3. 5. Heb. 8. Luk. 24. 44. 27. Luk. 16. 31. is an untruth , except Formalists make the King so the head of the Church , in prescribing Laws for the Policy thereof , as they make him a Canonick writer , as were David , Moses , Solomon , from whose example they would prove the King to be the head of the Church : But I judge Moses saw the patern in the Mount , and God face to face , as a Prophet whose words are Scripture to us , Deut. 34. 10. And there arose not a Prophet since in Israel like unto Moses , whom the Lord knevv face to face ; And as a Prophet , not as a King , his face did shine , Exod. 34 ▪ 27 , 28 , 29. And he was commanded as a Prophet , to write the Law not as a King , Numb . 12. 6. 7. Moses is made the most eminent Prophet that was in the Old Testament . And why ? Because God spake to other Prophets by Dreams and Visions ▪ But he spake the Law and written Scripture to Moses , mouth to mouth : This should not be a comparison between Prophet and Prophet , but between Prophet and King , by this learning . 8. We judge Noahs Ark doth prove the same , it being a speciall type of the Church , 1 Pet. 3. 20 , 21. And he built it by Faith , Heb. 11. 7. And so by a Word of God , and at Gods speciall direction , in all the length , bredth , formes of it , and not of his own head , Gen. 6. 14 , 15 , &c. And is commended by the spirit of God for so doing , Gen. 6. 22. Thus did Noah according to all that God commanded him , so did he . And Formalists should deserve the like Testimony , if it could be said of them , And as the Lord commanded the Church , in creating Prelats , Surplice , and all the positives of Church-policy ; so did she . And so saith Calvin , on Genesis . 6. 22. And P. Martyr , and Musculus piously on this place : and with them , Vatablus . Hence I judge all other things in this , and the following Arguments Answer . SECT . IV. ANy Positives not warranted by some speciall word of God shall be additions to the word of God : But these are expresly forbidden , Deut. 4. 2. Deut. 12. 32. Prov. 30. 6. Rev. 22. 18 , 19. To this Formalists answer : 1. They have a generall Commandment of God , though not a speciall . Ans . So have all the unwritten Traditions of Papists ; hear the Church , she is Magistra fidei ; so doth the Papist Horantius answer Calvin , That the spirit of God hath given a generall and universall knowledge of mysteries of Faith and Ceremonies belonging to Religion , but many particulars are to be received by tradition from the Church : but of this hereafter . 2. Master Prynne answereth that is a wresting , These Texts ( saith he ) speak only of additions to books or doctrines of Canonical Scriptures then written , not of Church-Government or Ceremonies ; yea , God himself after the writing of Deutronomy caused many Canonicall books of the old and New Testament to be written : Many additions were made to the service of God in the Temple not mentioned by Moses . Another answer R. Hooker giveth , teaching with Papists , Bellarmine ( as in another place after I cite ) with Cajetane , Tannerus and others ; That additions that corrupt the word are here forbidden , not additions that expound and perfect the word : True it is , concerning the word of God , whither it be by misconstruction of the sense , or by falcification of the words , wittingly to endeavor that any thing may seem Divine , which is not , or any thing not seem , which is , were plainly to abuse even to falcifie divine evidence : To quote by-speeches in some Historicall narration , as if they were written in some exact form of Law , is to adde to the Law of God. We must condemn ( if we condemn all adding ) the Jevvs dividing the supper in tvvo courses : their lifting up of hands unvvashed to God in Prayer , as Aristaeus saith , Their Fasting every Festivall day till the sixth hour . Though there be no expresse word for every thing in speciality , yet there are general Commandments for all things ; say the Puritans , observing general Rules , of 1. Not scandalizing : 2. Of decency : 3. Of edification : 4. Of doing all for Gods glory . The Prelate Vsher , in the question touching traditions ; We speak not of Rites & Ceremonies , vvhich are left to the disposition of the Church , and be not of Divine , but of Positive and Humane right : But that traditions should be obtruded for Articles of Religion , parts of Worship , or parcels of Gods vvord beside the Scriptures , and such Doctrines as are either in Scriptures expresly , or by good inference we have reason to gainsay . Here is a good will , to make all Popish Traditions that are only beside , not contrary to Scripture ( and in the Popish way all are only beside Scripture ) as Lawfull , as our Ceremoniall additions , so they be not urged as parts of Canonicall Scripture : Well , the places Deut. 4. & 12. Prov. 30. Rev. 22. ( say our Masters of mutable Policy ) forbid only Scripturall , or Canonicall additions , not Ceremonial additions : But I wonder who took on them to adde additionals Scripturall : if Baals Priests should adde a worship of Iehovah , and not equall it with Scripture , nor obtrude it as a part of Moses's Books , by this means they should not violate this precept : Thou shalt not adde to the word , &c. 2. Additions explaining the Word , or beside the Word , as Crossing the bread in the Lords-Supper are Lawfull , only additions corrupting , or detracting from the word , and everting the sense of it , are here forbidden , and in effect these are detractions from the word , and so no additions at all by this distinction are forbidden , but only detractions : The word for all this wil not be mocked , it saith , Thou shalt not add , Thou shalt not diminish . But the truth is , a Nation of Papists answer this very thing for their Traditions . 1. Bishop Ans . to the 2. part of Refor . Catho . of Trad. § . 5. pag. 848. The words signifie no more , but that we must not either by addition , or substraction , change or pervert Gods Commandments , be they written , or unwritten : Else why were the Books of the Old Testament written aftervvard ; if God had forbidden any more to be written or taught , beside ▪ that one Book of Deutronomy ? Shall we think that none of the Prophets that lived and wrote many Volumns after this , had read these vvords , or understood them not , or did vvilfully transgresse them ? D. Abbot answereth , What the Prophets vvrote , serve to explain the Law , they added no point of Doctrine to Moses Lavv , for Exod. 24 , 4. Moses vvrote all the vvords of God , Deut. 31. 9 , 10. Moses wrote this Lavv , then he vvrote not a part of the Law , and left another part unvvritten . The Iesuit Tannerus answereth the same in terminis with the Formalists : Colloquio Ratisbonensi foll . 11. & 13. D. Gretserus , ad dicta , Resp . Prohiberi additionem quae repugnet verbo scripto , non autem illam , quae verbo scripto est consentanea cujusmodi sunt traditiones — Post pentateuchum accesserunt libri josue , Prophetarum , &c. Tamen nemo reprehendit , quia illi libri fuerunt consentanei sacrae Scripturae : Additions contrary ( say they ) to the vvord are forbidden , not such as agree vvith the vvord , such as are all the traditions of the Church ; for after Deutronomy vvere vvritten the Books of Ioshua and the Prophets ; so Cajetan . Coment in Loc. Prohibemur ne ●ingamus contineri in lege , quod in ea non continetur , nec subtrahamus , quod in ea continetur , Gloss . Interline : Non prohibet veritatem veritati addere , sed falsitatem omnino removet . Lira . Hic prohibetur additio depr●vans intellectum legis , non autem additio declarns aut clucidans , Tostatus in Loc. Q. 2. Ille ( pecat ) qui addit , addit tanquam aliquid de textu , vel necessarium , sicut alia qu● sunt in textu velut dictum a spiritu sancto , & hoc vocatur propriè addere . Formalists ( as Dr. Morton say ) It is sin to adde to the vvord any thing , as a part of the written vvord , as if Ceremonies were a part of the vvritten Scripture , and spoken by the immediate inspiring spirit that dyteth Canonick Scripture , they come only a● Arbitrary and ambulatory adjuncts of Worship from the ordinary spirit of the Church , and are not added as necessary parts of Scripture , or as Doctrinals ; so Papists say , their traditions are not additions to the written vvord , nor necessary parts of the vvritten Scripture , but inferiour to the Scripture . 1. They say their Traditions are no part of the written word or Scripture ; for they divide the word of God in two parts , as Bellarmine , Turrian , Tannerus , Stapleton , Becanus , all of them say , Aliud est verbum dei scriptum & dicitur Scriptura sacra , aliud est verbum dei non scriptum , & dicitur ecclesiae traditio ; There is one vvord of God vvritten , called the holy Scripture ; And there is another vvord of God not vvritten , and it is called the Tradition of the Church . Now their Tradition is no more a part of the Scripture ( but another part of the word of God contradistinguished from Scripture ) then the body is a part of the soul , or Scotland a part of England , for both England and Scotland are collaterall parts of great Brittain ; the Scripture ( say they ) is the unperfect rule of Faith , and not the compleat will of God , as touching Faith or manners , but Scripture and Tradition together , are the perfect and totall rule : so say Formalists , that Scripture is the compleat and perfect rule of Faith and manners to regulate all our Morall acts ; But the other part of the distinction is , that Scripture is not a compleat and full rule to regulate all our Morall Acts whatsoever , whither of Faith or manners or Church-Policy , as it is no rule to my conscience and practise to believe , for orders , cause and obedience to my Superiours , and for decency that I am to wear a Religious significant linnen creature called a Surplice , or not to wear it , or that I am to excercise , or not exercise that grave action of drawing my thumb Crosse the Air above the face of a Baptized Childe vvhile I baptize , to betoken his dedication to Christs service : And hitherto neither Traditions , nor Positives of Church-Policy are added , as necessary parts of written Scripture : 2. Traditions are not added to the Scripture , by Papists , as coming from the immediatly inspiring spirit that dyted and wrote Scripture , more then our Ceremoniall Positives of policy : It s true , Papists say they come from an infallible spirit : But Formalists ( I hope ) refer not their unwritten Positives to so noble blood ; yet in this , they agree that Traditions are not added by them , as descending from the immediate inspiring spirit of written Scripture : Therefore Cornelius a Lapide saith , Non addetis ad verbum quod vobis loquor , aliquid , scilicet tanquam meum , vel a me dictum aut jussum , nulli enim homini licet prescripta aut precepta sua pro preceptis a deo ( a spiritu sancto immediatè inspirante ) dictatis , aut pro Scripturis sacris addere ; It is not lavvfull for any man to adde to the vvord any thing of his ovvn , as his ovvn , or as spoken and commanded by himself : For no man may broach his own injunctions and precepts , as if they were the precepts taught by the immediate inspiring spirit , speaking in the Scriptures . Hence Papists teach that their Traditions flow from a little lower Spring , then from the immediately inspiring Scripturall spirit ; So I make this good from famous Iesuites ; Cornelius a Lapide , in Deut. 4. 1 , 2. saith , Sed et ipsi judaei multa addiderunt legi , ut coelaturas , omnemque ornatum templi ; ut festum sortium sub Eester , festum dati ignis , festum Encaeniorum &c. Hec enim non a de● , sed a judaeis sancita et instituta sunt , denique hec non sunt addita , sed potius inclusa legi dei : Quia Lex jubet obedire parentibus , Magistratibu● , pontificibus eorumque legibus . The Jevvs ( saith he , objecting the instances of Formalists ) added many things to the Lavv , as the ingraving and adorning of the Temple , the feast of Purim , of Dedication &c. And these traditions vvere not ordained and instituted by God ( Ergo , not by the immediate inspiring spirit , as is the Holy Scripture ) but by the Iews , and they were not added to the Law , but included in the Law , because the Law biddeth obey Superiors and their Laws ; whence it is evident , that these very Ceremoniall traditions of Papists , for which Formalists contend , are not added to the word as coming from God , or the immediatly inspiring spirit that diteth scripture ; but from the Church , without warrant of Scripture , just as Popish traditions , which we count unlawfull additions to the word . And Tannerus the Iesuit saith , Tom. 3. in 22. de fide , spe et cha . dis . 1. de fide Q. 1. Dub. 8. That the assistance of the spirit that the Church hath in proposing unwritten traditions , requireth no positive inspiration or speech made by God to the Church ; but it is enough that the Church have a very negativehelp of God only , by which she is permitted not to erre : His words are these : Nam assistentia illa dei , quà ecclesiae adest , ne ejusmodo rebus fidei ( in traditionibus non scriptis ) proponendis erret , por se non dicit , nec requirit positivam inspirationem , se● , locu●●on●m Divinam ipsi ecclesiae factam , sed contenta est quovis auxilio dei etiam mere negativo , quo fit ut ecclesia ijs in rebuus non sinatur errare : Cum tamen nova revelatio utique novam inspirrtionem seu Locutionem dei aliquid positivè notificantem significet . And the like saith Malderus , in 22. de virtu . Theolog. That , though traditions come from an infallible spirit , no lesse then Scripture ; yet traditions are the Word of God , because they are heard and constantly believed : But the Holy Scripture is the Word of God , because written by the inspiration of the holy spirit . Q. 2. Art. 1. Dub. 4. pag. 83. And therefore he maketh two sorts of traditions , some meerly Divine , vvhich the Apostles received either immediately from the Holy Ghost , or from the mouth of Christ , as those touching the matter and form of the Sacraments : Others ( saith he ) are properly Apostolick , as those touching the Lent Fast , instituted by the Apostles . ib. tract . de trad . Q. Vnic . Dub. 1. Traditiones ( inquit ) per apostolos traditae , aliae sunt Divin● , quas immediatè ipsi a spiritu sancto dictante , v●l ex ore Christi acceperunt ; ut de materia et potissimum de formis sacramentorum ; aliae autem propri● dicuntur Apostolica , ut de Iejunijo Quadragesimali , quod Apostoli I●stituerunt . Hence it is evident , if Papists cannot but be condemned of impious additions to the Scriptures , by these places , Deut. 4. Deut. 12. Formalists are equally deep in the same crime : and the same is the answer of Malderus , ibid. Dub. 2. vetat . Apoc. 22. Ne quis audeat Divinam prophetiam depravare , assuendo aliquid aut abradendo . Turrianus , tom . de fide . spe . et cha . de traditio . disp . 20. Dub. 2. pag. 255. Respondetur Joannem planè probibere corruptionem Libri illius , non tamen prohibet ne alij Libri scribantur , vel alia Dogmata tradantur . Stapletonus , Relect. Prin. fidei Doct. Contaver . 4. q. 1 ▪ Art. 3. Sed non prohibet vel legis interpretationem per sacerdotes faciendam ( imò hoc disertè prescribit , Deut. 17. ) Vel aliquid aliud in fidem admittendum qúod lege scriptâ non contineatur . Alioqui quicquid postea prophet● predicaverunt , et Divinis Scripturis adjectum est , contra hoc dei mandatum factum censeri debet . Learned D. Roynald Answereth , Apolog. Thes . de sac . Script . pag. 211 , 212. and saith : This very Law of Moses promiseth life Eternall to those that love the Lord vvith all their heart , and , that the Prophets added to the Writings of Moses , no Article of Faith necessary to be believed ▪ but did expound and apply to the use of the Church , in all the parts of piety and Religion , that vvhich Moses had taught . Lorinus , followeth them in Deut. 4. 1. Christus ( inquit ) et Apostoli pentateucho , plura adjecerunt , immò in vetere Testamento , Iosue , Prophetae , Reges , Christ ( saith he ) and the Apostles added many things to the five Books of Moses ; yea , in the Old Testament , Ioshua , the Prophets and the Kings , David and Solomon , did also adde to Moses . But the truth is , suppose any should arise after Moses , not called of God to be a Canonick writer , Prophet , or Apostle , and should take on him to write Canonick Scripture , though his additions for matter were the same Orthodox and sound Doctrine of Faith and manners , which are contained in the Law of Moses and the Prophets ; he should violate this Commandment of God : Thou shalt not adde . For Scripture containeth more then the sound matter of Faith ; it containeth a formall , a heavenly form , stile , Majesty and expression of Language , which for the form , is sharper then a two edged sword , piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit , and of the joynts and marrow , and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart , Heb. 4. 12. If therefore , the Prophets and Apostles had not had a Commandment of God to write Canonick Scripture , which may be proved from many places of the Word , they could not have added Canonick Scripture to the writings of Moses . But the Answer of D. Roynald , is sufficient and valid against Papists , who hold that their Traditions are beside , not contrary to the Scripture ; just as Formalists do , who say the same for their unwritten Positives of Church-policy : But our Divines Answer , That traditions beside the Scripture , are also traditions against the Scripture , according to that , Gal. 1. 8. But if we or an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , beside that which we have preached unto you , Let him be accursed : And Papists more ingenious then Formalists in this , confesse , That , if that of the Apostles , Gal. 1. 8. be not restricted to the written Word , but applyed to the Word of God in its Latitude , as it comprehendeth both the written word or Scripture , and the unwritten word or Traditions ; then beside the word is all one with this , contrary to the word , which Formalists constantly deny . For Lorinus the Jesuit saith , Comment . In Deut. 4. 2. Quo pacto Paulus Anathèma dicit , Gal. 1. 8. Iis , qui aliud Evangelizant preter id quod ipsi Evangelizaverit , id est , adversum et contrarium . So doth Cornelius a Lapide , and Estius expound the place , Gal. 1. 8. And they say , that Paul doth denounce a Curse against those that would bring in a new Religion and Judaism beside the Gospel : But withall , they teach , that the Traditions of the Church are not contrary to Scripture , but beside Scripture ; and that the Church which cannot e●re , and is led in all truth , can no more be accused of adding to the Scripture , then the Prophets , Apostles and Evangelists who wrote after Moses , can be accused of adding to Moses his writings ; because the Prophets , Apostles and Evangelists , had the same very warrant to write Canonick Scripture , that Moses had ; and so the Church hath the same warrant to adde Traditions to that which the Prophets , Evangelists and Apostles did write ; which they had to adde to Moses ; And therefore the Councel of Trent saith , S. 4. c. 1. That , unwritten traditions coming either from the mouth of Christ , or the ditement of the holy spirit , are to be recieved and Religiously Reverenced with the like pious affection and Reverence that the holy Scriptures are received , Pari pietatis affectu ac Reverentiâ ; And the truth is , laying down this ground , that the Scripture is unperfect , and not an adequat rule of Faith and manners , as Papists do ; then it must be inconsequent , that because Traditions are beside the Scripture , which is to to them but the half of the Word of God ; Yea , it followeth not , this Popish ground supposed , that Traditions are therefore contrary to the Scripture , because beside the Scripture , no more then it followeth that the Sacraments of the New Testament , Baptisme , and the Supper of the Lord , in all their positive Rites and Elements are not ordained and instituted in the Old Testament ; and in that sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , beside the Old Testament ; that therefore they are against the Old Testament ; though we should imagine they had been added in the New Testament , without all warrant of speciall direction from God , by the sole will of men ; or because some Ceremonials commanded of God , are not commanded in the Morall Law or Decalogue , either expresly or by consequence ; and so these Ceremonials , though instituted by the Lord , be beside the Morall Law ; that therefore they are contrary to the Morall Law : Yea , to come nearer , because the third Chapter of the Book of Genesis , containing the Doctrine of mans fall and misery , and Redemption by the promised seed , is beside the first and second Chapters of the same Book , it doth not follow that it is contrary , or that Moses adding the third Chapter , and all the rest of the five Books , did therefore ●ail against this precept , Thou shalt not adde to that which I command thee : for certain it is , that there are new Articles of Faith in the third chapter of Genesis , which are neither in the first two Chapters expresly , nor by just consequence ; but if the Church or any other of Jews or Gentiles should take upon them to adde the third Chapter of Genesis to the first and second , except they had the same warrant of Divine inspiration that Moses had to adde it , that addition had been contrary to the first two Chapters , and beside also , and a violation of the Commandment of not adding to the word ; so do Formalists and the Prelate Vsher in the place cited presuppose that the Scripture excludeth all Traditions of Papists , because the Scripture is perfect in all things belonging to faith and manners , but it excludeth not all Ceremonies , which are left to the disposition of the Church , and be not of Divine , but of Positive and humane Right : Hence it must infer the principle of Papists , that the Scripture is not perfect in all Morals , for it is a Morall of Decency and Religious signification , that a childe be dedicated to the service of Christ , by the sign of the crosse . Now what can be said to thi● , I know not , but that the sufficiency , and perfection of scripture doth no whit consist in holding forth Ceremonials ; but only in setting down doctrinals . Why ? and Papists say the same , that the scripture is perfect , though it teach us not any thing of tradionals in speciall , yet in generall it doth hold forth the traditions of the church . So Tostat . Abulens . in Deut. 4. v. 2. ad lit . saith , Hic commendatur lex ex perfectione , quia perfecto , nec addi potest , nec auferri debet : Here the Law of God is commended ( saith he ) from its perfection , and that is perfect , to which nothing can be added , and from which nothing should be taken : Yea , so far forth is the scripture perfect , in the Articles of Faith , that Castro in summa . c. 8. Canus locor . Theolog. l. 2. c. 7. and l. 4. c. 4. and Tannerus tom . 3. in 22. disp . 1. de fide . Q. 1. dub . 7. saith , We are not now to wait for any new revelation of any verity unknown to the Apostles , Et nihil novi definiri ab ecclesia Apostolis incognitum , and all verities now revealed were implicitely believed by the Apostles , and contained in Vniversall generall precepts , as that the Saints are to be worshipped , that Canonicall Books containeth the word of God : the Bishops of Rome are the true successors of Peter , and Catholick pastors , &c. and he saith , Quod ecclesia non posset novum fidei articulum condere , communiter etiam docent Scholastici in 3. dis . 25. & he subscribeth to that truth of Vincentius Lyrinensis , c. 17. In ecclesia nulla nova Dogmata procudi , sed pretiosam divini Dogmatis Gemmam exsculpi , fideliter cooptari , adornari sapienter , ut intelligatur illustrius , quod antea obscurius credebatur : No new points of saith , or manners are forged in the Church , but the precious pearl of divine truth is in it polished , faithfully applied and wisely illustrated , that they may be more clearly understood , which before was more obscurely beleeved ; so that to say , the perfection of scripture consisteth not in particularizing all the small positives of policy , is no more then Papists say of the perfection of the scripture in their traditions . 2. Moses speaketh both of the Morall and Ceremoniall Law , called by the names of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Statutes rights , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Judgements and Laws whatsoever extolled by David , Psal . 119. As his delight , his joy , his heritage , his songs in the house of his pilgrimages , and of both he saith , that there is life in keeping them : Now the Ceremonies of Moses had an exceeding great excellency in looking to Christ , and being shadows of good things to come , Heb. 10. 1. And our Ceremonies have the same aspect upon Christ : Why ? but the day of the commemoration of Christs Death , Nativity , Ascension ; Dedication to Christ , by a Crosse in the Aire , should have the same influence and impression on our hearts ( if they be lawfull ) that the like Ceremonies and Laws had upon Davids spirit , Christ being the object and soul of both ? 2. Of these Ceremonies and Laws , Moses faith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 6. for this is your wisdom , and your understanding in the sight of the Nations : Why ? but these same Ceremonies looking with a broader and fuller face on Christ already come ( if Christ have put any life of lawfulnesse in them ) then their dim shadows of old , should also be our : wisdom in the hearing of Pagans , who know not God ? 3. It is a wonder to me that the learned Master Prynne should say that the place , Deut. 4. speaketh nothing of Church-Government and Ceremonies , but only of Doctrines of Canonicall Books : For that is as much as to say the place speaketh nothing of Divine Ceremonies , but only of divine Ceremonies , for what a number of Divine Ceremonies and Laws are in the Law of Moses , which were given by the Lord himself ? as is clear by the words , ver . 1. Now therefore hearken , O Israel , unto the Statutes and judgements that I teach you , that ye may live , and v. 5. Behold I have taught you Statutes and judgments , which the Lord my God commanded me , v. 8. And what nation is there so great , that hath statutes and judgements so Righteous , as all this Law which I set before you this day ? Now of all this Law the Lord saith , v. 2. Ye shall not adde unto the Word which I commanded you , Neither shall ey diminish . The Learned and Reverend Mr Prynne , must restrict this word of the Law , which can admit of no addition , to some speciall Law , either the Morall only , or the judiciall and Ceremoniall only , not to the former ; for then additions to the Decalogue only , should be forbidden ; this never man taught : Stapleton , indeed , Relect. Prin. fid . Doctrin , cont . 4. Q. 1. Art. 3. restricteth it to the Ceremoniall Law only ; but Moses maketh it a Law as large , v. 2. as the word which God Commandeth : And , as ( saith he ) v. 5. the statutes and the judgements which the Lord Commanded me , v. 8. All this Law , Deut. 31. 9. This written Law delivered to the Priests and kept in the Ark , the Law that all Israel heard read , v. 11. Of which it is said , v. 24. When Moses had made an end of writing of the words of this Law in a Book , untill they were finished . Now this was the whole five Books of Moses : And were there nothing of Church-Government in Moses Law ? What shall we then say of the High Priest , his calling , Office , habit , of the Priests , Levites , their charge , calling , attire , of the Law of the Leaper , his healing , his extrusion out of the Camp , of the Law of those that were defiled with the dead , of their qualification who were to be Circumcised , who were to eat the Passeover , or who not , who were to enter into the house of God , and Congregation , who not ; not a few of these , touching Church-Government , are included in the Law that God Commanded Israel , as their wisdom . 4. That there were many additions made to the service of God in the Temple , not mentioned by Moses , is nothing to purpose , except it be proved that these additions were made by the Church , without any word of God , the con●rary whereof is evident , for the Temple and whole patern thereof , was delivered in writing by the Lord to David , 1 Chron. 28. 11. 19. If Formalists will have no Laws made but by Moses , as the only Law-giver , they have as good reason to say , That Moses was the only Canonick writer , and none but he , which is absurd . Or , 2. That Moses by his own spirit was a Law-giver , and had active influence in excogitating the Law ; We conceive that Protestants are to own this Doctrine , which Tostatus imputes to us as Hereticks , Com. in Loc. Q. 2. Quasi Moses nudus minister & relator verborum ( dti ) esset , & non legem conderet : As if Moses were a meer servant , and a naked reporter of the Lords Law and words , and not a Law-maker . For in the making of Laws and Divine institutions , we judge that all the Canonick writers were meer patients , as the people are ; for God is the Commander , and Moses the person Commanded , and a meer servant , Deut. 4. 5. Mal. 4. 4. Heb. 3. 3 , 4 , 5. And Moses and all Canonick writers were only to receive the word at Gods mouth , and to hear it , Ezek. 3. 8. As meer servants ; and in this the Church of Prophets and of Apostles , and the Church that now is , were alike : I know no Authority of the one above the other . Indeed , in writing and relating to the Church , the will of God , and the Scriptures ; Canonick writers are agents inspired with the Holy spirit , immediately breathing on them in Prophecying and in writing Scripture . But the Proclaimer of a Law , as such hath no influence in making the Law : Let it be also remembred , that as Papists say two things to the place , so do Formalists . 1. That it is not against Ceremonies . 2. That the Church is limited in making Ceremonies beside the Word , that they may not make them too numerous and burdensome : This I make good in the words of a famous Iesuit , who citeth the words of a Learned Papist , approving them . Lorinus , Coment . in Loc. Refellit idem Oleaster Hereticos hinc inserentes institui , non , posse Ceremonias ac ritus novos circa cultum dei : Quam vis ipse optat moderationem in preceptis ac censuris , ut facilius & suavius possint servari : To whom I oppose that golden sentence of a man , endued with the spirit of God above any Papist . Calvin . Com. in Deut. 4. v. 2. Insignis locus , quo apertè damnatur quicquid hominum ingenio excogitari potest . Ibid. Quoniam preposter â lasciviâ rapitur totus ferè mundus ad cultus fictitios , qui tamen precise une verbo damnantur , ubi deus ita jubet suos acquiescere positae legi , ne justiores esse appetant , quam illic docentur . All Worship is precisely condemned here , or any thing devised about the Worship by the wit of men . I would here meet with a Grand exception of Mr. Hooker , Eccles . Polic. 3. Book , pag. 111. Their distinction of matters of substance , and of circumstance , though true , will not serve ; for be they great things , or be they small , if God have Commanded them in the Gospel , and ( if ) his Commanding them in the Gospel do make them unchangeable , there is no reason that we should change the one more then the other ; if the authority of the maker do prove their unchangeablenesse which God hath made , then must all Laws which he hath made , be necessarily for ever permanent , though they be but of circumstances only , and not of Substance . Ans . 1. Our distinction of matters of substance and circumstance rightly taken , will serve the turn : But the mistake is , in that 1. Many things are but circumstances of worship , such as are Positives and Religious significant Ceremonies to Formalists , that are not so to us , for to wear a surplice in sacrificing to Jupiter , were to make the Act of wearing that Religious habit , an act of Religious honouring of Jupiter , but to wear Surplice and to sacrifice in that habit to Iupiter at eight of clock in the morning , rather then at ten , in this place Physicall , rather then this , is no worshipping of Iupiter , but a meer Physicall circumstance , neither up , nor down to the worship , and time and place Physicall , are neither worship , nor Religious means of worship : 2. Time , and Place , Name , Country , Form , Figure , Habit or Garments , to hold off injuries of Sun and Heaven as such ●re never commanded , never forbidden of God , and therefore the change of these circumstances can be no change of a Commandment of God : We never advanced circumstances , as such to the orbe and spheare of Morals ; Formalists do so advance their Ceremonies , and therefore if God command Surplice , though by the intervening authority of his Church , such cannot be altered , except God command to alter the Religious signification of white linnen , but we know not where God hath commanded the alteration of any Ceremonies , except that , the Lords coming in the flesh , as a thing to come , must alter all Ceremonies which shadow forth Christ to come , when the body Christ is come already : Let us know such a ground for alteration of corner Cap , Altar , Surplice , except to drive such Oxen out of the Temple . 3. We hold that the Lords commanding such a thing in the Gospel , is a reason why it should be necessarily permanent for ever , except the Lord hath commanded it should be for a time only , as he commanded Moses's Ceremonies , and so Gods Authority of commanding a thing to be unchangeably in his worship , is a reason why it should be unchangeably in his worship ; and his commanding any thing to be for a time only , and alterably in his worship , is a reason why it should be for a time only , & alterably in his worship ; so to us Gods Commandment is a reason , why his own Ceremonies and Sacraments of the New Testament should be in the Church , because the Law-giver hath in scripture commanded them to be : and the reason why Hookers surplice and crossing should not be , is because he hath commanded no such thing : Now the reasons of alteration of any Laws in the Gospel , is from God , never from the Church : as 1. If God immediately inspire Moses to make a tabernacle , and thereafter inspire David and Solomon to make the Temple in the place of the tabernacle , and give them no Commandment for a tabernacle , its evident that God hath altered and removed the Tabernacle , and that the alteration is not from David nor Solomon : 2. If God command types and Ceremonies to be in his Church , till the body Christ come , Col. 2. 17. then when Christ is come , and his coming sufficiently published to the world , then are his own Ceremonies altered , and removed ; but not by the discretion of Peter and Paul , or the Church , but by God himself . 3. When God commandeth such Offices to be in his house , which dependeth immediately upon his own immediate will of giving gifts essentially required to these Offices , then these offices are so long in his Church , as God is pleased by his immediate will to give these gifts ; and when God denyeth these gifts essentially requisite , sure it is , his immediate wil hath altered and removed the office , not the will of the Church , so the Lord hath alterd and removed these Offices and gifts of Apostles , who could speak with tongues , and seal their doctrine with Miracles , Evangelists , Prophets extraordinarily inspired , gifts of healing , &c. 4. Some things are not matters of worship at all , but of goods , as the community of goods , love-Feasts , matters of civill conversation , these are only in their morality , as touching distribution to the necessities of the Saints , and brotherly kindenesse , unalterable , and no otherwise . Now for these things that are smaller or weightier , we hold they are not in their weightinesse or smallnesse of importance to be considered , but as the Authority of God hath imprinted a necessity on them , so are they obligatory to us : I am obliged to receive this as scripture , that Paul left his cloak at Troas ; no lesse then this , Christ came into the world to save sinners , in regard of Canonicall authority stamped upon both : R. Hooker with other Formalists , Will have the lightnesse of matter to make the Law alterable : Truly to eat of the Tree of knowledge of good and ill , being put in the ballance with the love of God in it self , is but a light thing ; yet the breach of that Law involved all the world in condemnation . And what else is this , but that which Papists say , that there be two sort of things in scripture ? so saith Cornelius a Lapide Comem . on 2 Tim. 3. 16. 1. The Law and the Prophets , these God revealed and dyted to Moses and the Prophets ; but there are other things in Scripture , as Histories and morall exhortations , which Canonick writers learned either by hearing , seeing , reading or meditation , there was no need these should be dyted , by the inspiration of the holy Spirit , for they know them themselves , though they were assisted : 2. Excited by the holy spirit to write ; Conceptum , & memoriam eorum quae sciebant , non iis suggessit spiritus sanctus , sed inspiravit ut hunc potius conceptum , quam illum scriberent , & omnes eorum sententias & conceptus ordinavit , digessit , & direxit spiritus sanctus , v. g. Vt hanc sententiam primò , illam secundò , aliam tertiò collocarent : Yet Estius saith on the place , The Scriptures are given by divine inspiration , ita ut non solum sententiae , sed & verba singula & verborum ordo , ac tota dispositio fit a deo , tanquam per seipsum loquente ac ▪ scribente : So as not only the sentences , but every word , and the order and disposition of words is of , or from God , as if he were speaking and writing himself . Now for the additions Canonicall , that the Prophets and Apostles made to the writing of Moses : I hope Papists and Formalists cannot with any forehead alledge them , to prove that the Church may adde Traditions , and alterable Positives of Church-Policy to the written word of God , except upon the same ground , they conclude , That the Church now hath the same immediatly inspired spirit , that the Prophets and Apostles had , and that our Prelats saw the visions of God , when they saw but the visiones aulae ; the visions of Court , and that their calling was , as Pauls was , Gal. 1. 1. not of men , neither by men , but by Iesus Christ : When as it is not by Divine right , and was both of the King , and by Court : 2. Except they infer that the Church that now is , may adde Canonicall and Scripturall additions to the Scripture ; for such additions the Prophets and Apostles added to the writings of Moses : and 3. that that precept , Thou shalt not adde , &c. was given to the Lord himself to binde up his hands , that no Canonick Scripture should ever be , but the only writings of Moses , which is ( as some write ) the dream of Saduces , whereas inhibition is given to the Church of God , not to God himself , for what the Prophets and Apostles added , God himself added ; yea , to me it is a doubt ( while I be better informed ) if the Lord did ever give any power of adding to his Scripture at all , without his own immediate inspiration , to either Prophet or Apostle ; or that God did never command Moses , or Prophet or Apostle to write Canonick Scripture of their own head , or that his Commandment to write Scripture , was any other then an immediate inspiration , which essentially did include every syllable and word that the Apostles and Prophets were to write : For I do not coaceive , that 1. God gave to Apostles and Prophets power to devise a Gospel and write it : I suppose Angels or men could not have devised it ; yea , that they could no more have devised the very Law of nature , then they could create such a piece , as a reasonable soul , which to me is a rare and curious book , on which essentially is written by the immediate finger of God , that naturall Theology , that we had in our first creation . 2. I do not conceive , that as Princes and Nobles do give the Contents , or rude thoughts of a curious Epistle to a Forraign Prince , to their Secretary , and go to bed and sleep , and leaves it to the wit and eloquence of the Secretary , to put it in forme and stile , and then signes it , and seals it without any more ado ; so the Lord gave the rude draughts of Law and Gospel , and all the pins of Tabernacle and Temple , Church-officers , and Government , and left it to the wit and eloquence of Shepherds , Heardsmen , Fishers , such as were the Prophets , Moses , David , Amos ; and Peter and divers of the Apostles , who were unlettered men , to write words and stile as they pleased , but that in writing every jot , tittle , or word of Scripture , they were immediatly inspired , as touching the matter , words , phrases , expression , order , method , majesty , stile and all : So I think they were but Organs , the mouth , pen and Amanuenses ; God as it were , immediately dyting , and leading their hand at the pen , Deut 4. 5. Deut. 31. 24 , 25 , 26. Mal. 4. 4. 2 Pet. 1. 19. 20 , 21. 2 Tim. 3. 16. Gal. 1. 11 , 12. 1 Cor. 11. 23. so Luk. 1. 70. God borrowed the mouth of the Prophets ; As he spake by the mouth of his holy Prophets , which hath been since the world began : Now when we ask from Prelates what sort of additionall , or accidentall worship , touching Surplice , Crosse , and other Religious Positives of Church ▪ Policy , it is , that they are warranted to adde to the word , and how they are distinguished from Scriptures , Doctrinals : They give us these Characters of it , 1. God is the Author of Doctrinals , and hath expressed them fully in scripture : But the Church is the Author of their Accidentals , and this is essentiall to it , that it is not specified particularly in scripture , as Bread and Wine , Taking and Eating in the Lords Supper is ; for then it should be a Doctrinall point , and not Accidentall . 2. It is not in the particular a point of faith and manners , as Doctrinals are : But hear the very Language of Papists ; for Papists putteth this essentiall Character on their Tradition , that it is not written , but by word of mouth derived from the Apostles , and so distinguished from the written word ; for if it were written in scripture , it should not be a Tradition . So the Jesuit Malderus , in 22. tom . de virtut . de obj . fidei Q. 1. Dub. 3. Pro Apostolica traditione habendum est , quod eum non inveneatur in Divinis literis , tamen Vniversa tenet ecclesia , nec consiliis institutum , sed semper retentum 2. That the Traditions are necessary , and how far Papists do clear , as I have before said ; for the Church may coin no Articles of faith , these are all in Scripture . For the Iews two Suppers , and their additions to the passeover , as Hooker saith , and their fasting till the sixth hour every Feast day , we reject as dreams , because they are not warranted by any word of institution ; not to adde , that the Church of the Jews never took on them to command the observation of these forgeries , under the pain of Church-censures , as Papists and prelats did their Crossing and their Surplice . Hooker saith , A Question it is , whither containing in Scripture , do import expresse setting down in plain terms , or else comprehending in such sort , that by reason , we may thence conclude all things which are necessary to salvation . The Faith of the Trinity , the Co-eternity of the Son with the Father , are not the former way in Scripture ; for the other , let us not think , that as long as the World doth indure , the wit of man shall be able to sound to the bottom of that which may be concluded out of Scripture . — Traditions we do not reject , because they are not in Scripture ; but because they are neither in Scripture , nor can otherwise sufficiently , by any reason , be proved to be of God. That which is of God , and may be evidently proved to be so , we deny not ; but it hath in its kinde , although unwritten , yet the self same force and authority with the Written Laws of God. — Such as are alterable Rites and Cystomes , for being Apostolicall , it is not the manner of delivering them to the Church ; but the Author from whom they proceed , which gave them their force and credit . Ans . 1. The consequences of Scriptures are doublesse many , and more then are known to us , and the particulars of that Government that we contend for , are in Scripture , that is , there should be no Government , but what is either expresly in Scripture , or may be made our , by just consequence , we believe , if they cannot be proved from Scripture , let them fall as mens hay and stubble . But in the mean time , these are two different questions : Whither there be an immutable Platform of Discipline in the Word ? Or whither ours be the only Platform and no other ? If we carry the first , Ceremonies must fall . And certainly , in all reason , we are on the surest side : If we cannot observe all that is written , it is not like that God hath laid upon us unwritten burdens . 2. Hooker doth not reject all the Popish Traditions , as our Divines Reformed do ; because they are not warranted by the Word ; so , that if the Images of God and Christ , and the Worshipping of them , and Purgatory , and the Supremacy of the Pope , can be proved to be of God , though they be no more in Scripture , then Crossing and Surplice ; then would he receive all these , as Having the self same force and authority with the Written Laws . Now we know no other weightier Argument to prove there 's no Purgatory , but because the scripture speaketh of Heaven and Hell , and is silent of Purgatory . 2. That naturall reason can warrant a positive instituted Worship , such as Surplice , betokening Pastorall Holinesse , without any Scripture , is a great untruth ▪ for naturall reason may warrant new Sacraments , as well as new Sacramentals . 3. If Traditions have their force and credit from God , not from the manner of delivering them , that is , from being contained in scripture , or not contained in it ; then certainly they must be of the same Divine necessity with scripture : For whither Christ Command that the Baereans believe in the Messiah , by the Vocall Preaching of Paul , or by the written scriptures of the Prophets and Apostles , it is all one , it is the same word , and coming from Christ , must be of the same Divine authority : But this is to beg the question , for that we are to believe no unwritten tradition ; because it is unwritten , to have the self same force and authority with the Written Laws of God. For Lorinus , Cornelius a Lapide , Com. in 4. Deuter. Estius , Com. in . 2. Thes 2. 15. Bellarmine , Tannerus , Malderus , Becanus , say , Whither the Lord deliver his minde to us in his Written Scripture , or by Tradition , it is still the Word of God , and hath authority from God. But the truth is , to us it is not the Word of God , if it be not a part of the Counsel of God written in Moses , or the Prophets and Apostles ; for though the Word have authority only from God , not from the Church , nor from men , or the manner of delivering of it , by word or writ ; yet we with the Fathers and Protestant Divines , and evidence of scripture , stand to that of Basilius , Homil. 29. Advers . c●l●mnian●es . S. Trinit . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Believe what are written , vvhat are not vvritten ●eek not after : And so , seek not after Sur●lice , Crossi●g , and the like : And that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Every word ( and so this , That Crossing Surplice , are Religious signes of spirituall duties ) and every thing or action , must be made good by the Testimony of the heavenly inspired Scripture ; these things that are good ( and so Religiously decent and significant ) may be fully confirmed , and these that are evil , corfounded : And to us , for our Faith and practise , if it be not Law and Testimony , it is darknesse , and not light . And as Gregor . Nyssen . the Brother of Basyl saith , Dialog . de anim . et Resurrect . tom . 2. ed. Grecola● . pag. 639. Edit . Gre● . pag. 325. That only must be acknowledged for truth , in which is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the seal of the Scriptures Testimony , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And how shall it be true to us i● Scripture say it not ? Or how shall it appear to us to be from God ? For Cyril Alexandrin . saith , What the holy Scripture saith not ( such as are your Positives of mens devising ) how shall we receive it , and account it , amongst things that are true ? And it is not that which Hereticks of old said , for their Heresies to say ( ●s Hooker doth ) that any thing may be proved to be of God , which is not written in Scripture : For saith Hieronimus , in Hag. c. 1. Sed & alia quae absque authoritate & testimoniis Scripturarum , quasi Traditione Apostolica sponte reperiunt atque confingunt , percutit Gladius dei . The Scripture doth bar the door upon Hereticks , saith Chrysostome , — And he is a Theef that taketh another unlawfull way then the Scripture . And by what Argument can reason without Scripture prove that Crosse and Suplice are of God : But by that same reason , Papists without Scripture , can , and may prove their Traditions to be of God ? And if we admit reason , and exclude Scripture , it is as easie to prove their Traditions , as our Positive additions to Worship : And what Answers Papists give for their Traditions , to ●lude the power of Scripture , and evidence of Testimonies of fathers , all these same are given by Prelats for their additions ; to say nothing that Hooker asserteth unwritten Traditions to be Gods Word ; and in the very stile of the Councel of Trent , we are to acknowledge Traditions , though unwritten , yet to have the self same authority and force with the Written Laws of God. And shal the Surplice and Crosse and such stuffe , be of the self same force and authority with the Evangel according to Luke and John : But what wonder ? For Hooker holdeth , that we have no other way to know the scripture to be the Word of God , but by Tradition , which Popish Assertion holden by him and Chillingworth , to me , is to make the Traditions of men the object of our Faith. Hooker : About things easie and manifest to all men by Common sense , there needeth no higher Consultation , because a man whose wisdom is for weighty affairs admired , would take it in some disdain to have his Counsel solemnly asked about a toy ; so the meannesse of some things is such , that to search the Scriptures of God for the ordering of them , were to derogate from the Reverend Authority of the Scripture , no lesse then they do , by whom Scriptures are in ordinary talking very idely applied unto vain and Childish trifles . Ans . 1. It is a vain comparison to resemble God to an earthly wise man in this ; for a King of Kings , such as Artaxerxes , if he were building a stately Palace for his Honour and Magnificence , would commit the drawing of it , the frame , the small pins , rings , bowles , to the wisdom of a Master of work , skilled in the Mathematicks , and not trouble his own Princely head with every small pin ; but this is because he is a man , and cometh short of the wisdom , skill , and learning of his servants . 2. Because , how his Honour and Magnificence be declared in every small pin of that Palace , is a businesse that taketh not much up the thoughts of a stately Prince . The contrary of both these are true in the Lord our God , his wisdom is above the wisdom of Moses , and Moses cannot frame a Tabernacle or a Temple for Gods Honour in the least pin or s●uffer , with such wisdom as the only wise God can do . 2. The Lord is more jealous and tender of his own Honour , in the meanes and smallest way of Illustrating of it : Yea , in the smallest Pin , then earthly Princes are , for earthly Princes may Communicate with their inferiours the glory of curious works set forth , as speaking monuments of their honour ; the Lord who will not give his glory to another ; never did communicate the glory of devising worship , or the Religious means of worshipping and honouring his glorious Majesty to men . 2. God hath thus ●ar condiscended in his wisdom , to speak particularly in written Oracles of every Pin , Ring , tittle , Officer of his house , of every Signe , Sacrament , Sacramentall never so mean and small ; Ergo , It is no derogation from the dignity of Scripture , to have a mouth to aske counsell , where God hath opened his mouth to give Counsell in written Oracles : 3. There is nothing positive in Gods worship so small , as that we may dare to take on us to devise it of our own head . 4. Hooker contradicteth himself ; he said the Ceremonies have their authority from God , and though unwritten have the self same force and authority with the written Laws of God , pag. 44. Here he will have the unwritten positives so small and far inferiour to written Scripture , that to aske for scripture to warrant such small toys , is to derogate from the reverend Authority and Dignity of the Scripture : so Ceremonies pag. 46. are but Toyes , unworthy to be written with Scripture , but p. 44. They have the self same force and authority with written Scripture . Hooker . It is unpossible to be proved , that only the Schoole of Christ in his word is able to resolve us , what is good and evil : for what if it were true concerning things indifferent , that unlesse the word of the Lord had determined of the free use of them , there could have been no Lawfull use of them at all , which notwithstanding is untrue ; because it is not the Scriptures setting down things indifferent , but their not setting them down as necessary , that doth make them to be indifferent . Ans . Then because the scrip●ure hath not forbidden the killing of our children to God , as a ●alse worship against the second Commandment , but only as an act of Homicide against the sixth Commandment , and hath not forbidden all the Jewish Ceremonies , so they have a new signification to point forth Christ already come in the flesh , these must all be indifferent : For let Formalists give me a Scripture to prove , that Circumcision , killing of Children , sacrificing of Beasts , are any wayes forbidden in this notion , but in that they are not commanded , or set down in the word as not necessary ? 2. Such Divinity I have not read ; That only the Schoole of Christ is not able to resolve us what is good and evil : I mean Morally good and evil . For Hooker pag. 54. Book 2. saith , The controversie would end , in which we contend , that all our actions are ruled by the word : If 1. we would keep our selves vvithin the compasse of morall actions , actions which have in them vice or vertue : 2. If we vvould not exact at their hands for every action , the knowledge of some place of Scripture , out of vvhich vve must stand bound to deduce it . Then it is like the School of Christ , the word can and doth teach us , what is a Morall action good or ill , an action in vvhich there is vertue or vice ; and to me it is a wonder , that the Old and New Testament , which containeth an exact systeme and body of all Morals , whither naturall or Civill , or supernaturall , should not be the only rule of all Morals . Now I finde that Mr. Hooker saith two things to this ; 1. That Scripture doth regulate all our Morall actions but not scripture only , for the Lavv of nature , and the most concealed instincts of nature , and other principles may vvarrant our actions : We move , ( saith he ) we sleep , vve take the Cup at the hand of our friend ; a number of things vve often do , only to satisfie some naturall desire , vvithout present expresse and actuall reference to any Commandment of God ; unto his glory , even these things are done vvhich vve naturally perform , and not only that vvhich naturally and spiritually vve do , for by every effect proceeding from the most concealed instincts of nature , his povver is made manifest . But it doth not therefore follovv , that of necessity we shall sin , unlesse vve expresly intend the glory of God , in every such particular . Ans . I speak of these more distinctly hereafter , here I answer , that as there be some actions in man purely and spiritually , but supernaturally morall , as to believe in Christ for Remission of sins , to love God in Christ : These the Gospel doth regulate . 2. There be some actions naturally morall in the substance of the act , as many things commanded , and forbidden in the Morall Law ; and these are to be regulated by the Law of nature and the Morall Law : 3. There be some actions mixed , as such actions in which nature , or concealed instincts of nature are the chief principles , yet in , and about these actions , as in their modification of time , place , and manner , and measure , there is a speciall morality , in regard of which they are to be ruled by the word , such mixed actions as these , that are mentioned by Hooker , As to move , sleep , take the cup at the hand of a friend , cannot be called simply morall , for to move may be purely naturall , as if a man against his will fall off a high place , or off a horse , to start in the sleep are so naturall , that I know not any morality in them ; but sure I am , for Nathaniel to come to Christ , which was also done by a naturall motion , is not a meer naturall action , proceeding from the most concealed instincts of nature ; so to sleep hath somewhat naturall in it , for beasts do sleep , beasts do move ; I grant they cannot take a cup at the hand of a friend , they cannot salute one another : ( It is Hookers instance ) but fancy sometimes in men do these , whereas conscience should do them : What is naturall in moving and sleeping , and what is common to men with beasts , I grant , Scripture doth not direct or regulate these acts of moving and sleeping ; we grant actions naturall and common to us , with beasts , need not the rule of the Word to regulate them : But this I must say ( I speak it , my Record is in Heaven , not to offend any ) Formalists , as such , and as Prelaticall , are irreligious and Profane : One of them asked a godly man , Will you have Scripture for giving your horse a peck of Oats , and for breaking winde , and easing or obeying nature ? And therefore they bring in these instances to make sport : But I conceive , sleeping moderately , to inable you to the service of God , as eating , drinking , that God may be glorified , 1 Cor. 10. 31. are also in the measure , & manner of doing , Morall , & so ruled by Scripture , and Scripture only , and not regulated by naturall instincts : But what is all this to the purpose ? are Surplice , Crossing , Saints-dayes , such actions as are common to us with beasts , as moving and sleeping are ? Or is there no more need that the Prelate be regulated in wearing his corner-Cap , his Surplice in Crossing , then a beast is to be ruled by Scripture in moving , in sleeping , in eating grasse ? 2. Expresse and actuall reference and intention to every Commandment of God , or to Gods glory in every particular action ; I do not urge , a habituall reference and intention I conceive is holden forth to us in Scripture : 1 Cor. 10. 31. 3. God by every effect , proceeding from the most concealed instinct of nature is made manifest in his power . What then ? the power of God is manifest in the Swallows building her nest ; Ergo , neither the Swallow in building her nest , nor the Prelate in Crossing an Infant in Baptisme to dedicate him to Christ , have need of any expresse or actuall reference to any Commandment of God or Gods glory : Truly , it is a vain consequence in the latter part , except Hooker make Surplice , Crossing , and all the mutable Frame of Church-Government to proceed from the most concealed instincts of nature , which shall be n●w Divinity to both Protestants and Papists : And I pray you , what power of God is manifest in a Surplice ? I conceive it is a strong Argument against this mutable frame of Government , that it is not in the power of men to devise , what Positive signes they please , without the word to manifest the power , wisdom and other attributes of God : For what other thing doth the two Books opened to us , Psal . 19. The Book of Creation and Providence ; and the Book of the Scripture , but manifest God in his nature and works , and mans misery and Redemption in Christ ? Now the Prelats and Papists devise a third blanke book of unwritten Traditions and mutable Ceremonials ▪ We see no Warrant for this book : 4. Hooker maketh a man in many Morall Actions , as in wearing a Surplice , in many actions flowing from concealed instincts of nature , as in moving , sleeping , like either the Philosophers , Civilian or Morall Athiest , or like a beast to act things , or to do by the meer instinct of nature . Whereas being created according to Gods Image , especially , he living in the visible Church , he is to do all his actions deliberate , even naturall and morall in Faith , and with a Warrant from scripture , to make good their Morality , Psa . 119. 9. Prov. 3. 23 , 24. 2 Cor. 5. 7. And truly Formalists give men in their Morals to live at random , and to walk , without taking heed to their wayes , according to Gods word . Hooker . It sufficeth that our Morall actions be framed , according to the Law of reason ; the generall axiomes , rules , and principles of which being so frequent in holy Scripture , there is no let , but in that regard , oven out of Scripture , such duties may be deduced by some kinde of consequence ( as by long circuit of deduction it may be , that even all truth out of any truth may be concluded ) howbeit no man be bound in such sort to deduce all his actions out of Scripture , as if either the place be to him unknown , whereon they may be concluded , or the reference to that place , not presently considered of , the action shall in that be condemned as unlawfull . Ans . 1. The Law of reason in Morals ( for of such we now speak ) is nothing but the Morall Law and will of God , contained fully in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament ; and therefore is not to be divided from the Scriptures ; if a man be ruled in that , he is ruled by Scripture : for a great part of the Bible , of the Decalogue , is Printed in the reasonable soul ▪ of man : As when he loveth his Parents , obeyeth his superiors , saveth his Neighbour in extream danger of death , because he doth these according to the Law of Reason , shall it follow that these actions which are expresly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Rom. 2. 14. the things or duties of the Law , are not warranted by expresse Scripture , because they are done according to the Law of naturall reason ? I should think the contrary most true . 2. Such duties ( saith he ) Morall duties ( I hope he must mean ) to God and our Neighbour , may be deduced by some kinde of consequence out of Scripture : But by what consequence ? Such as to Argue , Quidlibet ex quolibet . The Catechisme taught me long ago of duties to God and my Neighbour , that they are taught in the ten Commandments . Now if some Morall duties to God and man be taught in the ten Commandments , and some not taught there : 1. Who made this distinction of duties ? None surely but the Prelats and the Papists ; if the Scripture warrant some duties to God and our Neighbour , and do not warrant some , the Scripture must be unperfect . 2. The warranting of actions that may be service to God , or will-worship , or homicide by no better ground then Surplice and Crosse , can be warranted , or by such a consequence , as you may deduce all truth out of any truth , is no warrant at all ; the Traditions of Papists may thus be warranted . 3. Nor is the action to be condemned , as unlawfull in it self , because the agent cannot see by what consequence it is warranted by Scripture , it followeth only to him that so doth , it is unlawfull , Rom. 14. 14. In that he doth Bonum , non benè , a thing lawfull , not lawfully . 4. It is unpossible to deduce all truth out of any truth : For then because the Sun riseth to day , it should follow , Ergo , Crosse and Surplice are Lawfull : I might as well deduce the contrary , Ergo , they are unlawfull . Hooker : Some things are good in so mean a degree of goodnesse , that men are only not disproved , nor disallowed of God for them , as , Eph. 5. 20. No man hateth his own flesh , Matth. 5. 46. If ye do good unto them that do so to you , the very Publicans themselves do as much : They are worse then Infidels that provide not for their own , 1. Tim. 5. 8. The light of nature alone , maketh these actions in the sight of God allowable . 2. Some things are required to salvation by way of direct , immediate and proper necessity finall , so that without performance of them , we cannot in ordinary course be saved . — In these , our chiefest direction is from Scipture , for nature is no sufficient director what we should do to attain life Eternall . 3. Some things although not so required of necessity , that to leave them undone excludeth from salvation , are yet of so great dignity and acceptation with God , that most ample reward is laid up in Heaven for them , as Matth. 10. A Cup of cold Water shall not go unrewarded : And the first Christians sold their possessions , and 1 Thess . 2. 7. 9. Paul would not be burdensome to the Thessalonians : Hence nothing can be evil that God approveth , and he approveth much more then he doth Command , and the precepts of the law of Nature may be otherwise known then by the Scripture , then the bare mandat of Scripture is not the only rule of all good and evil , in the actions of Morall men . Ans . 1. The Popery in this Author ( in disputing for a Platform of Government ) that is up and down , and changeable at the will of men , made me first out of love with their way : for his first classe of things allowable by the light of Nature without Scripture , is far wide ; for Eph. 5. 20. That a man love his own flesh , is Commanded in the sixth Commandment , and the contrary forbidden : otherwise for a man to kill himself , which is self-hatred , should not be forbidden in Scripture , the very light of nature alone will forbid ungratitude in Publicans , and condemn a man that provideth not for his own : But that this light of nature excludeth Scripture and the Doctrine of Faith , is an untruth : for Hooker leaveth out the words that are in the Text , and most against his cause : He that provideth not for his own , is worse then an Infidel , and hath denied the Faith : Ergo , the Doctrine of Faith commandeth a man to provide for his own . What Morall goodnesse nature teacheth , that same doth the Morall Law teach , so the one excludeth not the other . 2. It is false , that Scripture only as con●adistinguished from the Law of Nature , doth direct us to Heaven : for both concurreth in a speciall manner , nor is the one exclusive of the other . 3. For his third classe it s expresly the Popish Works of supererogation , of which Hooker and Papists both give two Characters . 1. That they are not Commanded 2. That they merit a greater degree of glory : Both are false : To give a Cup of cold water to a needy Disciple , is commanded in Scripture , Isa . 57. 9 , 10. Matth. 25. 41 , 42. And the contrary punished with everlasting fire in Hell : For Paul not to be burdensome to the Thessalonians , and not to take stipend or wages for Preaching , is commanded , for considering the condition that Paul was in , was , 1 Thess . 2. 6. To seek glory of men , was a thing forbidden in Scripture , and so the contrary cannot be a thing not commanded ; and not to be gentle , v. 7. As the servant of God ought to be , even to the enemies of the truth , 1 Tim. 2. 24. Not to be affectionately desirous to impart soul & Gospel and all , to those to whom he Preached , as it is v. 8. is a sin forbidden , and for the merit of increase of glory , it is a dream . Hence I draw an Argument against this mutable form of Government : The changeable Positives of this Government , such as Crossing , Surplice and the like , are none of these three enumerated by Hooker . 1. They are not warranted by the Law of nature , for then all Nations should know by the light of nature , that God is decently worshipped in Crosse and linnen Surplice , which is against experience . 2. That these Positives are not necessary to salvation , with a proper finall necessity , as I take , is granted by all . 3. I think Crosse and Surplice , cannot deserve a greater measure of glory : for Formalists deny either merit or efficacy to their Positives . The Jesuit Tannerus , confirmeth all which is said by Hooker , as did Aquinas before him : And E●ki●s in his conference with Luther , and Oecolampadius , who say , for imagery and their Traditions ; that it is sufficient that the Church say such a thing is truth and to be done , and the scripture doth not gain-say it . SECT . V. Morall Obedience resolved ultimately in Scripture . FOR farther light in this point , it is a Question : What is the formall object of our obedience in all our our Morall actions ? that is , Whether is the Faith practicall of our obedience , & the obedience itself , in all the externals of Church Government resolved in this ultimately and finally . This and this we do , and this point of Government we believe and practise : because the Lord hath so appointed it , in an immutable Platform of Government in Scripture : or because the Church hath so appointed , or because there is an intrinsecall conveniency in the thing it self , which is discernable by the light of nature ? Ans . This Question is near of blood to the Controversie between Papists and us , concerning the formall object of our faith ▪ that is , Whither are we to believe the scripture to be the Word of God , because so saith the Church : or upon this objective ground , because the Lord so speaketh in his own Word : Now we hold , that scripture it self furnisheth light and faith of it self , from it self ; and that the Church doth but hold forth the light : as I see the light of the Candle , because of the light itself , not because of the Candlestick . Hence in this same very Question , the Iews were not to believe , that the smallest pin of the Tabernacle , or that any officer , High-Priest , Priest or Levite , were necessary , nor were they to obey in the smallest Ceremoniall observance ; because Moses and the Priests or Church , at their godly discretion , without Gods own speciall warrant said so : But , because so the Lord spake to Moses , so the Lord gave in writing to David and Solomon , 1 Chron. 28. 11. 19. And so must it be in the Church of the New Testament , in all the Positives of Government ; otherwise , if we observe Saints-dayes , and believe Crossing and Surplice , hath this Religious signification , because the Church saith so ; then is our obedience of conscience finally resolved in the Testimony of men so speaking , at their own discretion without any warrant of scripture . 2. To believe and obey in any Religious Positives , because it is the pleasure of men so to Command , is to be servants of men , and to make their will the formall reason of our obedience , which is unlawfull . If it be said , that we are to believe and Practise many things in naturall necessity , as to eat , move , sleep , and many circumstantials of Church-Policy , because the Law of naturall reason saith so ; and because there is an intrinsecall conveniency , and an aptitude to edifie , & to decore and beautifie in an orderly and a decent way the service of God , and not simply , because the Church saith so , nor yet because the Lord speaketh so in the Scripture , and therefore all our obedience is not Ultimately and finally resolved into the Testimony of the Scripture . I Answer , That there be some things that the Law of Nature commandeth , as to move , eat , sleepe ; and here with leave I distinguish Factum , the common practise of men from the jus , what men in conscience ought to do , as concerning the former , morall and naturall mens practise is all resolved in their own carnall will , and lusts , and so they eat , move and sleep , because nature , and carnall will , leadeth them thereinto , not because God in the Law of nature ( which I humbly conceive to be a part of the first elements and principles of the Morall Law , or Decalogue , and so a part of Scripture ) doth so warrant us to do ; and therefore the moving , eating , drinking of naturall Moralists , are materially lawfull and conforme to scripture , for God by the Law of nature commandeth both Heathen men , and pure Moralists within the visible Church , to do naturall acts of this kinde ; because the Lord hath revealed that to be his will in the Book of nature : But these Heathen do these acts , because they are suitable to their Lusts and carnall will , and not because God hath commanded them so to do in the Book of nature ; and this is their sin in the manner of doing though materially , Et quod substantiam actus , the action be good ; and the same is the sin of naturall men within the visible Church , and a greater sin ; for God not only commandeth them in the Law of nature , but also in Scripture to do all these naturall acts , because God hath revealed his will in these naturall actions , as they are morall to naturall men within the visible Church , both in the Law of nature , and in the scripture , and De jure they ought to obey , because God so commandeth in both , and in regard all within the visible Church , are obliged to all naturall actions in a spirituall way , though their eating , moving , sleeping be lawfull materially , Et quod substantiam actus , yet because they do them without any the least habituall reference to God , so commanding in natures Law and scripture , they are in the manner of doing , sinfull ; otherwise Formalists go on with Papists and Arminians to justifie the actions of the unregenerated , as simply Lawfull and good , though performed by them with no respect to God or his Commandment : 2. As concerning actions of Church-Policy , that cannot be warranted by the light of nature , and yet have intrinsecall conveniency and aptitude to edifie and decently to Accomodate the worship of God. I conceive these may be done , but not because the Church so commandeth , as if their commandment were the formall reason of our obedience , but because partly the light of the Law of reason , partly scripture doth warrant them ; but that Crosse and Surplice can be thus warranted is utterly denied : Again I conceive that there be two sort of positives in the externals of Government or worship : 1. Some Divine , as that there be in the Publique Worship , Prayers , Praising , Preaching , Sacraments , and these are substantials ; that there be such Officers , Pastors , Teachers , Elders and Deacons ; that there be such censures , as rebuking , Excommunication and the like , are morally Divine , or Divinely Morall : and when the Church formeth a Directory for worship and Government , the Directory it self is in the Form not simply Divine . And if it be said that neither the Church of the Jews , nor the Church Apostolique had more a written Directory , nor they had a written Leiturgy or book of Common Prayers or Publick Church-service : I answer , nor had either the Iewish or Apostolick Church any written Creed or systeme , written of fundamentall Articles , such as is that , which is commonly called the Apostolick Creed ; but they had materially in the scripture the Apostolick Creed ; and the Directory they had also the same way , for they practised all the Ordinances directed , though they had no written Directory in a formall contexture or frame : for Prayers , Preaching , Praising , Sacraments and Censures never Church wanted in some one order or other ▪ though we cannot say that the Apostolick Church had this same very order and forme : But a Leiturgy which is a commanded , imposed , stinted Form , in such words and no other , is another thing then a Directory as an unlawfull thing is different from a Lawfull : 2. There be some things Positive humane , as the Ordering of some parts , or worship , or Prayer , the forme of words or phrases , and some things of the Circumstantials of the Sacrament , as what Cups , Wood or Mettall , in these the Directory layeth a tie upon no man , nor can the Church in this make a Directory to be a Church Compulsory to strain men : And this way the Directory is not ordered and commanded in the frame and contexture , as was the Service-Book ; and the Pastor or people in these , are not properly Morall Agents , nor do we presse that scripture should regulate men in these . But sure in Crossing , in Surplice men must be Morall Agents , no lesse then in eating and drinking at the Lords-Supper , and therefore they ought to be as particularly regulated by Scripture in the one , as in the other . Quest . But who shall be judge of these things which you say are Circumstantials only , as time , place , &c. and of these that Formalists say are adjuncts and Circumstances of worship , though also they have a Symbolicall and Religious signification : must not the Church judge , what things are indifferent , what necessary , what are expedient , what Lawfull ? Answer , There is no such question imaginable , but in the Synagogue of Antichrist ; For as concerning Norma judi●andi , the Rule of judging , without all exception , the scripture ought to be the only rule and measure of all practicall truths , how Formalists can make the Scripture the rule of judging of unwritten Ceremonies which have no warrant in Scripture , more then Papists can admit scripture to regulate and warrant their unwritten Traditions , I see not , we yield that the Church is the Politick , Ministeriall , and visible judge of things necessary and expedient , or of things not necessary and expedient : But we know no such question in this Controversie , as who shall be judge : but supposing the Church to be a ministeriall judge , and the Scripture the infallible Rule , the question is , whether this judge have any such power , as to prescribe Laws touching things indifferent , and to injoyne these , though they have no warrant from Scripture , as things necessary , and to binde where God hath not bound . Quest . But doth not the Church determine things , that of themselves are indifferent ; as whether Sermon should begin at nine of clock , or ten in the morning , and after the Church hath past a determination for the dyet of ten a clock , the indifferency of either nine or ten is removed , and the practise without any warrant of Scripture restricted to one , for order and peace sake ; and why may not the like be done in Positives of Church-Government ? Ans . The truth is , the Church by her will putteth no determination on the time , but only ministerially declareth that which Gods providence accomodating it self to the season , climate , the conveniency of the congregation as they lie in distance from the place of meeting , hath determined already : But neither Providence , scripture , nor naturall reason hath determined , that there should be in every Diocesan Church a Monarch-Prelate , Pastor of Pastors , with majority of power of jurisdiction and ordination over Pastors , more then there should be one Pope , Catholick Pastor of the Catholick visible Church , or that Crossing should betoken Dedication to Christs service , only will as will must determine positive Religious observances , such as these are . SECT . VI. What Honour , Praise , Glory , Reverence , Veneration , Devotion , Service , Worship , &c. are . FOr the more clear opening of the ensuing Treatise , it is necessary to speak somewhat of worship and Adoration , and especially of these , 1. Honour . 2. Praise . 3. Glory , 4. Reverence . 5. Veneration . 6. Devotion . 7. Religion . 8. Service . 9. Worship . 10. Love. 11. Obedience . 12. Adoration . 1. Honour , is a testification of the excellency of any , Arist . Ethic. l. 8. c. 8. Aquinas . Honos est signum quoddam excellentiae . Honour is a signe or expression of Excellency in any , it doth not import any superiority in the party whom we honor , as Adoration doth . Praise , is a speciall honouring of any , consisting in words . Glory , is formally the effect of Honour , though it be taken , Pro claritatè , for the celebrity or renownednesse of any ; yet glory seemeth to be founded upon celebrity , as its foundation . Reverence is a sort of Veneration of a person for excellency connotating a sort of fear . Veneration is a sort of fear , and reverencing of a person : I see not well any difference between Reverence and Veneration , except that Veneration seemeth to be some more , and cometh nearer to Adoration : Devotion is the promptitude , cheerfulnesse , or spirituall propension of the will to serve God ; Religion is formally in this , when a man subjecteth himself to God , as to his supreame Lord , and thence ariseth to give him honour , as his God , and absolute Lord. The two integral parts of Religion , are the subjection of the reasonable creature to God. 2. An exhibition of honour ; if any object that the subjection of the creature to God is humility , not Religion , Raphael de la Torres in 22. tom . 1. de obj . adorat . q. 81. art . 1. disp . unic . n. 8. answereth that subjection to God , as it issueth from a principle of tendering due Honour to God for his excellency , its Religion ; but as it abandoneth the passion of hope in the way of attaining honour , it is an act of humility to God , as the giving of money for the paying of debt , is an act of justice ; but as it is given to moderate the desire of money , it is an act of Liberality . The acts of Riligion are of two sorts , some internall and elicite , as to Adore , Sacrifice , Pray , by these a man is rightly ordered toward the Honouring of God only : But there be other acts imperated and Commanded by Religion , which flow immediately from other vertues , as it may be from mercy and compassion to our brother , but are Commanded by Religion , as Jam. 1. 27. Pure Religion and undefiled before God and the Father , is this , to visit the father lesse and the widows , &c. Service is from the bond of subjection , to reverence God as an inferior or servant doth his Lord and Master : A servant doth properly do the will of his Master , for the gain or profit that redoundeth to his Master ; but , because we cannot be profitable to the Almighty by way of gain ; therefore we are to serve him in relation to an higher end , then accession of gain ( of which the Lord is not capable , Psal . 16. 2. Iob 22. 3. ) For the declaration of his glory : For Worship formally is to give reverence to God for his excellency ; in one and the same act we may both Worship God and serve him . Only service doth include the obligation of a servant to a Lord. As concerning Love , Faith and Hope , they are internall Worship , not properly Adoration : Love as Love doth rather import an equality with the thing loved , and a desire of an Union , rather then a submission . It is true , there is a perfection in that which we Love , but not essentially to perfect the Lover , that possibly may agree to the Love between man and man , but not to Love as Love : for the Father Loves Christ his Son , and did delight in him from eternity , Prov. 8. 30. A superior Angel may Love an inferior ; yet the Father cannot be perfected by Loving Christ , nor a superior Ang●l , by Loving any inferior ; Faith and Hope may suppose a resting on a helper as a helper , and so are internall Worship ; if they be adoration formally may be a Question . It is an untruth which Raphael de la Torres , with other schoolmen say , That with the same Religion by which we Honour holy men , we Honour God ; upon this reason , because holinesse in them is a participation of the Divine Nature , therefore God must be the intrinsecall end , and formall reason , for which we Honour the Saints . For Holinesse in Saints , is a participation of the Divine nature ; but it is a Temporary and a created participation , it is not the same very holinesse that is in God ; but the created effect thereof : and so the Love I bear to any Creature , because there is somewhat of God in every Creature ; And the Love to our Neighbour , Commanded in the second Table of the Law , should be the Love of God , Commanded in the first Table of the Law. 2. When I bow to the gray-haired , and to the King ; I then do an act of obedience to the fifth Commandment : No man can say , that when I bow to the King , or to an holy man , that I am then bowing to the God of heaven , and Worshipping God : No acts terminated upon Saints living or dead , are acts of Worshipping God ; yea , reverencing of the Ordinances of God , as the delighting in , or trembling at the Word , are not properly acts of adoring God. Obedience is founded , not formally upon Gods excellency , properly so called ; but upon his jurisdiction and Authority to Command . Adoration is the subjection or prostration of soul or body to God in the due recognition and acknowledgement of his absolute supremacy . There is no need , that Vasquez should deny , that there is any internall Adoration , for that Adoration is only an externall and bodily Worship of God , can hardly be defended ; for there may be , and is Adoration in the blessed Angels , as may be gathered from Isa . 6. 1 , 2 , 3. H●b . 1. 6. And it is hard to say , that the glorified spirits loosed out of the body , and received by Christ , Act. 7. 59. Psal . 73. 27. Into Paradice , Luk. 23. 43. And so with him , Philip. 1. 23. And Praying under the Altar , Rev. 6. 9 , 10. And falling down before the Lamb , and acknowledging that he hath Redeemed them , Rev. 5. 8 , 9 , 10. do not Adore God and his Son Christ ; because they have nor bodies and knees to bow to him , and yet they Adore him , Phil. 2. 9 , 10. in a way suitable to their spirituall estate . It is an untruth that Rapha . de la Torres , in 22. q. 84. Art. 2. disp . 2. n. 1. saith , That Protestants detest all externall Worship now under the New Testament , as contrary to Grace , and Adoration of God in spirit and truth . For things subordinate are not contrary ; we should deny the necessity of Baptisme , and the Lords Supper , and of vocall praying and praising under the New Testament , which are in their externals , externall worship . I grant internall Adoration , is more hardly known : But 't is enough for us to say , as externall Adoration is an act by which we offer our bodies to God , and subject the utter man to him , in sign of service and reverence to so supream a Lord ; so there is a heart-prostration , and inward bowing of the soul , answerable thereunto . As the profession , whither actuall or habituall , in a locall and bodily approach , or in verball titles of Honour , in which we Honour great personages , by bowing to them , in prostration and kneeling , is an act in its state Civill , not Religious , we intending ( I presse not the necessity of a ●ormall or actuall intention ) only to conciliate Honour to them , suitable to their place and dignity : so a profession , whither actuall or habituall , in a Religious bodily approach to God , either by prayer or prostration , or in●lination of the body tending to the Honour of God is a Religious act . Now bodily prostration of it self , is a thing in its nature indifferent , and according as is the object , so is it either Artificiall : as if one should stoop down to drive a wedge in an image ; or civill , if one bow to Honour the King ; or Religious , when God and Divine things are the object thereof : But with this difference , the intention of the minde , added to externall prostration to a creature reasonable , may make that prostration idolatrous , and more then civill honour . Thus bowing to Haman , Honoured by Ahasuerus , who hath power to confer honours , if people bow to him as to God , is more then civill honour : And Cornelius his bowing to Peter , Act. 10. as to more then a man , is Idolatrous , and not civill honour ; and the Carpenters bowing to an Image , as to a piece of Timber formed by Art , is only Artificiall bowing ; and if any stumble at a stone before an Image , and so fall before it , it is a casuall and naturall fall ; whereas a falling down with intention to Adore , had been Religious Adoring : But when the object of bodily prostration or kneeling , is God , or any Religious representation of God , whither it be the elements of bread and wine , which are Lawfull Images of Christ , or devised pictures or portraicts of God or Christ ; because these objects are not capable of artificiall , naturall , or civill prostration , if therefore they be terminating objects of bodily kneeling or prostration ; these Religious objects , to wit , God , and Religious things , must so specifie these bodily acts , as that they must make them Religious , not civill acts , though there be no intention to bow to God ; for bowing to God hath from the object , that it is a Religious bowing , though you intend not to direct that bowing to God , as bowing to Jupiters Portraict , is a Religious Worshipping of that Portraict , though you intend not to worship the Portraict : for the act and Religious object together , maketh the act of prostration or kneeling , to be essentially Religious , though there be no intention to bow to these ; indeed the intention to bow to God , maketh kneeling to God to be more Morally good , laudable and acceptable before God , then if therewere no such intention , but the want of the intention , maketh it not to be no Religious worship , nor can it make it to be civill worship . Hence let this be observed , that intention of bowing can , or may change that bowing which otherwayes were but civill ( if there were no such intention of over-esteeming the creature ) into a Religious bowing , but neither our over or under-intention can change a Religious kneeling to God , or to an Image into a civill kneeling , because civill or naturall bowing to creatures , is more under the power of an humane and voluntary institution of men , then Religious bowing , which hath from God without any act of mans free will , its compleat nature . When we kneel to Kings , we signifie by that gesture , that we submit our selves to higher powers , not simply ( saith P. Martyr . ) but in so far as they Command not things against the Word of the Lord. When we Adore God , we Adore him as the Supream Majesty , being ready to obey him in what he shall Command , without any exception ; the Adoration of men , signifieth a submission limited , if it go above bounds , it is the sinfull intention of the Adorer , who may change the civil Adoration into Religious , and may ascend : But the Aderation of God cannot so descend , as it can turn into Civill Adoration , only keeping the same object it had before . Worship is an action , or performance , or thing , by which we tender our immediate honour to God , from the nature of the thing it self : 1. I call it an action , because the passion of dying or suffering , is not formally worship ; but only dying comparatively , rather then denying of Christ , or dying so , and so qualified , dying with Patience and Faith , may be called a worship . 2. I call it not an action only , but a performance or thing ; because an office , as the Priesthood , the Ministery is a worship , and yet not an action ; Sometime , Time it self , as the Sabbath Day is a Worship ; yet it is not an action : So the Lord calleth it His Holy Day : and undenyably the lewish dayes , the High Priests garment , and many things of that kinde , were Divine or Religious performances , things , or adjuncts of Divine Worship , but so , as they are not meerly adjuncts of Worship , but also worship ; for the High Priests Ephod was not only a civil ornament , nor was it a meer Physicall or naturall means to ●ence off the injuries of sun , and Heaven , we do not think that the Lord in all , or any place of the Old or New Testament setteth down any Laws concerning garments simply , as they do fence off cold or heat , that belongeth to Art , only he speaketh of garments as contrary to gravity , as signes of vanity and lightnesse , Isa . 3. 16 , &c. Zepha . 1. 8. 1 Pet. 3. 3 , 4. And of garments as Religious observances , of which sort was the attire and garments of the Priests and High-Priests in their service , in which consideration the Religious times , holy places , and Mosaicall garments were Divine Worship , by which God was immediatly honored , but not adjuncts only , or actions ; but Religious things or performances . 3. It is such a performance , as from thence honour doth immediatly redound to God , but that this may be the clearer ; I conceive that there is a twofold immediate honouring of God , in the worship of God : 1. An honouring of God lesse immediate , as hearing of the word , is an immediate honouring of God , because honour floweth immediatly from God , both Ex conditione operis , and Ex conditione operantis ; from the nature of the work , and intention of the worker : yet it is a lesse immediate honouring of God , in regard , that I may also hear the word even from the condition of the work , and so from the intrinsecall end of the worker , that I may learn to know God , and believe , for thus far I am led to honour God immediatly in hearing the word ; that action of its own nature conveying honour to God ; there interveeneth also a medium amidst between me and honouring of God , to wit , the Preacher , or the Bible ; to which no externall adoration is due : There is another more immediate worship , to wit , praising of God , from which by an immediate result , God is honoured , and in worship especially strictly immediate , God is immediatly honoured both in the intention of the work , and the intrinsecall end of it , and the intention of the worker ; though no other thing be done , and others be not edified either in knowledge , increase of Faith , or any other wayes : And in this , duties of the second Table , of mercy and justice , differ from worship , in that such acts of love and mercy , as to give almes to save the life of my brother , or of his beast , are not acts of worshipping God ; their intrinsecall end , and the nature of the work being to do good to the creature , principally , Ex naturâ , & conditione operis , though God also thereby be honoured ; yet in a more secundary consideration : For I praying to God , do immediately from the nature of the action honour God , though no good should either redound to my self , or to the creature ; thereby , it is true , God , by acts of love and mercy to our neighbour , is honoured two wayes : 1. In that men seeing our good works do thence take occasion to glorifie our Heavenly ●ather , whose truth teacheth us by the grace of God to do these works , but the intrinsecall and proper use of these , is to do good to our selves as in works of sobriety , and to our neighbour , as in works of righteous dealing , but not immediatly , and i● the first and primary consideration to honour God , as in works of Piety , holinesse and worship , the honouring of God by secondary resultance , doth issue also from these duties of righteousnesse , but not as from the acts of praying , praising , Sacramentall eating , drinking . 2. The doer of these acts of mercy , may , and is to intend the honouring of God. There is a twofold intention in worship , one formall and properly Religious , and is expounded Morall , Ex naturâ rei , to be Religious , it being such an intention , as can have no other state in worship , but a Religious State , as if the three Children should bow at the Commmandment of the King of Babylon , though intending to worship the true God. Here should be an intrinsecall intention , Ex naturâ & conditione operis , to worship , and that from two grounds conjoyned together : 1. Here is bowing down : 2. Bowing down to a Religious Object , commanded by a Prince , and so cometh under the Morall notion of the command of a Judge . When the object of bowing down is Religious , the signication that we give divine honour to God by kneeling is as inseparable ( saith Raphael de la Torres ) from kneeling or bowing down , as a bearing testimony by word , that God is true , and knoweth all secrets , and will be avenged on perjury , is inseparable from vocall swearing by the name of God , or as any man should be an Idolater , who in expresse words should say to an Idol , O my God Jupiter help me , though that Adoration were fained , and he who so prayeth , should in his heart abhor and detest Jupiter and all false Gods : But there is another intention not Religious ; if a Childe reade a Chapter of the Bible , that he may learn to read and spell , that is an action of Art , not of Worship ; because the object of the Childes reading , is not Scripture as Scripture , but only the Printed Characters as they are , Signa rerum ut rerum , non ut rerum sacrarum , signes of things , not of holy things , and here the object not being Religious , the intrinsecall operation cannot raise up any Religious intention of the Childe . Upon this ground , it is easie to determine whether or no an intention of Worship be essentiall to Worship or not , the former intention which is intrinsecall , and Intentio operis , may be essentiall , it resulting from the object ; but the latter intention of the worker , is so far extraneous to Worship , as whether it be , or be not , the nature of Worship is not impaired nor violated . Hence , Adoration is worship ; But every worship is not Adoration . Uncovering the head , seemeth to be little older then Pauls Epistles to the Corinthians . The Learned Salmasius , thinketh it but a Nationall sign of honour , no wayes universally received : But certainly it is not Adoration : Though therefore we receive the Supper of the Lord uncovered , no man can conclude from thence Adoration of the Elements , as we do from kneeling conclude the same , as we shall here for all bodily worship or expression of our affection to the means of graces ( though these means be but creatures ) is not Adoration properly either of God , or of these means , it is Lawfull to tremble at the word , and for Josiah to weep before the Book of the Law read , and for the Martyrs to kisse the Stake , as the Instrument by which they glorified God , in dying for the truth ; all these being Objectam quo , and means by the which they conveyed their worship to the true God , and naturall and Lawfull expressions of their affection to God : For uncovering the head , it is a sort of Veneration or Reverence , not Adoration ; and Paul insinuateth so much when he saith , 1 Cor. 11. 4. Every man praying and prophecying , having his head covered , dishonoureth his head : But it is not his meaning , that he dishonoreth God. 2. The Jewes to this day , as of old , used not uncovering the head as a sign of honour : But by the contrary , covering was a sign of honour : If therefore the Jews , being made a visible Church , shall receive the Lords Supper , and Pray and Prophecy with covered heads , men would judge it no dishonouring of their head , or not of dis-respect of the Ordinances of God : Though Paul having regard to a Nationall Custome in Corinth , did so esteem of it . Antonius Corduba a Franciscan , enumerateth nine externall acts of Adoration , but speaketh nothing of uncovering the head ; as 1. Sacrificing . 2. Martyrdome . 3. Giving and Receiving the Sacraments . 4. Suiting of Pardon . 5. Suiting of Grace . 6. Smiting the breast . 7. Building of Churches . 8. Institution of Feasts . 9. Vows and Oaths . Prelaticall Formalists side with them , in Building and Consecrating of Churches , and Holy-dayes , which are but will ▪ worship , as used by them : And for Martyrdome , it is formally an act of Christian fortitude , not worship , the confession of Gods truth a Conc●mitant of Martyrdome , is indeed worship . How suiting of Pardon , and suiting of Grace are two externall acts of Adoration , I see not : for by this way , if we regard the multitude of things that we suit , there should be moe then two : Consecrating of Churches is taken two wayes : 1. For a meer dedication or Civill destination of any thing to its end and use : As when a house is builded , a garment is first put on , when we refresh our selves with a draught of water , we may pray for a blessing on these , and on all the Creatures for our use , and the very habituall intention of the builder of an house to dwell in , is a Civill dedication of it to that use for which it is Ordained . Prayer added to it for a blessing of it in the use , maketh not a Consecrated thing ; for then my clothes every day put on , my sleep , my dayly walking in and out , my Physick , my meals , my horse , my ship I sail in , should all be Holy , Consecrated , and Religious things , which I were to Reverence as Religious things ; for all these may be blessed in their use : But here is that we condemn in Religious dedication of Churches : 1. That the end being sacred , to wit , the habituall worshipping of God in that place . 2. The praying for the Church or house of worship , to say nothing of the vain Ceremonies used in the dedication of Churches : These two are applyed to make the Church holy , and to denominate it the house of God , and capable of Religious veneration , and salutation : Then certainly , all the Synagogues of Judea , should be Religiously holy , as was the Temple . 2. And Prayers should be more acceptable to God in the Synagogue for the houses sake , then prayers in any other place . 3. God shall binde himself by promise to hear prayers in the Synagogue , or made with the face toward the Synagogue , as he did toward the Temple : we were obliged in the New Testament to pray with our faces toward the Churches or meeting places in the New Testament , and we should have one famous and celebrious Church for all Iews and Gentiles , more holy then all the little holy Temples now consecrated as holy places , and where shall this be ? And what typicall signification shall it have ? It must signifie Christ to come , or already come , both is unlawfull . 2. Again , if habituall Dedication by vertue of Prayer make a place holy , by the same reason actuall Dedication should make a place holy ; and the belly of the Whale should have been holy because there Jonah prayed , and every place a believer prayeth shall be holy , his closet , a private corner of his Orchard or Garden where he prayeth shall be holy , for these may be habitually destined and appointed ( if you call this Dedication ) for prayer only , and it shall be unlawfull to do any civill businesse there , more then it is unlawfull ( as Formalists teach ) to do any other civil businesse in the Churches , or places of meeting in the New-Testament : 3. God himself appointed the place , the Time when it should be built , the person , by whom , by Solomon , not David ; the length , the breadth , the Chambers , Porches , Ornaments of the only holy place at Jerusalem ; he hath no where appointed and prescribed these for the meeting places of the New Testament , but hath said that all places are alike , as touching any Religious holinesse , Ioh. 4. 23. 1 Tim. 2. 8. 4. Shall we think God is not acceptably served , and that the Synagogues of the Iews , of which we read not any patern or rule for Dedication , are Prophane , because they are not Dedicated by the Bishops laying the first foundation stone of the house ? Or because they want the ornaments of whorish Ceremonies , that Durandus enumerateth ? or because they have not the surpassing beauty of admirable Temples , that Christians now a little overswelling with the zeal of prosperity builded for the worship of God , out of superlative detestation of Dioclesian , and Maximinus , who had demolished all the Churches which Christians had leave to build under tollerable Emperors , such as Severus , Gordianus , Philip , and Galienus , as Eusebius teacheth ? Or that we are to give a Testimony of as cheerfull affection for the beautifying of Temples , void of all typicall relation to the glory of Iesus Christ , as David did show , 1 Chron. 28 14. 2 Chron. 2. 5. And that it is Morall and perpetually obligatory under the New Testament ; that we bestow charges upon sumptuous Temples , upon these fancied grounds of Master Hooker ? For his first Morall ground is , Nothing is too dear to be bestowed about the furniture of Gods service : 2. Because sumptuous Temples serve to the world for a witnesse of his almightinesse , whom we outwardly serve , and honour with the chiefest of outward things , as being of all things himself incomparably the greatest : 3. It were strange , that God should have made such store of glorious creatures on earth , & leave them all to be consumed on secular vanity , allowing none but the baser sort to be imployed in his own service : 4. Rarest and most gorgeous treasures are too little for earthly Kings . 5. If the corruptible Temples of the holy spirit are to be served with rich almes , what should be done for houses to edifie the living Temples redeemed by Iesus Christ : To all which I say : 1. The Temple of Ierusalem in its glory , proportion and beauty , was a Positive worship , and so must be warranted by the positive Warrant of the Word , and the like Warrant must all our Churches in the New-Testament have : 2. If we must extend our liberality and bounty towards God to the highest , and to testifie the greatnesse and Almightinesse of him whom we serve : then did David and Solomon in both fail , there were more glorious and rich houses on earth , and divers times have been builded to the honour of false gods , and to declare the Royall magnificence of mortall Kings : God never for his own honour appointed such a banquet as Ahasureosh did , to continue for an hundred and fourscore dayes , Esther 1. 4. More might , and ought to have been done by David and Solomon , if it had been a morall ground to build a house , to be a witnesse of Almightinesse : 3. And God appointed sacrifices , and Sacraments in both Testaments , as Testimonies of the great Lord Iesus ; yet in base and obvious creatures ; we may not devise Symbols or witnessing Images of the Almightinesse of that God whom we serve , at our pleasure : 4. If our Lord love mercy better then Sacrifice , especially under the New Testament , when his worship must be more spirituall : Then the Argument may be strongly retorted , we are to bestow more on feeding the living Members of Christs body ( which yet is not secular vanity ) then on dead stones ; except Master Hooker can warrant us to serve God under the New Testament in precious stones and gold , for which we can see no Warrant : 5. All these Arguments are broadly used by Papists , for Images and rich Churches : Nor doth Hooker give us any Argument for this , but what Papists gave before him : Have ye not houses ( saith he ) to eat and drink in ; Ergo , He teacheth a difference between house and house , and what is fit for the dwelling place of God , and what for mans habitation , the one for common food , the other for none but for heavenly food . Ans . That there was publick meeting places and Churches in Corinth , now under Heathen Rulers , 1 Cor. 6. is denyed , by all both Protestant and Popish writers , far lesse had they then any consecrated Churches , and from the inconveniency of taking their Supper while some were full and drunk in the place where the Lords Supper was Celebrated , whereas they ought to have Supped in their own houses : to infer that the Church is a holier place , then their own house , I professe is Logick , I do not understand , it only concludes these two sort of houses are destinated from two sort of different uses , sacred and prophane and no more . Neither am I much moved at that , Psal . 74. which is said , ver . 8. They have burnt all the convening places , or all the Congregations of God in the land : Vatablus , expoundeth it of the Temple : Exusserunt totum Templum Dei terrenum : Or all the question will be , why the Synagogues are called Gods Synagogues , as they called the Temple , Ier. 7. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Temple of the Lord , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The house of the Lord : Whither because every Synagogue was no lesse in its own kinde a house holy to the Lord then the Temple : Certainly there is no rationall ground to say , that Synagogues were Typicall , that the people were to pray with their faces toward the Synagogue , and to offer Sacrifices in the Synagogue : But that a Synagogue is called the house of God , from the use and end , because it was ordained for the worship of God , as that which God hath appointed for a speciall end and work , in that the Lord assumeth the propriety thereof to himself , so saith the Lord of Cyrus , Isa . 45. 1. Thus saith the Lord to his Anointed , to Cyrus whose right hand I have holden ; yet was not Cyrus Typically , or Religiously holy , as the Temple of Ierusalem , and c. 44. v. 28. He saith of Cyrus , He is my shepherd : and why ? He shall perform all my pleasure , so Hos . 2. 9. Therefore will I returne ( saith God ) and take away my corne in the time thereof , and my wine in the season thereof , and will recover my wool and my flax ( given ) to cover her nakednesse , To say nothing that all the holy land was Gods land , Hos . 9. 3. They shall not dwell in the Lords land ; and consequently all the Synagogues were Gods houses ; and the enemy of whom the Church complaineth to God in that Psalme , was thus bold , as notwithstanding Canaan was Gods Heritage and proper Land in a speciall manner , yet it was destroyed and burnt by the enemies , even these houses that God was worshipped in , not being spared ; But how God was so present in every Synagogue , and that even when there were no actuall worship of God in it , as he was in the Temple , and that it was so holy a place , as they were to put off there shooes who came into the Synagogue , God shewing his own immediate presence in every synagogue , as he did , Exod. 3. 5. To Moses in the burning bush , Exod. 5. 1. v. 12. Is a thing that hath no warrant in the word of God ; for if every synagogue had been thus holy : 1. It should have been a house dedicated to God in a Religious way , as was the Temple : 2. God should dwell in every Synagogue then , & in every Church under the New Testament now , as he said he would dwell in the Temple . 3. Then must Heathens and the uncircumcised be forbidden to come into any Synagogue , or any Church under the New Testament , the contrary whereof was evident in scripture ; none were forbidden to enter in the Synagogues , Paul , 1 Cor. 14. 23 , 24. alloweth that Heathens come into the Churches or meetings where Christians are worshipping God. 4. If either the Temple of Ierusulem was holy for the worship in it , or for that it was a Type of our Materiall Temples under the New Testament , then our Churches under the New Testament shall be more holy , yea , our private houses in which we may worship God shal be more holy , as our worship is more spirituall then carnall Commandments of the Leviticall Law were , and the body must be more holy then the shadow ; yea , all the earth now from the rising of the sun , to the going down of the same , in regard of more spirituall worship , even the Stables and Alehouses , where we may offer the Incense of Prayer to God , and offer the sacrifices of praises , Mal. 1. 11. shall be alike holy , as either our Churches or the Temple was of old . CAP. I. Q. 1. Whether or not Humane Ceremonies in Gods Worship , can consist with the perfection of Gods Word ? THese humane Ceremonies we cannot but reject upon these grounds ; Our first Argument is : Every positive and Religious observance , and Rite in Gods worship , not warranted by Gods Word , is unlawfull : But humane Ceremonies are such : Ergo , The Proposition is sure , the holy Spirit useth a Negative Argument , Act. 15. 24. We gave no such Commandment , Levit. 10. 1. Jer. 7. 30. and 19. 5 , 6. and 32. 35. 2 Sam. 7. 7. 1 Chron. 15. 13. The Lord Commanded not this , Ergo , It is not Lawfull . Formalists , Answer : Every worship holden to be of Divine necessity and yet not Commanded by God , is unlawfull ; but not every worship holden as free , and not binding the Conscience , requireth that God Command it . Ans . 1. Gods Consequence is from the want of a Lawfull efficient and Author ; you make him to reason from an Adjunct of the worship : But all worship hath necessity , and Divinity , and a binding power only from the Author God. For why is it Lawfull to Abraham to kill or intend to kill his Son ? Why is not eating the forbidden fruit Lawfull ? Only because God Commandeth ; and if God forbid Abraham to kill his Son , and Command Adam to eat , it is Lawfull . 2. If this be good , observe all the Ceremoniall Law , so you lay not Divine necessity upon the observance thereof ; offer Sacrifices to God under the New Testament , and you cannot fail in the worship against the Institutor ▪ So slaying of the Children to Molech , so you count it free and changeable , shall not fail against Gods Commandments of the first Table ( I Command it not . ) They Answer , To kill Children , is Man slaughter ; but I Reply : God doth no● , Ier. 7. Reason against Offering the seed to Molech , as it was murther and forbidden in the sixth Commandment : but as false worship , and forbidden in the second Commandment : Else he proveth not , that it was unlawfull worship against piety , but that it was an act of cruelty : Yea , so it be thought free and bind not the Conscience , it may be Lawfull worship , and is not condemned by this ( God Commanded it not ) Ergo , It is not Lawfull . I Commanded not , ( saith a Morton , and b D. Burges . ) that is , I discommanded , or forbade . Ans . So c saith the Iesuit Valentia ; but so , Circumcising of women , boyling of the Paschall Lambe , another Ark then Moses made , should not be unlawfull , for these are not expresly discommanded . But Gods Commanding to Circumcise the Male-childe , to Roast the Paschall Lambe , to make this Ark : and his silence of Circumcision of women , and boyling the Passeover , and silence of another Ark , is a Command . 2. The Text , Jer. 7. Is wronged , I Commanded not , neither came it in my heart to Command this Abomination : That is , I never purposed it as worship : else they knew , to kill their Children , except to God , as Abraham was Commanded , was unlawfull , as Isa . 63. 4. The day of Vengeance is in mine heart , 2 King. 10. 30. 1 King. 8. 18. Gen ▪ 27. 41. To be in ones heart , is to purpose a thing . 3. Valentia saith , Exod. 18. 20. I Commanded not the false Prophet to speak ; But how ? By not sending or calling him : Else God did not say by a Positive Commandment to every false Prophet , Prophecy not ; but because God b●de him not Prophecy , he was to know God forbade him : Else to speak Arbitrary Doctrines and Prophesies , not tying the Conscience , were no false Prophecying . They Object , 1 King. 8. 17. It was well that it was in Davids heart to build a house to God , and yet David had no warrant in Gods Word , for to build an house to God. So Morton d Burges e Ans . David had a twofold will and purpose to build Gods house : 1. Conditionall : It was revealed to David , that God would have an house built , therefore David might conditionally purpose to build it ; so it was Gods will he should be the man. This wanteth not Gods word : We may desire what ever may promove Gods glory conditionally . As that Petition teacheth ( Thy Kingdom come . ) This was recommended of God and approved ▪ 2 Kin. 8. 17. 2. A resolute will upon Nathans mistake , the blinde leading the blinde , this was not Commanded , though the desire of the end was good , that is , that a house should be built . Morton , 16. It was Lawfull upon common equity , considering Gods mercy to him , in subduing his enemies , and that he dwelt in Cedars , whereas God wanted an house , but he could not actually perform it , without Gods word : So Burges . Ans . 1. The consequence without Gods word , is as good to conclude , that David might actually build Gods house , as to will and purpose to build it : Because the word is a perfect rule to our thoughts and purposes , no lesse then to our actions ; if to build without Gods Word was unlawfull : Ergo , to purpose this without Gods Word was unlawfull . A purpose of sin , as of Adultery , is sin , a purpose of will worship , is will-worship and sin . 2. A man of blood is as unfit to purpose to be a type of a peaceable Saviour , as to be a type of a Saviour , 3. If God reprove Samuels light for judging according to the eye , 1 Sam. 16. 7. Far more he rebuketh his purpose to Anoint a man without his word , Who giveth Kingdoms to whom he pleaseth : Yet Samuel had a good intention , and Gods word in generall , that one of Iesse's Sons should be King. 4. I● that good purpose had remained with David deliberately to build the Lords house , after the Lord had said , Solomon , not David , must build the house , it would have been sinfull ; yet the reasons upon common equity , and a generall warrant that God would have an house , had been as good as before : if Mortons consequence be once good , it s ever good . 5. By this , without the warrant of the Word , we may purpose to glorifie God : The Baptist without Gods warrant , may purpose a New Sacrament , Cajaphas may purpose that he shall be the man who shall dye for the people : I may purpose to glorifie God , by a thousand new means of worshipping : Papists have good intentions in all they do . 6. A purpose of heart is an inward substantiall worship warranted by Gods Word , Psal . 19. 14. Psal . 50. 21. Psal . 74. 11. Ier. 4. 14. Gen. 8. 2. Eccles . 2 , 3. Isa . 55. 7. Ergo , The word is not a rule in substantiall and Morall Duties ; heart-purposes cannot be indifferent heart-ceremonies . 7. David needed not aske counsell at Gods mouth and word , for an indifferent heart-purpose , grounded upon sufficient warrant of common equity , whether he should act it or no● ; that which warranteth the good purpose , warranteth the enacting of the good purpose . 8. Who knoweth if God rewardeth additions to the word , with a sure house , and all indifferent Ceremonies ? All additions to Gods Word are unlawfull ▪ Deut. 4 ▪ ● . Deut. 12. 32. Prov. 30. 6. Rev. 22. 18. Ioh. 20. 31. Luk. 16. 29 , 30. 2 Tim 3 ▪ 17. Psalme 19. 7 , 8. So , a Basilius , b Hieron , d Cyprian , e Chrysostome , f Procopius , g Turtullian , All the Fathers , all Protestant Divines opposing Traditions ▪ put their seal and Pen to the plenitude of Scripture : But humane Rites are Additions to Gods word . h Morton and Burges say , God forbiddeth in the foresaid places , additions of any thing , as Divine and a part of Gods Word , or additions contrary to Gods Word , and corrupting the sense thereof , but not additions perfecting and ●●●plaining his Word ▪ a● Commentaries and Annotations of the text . So do Papists Answer , Duvallius , i a Sorbonist ▪ He forbiddeth other new Sacrifices , as of the Gentiles , who offered their Sons and Daughters : So k Valentia , l Vasquez , m Bellarmine , n Suarez , o Cajetan , They are not added which the Church addeth ▪ they are from the spirit of God : So p Bannes ; but all these do elude , not expound the Texts : 1. Because ▪ if the Iewish Princes had Commanded Arbitrary and conditionall Ar●s , Sacrifices , places of worship , so they add● not heathenish and wicked , as the Gentiles Sacrificing their Children , they had no● failed by this answer ; yet Moses the Prince , is Commanded to make all according to the Patern in the Mount. 2. God speaketh to all Israel , and not to the Princes only , Deut. 4. 1. Hearken O Israel , he speaketh to these who are bidden to keep their soul diligently , v. 6. 3. It is Bellarmines groundlesse charity , to think private heads who were not Princes and Law-givers , did not take on an h●iry Mantle to deceive , Zach. 13. 4. And say , Thus saith the Lord ▪ when God had not spoken to them , Ier. 23. 16. 32. Yea , and Private women added their own dreams to the word of God , Ezech. 13. 17 , 18. 3. They say Traditions are from Gods Spirit : But hath Gods Spirit lost all Majesty , Divinity and power in speaking ? If the Popes Decretals , the Councels , the dirty Traditions , wanting life , Language , and power , be from Gods Spirit : Formalists admit Traditions from an humane spirit , and in this are shamed even by Papists , who say , God only ●an adde to his own Word , whereas they say , men , and the worst of men , Prelates may adde to Gods vvord : 4. But that additions perfecting are forbidden is clear : 1. Additions perfecting , as Didoclavius p saith , argueth the word of imperfection , and that Baptisme is not perfect without Crossing . 2. It is Gods Prerogative to adde Canonick Scripture to the five books of Moses , and the Nevv-Testament , and the doctrine of the Sacraments which cannot be Syllogistically deduced out of the Old Testament , Matth. 28. 19 , 20. Ioh. 21. 31. Heb. 3. 2. Rev. 1. 19. and these are perfecting and explaining additions , therefore men may by as good reason adde Canonick Scripture to the Revelation , as adde new Positive Doctrines like this ( The holy Surplice is a sacred signe of Pastorall Holinesse ) ( Crossing is a signe of dedicating the childe to Christs service ) for Papists ●ay , even Vasquez q That the Pope neither in a generall Councell , nor out of it , can ordain any nevv points of Faith , vvhich are not contained in the principles or Articles revealed , and may not be evidently concluded out of them . Formalists answer , It is not lavvfull to adde any thing as a part of divine worship , but it is Lawfull to add● something as an indifferent Rite , coming from Authority grounded upon common equity ▪ And this is the ansvver of the Jesuite Vasquez r The Pope and Church cannot make an Article of Faith , for that is believed by divine Faith , to come from God only , but as Law-givers they may give Laws that bindeth the conscience , and yet are not altogether essentiall in worship . If additions , as divine parts of Gods worship ( say we ) be forbidden ; God then forbidding to adde such Traditions , forbiddeth his own spirit to adde to Gods word , for no man but God can adde additions Divine , that is , coming from God , but God himself , & by good consequence the forbidding men to add additions , as really coming from God , should forbid men to be Gods , for divine additions are essentially additions coming from God ; but if he forbid additions only of mens divising , but obtruded to have the like efficacy and power over the conscience , that Canonick Scripture hath , then were it lawfull to adde killing of our children to Molech , so it were counted not really to come from God , with opinion of divine necessity ; and by this , God should not forbid things to be added to his Word , by either private or publick men , but only he should forbid things to be added with such a quality , as that they should by Divine Faith be received as coming from God , and having the heavenly stamp of Canonick Scripture , when as they are come only from the Pope and his bastard Bishops ; so all the fables of the Evangell of Nicodemus ; The materials of the Iewish and Turkish Religion might be received as lawfull additions , so they do not contradict the Scripture , as contrary to what is written , but only beside what is written , and with all , so they be received as from the Church : Also 3. Additions contrary to the word , are diminutions ; to adde to the eight Command this addition ( The Church saith it is lawfull to steal ) were no addition to the ten Commandments , but should destroy the eight Commandment , and make nine Commandments only , and the meaning of Gods precept , Deut. 12. Thou shalt neither adde , nor diminish ; should be , Thou shalt neither diminish , neither shalt thou diminish : And so our Masters make Moses to forbid no additions at all : 6. Commentaries and Expositions of the Word , if sound , shall be the word of God it self ; the true sense of a speech , is the form and essence of a speech , and so no additions thereunto but explanations , except you make all sound Sermons , Arbitrary Ceremonies and Traditions , whereas Articles of Faith expounded are Sermons , and so the Scripture it self materially taken , is but a Tradition . QUEST . II. Whether Scripture be such a perfect rule of all our Morall Actions ; a● that the distinction of essentiall and necessary , and of accidentall and Arbitrary worship cannot stand ? And if it forbid all worship not only contrary , but also beside the word of God as false , though it be not reputed as divine and necessary . FOrmalists do acknowledge , as Morton , Burges , Hooker , and others teach us , that Ceremonies which are meer Ceremonies , indifferent in nature and opinion , are not forbidden : yea , that in the generall they are commanded upon common equity , and in particular according to their specification , Surplice , Crossing , Kn●eling before consecrated Images , and representations of Christ are not forbidden , and negatively Lawfull , having Gods allowing if not his commanding will ; but only God forbiddeth such Ceremonies , wherein men place opinion of divine necessity , holinesse and efficacy , in which case they become Doctrinall , and essentiall , and so mens inventions are not Arbitrary and accidentall worship : But let these considerations be weighed . 1. Distinct . The Word of Go ▪ being given to man , as a Morall Agent , is a rule of all his Morall Actions , but not of actions of Art , Sciences , Disciplines ; yea , on of meer nature . 2. Distinct . ( Beside the Word ) in actions Morall , and in Gods worship , is all one with that ( which is contrary to the Word ) and what is not commanded is forbidden , as not seeing in a creature capable of all the five senses is down right blindenesse . 3. Lawfulnesse is essentiall to worship instituted of God , but it is not essentiall to worship i● generall : neither is opinion of sanctity , efficacy , or Divine necessity essentiall to worship , but only to Divine worship , and its opinion not actuall nor formall , but fundamentall and materiall . 4. Seeing the Apostles were no lesse immediatly inspired of God , then the Prophets , it is a vain thing to seek a knot in a rush , and put a difference betwixt Apostolick Commandments or Traditions and divine Commandments , as it is a vain and Scripturelesse curiosity to difference betwixt the Propheticall truths of Moses , Samuel , Isaiah , Ieremiah , Ezekiel , &c. And Divine Prophecies , which is , as if you would difference betwixt the fair writing of Titus the writer , and the writing made by the pen of Titus , or betwixt Peters words , and the words spoken by Pete●● tongue , mouth and lips , for Prophets and Apostles were both Gods mouth . 5. Worship essentiall , and Worship Arbitrary , vvhich Formalists inculcate ; or worship positively lavvfull , or negatively lavvfull , are to be acknowledged as worship Lawfull , and Will-worship , and vvorship Lawfull and unlawfull . 6. What is vvarranted by naturall reason , is vvarranted by Scripture , for the Law of nature is but a part of Scripture . 7. Actions are either purely morall , or purely not morall , or mixed of both : The first hath vvarrant in Scripture , the second none at all , the third requireth not a vvarrant of Scripture every vvay concludent , but only in so far as they be Morall . 8. Matters of meer fact , knovvn by sence and humane testimonie , are to be considered according to their Physicall existence if they be done or not done ; if Titus did such a thing or not , such are not in that notion to be proved by Scripture : 2. They may be considered according to their essence and Morall quality of good and lawfull , ●ad or unlawfull , and so they are to be warranted by Scripture . 9. There is a generall vvarrant in Scripture for Worship and morall actions , tvvofold : either vvhen the Major proposition is only in Scripture , and the Assumption is the vvill of men , or vvhen both the Proposition and Assumption are warranted by Scripture : the former vvarrant I think not sufficient , and therefore the latter is necessary to prove the thing lavvfull . Hence our 1. conclusion . Every worship , and Positive observance of Religion , and all Morall actions are to be made good , by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( according as it is vvritten ) though their individuall circumstances be not in the word . 2. The offering , for the Babe Iesus , tvvo Turtle Doves , and ●vvo Pigeons , are according as it is vvritten in the Lavv , and yet Ioseph and Mary , the Priest the Offerer , the day and hour when the male childe Iesus for whom are not in the Law , Exod. 13. 1. Numbers 8. 26. In the second Table Amaziah his Fact of mercy in not killing the children for the Fathers sin is said to be , 2 Kin. 24. 6. performed by the King ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As it is vvritten in the Book of the Law of Moses : yet in that Law , Deut , 24. 6. There is not a word of Amaziah , or the children whom he spared : because these be Physicall , and not Morall circumstances , as concerning the essence of the Law of God. Hence in the Categorie of all Lawfull Worship and Morall actions : both Proposition and Assumption is made good by this , As it is vvritten , even to the lowest specifice degree of morality as all these . 1. The Worship of God. 2. Sacramentall worship under that . 3. Under that , participation of the Lords Supper . 4. Under all , the most speciall participation of the Lords Supper by Iohn , Anna , in such a Congregation , such a day ; All these I say , both in Proposition and Assumption are proved by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : And can bid this ( according as it is written ) the like I may instance in all other Worship , in all acts of Discipline , in all Morall acts of justice and mercy , in the second Table : But come to the Prelats Kalendar , They cry ( Order and decency is Commanded in Gods Worship . ) And we hear Pauls cry , not theirs ; but under this is , 2. ( Orderly and decent Ceremonies of humane institution ; ) And here they have lost Pauls cry , and the Scriptures ( as it is written ) 3. Under this ( be Symbolicall signes of Religious worship instituted by men ) ( according as it is written ) is to seek . And 4. under all , ( Thomas his Crossing of such an Infant ) is written on the back of the Prelats Bible , or Service book , but no where else : So do Papists say , What ever the Church teach , that is Divine truth . Under this cometh in , invocations of Saints , Purgatory , and all other fatherlesse Traditions , which though Papists should teach to be Arbitrary and indifferent ; yet would we never allow them room in Gods house , seeing they cannot abide this touchstone ▪ ( according as it is written . ) 2. Because Scripture condemneth in Gods Worship , what ever is ours , as will-worship , Hence , 2. All worship and new Positive means of worship , devised by men , are unlawfull ; but humane Ceremonies , are such , Ergo , The Proposition is proved many wayes : as , 1. What is mans in Gods Worship , and came from Lord-man , is challenged as false , vain , and unlawfull , because not from God , as Idols , according to their own understanding , Hos . 13. 2. So , from Israel it was , the workman made it , Hos . 8. 6. Hence , a Zanchius , and b Pareus infer , all invented by men , are false and vain , and so are condemned , Ier. 18. 12. The imaginations of their ●vil heart , and , Psal . 106. 39. Their own devises , their ovvn vvorks , their ovvn inventions , as , Act. 7. 41. Figures vvhich y● made , Act. 7. 43. Had they been figures of Gods making , as the Cherubins and Oxen in the Temple , as 1 King. 7. They had been Lawfull ▪ dayes devised by I●rob●ams heart , 1 King. 12. 32 , 33. The light of your ovv●●●ir● , Isa . 50. 11. A plant that the Heavenly Father planted not ; Ergo , By man , Math. 15. 14. 2. The Proposition is proved from the wisdom of Christ , who is no lesse faithfull then Moses , who followed his Copy that he saw in the Mount , Exod. 40. 19. 21. 23. Exod. 25. 40. Heb. 8. 5. Heb. 3. 1 , 2. Ioh. 15. 15. Or Solomon , 2 Chron. 29. 25. 1. Chron. 28. 11 , 12. Gal. 3. 15. Also , I prove our Conclusion . 3. thus : If the word be a rule to direct a young mans vvay , Psal . 119. 9. A light to the Paths of men , v. 105. If the Wisdom of God cause us to understand Equity , Iudgement , Righteousnesse , and every good vvay , Prov. 2. 9. And cause us vvalk safely , so that our feet stumble not , Prov. 3. 25. So that vvhen vve go , our steps shall not be straightned , and vvhen vve run , our feet shall not stumble , Prov. 4. 11 , 12. If wisdom lead us as a Lamp , and and a Light , Prov. 6. 23. Then all our actions Morall ▪ of first or second Table , all the Worship , and right means of the Worship , must be ruled by this , ( according as it is Written ) else in our actions we walk in darknesse , we fall , stumble , go aside , and are taught some good way , and instructed about the use of some holy Crossing , some Doctrine of Purgatory , and Saint-worship , without the light of the Word : But this latter is absurd : Ergo , So is the former . It is poor what c Hooker saith against us : If Wisdom of Scripture teach us every good path , Prov. 2. 9. By Sccripture onely , and by no other mean , then there is no art and trade , but Sripture should teach : But Wisdom teacheth something by Scripture , something by spirituall influence , something by Worldy experience , Thomas believed Christ vvas risen by sence , because he savv him , not by Scripture , the Ievvs believed by Christs miracles . Ans . 1. Some actions in man are meerly naturall , as to grow ; these are not regulated by the word . 2. Some agree to man , as he liveth , as to sleep , eat , drink , and these are considered as animall actions , Actiones animales , and do not belong to our Question : But as they are in man , they be two wayes regulated by the word . 1. According to the substance of the act , the Law of nature , and consequently , the word of God Commandeth them : If one should kill himself through totall abstinence from meat and sleep , he should sin against the Law of nature . 2. These actions according as they are to be moderated by reason , are to be performed soberly , and are in Gods word Commanded . d 3. Some actions agree to man , as he is an Artificiall , or Scientifick agent , as to speak right Latine , to make accurate demonstrations in Geometry , and these are ruled by Art , man in these , as they be such , is not a Morall Agent , but an Artificiall Agent , I say as they are such , because while one speaketh Latine according to the Art of Disputer or Linacer , he should not lie , and all morality in these actions are to be ruled by Gods vvord , and as actions of Art , they are not every good path , or every good Morall vvay that Solomon speaketh of , Prov. 2. 9. and therefore it is a vain Argument against the perfection of Gods word . 2. Hooker saith , God teacheth us something by spirituall influence Ans . If without the word , by only influence , spirituall , as he taught the Prophets ; it was a vain instance , for influence , visions , inspirations were of old in place of Scripture . If Ceremonies , as Crossing & Surplice come this way from God , they be as nobly born , as the Old and New-Testament : If God teach any thing now by influence spirituall without Scripture . Hooker is an Enthusiast , and an Anabaptist : If experience and sense teach many things now , which Scripture doth not teach , and yet is worship , or a Morall Action , we desire to know these : 3. The instance of Thomas , learning that Christ is risen from the dead , by sence and not by Scripture , and of the Iews believing by miracles , and not by Scripture , might make a Iesuit blush , for Christs Resurrection , and the Doctrine of the Gospel confirmed by Miracles , are not Arbitrary Rites beside Gods word , but fundamentals of salvation : Hence the man will have us believe God revealeth Articles of faith to us , by other means then by his word : Thomas was helped by his sense , and some Iews to believe Christs Death and Resurrection by miracles : But the formall Object of their Faith , was the Lord speaking in his scriptures . 2. Hooker Objecteth ; When many meats are set before me in the Table , all are indifferent , none unlawfull , if I must be ruled by Scripture , and eat in faith , and not by natures light , and common discretion : I shall sin in eating one meat before another . How many things ( saith e Sanderson ) do Parents and Masters command their servants and sons ? Shall they disobey , while they finde a warrant from Scripture ? Ans . For eating in measure , the Scripture doth regulate us , for eating for Gods glory , the scripture also doth regulate us , and the action of eating according to the substance of the action , is warranted by the Law of nature , which is a part of the word ; the meer order in eating is not a Morall action , and so without the lists of the question . If the question be of the order of eating , I think not that a Morall action : 2. Eating of divers meats is a mixt action , and so requireth not a warrant in the Morality every way ; if you eat such meats ( where there be variety to choose ) as you know doth ingender a Stone , or a Cholick , you sin against the sixth Commandment : 3. Masters , Parents , Commanders of Armies may command Apprentices , servants , sons , souldiers , many Artificiall actions , in Trades , in War , where both Commanders and obeyers are artificiall , not morall Agents , and so they touch not the question , but what is morall in all actions of Art , Oeconomy , Sciences , is ruled by the word , except our Masters offend that Paul said , Children should obey their Parents in the Lord : That men are not both in commanding inferiours , and obeying Superiours vexed with scruples , cometh not from the insufficiency of Gods word , but from this , that mens consciences are all made of stoutnesse . But if this be true , Seth , Enoch , Noah , Shem , could not eat nor sleep ( saith f Hooker ) but by revelation which was Scripture to them . Answer , Supernaturall Revelation was to these Fathers the rule of Gods worship , and all their actions supernaturall , and of all their actions morall , in relation to the last end ; but for eating and drinking , they being actions naturall , they were to be regulated in these ; by naturall reason , and the Law of nature , which was apart then of the Divine Tradition that then ruled the Church , while as yet the word was not written . Hooker urgeth thus ; It will follow that Moses , the Prophets and Apostles should not have used naturall Arguments , to move people to do their dutie ; they should only have used this Argument ( As it is written ) else they taught them other grounds and warrants for their actions then Scripture . Ans . None can deny naturall Arguments to be a part of the word of God , as is clear , Rom. 1. 19. 1 Cor. 15. 36 , 37. 1 Cor. 11. 14. Yea , Christ , Mat. 7. 12. teacheth , that this principle of nature ( whatsoever ye would men should do to you , do ye so to them ) is the Law and the Prophets , because it is a great part of the Law and the Prophets , and therefore they say in effect ( As it vvritten in the Scripture ) when they say ( as it is written in mans heart by nature . ) 2. Principles ▪ of nature , are made scripture by the Pen-men of the holy Ghost , and do binde as the Scripture . 3. It will be long ere the Law of nature teach Crossing , and kneeling to bread , to be good Ceremonie . They Object . I could not then ride ten miles to solace my self with my friends , except I had warrant from Scripture , and seeing the Scripture is as perfect in acts of the second Table , as in acts of the first ; I must have a reason of all the businesse betwixt man and man , of all humane and municipall Laws , but it is certain ( saith Sanderson ) faith as certain as Logick can make it , is not required in these , but onely Ethicall and Conjecturall faith , whereby we know things to be Lawfull Negatively : It s not required that we know them to be Positively conform to Gods Word . Ans . If you ride ten miles with your friend and do not advise with his word , who sayes ( Redeem the time ) you must give account for idle actions , if Christ say , you must give an account for idle Words . 2. Though there seem to be more Liberty in actions of the second Table , then of the first ; because there be far moe Positive actions , not meerly Morall , which concerneth the second Table , because of Oeconomy , Policy , Municipall and Civill Laws , Arts , Sciences , Contracts amongst men , that are not in the first Table ; yet the Morallity of the second Table , is as expresly in Gods Word , as the Worship of the first Table . 1. Because what is justice and mercy , and love toward man in the second Table , doth no more depend upon mans sole will , but upon Gods Morall Law & the Law of nature , then it dependeth upon mans will or human wisdom , how God should be worshipped according to the first Table . For Gods will in his Word , is called by our Divines , a perfect Canon and rule of Faith , and also of Manners : And as the grace of God , T it 2. teacheth us what is Piety , so also what is Righteousnesse and Sobriety . 2. Because as Gods Word condemneth will-worship , which is come of no Nobler blood , then mans will , so condemneth it idle words , and idle actions , which are but will-works , and will-words , and deeds of will-justice , and will-mercy : and a will-conscience in the second Table , putteth no lesse a rub upon the wisdom of the Lord , the Law ▪ giver , then a will conscience in the first Table . But Formalists say , If mans will and authority cannot appoint Crossing , Holy humane-dayes , Surplice , and such , the decent expressions and incitements of Devotion , in the kinde of Arbitrary , Mutable , and Ambulatory Worship ; but they must be therein guilty of adding to the Doctrine of Piety and Religion in the first Table : by that same reason they cannot make humane Civill and Positive Laws in War and Peace , to be means of conserving justice and mercy tovvard humane societies in the kinde of duties of Righteousnesse and sobriety tovvards our selves and Neighbours ; but they must be guilty of adding to the Doctrine of the second Table . I Answer : 1. The case is not alike , we cannot be Agents in the performing of any worship to God ; nor can we use any Religious means for honouring God , which belong to the first Table : But in these we are Morall Agents , doing with speciall reference to conscience , and to true happinesse and the glory of God , as the ends both of the work and workers : and therefore in these we are precisely ruled by the wisdom of God , who hath in his word set down what Worship , and what means of exciting Devotion , and decoring of his Worship pleaseth him , and hath not left men to Lord-will , or Lord-wit ; but in many actions that belong to humane societies , we are not Morall Agents , but often Agents by Art , as in Military discipline , Trades usefull for mans life , Oeconomy and Policy in Kingdoms and Cities , in Sciences , as Logick , Physick , Mathematicks , in these Finis operis , the end of the work is operation , according to the principles of Arts and Policy , and we are not in them Morall Agents , and so not to be regulated by Gods Word . For the Scripture giveth not to us , precepts of Grammar , of War , of Trades , and Arts , teaching us to speak right Latine , to make accurat demonstrations : nor is the end of the work here a thing that pitcheth upon that tender and excellentest peece in us , our Conscience , and our Morall duties to God and men , but to make such humane Laws , just and suitable with sobriety and justice , is not left to Lord-will , but right reason , the principles of a naturall Conscience ( which are parts to us of Scripture ) and the Word of God it self hath determined ; whether , to carry Armour in the night , in such a case ? Whether to eat flesh in such a season of the year ▪ when the eating thereof hurteth the Common-Wealth , and the like belong to works of justice and mercy , or no ? Now it is no marvel that in things belonging to our naturall life , peace , societies , policy , where the end of the work is naturall or civill , and belongeth not , as such , to the Conscience , and Salvation of the soul , that there men be Artificers or Agents according to Art , Oeconomy , Policy , whereas the end of the work , Finis operis , in the Worship of God , is Morall , and a matter of an higher nature ; and so the means and manner of Worship here , are determined by Gods Word . But when actions of Arts , Sciences , Trades , Oeconomy , Policy , and Laws positive , are elevated above themselves , Ad finem operantium , to the end that Agents are to look unto , as they be Morall Agents ; Gods Word is as perfect a rule for acts of good manners in the second Table , as in the first : For example , that I speak good Latine , I am to see to Disputers Precepts ; but that I lie not , and speak not Scandals or Blasphemies , while I speak Latine , there I am to look to Gods Law given by Moses . That a Tradesman make works according to Art , he is to advise with Art , but that he sell not his work at too dear a price , he is to advise with the eight Commandment ; and when all these acts of Art are referred to Conscience ▪ Salvation , and the glory of God , as they ought to be Respectus finis operantis ▪ in respect of the Morall intention of the doer , all their Morallity is squared by Gods-Word . Hence there be no actions of Worshipping God , but they be purely Morall , Et respectu finis operis , Et respectu finis operantiis ; but many actions belonging to the second Table , are either purely not Morall , as actions of meer Art , or they be mixed , and Respectu finis operis , in respect of the end of the work , they are not Morall , nor to be squared by the Word at all ; and in respect of the Morall intention of the doer , they be Morall , and so mixed actions , and partly ruled by the Word , and partly ruled by Art or Policy , according to our seventh distinction . II. Conclusion : In actions or Religious means of Worship , and actions Morall , whatever is beside the Word of God , is against the Word of God ; I say in Religious means , for there be means of Worship , or Circumstances Physicall , not Morall , not Religious , as whether the Pulpit be of stone or of timber , the Bell of this or this Mettall , the house of Worship stand thus or thus in Situation . Our Formalists will have it in the power of rulers to Command in the matter of Worship , that which is beside the Word of God , and so is negatively Lawfull , though it be not Positively conform to Gods Word , nor Commanded or warranted by practice ; which I grant is a witty way of Romes devising , to make entry for Religious humane Ceremonies . But 1. Whatever is not of Faith , and a sure perswasion , that what I do pleaseth God , is sin , Rom. 14. 14. 23. And therefore neither can be Commanded by Rulers , nor practiced by inferiours : But things besides Scripture , and negatively Lawfull , are things not of Faith ; Ergo , The Assumption I Prove : 1. I doubt if Lord-will , be the Lord-carver , of what pleaseth God. 2. If it may stand with the wisdom of Christ the Law-giver ; for no Ceremonies maketh Christ a perfect Law-giver : 3. In things doubtsome , abstinence is the surest side ; Ergo ; Rulers ought not to command them : 4. Samuel , David , even wicked Saul abstained in things doubtsome , while the Oracle of God removed the doubts , and answered him . 5. Paul in eating or not eating , which are things most indifferent , requireth a certain perswasion of positive assurance , Rom. 14. 14. I know , and am perswaded by the Lord Iesus , that there is nothing unclean of it self , but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean , it is unclean . a Master Sanderson saith , In things substantiall of Gods Worship , and in things to be done upon necessity of salvation , what is not of Faith ; certainly assuring us it is conforme positively to Gods word , it is sin , so we abhor Popish Additions : But in the actions of our life , as the lifting of a straw , and in Ceremoniall worship , or accidentals , it holdeth not ( saith b Morton , and Doctor Burges ) not in all particulars ( saith c Paybodie ) for there should be no end ( saith d Doct. Iackson ) of doubting , for Papists might doubt to assist our King against Roman Catholicks . Ans . 1. Let Formalists explain themselves ; Doctrinals , Substantials , and essentiall worship , is such as God hath commanded in the Proposition , and in the Assumption , and particularly in Gods word ; Accidentals are such , as he hath commanded in generall , but left particulars to mens will , so they define , like M●sters of Arts. But this our Masters say , in all that Christ hath particularly Commanded , his Testament is perfect , and so I believe , what God hath set down , he hath set down , and so we have Scripture right down as perfect as the Fables of Esop , & Nasoes Metamorphosis : what is in Esopes and Nasoes books , is in their books , and what they command you , are with certainty of Faith to believe they command , and what the Prophets and Apostles writ , that they writ , and that is essentiall worship ; what they writ not , they writ not . 2. Mr. Sandersons lifting up a straw , is a straw for an instance ; actions of imagination are not Morall , we give him leave to ruh his beard without Faith , as he weareth white sheets above his garments in Divine service against Faith. 3. To do in Faith , is to know , that , in that I serve Christ , and am accepted of God , Rom. 14. 2. To do that which condemneth me not , and maketh me happy in the doing thereof , v. 21. 3. It is a Faith that I have before God in my conscience , v. 2● . 4. It is a perswasion by the Lord Iesus , that it is clean . 5. It is such , as I know is positively Lawfull by Scriptures expresse warrant , 1 ▪ Cor. 10. 26. The earth is the Lords and the fulnesse thereof ; Ergo , I have certainty of faith , that it is positively conform to Scripture what I do : but in things negatively Lawfull , as lifting a straw , wearing a Surplice , I have no perswasion by the Lord Iesus , that I serve Christ , and am accepted of God in so doing , and know not from Psa . 24. 1. or from any other scripture , that it is lawfull what I do . 3. A generall warrant is either when the major Proposition only is sure by Scripture , but you must take the Assumption upon the Formalists Merchant-word , or where both Proposition and assumption can indure , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according as it is written ; this latter wee imbrace with both our hands , but Formalists deny it to us : The first is their meaning . This , what is decent and not contrary to Gods Word , that the Rulers may command : But Surplice , Crossing , &c. are decent and not contrary to Gods Word ; Ergo. So one Giles Widdows e saith ▪ Man and Wife are one flesh : Ergo , the Ring in Marriage is good . And , Fine linnen is the Righteousnesse of the Saints , Rev. 19. Ergo , a Surplice is good . And , Matth. 16. Take up your crosse : Ergo , the Crossing in Baptisme is lawfull . Enough of this ▪ But so the worship of the Devil is lawfull ▪ and , Aarons golden Calf is lawfull ; for I can finde a major Proposition for them in Scripture , of which you have a Faith both Negative and Positive ; as this , Whatever God commandeth in his Word , that is lawfull : But God commandeth the Indians Devil vvorship in his Word : Ergo , &c. I am not holden to give my Faith for the Assumption : Yet it is as good as our Masters reasoning . 4. Jackson is wide in his lawfull Negatives , for to fight against Roman Catholicks , at our Kings Command , upon good grounds , is not an indifferent thing , Except to kill men , and shed blood , be indifferent and lawfull Negatively : I thought , to make War , had been amongst the Substantials , and Positively conform to Gods Word . 5. The Fathers , as Origen , Ambrose , Chrysostom , Theophylact , Oecumenius , Theodoret , Anselm and Ierome , upon the place Rom. 14. 23. as Vasquez saith f from this place , Rom : 14 ▪ 23. that What any doth , must be warranted by the light of the conscience as lawfull . If Formalist ; stand to this , they must give us some things against conscience , and something beside conscience , that is morally lawfull , and therefore if conscience see not such a thing against Scripture , though it have no warrant in Scripture , yet it is lawfull , and done in a certain perswasion of a well informed conscience ; but these who eat things thought to be unclean by Gods Law , to the scandall of others , who knew these meats were not against Piety and Gods Lavv , nor yet that the eating of them was against charity , while Paul delivered the Doctrine of Scandall , yet their eating was unlawfull . 6. Formalists say nothing here , but what Papists said before them , they say , Men may go to War , doubting of the lawfulnesse thereof ; and therefore h Vasquez , i Angelus , k Corduba , and l Navarr . will us , While the doubt remaineth , to choose the surest side , as conscience ought to do : And m Vasquez saith , Manente dubio , &c. To do so long as the doubt remaineth , is to do against the judgement of conscience : And n Adrianus saith , While they doubt , and yet go to War , they expose themselves to the danger of Man-slaughter , and by not going to War , they should onely sin by not obeying . o Suarez saith , It is a speculative doubt , vvhen Superiors commandeth it : And p Sylvester saith , Such a doubt should be expelled at the commandment of Superiors . And no marvell the command of Superiors to Papists is an Oracle , and blinde obedience is good meriting ; therefore q Gratian and the Iesuit r Sanches saith , Inferiors are not holden to examine the commandments of Superiors . 5. Iackson saith , This ( Whatsoever is not of Faith is Sin ) holdeth in omission of good , as in commission of evil : Ergo , Your not practising indifferent Ceremonies , is not of Faith , and so Sin. Ans . He that obeyeth doubtingly , is condemned , and he that obeyeth not doubtingly , is condemned ; But , Master Doctor , your enumeration is not sufficient , and may strike against doubting to worship a Romish Idol , at the command of Superiors ; for I shew you a third , and its Pauls way , Eat not , obey not , and abstain with perswasion of Faith , that what you do is agreeable Positively to Gods Word . Jackson saith , They sin , not by doubting , if the fear of evil after mature deliberation , be not extraordinary , and such as cannot be recompenced by the goodnes which appeareth in the act of Obedience . Doubting is no internall part or essentiall cause of sin , vve sin not because vve doubt , but because vvhile vve doubt , vve prefer an evil , or a lesse good , before a good , or a greater good . So their sin vvas not doubting , but they preferred not eating , vvhich vvas a bodily losse onely , to the evil feared , vvhich vvas to be partakers of the Table of Devils , and being Apostates from the Israel of God. Ans . Paul expresly saith , doubting is sin , and condemneth it ver . 23. and requireth , ver . 5. Let every man be perswaded in his conscience , v. 21. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that which he alloweth , v. 23. Whatsoever ( more or lesse in Morall actions ) is not of Faith , is sin : 2. Internall perswasion , Rom. 14. 14. Is an internall cause of obedience , as v. 21. And therefore doubting being a sin that condemneth , Rom. 14. 23. must be such a sinfull ingredient , as maketh the action sinfull . 3. We both sin , because we doubt , and also because we prefer a lesse good , or an evil to a greater good . 4. No feared evil , though never so evil , whether of sin or punishment if it follow not kindly , but only by accident , and through the corruption of our nature , should or can make us do any thing doubtingly or sinfully , for then we might do evil , that good might come of it : No good of obedience can warrant me to sin , and disobey God , nor should that be called obedience , nor is it obedience to men , which is disobedience to God. 5. It is an untruth that non-eating was only a bodily losse , for non-eating Physicall , is a bodily losse , but Paul urgeth non-eating morall , to eschew the fall of one for whom Christ died . 6. The Doctor saith Ibidem . No power under the Heaven could make a Law over the Romans , injoyning such meats , because Gods law ( as they conceive ) condemned them . Now how pleasant are right words ? I assume , we conceive God hath denounced all the plagues written in his Book , upon practisers of humane Ceremonies , as upon adders to the word of God , Rev. 22. 19. Yea Heresies , to with , that Christ is not the consubstantiall Son of God , may seem probable to us ; shall the good of obedience in believing my Pastor , whom God hath set over me , hinder me to obey ? 7. Papists say also , that Scripture is perfect in generall , allowing that Ceremonies should be , when Paul saith , Let all things be done in order and decency , 1 Cor. 14. But the Scripture giveth no particular warrant for these , but onely the Churches determination . So w Scotus , x Suarez , y Bellarmine z Vasquez a Bannes , b and Duvallius . The Scripture implicitely , and generally containeth all the substantials necessary for salvation , but not traditions in particular , that is the Churches part , just as Formalists say , order and decency is commanded in the word , but Crossing , Surplice , Humane dayes and such are left to the Prelates Kalender , to fill up what his Lordship thinketh good . So Hooker ( c ) Speech is necessary , but it is not necessary that all speak one kinde of Language , Government is necessary , but the particulars , Surplice , Crossing , &c. Are left to the Church . 2. What is negatively Lawfull here , cannot be admitted ; If Rulers may Command one thing that is negatively Lawfull , they may Command all things ; because what they Command under this formall reason , as not against Scripture , they should not adde nor devise new worship , though they Command all of that kinde : But the latter is absurd , for so they might Command in Gods worship . 1. The actions of sole imagination , the lifting of a straw , and all idle actions that cannot edifie . 2. They might Command a new Ark to represent Christ incarnat , as the Jews Ark did represent him to be incarnat , a new Passeover , to represent the Lambe already slain , and all the materials of the Ceremoniall Law with reference to Christ already incarnat , dead , and risen again : For all these are by Formalists Learning negatively Lawfull ; Shew us a Scripture where they are forbidden , more then Surplice , Crossing , except because they be not Commanded . If it be said , They do not Command things negatively Lawfull , as such , but as they edifie and teach : Well then , 1. As they edifie and teach , they are positively good , and apt to edifie , and so must be proved by the Word as Commanded , and so not negatively Lawfull , and not as beside , but as Commanded in the Word . 2. Yet it will follow , that all these may be used in Faith , that is , out of a sure perswasion that they are not contrary to Gods Word , and so Lawfull . I might dance in a new linnen Ephod , before a new Iewish Ark , representing Christ already incarnat , and that in the negative Faith of Mr. Sanderson , Hooker , and Jackson , for this Ark is not against Scripture , yet this Ark is not Commanded , and so not forbidden . 3. Idle actions that have no use or end , might be Lawfully Commanded by this , because they are not forbidden , yet are such unlawfull , Quia carent justâ necessitate et utilitate , as Gregorius saith : I prove the connexion , because an action Morall , such as ( to Sign with the Crosse ) performed by a Subject of Christs visible Kingdom , for Gods glory and edification of the Church , which yet is neither Commanded nor forbidden by God , nor Commanded by natures light ( for none but those that are beside reason will say this ) nor light of Gods word , or the habit of Religion , hath no more reason , then the making or forming a Syllogisme in Barbara , which of it self cometh only from Art ; and as such hath no Morall use , and by as good reason may the Church Command dancing before a new devised Ark ; yea , such an action involveth a contradiction , and is Morall , and not Morall : for of its own nature it tendeth to no edification , for then it might be proved by good reason to be edificative , and an action cannot be edificative from the will of men , for Gods will , not mens will ▪ giveth being to things . 4. What is beside Scripture , as a thing not repugnant thereunto , wanteth that by which every thing is essentially Lawfull : Ergo , It is not Lawfull . The Consequence is sure , I prove the Antecedent : Gods Commanding will , doth essentially constitute a thing Lawfull , Gods Commanding will only maketh eating and drinking bread and wine in the Lords Supper Lawfull , and the Lords forbidding will should make it unlawfull ; and Gods forbidding to eat of the Fruit of the Tree of knowledge of good and evil , maketh the non-eating obedience , and the eating disobedience . As the killing of Isaac by Abraham , is Lawfull , and that because God Commandeth it ; and the not killing of him , again is Lawfull , when God forbiddeth it . But things negatively Lawfull and beside the word of God , wanteth Gods Commanding will ; for God Commandeth not the materials of Jewish Ceremonies to represent Christ already come , and such like : for if he should Command them , they should be according to the word of God , and not beside the word of God : If it be said they have Gods Commanding will , in so far that he doth not forbid any thing not contrary to his own word ; but hath given the Church Authority to adde to his worship , things not contrary to his word , as they shall see they do promove godlinesse , or may edifie the Church : But then if the Church must see by the light of reason , and naturall judgement , aptitude in these to promove godlinesse , they are Commanded by God , who hath even stamped in them that aptitude to edifie , and so are not beside Gods word . 4. Our Divines condemne all the Traditions of the Church of Rome ; as Purgatory , Prayer for the dead , Imagery , Adoring of Reliques , all the Crossing , Holy water , Chrisme , Oyl , Babies , Bells , Beads , &c. Because God hath no where Commanded them , and sins veniall and beside the Law , and sins mortall and contrary to the Law , we condemne ; because , as what is capable of seeing , and life , and hearing , and yet doth not see , live , nor hear , that in good reason we call blinde , dead , and deaf ; all beside the word are capable of Morall goodnesse , and yet not Morally good , because not warranted by Gods word , therefore they must be Morally evil . III. Conclus . Opinion of Sanctity , holinesse and Divine necessity , is not essentiall to false worship . Formalists will have their Ceremonies innocent and Lawfull , so they be not contrary to the word of God. 2. So they be not instamped with an opinion that they binde the Conscience , and are of Divine necessity , holinesse and efficacy ; So a Morton their Prelat , for opinion of justice , necessity , efficacy and merit , ( saith he ) make them Doctrinals and so unlawfull : But this is but that which Papists say : So Suarez b saith , That their unwritten Traditions are not added to the word of God , as parts of the word of God ; but as things to be believed and observed by the Churches Commandment ; and these who did swear by Jehovah and Malcom , Zeph. 1. esteemed Malcom , and an oath by Malcom , not so Religiously and so holy , as an oath by Jehovah and Malcom ; and yet no doubt , they ascribed some necessity to oaths by Malcom and Jehoram saying , ( Am I Jehovah to kill and make alive ) who yet worshipped Ieroboams Calves , esteemed the worshipping of these Calves lesse necessary , and lesse holy and meritorious , then the worshipping of the true Yehovah ; yet the Calves called their gods , which brought them out of the Land of Aegypt , had some necessity and opinion of holinesse . For 1. Aaron in making a Calf , and Proclaiming a Feast to the Calf , committed false worship ; but Aaron placed not holinesse , justice , or merit in that worship : Because , Exod. 32. 22. for fear of the people who in a tumult gathered themselves together against him , he committed that Idolatry ; Ergo , necessity of Sanctity , Merit , and Divine obligation , is not essentiall to false worship : Ieroboam Committed Idolatry in saying , These are thy Gods O Israel ; but he placed no efficacy or merit therein , because , 1 King. 12. 27. He did it , least the people going to Ierusalem , should return to Rehoboam , and kill him ; And the Philistims dis-worship in handling the Ark unreverently , had no such opinion , they doubting whither God or Fortune ruled the Ark , 1 Sam. 6. 9. It were strange if these who say in their heart , There is no God , Ezech. 9. 9. Psal . 94. 6. And so fail against inward worship due to God , should think that the denying of God were service and meritorious service to God ; and that Peter denying Christ , and Iudaizing , Gal. 2. 12. for fear , thought and believed he did meritorious service to Christ therein : Pilate in condemning Christ ; Iudas in selling him ; the Souldiers in scourging him , did dis-worship to their Creator , the Lord of glory : Shall we think that Pilate , who for fear of the people did this ▪ believed he was performing necessary , Divine and Meritorious worship to God ? 2. If opinion of necessity Divine , of Merit and sanctity , as touching the conscience , were essentiall to false worship ; it were impossible for gain and glory , to Commit Idolatry , to preach lies in the Name of the Lord for a handfull of barley , as Ezek. 13. 19. Mic. 3. 5. 1 Kin. 22. 6. 1 Tim. 4 ▪ 1 , 2. Tit. 1. 11. For its a contradiction to Preach Arrianisme , Turcisme , Popery , against the light of the minde only for gain ; and yet to think that in so doing , they be performing meritorious service to God : Yea , they who devise will-worship , know their own will to be the Lord-carver of that worship , at least they may know it ; yet shall we think they hold themselves necessitated , by a Religious obligation so to do ? Else it were impossible , that men could believe the burning their Children were will-worship , indifferent and Arbitrary to the worshippers , which is open war against reason : Now a worship cannot be false , wanting that which is essentaill to false worship . 3. False worship is false worship by order of nature , before we have any opinion , either that there is Religious necessity in it , or meer indifferency : Ergo , Such an opinion is not of the essence of false worship . 4. By that same reason , opinion of unjustice , or opinion of doing justice , should be of the essence of unjustice ; Cains killing of his Brother , should not be Man-slaughter , except Cain placed some divine Sanctity in that wicked fact , which is against all reason ; and the reason is alike in both Gods Commanding will and his forbidding will. They Answer , Gods will constituteth Lawfulnesse in essentiall worship , and mans will in things arbitrary ; but this is to beg the question , for when we ask what is essentiall worship , they say , it is that which God commandeth , and what is accidental or arbitrary , it is that which human authority commandeth , & this is just , Gods wil is the essentiall cause of that worship whereof it is the essentiall cause , & mans will is the essentiall cause of that , whereof it is the essentiall cause . 5. All the materials of Jewish and Turkish worship , might be appointed for right worship , so we held them to be Arbitrary . 6. God cannot forbid false worship , but in that tenure , that he commandeth true worship ; but whether we esteem it true , or not , holy , or not ; he cōmandeth true worship , Erg. &c. IV. Conclusion , It is a vain and unwarrantable distinction to divide worship in essentiall , which hath Gods ; 1. Particular approving will to be the Warrant thereof , and worship accidentall or Arbitrary , which hath only Gods generall and permissive will , and hath mans will for its father ; so Ceremonies ( say they ) In these , hath Gods generall will , according to their specification , whether a Surplice be decent , or not , is from mans will , therefore they are called worship reductively , because in their particulars , they have no Divine institution , and they tend to the honouring of God , not as worship , but as adjuncts of worship ; so a Morton ; so b Burges . Ans . As Sacramentall worship is lawfull essentiall worship , so that this element , bread and wine , and this water is not Arbitrary ; Ergo , If decency be of divine institution , and Gods approving will , then that Surplice or Crossing , or not Surplice and Crossing be decent , is not Arbitrary , and only from Gods permitting will : If the generall must be warranted by the word , so also specials under the generall , else mens will may make a horned Bullock a decent Sacrifice to represent Christ already come in the f●●sh ; for if the written word warrant not the specials of Religious observances , a door is open for all humane inventions : The uniting of these two ( The Crossing of the finger in the Air above a childes face ) and ( the dedication of the childe to Christs service ) are every way like to the uniting , Of Bread and Wine eaten and drunken , and the souls nourishing by Christ crucified and apprehended by Faith : If there be oddes , it is in the Authority of the institutors : Our Formalists say , the one is essentiall , because ordained by Christ , and so bindeth the conscience , and the other Arbitrary , accidentall and of lesse authority : We owe them thanks indeed , the sin is the greater that the Authority is the lesse , but the externall worship is alike . There be oddes betwixt the kissing of a wife by a stranger , and the kissing by her own husband , and oddes betwixt an act of Royall Majesty performed by the King , and that same Act performed by a Traitor faining the same Act , as there be oddes betwixt money stroken by a Tinker , and by the Kings master of Coyne ; will this distinction serve the whorish woman , the kisses of a strange man be Arbitrary , indifferent and accidentall : but the kisses of my own husband be essentiall and kindely . And the Tinker might save his head for his false coyne , the Kings money is essentially Legall and currant , but money stroken by me , is Arbitrary and of lesse Authority , then the Kings Lawfull Coyn. 2. If it be necessary and good to honour God by decency and order , the particular goodnesse and holynesse of Surplice and Crossing is also good and holy . But God hath particularly , Micah 6. 8. Shewed thee what is good O man ; Ergo , he hath also shewed what is particularly holy . But God hath not shewed us in his Word any goodnesse in Crossing , Surplice , because they are of mans devising : If it be said , the particular goodnesse of Surplice and Crossing is good and shewed to us in the generall . I Answer , goodnesse of indifferent Rites , is , Repugnantia in adjecto , and a flat contradiction , as who would say , cold fire , indifferent is neither good nor evil , neither Lawfull , nor unlawfull : 2. Then God hath not shewed us all Morall goodnesse in his word , because he hath not shewed to us the goodnesse of Ceremonies . 3. Lawfulnesse is an essentiall property of Divine worship resulting from Gods particular approving will in his word , as is clear , Hosea 8. 5. 1 Chro. 15. 13. Lev. 10. 1. 2 Sam. 7. 7. Ier. 7. 30. Act. 15. 24. Ergo , Arbitrary worship must have Gods approving will , commanding it , else it is not Lawfull : I prove the Antecedent from the causes of worship : 1. The end of worship , which is the honouring of God maketh not worship Lawfull ; Idolaters may intend to honour God in their Idolatry , as well as true worshippers . 2. The matter of worship is not essentiall to Lawfull worship , for Lawfull and unlawfull worship may have the same common matter , as Solomons Calves in the Temple were lawfull , because ordained of God , and Samaria's Calves were unlawfull , because they were from men , the matter of both might be one and the same mettall , Hosea 8. 3. The Form of worship in generall , is not the essentiall and specifice Form of Lawfull worship , as the specifice Form of a living creature is not the specifice form of a man , the specifice form of a man is not the specifice form of a just man , as just . Also I may conceive Sacramentall eating in generall , and not conceive whether it be Lawfull or unlawfull : For if Lawfulnesse were the specifice form of worship , I could not conceive worship , but I behooved to conceive Lawfulnesse in it . Now then Gods commanding will , being wanting to Arbitrary worship , it cannot be Lawfull ; Ergo , unlawfull . If it be answered , Ceremonies are negatively lawfull , not positively lawfull , and the Argument proceedeth of Lawfulnesse positive , which is commanded in the word . But this is , 1. a begging of the question . 2. Negative Lawfulnesse , is from mans will , which should not be a Creatrix of the goodnesse of things or of Lawfulnesse , nor can it Create goodnesse , except you make man to be God : 4. Arbitrary goodnesse and Lawfulnesse hath either a particular warrant and cause of its goodnesse , and Lawfulnesse from Gods expresse Commandment , or 2. From the light of nature , or 3. From the sole will of men , or 4. partly from natures light , partly from mans will , but any of these wayes it cannot be Lawfull , I prove the Antecedent : for it cannot have its warrant from Gods generall will whereby the Proposition of a Syllogisme is warranted , but not the Assumption ▪ for thu● the golden Calse of Ieroboam ; the worshipping of Satan should be lawfull : for I can forme a Syllogisme to it from Scripture ( all worship commanded in the Word is Lawfull ▪ but Ieroboams golden Calf is Commanded in the Word ; Ergo , It is Lawfull . And if both Major ▪ Proposition and Assumption be warranted by the Word , then are Ceremonies essentiall and not Arbitrary worship . If Ceremonies be warranted by the light of nature , this is a part of Gods Word , and Rom. 1. 19 , 20. God hath shewed it to us , as , Rom. 2. 14 , 15. We would see natures light to prove that whitenesse of linnen signifieth Pastorall holinesse , rather then whitenesse in the wall , and that the crosse signifieth dedication of a childe to Christs service , rather then lifting up of the childe toward Heaven signifieth the same ; and yet Ceremonie● must be by this reason essentiall worship ; yea , to Sacrifice a sheep to represent Christ already Crucified ▪ is as Lawfull this way as all our Ceremonies . If the third be said , that Ceremonies have their goodnesse and Lawfulnesse from the sole will of men ; then Ceremonies are Will-worship : for worship instituted by the sole will of men , without light of Scripture , or nature , is Will-worship . 2. The devisers of them are either Brutish , or void of reason , and the practicers are servants of men , because they serve will , or rather lust of men , without any reason Commanding . 3. If Ceremonies come partly from mens will , partly from the light of reason ▪ then do they conclude the Lawfulnesse of Ceremonies either ●allibly or necessarily : If the former be said , we have little warrant of conscience to practice them ; nor can God be honoured , nor these things Lawfull , good , and edificative , more then unlawfull , evil and unapt to edifie , seeing there be no light of Scripture , or nature to make them good to us ▪ and because a fallible and unnecessary consequence , is over fallible and unnecessary , and standeth ( as Aristotle faith well ) in an indivisible point . It is a non-consequence , and so mens will is the best house that Ceremonies are descended of . If they can be proved by a necessary and infallible consequence , we desire to hear it , for it must be thus or the like : Things not contrary to the Word , and commanded as apt to edifie , may be Lawfull Arbitrary Worship : But Ceremonies are such ; Ergo , the Proposition is not true ▪ because Rulers judge either such things apt to edifie , because they see them to be so in themselves , or because they judge them to be so in themselves , therefore they are so in themselves : the former cannot be said , because this light whereby Rulers see Ceremonies to be apt to edifie , is either light of Scripture , or nature , or both : If this be said , they can make others see this light . Also , if there be goodnesse and aptitude to edifie souls in Ceremonies by natures light , sound reason , or the Word of God , they cannot be Arbitrary or indifferent worship : but must be essentiall worship , having warrant and Commandment from God ▪ for what natures light , or Scripture Commandeth , that God himself Commandeth , and what God Commandeth is essentiall , not Arbitrary worship . 2. And secondly , they are not Arbitrary things , but necessary and Lawfull by natures light , by Scripture , or both , which they deny ; if the latter be true , then is the will of Rulers , that which maketh Ceremonies good and Lawfull ▪ a●●in and blasphemous assertion , for Pope or Prince , or mens pleasure finde pre-existent goodnesse and Lawfulnesse in things , and they do not make them good : It is proper to God alone , who calleth things that are not , to create both beings and goodnesse of beings . 5. If Arbitrary goodnesse and Lawfulnesse of Ceremonies be thus warrantable , because nor contrary to the word , and esteemed Arbitrary ; I might fail against the first four Commandments , by superstition and idolary : so I esteem these , to wit , Idolatry and superstition Arbitrary , and not of Divine necessity , and yet in so doing , I should neither sin , nor commit acts of false worship ; because superstition and Idolatry are indeed forbidden , but superstition and Idolatry , with the opinion , that they have neither holinesse , merit , nor Divine necessity , but are meerly Arbitrary , are no where forbidden in the word . Let Formalists by their grounds , shew us a Scripture for it ; for they cannot by their Doctrine be forbidden as false worship , seeing they want that which essentially constituteth false worship ( as they teach ) for they ( as the Argument supposeth ) want opinion of necessity , Divine merit and holinesse . 6. If the Churches will , commanding Crossing , and Surplice , make them Lawfull ; then their forbidding them shall make them unlawfull , and mans will shall be a Pope and God. 7. If Rulers conclude them Lawfull , then either upon Nationall reasons concerning Britain rather then other Nations , or upon reasons immutable & eternal ▪ if the latter be said , they be essential worship , not Arbitrary ▪ if the former be said , they be more apt to stir up the dull senses of Brittish men , then othe●s , which is a dream . Dull senses are alike every where , sin originall alike in all places , and God in his perfect word hath provided alike remedies against naturall dulnesse to all mankinde , else we in Britaine do supererogate , and the word ▪ must be perfect to some Nations , in that which is common to all , and not to others . 8. By as good reason , Arbitrary mercy , and Arbittary justice is holden as Arbitrary worship ; for the Lords word is as perfect in works of charity for the second Table , as in works of Religion for the first , and if so be , then it were in mens will to do things conducing for the murthering , or not murthering of our brethren , of their own wit and will , without the word of God , and there should be some lawfull acts of will-love , or will-murther . 9. Laws oblige ( as Papists grant ) as a Driedo , and b Vasquez say , after Gerson , Occam , Almain , and other Papists , from the goodnesse of the matter commanded in the Law , not from the will of the Law-giver : If then the generall will and command of God constitute Arbitrary worship , this worship from Gods will layeth a band on the conscience , no lesse then essentiall worship : For Hezechiah is no lesse obliged in conscience to apply Figs to his boyle , and Moses to make every little ring in the Tabernacle : when God commandeth these , then the Prophets are to write Canonick Scripture : for Gods Authority in Commanding , is equall in all , though in respect of the matter , there be great things , and lesse things of the Law : therefore Gods generall permissive-will , doth no lesse oblige the conscience , then his approving will. 10. To this Arbitrary worship agreeth all the properties of will-worship ; as 1 Colos . 2. 18. It beguileth us of our reward ; for no promise of God is made of a Bishoprick for conformity ▪ 2. It is will-humility , to be devouter then God willeth us . 3. It intrudeth in things not known in the word . 4. It holdeth not the head Christ , for it maketh him not a perfect Law-giver , if Prelares under him give Laws added to his word , and that after the Traditions of men . 5. It inthralleth men dead with Christ , to a yoak . They object , But not to yoak upon the conscience . Answer ; yea , but we are in Christ freed also from the externall yoak , as from shedding of blood in Circumcision , removall out of the Campe seven dayes , many Ceremoniall Sabbaths , presenting of the male-children , and going up to sacrifica at Jerusalem ; yea , expensive offerings , all called burdens , Act. 15. 10. Col. 2. 20. Gal ▪ 4. 3 , 4 , 5. Col. 2. 14. 15. And multiplied holy dayes , Surplice , Crossing , keeping us in that same bondage ; though lesse ( they may say ) Magis , & minus non variant speciem . 6. This worship perisheth vvith the use : 7. Subjecteth us to the Ordinances of men . 8. Hath a shew of wisdom , Mr. Burges a saith , Some will-worship i● not unlavvfull , a● three Sermons in one day . The free-vvill offerings and vows vvere in some sort vvill-Worship . The Church at her godly discretion , and will , may appoint some Formalities to attend the Worship . Answer , Gregor ▪ de valent saith , That some Idolatry is Lawfull , some unlawfull : This man saith , some will-worship is lawfull , some unlawfull , that is , some sin is Lawfull , some unlawfull : 2. Three preachings come from zeal , not from will , and is no new worship different from preaching , and there may be reason therefore , where all cannot be present in one day at all the three , there is reason for three preachings , none for Crossing : 3. Will as will , is carver of will-worship : Will createth not the worship , but determineth the circumstances according to the light of reason , in Lawfull worship . But where will , as will , void of reason hath influence in the worship , it is wills brood : 4 ▪ The Freewill offerings were determined by God , the poor should offer a pair of Doves , in the Free-will offering : But the rich a Lamb , and it was sin for the rich to offer a pair of doves , and therefore will was not determinatrix in this . 5. The man jumbleth together godly discretion and will : they be much different ; but for godlinesse in short sleeves , and Crossing a finger in the Aire , I understand it not , nor can reason dream of any warrant for it , but will , as will , that is , mans lust made it . Neither do Formalists go from a Suarez , and b Bellarmine , who call that will-worship , which is devised only by a man● wit , and is not conforme to the principles of Faith , and wanteth all reason , and the received use of the Church . But we are disputing here against the Churches use , as if it were not yet a received use . But upon these grounds I go : 1. Reason not binding and strongly concluding , is no reason , but meer will. So Ceremonies have no reason : If the reason binde , they are essentiall worship : 2. Authority is only ministeriall in ordering Gods worship , and hath no place to invent new worship . 3. Authority as Authority especially humane , giveth no light , nor no warrant of conscience to obey , and therefore authority naked and void of scriptures-light is here bastard authority . 11. In all this Formalists but give the Papists distinction of Divine and Apostolick Traditions : for power of inventing Ceremonies to them is Apostolick , but not infallible and Divine : c Suarez giveth the difference : God saith he , Is the Immediate Author of Divine Traditions , and the Apostles only publishers : But the Apostles are immediate Authors of Apostolick Traditions , God in speciall manner guiding their will. So d Cajetan e Sotus f Bellar. So our Formalists g Duname h Hooker i Sutluvius ; But I like better what k Cyprian saith , That no Tradition , but what is in the word of God , is to be received : But this distinction is blasphemous , and contrary to Scripture , 1 Cor ▪ 14 ▪ 57. The things ▪ that I write unto you : ( even of decency and order , as v. 29. 40. ) Are the Commandment of the Lord , 2. Pet. 3. 2. Peter willeth them to be mindefull of the vvords which were spoken before , by the holy Prophets , and of the Commandments of us the Apostles of the Lord and S●vio●● : Then the Apostles Commandments are equall with the Commandments of the Prophets . But in the Old Testament , there were not some Traditions Divine , and some not every way Divine , but Propheticall , for the Prophets were the mouth of God , as is clear , 2 Pet. ● . 19 , 20 , 21. Luk. 1. 70. Rom. 1. 2. So 1 Tim. 6. 13. I give thee charge in the sight of God — 14. That thou keep this Commandment without spot , unrebukable , untill the appearing of the Lord Iesus . Now the Commandment ( as Beza l noteth ) Are all that he writ of discipline , which Formalists say , are for the most Apostolicke , but not Divine Traditions . 2. If Ceremonies seem good to the holy Ghost ▪ as they say they do from Act. 15. then they must seeme good to the Father and the Son , as the Canon is Act. 15. But that Canon was proved from expresse Scripture ; as Peter proveth , v. 7 , 8 , 9. and James v. 13 , 14 , 15 , 16. If they come from the Spirit , inspiring the Apostles , they cannot erre in such Traditions ; If from the spirit guided by the holy Ghost , they come from Scripture . 3. If these traditions come from no spirit led by light of Scripture , we shall not know , whether they be Lawfull , or not , for the Scripture is a Canonick rule of lawfull and unlawfull . 4. If any Apostolick spirit be given to Authors of Ceremonies , why not also in preaching and praying ? How then do many of them turn Arminians , Papists , Socinians ? 5. The Apostolick spirit leading institutors of Ceremonies , doth either infuse light naturall , supernaturall , or Scripturall in devising Ceremonies , and so Eatenus , in so far they were essential worship ▪ or the Apostolick spirit doth lead them , with no light at all , which is brutish Enthusiasme : or 3. Gods Apostolick spirit infuseth the generall equity , and negative Lawfulnesse of these truths ( Surplice is an Apostolicall signe of Pastorall holinesse ) and ( Crossing a signe of Dedication of a childe to Christs service ) Now light , for this we would exceedingly have . If this light be immediatly infused , then Surplice , Crossing are as Divine , as if God spake them ; for truths immediatly inspired lost no divinity , because they come through sinfull men ; for Balaam his Prophesie of the star of Jacob , was as Divine , in regard of Authority , as if God had spoken it , but if these trash come from an inferiour spirit , we desire to know what spirit speaketh without the word . But some may object ; The preaching of the word is somewhat humane , because it s not from the infallible spirit that dited the word ; Ergo , Ceremonies may come from the holy Spirit , though they be not as lawfull as Scripture . Ans . Let them be proved to be from the warrant , that the word is preached , and we yeeld to all ▪ 5. Apostolick Ceremonies , but not Divine have Gods generall allowing will for the accepting of them . Now Sampsons mother , Judg. 13. 23. proveth well , The Lord hath accepted our offering ; Ergo , it is Lawfull , and he will not kill us . So God atcepted Abel , and Noah their Sacrifices ; Ergo , they were Lawfull , and Divine worship . So Hosea 8. 8. They sacrifice flesh for the sacrifices of my offerings , and they eat it , but the Lord accepteth them not . Ergo , offerings of flesh without offering of themselves as living sacrifices to God are now unlawfull : If God accept of Ceremonies , they must be Divine service , if he accept them not , they must be unlawfull . They Answer , He accepteth them as Arbitrary worship , not as essentiall : I Answer , God might have accepted so Sampsons sacrifice , and Noahs , as arbitrary worship , and yet not be gracious to them , nor reward their sacrificing , as good service , contrary to the Texts alledged ; but I doubt much , if the Lord be gracious to men , and accept in Christ corner Caps , Surplice , Crossing , humane holy dayes . They object , Our Circumstances of time , place , persons , &c. are no more warranted by the Scripture , then Ceremonies are . And God might in his wisdom ( ●aith a Burges ) have calculated the order of times and places , such climats and seasons ; but he hath left these , as he hath left our Ceremonies to the Churches liberty . Ans . Time and place ( as I observed already ) being circumstances Physicall , not Morall , nor having any Religious influence to make the worship new and different in nature , from that which is commanded in the Law , though they be not expresly in the Word , do not hinder , but you may say , Such an act of worship is according as it is written : for as Praying , Preaching , hearing , is according as it is written : so is Praying and Preaching in this convenient place , proved by that same Scripture ( As it is written ) but one and the same Scripture doth not warrant Order and Surplice . 2. The question is not , what Gods wisdom can do , for he could setdown all the names of Preaching Pastors , Doctors , Deacons , Elders in the Word ; but his wisdom thus should have made ten Bibles more then there be : But all our Ceremonies might have been Comprehended in one Chapter of the Revelation , if God had thought good to Honour them with inserting them in the Canon . 3. He hath determined these by natures light , and prudence , which dwelleth with that light , revealed in the Word ; That a Bishop be thus qualified , as 1 Tim. 3. is Morall and determined ; but that they call him John , Thomas , and be of such Parents , Country , stature of body , is Physicall and in Christs wisdom , is not determined , nor could it be conveninetly . Lastly , that generall permissive will of God , is good , for all the Ceremonies of Rome , taught by Papists ; As for ours , as Suarez de Trip lic . virt . tract . 1. disp . 2. Sect. 6. n. 3. Dicendum fidem quoad substantiam credibilium semper fuisse eandem a principio generis humani . And so faith Alensis , 3. p. q. 69. Lombard . 3. dist . 25. and Durandus , 3. dist . 25. Bonaventura , 16. Art. 2. q. 1. Hugo de sancto victore de sacram , ● . 1. part . 10. cap. 4. This they have from the Fathers , Vincentius Lyrinensis , co●t ▪ prop. voc . nov . cap. 37. Jreneus , contr . hereticos , lib. 3. cap. 2. Hyerom in Psal . 86. Aug. de civitate , Dei lib. 11. cap. 3. lib. 14. cap. 7. Chrysost . de Lazero homil . 4. Cyprianus sermone de Baptismo . Optatus Milevitanus , contr . parmeni . de caelo , l. 5. And I might cite many others , who all affirm , All truth Divine is in Scripture , all not in Scripture is to be rejected : So Suarez , de leg . tom . 4. cap. 1. Haec enim praecepta Ecclesiastica pro universali . Ecclesia tantum sunt quatuor , qut quinque , quae solum sunt determinationes quaedam juris Divini moraliter necessaria homini . — Reliqua omnia vel pertinent ad particulares status qui voluntarie suscipiuntur , vel ad ordinem judicial●m . Et id●m contra seotae Anglica . Erro . lib. 2. cap. 16. Dicimus authoritatem Dei ( in benedictione Campanarum ) non de esse , saltem in radice & origine , quia ipse dedit authoritatem Pastoribus Ecclesiae ad regendam Ecclesiam , & disponenda , eaequae ad accidentarios ritus Ecclesiae pertinent . Bannes , tom . 3. in 22. q. 10. dub . 2. Notandum quod neque Pontifex , neque tota Ecclesia possunt novum articulum , novum dogma quoad substantiam , aut novum Sacramentum instituere . Andr. Duvallius , in 2. de legib . q. 4. Art. 2. Ceremoniae & judicialia in vetere lege erant juris Divini , in Nova lege sunt juris tantum Ecclesiastici : And Valdensis de Doctrina fidei , l. 2. cap. 22. Ecclesia non potest Novum articulum proponere : So Alphas . a Castro in summa , lib. 1. cap. 8. And Canus , loc . lib. 2. cap. 7. Cameracensis , 2. sentent . q. 1. Art. 1. Principia Theologia sunt ipsae s●cri Canonis veritates , quoniam adipsa fit ultima resoluti● Theologici discursus , & ex iis primo singulae propositiones Theologiae deducuntur . V. Conclus . Matters of fact are not , and need not be proved by Scripture : 1. Because sense maketh them known to us . 2. Their Morality is sufficiently known from Gods Word . 3. In matters offact there may be invincible ignorance : Christs Resurrection is not a matter of fact , as a Hugo Grotius saith , but also a matter of Law , as all the miracles and Histories in the Word , and to be believed , because God hath so spoken in the Word . QUEST . III. Whether Ceremonies have any Divinity in them ? ALL means of worship devised by men pretending holinesse , by teaching , exciting our dull affections to Devotion , as if they were powerfull means of grace , and did lay a band on the conscience , when as yet they be no such thing , and want all warrant from God , and are contrary to devotion , are unlawfull . But humane Ceremonies be such : Ergo , The Proposition is certain : I prove the Assumption by parts : 1. Whatever holinesse be pretended to be in Ceremonies ; yet God onely sanctifieth people , offices in his house , as the sons of Aaron , Altars , Temples , Vestures , Sacrifices by his expresse institution , as we are taught , b yet are Ceremonies holy ; their Author be the Apostles successours . 2. Their end to honour God. 3. Their matter is not civill or naturall . 4. Their signification mysticall , is Religious . 2. They be means of teaching and stirring up the dull affections to the remembrance of duties , by some notable and speciall signification , whereby the beholders may be edified ; and since to stir up the minde , as a memorative object be the word of Gods due property , or the works of Providence and Creation ; would not a Prelat in his Epistle to his under-Pastors , speak Peter-like , as , 2 Pet. 1. 13. I think it meet , so long as I am in this Tabernacle , to stir up your dull mindes , by way of remembrance to your Christian duty , by Crossing , kneeling to Gods board and Altar , and Surplice ; To be memorials were due to Phylacteries Commanded in the Law , to minde heavenly duties , Numb . 15. 38 , 39. Deut. 22. 12. And the twelve stones set up by Gods speciall Commandment , Ioshu . 4. 2 , 3. to be a memoriall of their miraculous entry into the holy Land , and Manna Commanded to be kept in the Ark , as a sign of Gods feeding his people with Christ the bread of life , Joh. 6. 48 , 49. 51. are Ordinances of God , to call to remembrance duties and speciall mercies : And Sacraments do signifie as tokens ordained of God , Gen. 17. 11. Gen. 9. 13. Heb. 9. 8. The Holy Ghost thus signifying , that the way to the holiest , was not yet made manifest : So Heb. 8. 5. Heb. 10. 1. And so must it be here said . The holy Prelats thus signifying , that Crossing should betoken the childes dedication to Christs service : So a Hooker : Actions leave a more deep and strong impression then the word . What blasphemy ? that Crossing and Surplice leave a deeper impression in the soul , then Gods Word , the power of God to salvation , Rom. 1. 16. And mighty through God to cast down strong holds in the soul , 2 Cor. 10. 4 ? I wonder if Crossing Capping ; kneeling to stocks , can bring every thought Captive to the Obedience of Christ . 3. It is essentiall to the word to teach , and make wise the simple , Psal . 19. 7. Psal . 119. 99. Prov. 6. 23. And Ceremonies are made Symbolicall and Religious teaching signes , yet is the stock called a Doctrine of lies , Jer. 10. 8. Habac. 2. 18. Though it teach and represent the same Iehovah that the Word teacheth , Isa . 40. 18. So it is not a living teacher , because it representeth a false god , or not the true God : for the true Iehovah saith , To whom will ye liken me ? But now the stock by mans institution took on it , without a warrant from God , to represent God. Now if God had warranted the stock to be an image representing God , as he warranteth the Temple , the Ark , Bread and Wine , to be images and representations of the true God Iesus Christ , the stock should be a Doctrine of truth , and not of lies ; so Surplice is a Doctrine of lies , not because what it teacheth is a lie , for what it teacheth is Scripture , Isa . 52. 11. That these who beareth the Vessels of the Lord , ( that is Pastors ) should be holy : but it is a Doctrine of lies , because it representeth Pastorall holinesse by humane institution , without all warrant of the Word of God. And when Paul calleth holidayes Elements , Gal. 4. 6. He meaneth that they spell to us , and teach us some truth , as a Estius saith , That holidayes do teach us Articles of Faith : To which meaning , b Paludanus , c Cajetan , d Vasquez say , God may well be painted in such expressions , as Scripture putteth on God , as in the likenesse of a Dove , as a man with hands , eyes , ears , feet , all which are given to God in Scripture . 4. It is essentiall to the Word to set down the means of Gods worship , which is the very scope of the second Commandment ; and therefore the Iews washings and Traditions are condemned , because they be Doctrines of men , appointed by men to be means of the fear or worship of God , as Math. 15. 9. Mar. 7. 8. Isa . 29. 13. Hence we owe subjection of Conscience to Ceremonies , as to lawfull means of Worship . 1. Stirring up our dull senses : And 2. as lawfull signes representing in a Sacramentall signification , holy things : 3. As teaching signes : 4. As means of Gods fear and worship : Whereas God ( as e Ainsworth observeth well ) in the second Commandment forbiddeth all images and representations : 2. All shapes , Exod. 20. 4. Temniah . 3. Forms of figures , Tabuith , Deut. 4. 16. 5. Any type of shadow , Tselem , Ezek. 7. 20. 16 , 17. 6. Any pictured shape , Maskith , Levit. 26. 1. Any Statue , Monument , Pillar , Mattesebah , any Graven , or Molten Portraict , Hos . 13. 2. 5. We are obliged to obey the Word , Exod. 20. 7. Prov. 3. 20 , 21. Prov. 8. 13. Ier. 6. 16. Ier. 5. 7. 2. We owe to the Word belief , Luk. 1. 20. Love , Psal . 119. 49. 81. Hope : 3. And are to expect a reward therefore , Psal . 19. 11. Rev. 2. 7. 10. 27 , 28. Gal. 4. 11. Rom. 6. 23. Coloss . 2. 18. Hebrew . 11. 25. Psal . 34. 9. Psalme 58. 11. Then if Decency be commanded , and order , in the third Commandment , Ergo , this , and that orderly mean of Worship , as Surplice ; But can we say , I hope in the Surplice ? O how love I crossing and Capping ? can we believe in Ceremonies , as means of Gods worship ? 6. The word is Gods mean to work supernaturall effects , to convert the soul , Psal . 19. 7. To work Faith , John 20. 3. To edifie , Act. 20. 32. To save , Rom. 1. 16. The obedience to Gods word , bringeth Peace , Psal . 119. 165. Comfort , v. 50. Gen. 49. 18. Isa . 38. 3. But Ceremonies , being apt to stir up the dull minde , must be apt to remove Naturall dulnesse , which is a supernaturall effect , and so to bring , Peace , joy , comfort : Organs are now holden by the same right , that they were in Moses-Law , then they must stir up supernaturall joy : There must be peace and comfort in practising them : Hear how this soundeth , This is my comfort , O Lord , in my affliction , that thy Surplice , Organs , and holy-dayes have quickened my dull heart . Now what comfort , except comfort in the Scriptures ? Rom. 15. 4. Ceremonies be innocent of all Scriptures . What joy ( a proper fruit of the Kingdom of heaven , Rom. 14. 17. ) can be in saplesse Ceremonies ? yea , observe , 1. Who truly converred from Popery , who inwardly humbled in soul , doth not abhor Ceremonies , by the instinct of the new birth ? 2. What slave of hell and prophane person call not for Ceremonies ? 3. Who hath peace in dying , that Ceremonies were their joy ? 7. All Lawfull Ordinances may by prayer be recommended to God for a blessed successe as all the means of salvation , Psal . 119. 18. Matth. 26. 26. Act. 4. 29 , 30. 2. We may thank God for a blessed successe , which they have by the working of the spirit of Grace , 2 Cor. 2. 24. 1 Cor. 1. 4 , 5. 2 Thes . 1. 2 , 3. Ephes . 1. 3. 3. We are to have heat of zeal against prophaning of word , Sacraments , Prayer , or other Ordinances of God : But what faith in praying , Lord work with Crossing , Capping , Surplice ? For where the word is not , nor any promise , there be no Faith , Rom. 10. 14. What praising can there be for Ceremonies working upon the soul ? What zeal ( except void of knowledge and light of the word , and so but wilde-fire ? Gal. 4. 17 , 18. Phil. 3. 6. 2 Sam. 21. 2. ) can there be , though the Surplice be imployed to cleanse Cups , and Crossing be scorned ? If the subject be nothing , the accidents be lesse ; if Surplice be not commanded , nor forbidden , the reverent or irreverent usage thereof , cannot be forbidden , nor commanded , true zeal is incensed only at sin , and kindled toward Gods warranted service . 8. I take it to be Gods appointment , that the Spirit worketh by a supernaturall operation , with his own Ordinances , in the regenerated , but we desire to know how the Spirit worketh with Ceremonies : Formalists are forced by these grounds to maintain the Lawfulnesse of Images : So 1. They be not adored : 2. If they be reputed as indifferent memorative Objects , and books to help the memory . But 1. It shall be proved that at first , Papists did give no adoration to Images , nor doth Durandus , Hulcot , Pic. Mirandula acknowledge any adoration due to them , but proper to God ▪ before the Images as objects . 2. We may liken God and Christ to a stock , so we count it indifferent , to make , or not to make such an image , yet likening him to any thing is forbidden , Isa 40. 18. Also we esteem it Idolatry interpretative , to take Gods place in his word , and to make any thing to be a mean of grace , except Gods own Ordinances : Against all these Formalists have diverse exceptions . As 1. Our Ceremonies ( say they ) do not respect the honour of God immediatly , and in themselves , but by accident , and as parts of Divine worship by reduction , as it containeth all the adjuncts of worship . Ans . Such Logick was never heard of : 1. If he mean a Surplice in the materials , to wit , Linnen and Crossing Physically considered , as separated from their signification , do not tend immediatly to the honour of God , but as an adjunct , he speaketh non-sense , for so Bread , Wine , eating , drinking , Water in Baptisme do not immediatly respect the honour of God , but only as they have a Morall consideration and stand under Divine institution . But yet so the materiall of worship is not the adjunct thereof , but the matter , as the body of a living man is not one adjunct of a man. If he mean , that Ceremonies in a Morall ( not in a Physicall ) consideration do not immediatly respect the honour of God , but reductively , and by accident . Let him show us , if the Surplice doth not as immediatly , and without the intervening mediation of any other thing , signifie and stir up our mindes to the remembrance of Pastorall holinesse , as eating all of one bread , doth immediatly stir up our mindes to the remembrance of our Communion of love , that we be all one body in Christ , 1 Cor. 10. 16. 2. If he mean Ceremonies as such speciall materialls , to wit , Surplice , &c. as ordained of man , who may ordain another Ceremony , doth not immediatly respect the honour of God. 1. This is to beg the question : 2. A white garment upon a priest of Jupiter Sacrificing to that Idoll should immediatly respect the honour of Iupiter , though the Priest might honour Iupiter with garments of white Roses , or some other like device , while he officiateth . So bowing of the knee in prayer doth immediatly honour God , though I may pray sitting or standing . 3. It is a dream that the honour of the subject is given to the adjunct , yea , and properly is the adjunct , and agreeth to the adjunct , as Surplice hath the very Office and place of Gods word and Sacrament● , to teach and signifie , and yet they are but adjuncts , if a mans Coat , or his Hat , or Shooes could discourse and reason , as only the man can do , in reason we should say the Coat is the man. 2. They say , God forbiddeth efficient and operative means of worship , and grace in the second Commandment , or means immediate which worketh by vertue in themselves , or wrapped in them , for so the word and Sacraments are means of grace and worship ; yea , the Sacraments be exhibitive seals , and therefore we owe to such means subjection of conscience immediatly , both to the things instituted , and particular means of admonition , and to the duties admonished or called to our remembrance by them , for they have vertue residing , and inherent in them , by divine institution to work upon us . But God forbiddeth not , in the second Commandment , means that teach occasionally , as Objectum a quo , therefore we owe subjection of conscience to the things admonished , but not to the particular means of admonition , therefore we are tied in conscience to Ceremonies only collaterally and propter aliud , they be only externall objects or occasions . For whoever ( saith he ) expected that men should be stirred up by Ceremonies , as by causes , or any otherwayes , but as by sensible objects , as we are by the sight of the creatures , or other memorials ? therefore ( saith he ) they are not means , by the which grace is wrought by the power of God wrapped in them , but resident in God himself , that freely giveth the grace , by the right use of them : so D. Burges . b Ans . All cometh to this , Ceremonies taketh the place of Word and Sacraments , but cannot fill the chaire , and discharge the office so well as Gods Ordinances doth : A Clown taketh on the Crown , and usurpeth the Throne , and cannot do Regall Acts , with such grace of Royall Majesty , as the Lawfull King , what , is he for that no usurping Traitor ? 2. He will not have Ceremonies to be causes of worship , but occasions so do Papists say : Images ( saith c Vasquez ) do only set before us the History and effects of God. Bellarmine , Suarez ( as all know ) do say , That Images cannot so represent Iehovah ; as he is in himself , or described in his word , nor can the Idoll or Image of ▪ God represent God , as a cause , but onely as an object externall and occasion , and yet God forbiddeth it , Isa . 40. 18. Hab. 2. 19. 20. 2. Gods word to the reprobate is a sealed Book , and is , as if you would teach letters , to a new weaned childe , Isa . 29. 11. c. 29. 9. It worketh by no inherent vertue wrapped in it self , but though it be mighty , yet is it mighty through God , 2 Cor. 10. 4. Ioshuahs twelve stones , the Phylacteries , the Manna , the Rainbow , did only , ( as d Aquinas saith well ) worke upon the senses and memory . The word it self doth but work morally or objectively , and is not a cause having the power of God wrapped in it . If Surplice work only as an occasion , the Preachers , Napkin , the bands of women doth so excite the memory and the affection : 3. All our Divines teach , that the Sacraments are exhibitive seals , but not of themselves , or by any vertue inherent in them ( as Papists say ) but by the power of God , which worketh by the right receiving of the Sacraments , and the Sacraments Actu Primo and essentially are only signes , which worketh objectively and occasionally , as you say your unhallowed Ceremonies do : 1. because they are Sacraments essentially , whether they be received by Faith , or not , and they are exhibitive seals only to believers . 2. Vnbelievers should not prophane the Sacraments by their unworthy receiving of them , if they were not Sacraments to them only signifying , and if they were exhibiting seals to them , then should they receive them worthily , which is against what we suppose : 3. The Fathers , as a Justine Martyr b Ireneus c Epiphanius d Chrysostom e Ambrose prove , that Circumcision , in its nature , except to believers , did only signifie Grace . 5. Here be a most vilde distinction , That we owe subjection of conscience to the thing admonished , but not to Surplice , or to such means and particular admonishers , but only collaterally : But ● . is the Church ordaining Ceremonies a collaterall Mistresse over the conscience , & who is the other collaterall judge here ? who but Christ ? 2. We owe this collaterall subjection of Conscience to the Image of the Trinity : for though we owe not subjection of Conscience to the image , as such an admonisher , or such an exhorting object ; seeing the Word of God may also admonish us of God , yet we owe subjection of conscience to the thing admonished , to wit , to the blessed trinity . 3. Neither owe we subjection of conscience to the word , as written with ink on paper , nor to the sound of the word Preached ; yea , nor do we owe subjection of Faith to the Word as the Word ; but only collaterall : when we say , ( I hope in the Word , ( I believe the Word , ) I rejoyce in the Word of God ) we take the Word , for Objetum quo , and God for Objectum quod , for the word is not the formall object of any subjection of Conscience ; I owe to the Word , not a subjection of Conscience collaterall or coequall with the subjection that I owe to ▪ God , but only subordinate as to a mean , and to the Word for God , and because it is instituted by God ; but I owe subjection of Conscience to God solely , independently , and onely ; yea , subjection of Conscience is not due to the Word for its manner of working , and not due to the Ceremonies ; because they work not as the Word of God doth ( as no wonder , they being but hay and stubble ) but subjection of Conscience is due to the Word , because God is the Author of it , and speaketh in it himself , as is clear , Ier. 13. 15. Amos 3. 8. Heb. 2. 3. Hear , for the Lord hath spoken , and it is to be received only , and in Conscience yielded unto , as it is the Word of God , Isa . 1. 2. 1 Thess . 2. 13. Now because we cannot receive the Surplice , Crossing , Capping , as the Surplice of God , and as the Crossing of Christ ; therefore are we not to submit at all to the Doctrines which these unlawfull teaching means doth bring to our memory , because they have no warrant of Christ , to speak or spell us the very language and minde of God , which God hath spoken in his word by his holy Prophets and Apostles : Yea , though crosses and afflictions work only upon us , as occasions , and externall objects ; yet are we to submit our Conscience to them , as to warnings , because they be sent as Gods Messengers appointed by him , as Mic. 6. 9. Hear the Rod , and who hath appointed it . 4. Ceremonies work ( saith Burges ) as sensible objects , and as other Creatures ; yea , but he is far wide , the Creature doth book ( as the word is , Psal . 19. v. 1. ) the glory of God , and that which may be known of God , is made manifest in them : and God hath manifested ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) these things by the Creatures , Rom. 1. 19. But Ceremonies are not books of Gods writing , God hath not written nor booked this upon a Surplice ( Be holy , ye who bear the Vessels of the Lord ) he hath written it in Isaiahs book , c. 52. 11. And we submit to the teaching of the Creatures , though they work not upon the soul , as the Word and Sacraments do , because God hath appointed such books to teach us ; Erg● , we are in no sort to submit to the Devils books , Printed by Prelats , or to their Ceremoniall Volumnes , because God hath written nothing upon them ; and here by the way , I say it is unlawfull , yea ▪ and Hypocrisie to be devouter then God will have us , as to enlarge the Phylacteries , and make them above Gods measure , Numb . 15. 38. To be humble by a mean not appointed of God , Ioh. 13. Or to do what God only should do , as to make Annointing Oyl besides Gods Oyl , Exod. 30. 31 , 32 , 33. Or to set a threshold and a post , beside Gods own threshold , Ezek. 43. 8. is presumption . Lastly , Gods spirit worketh not with Ceremonies , and so they are as the offering of Swines blood , and the slaying of a man ; and so Abomination to God , Isa . 66. 1 , 2. The holy spirit is merited to us by Christ , Ioh. 16. 14. He shall receive of mine , and shew unto you : But who can say that the grace of joy in the holy Ghost , wrought by the droning of Organs , and the holinesse taught by Surplice , is a work of the spirit merited by Christ as our High Priest ? 3. God hath made no promise that he will work by Ceremonies , for the spirit worketh not without the Word ; so then I might resist the working of the spirit , and not sin against the Word ; and this is Anabaptists Enthusiasme : If God work not by them , they be vain and fruitlesse ; and the Idol is unlawfull for this , that it profiteth not . Also , the spirits action is either naturall or supernaturall here : If naturall , it is a naturall work , and a naturall spirit , and to be rejected : If supernaturall , we may devise means to produce supernaturall effects , mens Ceremonies can produce supernaturall joy , comfort , peace , and acts of grace purchased to us by Christs merit ; this is a miracle . 3. They say , All this may be said against your Circumstances of time and place , for they are appropriated to Religious uses , and not for that made holy parts of Divine Worship . 2. Time and place , are new things as our Ceremonies are . 3. Spirituall signification maketh Ceremonies so much the better , but hindreth them not , but that they may be Rites of meer Order : Burges . Ans . Time , Place , Pulpit , Table-cloath , are new , Physically , often , not new Morally , or Religiously , they have no Spirituall influence in worship . A civill declamation hath the same time , place , pulpit with a Preaching ; for then , if for application , you call them Religious , as D. Ammes saith well , An hill whereon a Preacher Preacheth , a Iudge perswadeth a Law , a Captain speaketh to his Souldiers , is both a Sacred , a judiciall , a Military hill , 2. Signification spirituall , maketh Ceremonies capable of being ordered : for Surplice wearing , and Crossing , being Doctrinall , as teaching signifying , stirring up the dull affections , as doth the Word and Sacrament , they require order and decency : Now things of meer order , requireth no ordering , as time & place require not other time & place to circumstance them right . 2. This is that which Papists say ( as c Suarez ) that by consequent only , they have signification putupon them . Now fourthly , The place , Matth. 15. where Christ reproveth the Traditions of Pharisees , as Doctrines of men . The Jesuit Vasquez his Answer is their Answer : Vasquez , Tom. 2. in 12. disp . 152. cap. 4. That Christ reproveth them not because they kept the Traditions of the Elders ; Sed quod in falsis praeceptis Divinae legi contrari isputarent esse summam Religionis : Because they believed all Religion to stand in their Traditions , which were contrary to Gods Law , and for their own , omitted Gods Commandments . And Suarez , Tom. de legib . lib 4. cap. 2. He reproveth what they added , Tanquam nova , as new things : Corduba , Ad. victor . rel . 1. de potestate Ecclesiae , q. 3. Prop. 6. But Chrysostom , Hom. 32. in Matth. Thinketh better that they had no power to make Laws ; yea , d he condemneth the Laws written in their forehead . But this exposition is false : 1. They brought in Traditions at first for vain glory , to be called Rabbi , Matth. 23. 7 , 8. Ergo , they thought them not at first of Religious necessity : 2. Mark saith , cap. 7. 5. Why walk not thy Disciples according to the Traditions of the Elders ? Therefore the externall practice , and not the internall opinion of necessity and holinesse is condemned , as is clear . And when the Pharisees saw some of the Disciples eat bread with unwashen hands , they found fault . The challenge was for an external omission of an outward observance , which may be seen with the eyes ; Ergo , these Traditions are not condemned by Christ , because they were contrary to Gods Word , or impious ; but in this , that they were contrary , because not Commanded ; for in the externall Religious act of washing hands , there was no other impiety of a wicked opinion objected to Christs Disciples : for if the Pharisees eye had been satisfied in that the Disciples should wash before they eat , they would not have contended with Christs Disciples , about the Piety of these Traditions , nor about any inward opinion , that they added under this Reduplication as new , as Suarez saith : But the Church which cannot erre , including the Jewish Pope , the High Priest , can adde nothing as new contrary to Gods Law ; nor is there any question betwixt the Pharisees and the Lords Disciples : Whether the Traditions of the Elders , should be esteemed the marrow and sum of all Religion , as Vasquez saith ; But only anent externall conformity with walking in the Traditions of the Elders , or not walking , as is most clear in the Text : It is true , Christ objected they accounted more of mens Traditions , nor of Gods Commandments , as Papists and Formalists do : But that was not the state of the question betwixt the Disciples of Christ and the Pharisees . 2. Christ rejecteth these Traditions , by an Argument taken from the want of a lawfull Author , while he calleth them Precepts of men , opposed to the Commandments of God , and while he saith v. 13. That every plant not rooted by his heavenly Father , shall be rooted out ; Yea , and Christ expresly proveth their worship vain , because they taught the fear and worship of God , by the precepts of men , and not by the word of God ; and Ceremonies are the precepts of men . 3. Mar. 7. 10 , 11 , 12. He alledgeth their corrupt and false exposition of the fifth Commandment , in saying , It is a gift whereby Parents may benefit , which Children offer to God , though they help not their Parents in their poverty ; & necessity , & so you free them from obedience to the fifth Commandment of God , by setting up your false glosse ( saith Christ ) which is a human tradition . Then to Christ this is a good argument , your corrupting of the fift Cōmandment with your false glosses is a rejecting of Gods 5. Commandment ; why ? because it is a doctrine of men , and one of the Pharisees Traditions : For whether they placed operative sanctity in preferring mens Commandment to Gods or not ; none can deny but Christ reasoneth against these evils , because they were mens Traditions , otherway Formalists shall be forced to say , that if the Pharisees have esteemed them Arbitrary , and of no operative sanctity , mens Commandments had not been vain worship ; Christs Argument from Isa . 29. should prove nothing , for false glosses and corrupting the fifth Commandment is not vain worship , because it is a doctrine of men ; for Doctrines of men as only coming from men , and esteemed Arbitrary , are not vain , saith Formalists ; yea , except they be contrary in the matter to Gods Law , and proffered or equalized in the opinion of sanctity to Gods Law , they are not a whit vain , because they come from men , or are doctrines of men . 4. Christ defendeth his Disciples practice in abstaining from externall not-washing ; Ergo , he esteemed the externall washing unlawfull : But if the Disciples abstinence was because of the impiety of washing , and the opinion of sanctity put upon washing , otherwayes Lawfull ; he should have defended his Disciples in a thing unlawfull ; for to disobey the Elders and Church-guides , who sate in Moses's chair , and were to he obeyed , Matth. 23. 2 , 3. in an externall indifferent act of washing not contrary to the washings commanded in Moses Law , and so negatively conforme to Gods Law , is Lawfull , as Formalists and Papists both teach ; but Christ defended his Disciples in their non-obedience externall , for they were not challenged , for denying the opinion of operative holinesse to these Ceremonies : Christ who commanded obedience to sitters in Moses his chair in all things Lawfull , would have obeyed himself , and cleared his Disciples in so far , as they ought to obey , or not to obey . 5. Vasquez sayes , These Traditions were unlawfull , because they were invented , Sola voluntate hominum absque ratione , by the sole will of men without reason . But so are Popish Ceremonies , for if they can be proved by the word of God , and the light of nature , they are essentiall parts of Gods word , and not accidentall , nor left to the Churches will. 2. It is good then the Iesuit confesseth the Church from sole will , and so the Pope and Prelat can make no Laws , but either Scripture or natures light must warrant them , and sole will cannot rule them : 3. They had as good reason in generall from Moses his writings , and the Law-washings , as Pope and Prelats have for their Traditions . But saith Vasquez , Christ complaineth of these traditions , because they held them to be , Summam Religionis , the marrow of Religion , and took no care of Gods Law. Ans . That will no more prove them to be vain worship , and that the Disciples were to be justified in their non-conformity to these Church washings , then that Gods Disciples , and sound believers under the Old Testament should abstain from keeping Gods Sabbaths , his new-Moons , and from offering Sacrifices , because the people placed all holinesse in these of old , and neglected works of mercy and justice , Isa . 1. 11 , &c. Jer. 7. 4 , 5 , 6. But ( say Formalists ) Christ condemneth them because the Pharisees thought , eating with unwashen hands defiled the conscience , and meat defiled the soul , when the eaters did not wash as the elders commanded : Whereas Christ saith , It is not that which goeth in at the mouth , which defileth the man , but the wickednesse that cometh out at the heart . Ans . It is true , and I think Pharisees believed meat eaten contrary to the Elders Traditions , defiled the conscience , as is clear , Mat. 15. 16 , 17 , 18. And that also Christ condemneth , as a Doctrine of men , and of ignorant men , and so doth non-conformity to your Ceremonies pollute the conscience as a breach of the fifth , and second Command as you say . QUEST . IV. Whether humane Ceremonies can consist with Order , Decency , and the sincerity of our profession of true Religion ? CEremonies fight with Order and Decency . 1. These Rites pretended by Gods command , to adde order and decency to Gods worship , and yet deface his worship , and addeth none thereunto be unlawfull : But humane Ceremonies be such ; Ergo , That they pretend Order is proved . D. Burges saith , They have no place in all the New-Testament , save only , 1 Cor. 14. 26. Let all things be done in order , and decency , a place as ( a ) Estius citeth , Magnified by Papists , for all their Ceremonies : The Major is undeniable , I prove the Assumption : 1. Because Magick-like Rites honoured with Gods name as Christian-Masse , Christs-Masse , an Adored Tree called Gods board , when there is no use for a Table , a Crossing honoured with dedication to Christs service , is like Gods name used by sorcerers in Charming , Spelling , Divining , where vertue is ascribed to signes , characters and words , which have no such vertue from God or nature , and this Valentia justly calleth Superstition . b So the Iews called the Calfe Jehovah , Papists call a creature of their making , Agnus Dei , a stile due to Christ only , Joh. 1. 29. 2. All creatures are means of glorifying God , Rev. 4. 11. Prov. 16. 4. Rom. 11. 36. And may be invited to praise God , as Psal . 148. Now it were strange bleating , to say , O Crossing , Surplice , Praise ye the Lord , when things ordained by mans sole will , and so idle and sinfull , are made means to glorifie God ; with as good reason dancing in the Church , and blowing feathers in the Aire , which have by nature or reason , no aptitude for these ends , may be decent means of glorifying God. 2. Order and decency supernaturall in the Church is in the Word , Cant. 6. 4. Clear as the Sun , terrible as an Army with Banners : Nothing wanting Gods institution can reach a supernaturall end , as our Ceremonies are : 2. But also Ceremonies relatively sacred in Religious state must be more then civilly decent , as also right order produceth supernaturall joy , Gal. 2. 5. Civill order cannot do this : Or 3. Ceremonies adde naturall order , but this is not in colour , Religions colour is supernaturally white , ingenuous , not whorish : 2. Or then it addeth order of parts , and this is by right , grave , and convenient circumstantiating of things in Gods worship , and Paul dreamed never of Crossing to grace baptizing : 3. Or it addeth due quantity , Religious worship hath no quantity but time . 4. It is against sense , that order is commanded in the third Commandment , but not Surplice , Crossing , because they are by accident orderly ; what agreeth essentially to the generall , agreeth not essentially and necessarily to the speces and particulars which are by accident under that generall , as what agreeth to a man , agreeth not to white and black men . Decency is commanded , but by accident , and by mans will Surplice is decent . But then God commanding Sacraments , should not command Bread and Wine , sor they are by accident , and by Gods will Sacraments , he might have chosen other Elements , yet the will of God commanding Sacraments , commandeth this and this Sacrament also : What agreeth essentially to man , agreeth essentially to all men black and white . If Gods will essentially concur to constitute decency in his own worship , then must that same will essentially concur to constitute this decency , in Surplice , Crossing . 2. It supposeth a great untruth , that Crossing is not worship , because not ordained of God , but that proveth it is not Lawfull worship , but not , that it is non-worship , for Crossing used to the honour of Baal , and to edifie souls in performing their duty to Baal , is essentially a worshipping of Baal , otherwayes worshipping of Idols is not Worship , and yet it is an Act of Religious honouring of the Idol . 3. The Command that commandeth , or forbiddeth the end , commandeth and forbiddeth the means ( Thou shalt not murther ) forbiddeth the Master , not to command his servant to ride an extreamly deep and impetuous River , though the not riding of such a River be not set down in the word , and it is not forbidden as an Arbitrary action : If therefore decency binde the conscience , then the decency of this Rite , to wit , Crossing bindeth the conscience ; Our Ceremonies are not Nationall ; for Crossing being a Religious Rite , in all the world it s alike decent ; Ergo , non ▪ Crossing in some Country cannot be undecent ; Things meerly Religious , as all significant Ceremonies are of alike nature every where , and admit not of heat and cold with divers climates , are of good or evil manners , with divers Nations , therefore they must be determined in the word ; the man who Pre●aced on our Service book said , without some Ceremonies it is impossible to keep any order , or quiet Discipline in the Church . I am sure he must think that Paul preached in some Surplice that he might teach holinesse with his garments one way or other , he hath a stronger Faith then I can reach ; without circumstances worship cannot be , but without Romish dirt , the Worship and Discipline are better kept ▪ then with such whorish busking . Also whatever is a profession in fact , of a false Religion by Ceremonies indifferent , and yet proper to a false Religion , is a denying of the true Religion , but the using of these Ceremonies , used by Papists and Iews is such ; Ergo , The Proposition is Scripture , Gal. 2. 14. Peter lived after the manner of the Iews , in using the Religious materials of the Jews , though he had no Iewish intention or opinion ; yea , Acts 10. he disputeth against that : So Circumcision , Galathians 6. 14 , 15 ▪ is put for the Jewish Church . Now Altars , Organs , Iewish Ephods , or Surplice , Masse ▪ cloaths , and Romish Crossing , bowing to Altars , Images , are badges of Iewish and Popish Religion : We know the dispute betwixt Augustine and Ierome , who defended Peters d●ssimulation , Gal. 2. to gain the Iews : But Augustine saith , Epist . 9. Si propterea illa Sacramenta celebravit ( Paulus ) quia simularet se judaeum , ut illos lucrifaceret , cur non etiam Sacrificavit cum Gentibus , quia & iis , qui sine lege erant , tanquam sine lege factus est , ut eos quoque lucrifaceret ▪ Yea , then ( as Augustine saith to Ierome , Epist ▪ ad Hyeronym , 19. ) We might use all the Iewish Ceremonies to gain the Ievvs , and so fall in the Herersie of Ebion and the Nazarites . Duvallius , 2. Thom tract . de legib . q. 3. Art. 3. would defend Peter in that ; but he saith , Magis placet Barronii Responsio . Tom. 1. Annal. an . 51. Petrum venialiter peccasse : As for Pauls Circumcising of Timothy , Papists clear him . Vasquez , Tom. 1. in 12. disp . 181. cap. 8. Lo●o & tempore accomodato , He did it when he could not offend the Gentiles : Aquinas , 12. q. 103. Art. 4. Yea , so the Fathers , as Augustine , Epist . 19. Chrysostom , Cyrill , Hyeronym . Also Papists , Bensonius , tractat ▪ de fuga , lib. 1. disp . 1. q. 4. ad Articul . 4. Vasquez , Tom ▪ 1. 12. disp . 182. cap. 4. Brove to use Iewish Ceremonies , though with no Iewish minde is unlawfull : Suarez Tom. de legib . lib. 9. de leg . Divin . pos . cap. 14. Vsus Circumcisionis ex prohibitione est factus malus , & actus malus non honestatur propter intentionem bonam . Aquinas 22. q. 11. c● 12. q. 103. Art. 4. As one should mortally sin , who should say , Christum nunc nas●iturum , Christ is yet to be incarnat , So the using of the Iewish Ceremonies were a lie in fact . Cajetan , and Toletus , acknowledge a lie in fact . Salmeron , in Gal. 5. q. 2. saith , It is unlawfull to use the Iewish Ceremonies . Aegidius Comick ▪ de actib . supernatural . lib. 2. disp . 15. dub . 3. ● . 39. Nullo modo licet obullum ▪ finem , uti Ceremoniis propriis falsae Religionis . Vasquez , 12. disp . 182. ● . 48. Patres & Doctores communiter tenent non licere : Lodo. Meratius Iesuita , to . 1. in Thom. tract . de legib . disp . 19. Sect. 2. n. 5. Mentiti fuissent Apostoli usurpantes exteriores legis Mosaicae Ceremonias si non ex anim● usurpabant , tanquam sibi vere licitas , ex animo vere colendi Deum per illas , sicut ab aliis per easdem colebatur . So Grego . Valent. Tom. 2. disp . 7. punct . 7. q. 7. Soto de justif . l. 2. q. 5. It is a Religious scandall to the users of these Ceremonies : for Ceremonies devised by men , of no necessary use in Gods worship , are monuments of Idolatry , snares drawing the practisers to Idolatry , and so unlawfull , as the High places , Groves , Images , though not Adored of the Canaanites . This Argument is so learnedly prosecuted by D. Ammes , that I adde nothing to it . QUEST . V. Whether the Ceremonies , especially kneeling in the act of receiving the Sacrament , be guilty of idolatry ? VVHoever presumeth to invent a worship of his own , committeth Idolatry interpretatively , because he worshippeth a God whom he conceiveth is pleased with false worship : But that is not the true God , for he is pleased with no worship , but what he hath prescribed himself ; but all inventers and practisers of humane Ceremonies , worship such a God : Also , all who usurpeth the room and place of God , give the glory of God to creatures ; but all Authors and practisers of humane Ceremonies , take the room and place of God , from God , and give it to creatures , because to ordain worship ; and all Religious means of worship , is proper to the only wise Law-giver : But for the clearing of this Question , I divide it in some subordinate Questions . SECT . I. Whether Religious kneeling , laying aside our intention and will to Adore that before which we kneel , of its own nature be Adoration ? This Question is most necessary , both against Papists and Formalists : But first remember , that a Raphael de la Torres , a late Schoolman , maketh seaven Adorations : 1. Bowing of the knee . 2. Prostration . 3. The lifting up of the eyes . 4. Of the hands to Heaven . 5. Kissing . 6. Knocking on the Breast . 7. Uncovering of the head : Though this last be not Adoration , but a Nationall sign of Reverence , and is not every where Adoration ; yet b Abulensis saith , the Iews did pray and Sacrifice with covered heads : So saith c Virgill , and d Lod. Vives : Therefore the Corinthians had this from the Grecians as a civil sign of gravity , which should not be banished from Gods worship ; and if it be appropriate to an Idol , it should in that case be made Veneration : But no Reverence at all is due to an Idol . Jesuits , as e Suarez ▪ and others , and Formalists , Morton , Burges , Hooker teach us , That Religious bowing before a creature , if there be no intention of Adoring , is not Adoration : But it is to be considered ; 1. Bowing of the knee Physically or civilly ▪ is indifferent and is not Adoration : for we bow to Kings , and Artificers may bow the knee to drive a nail in a bed , and yet are not Adoring ; but Religious Adoration , whither ye will or not by natures impression is a Religious note of Religious submission . 2. I consider four acts of the soul that may convoy externall Adoration . 1. One of the minde , a consideration of the excellency of what we Adore : 2. A will to submit to this excellency : 3. The judgements diting this to be honest to submit : 4. A purpose or intention habituall or actuall of Adoring ; many of these may be where there is no Adoring : and the Religious externall bowing of the body is essentially Adoring , when that bowing is in a state of worship : kneeling before consecrated Elements for Reverence of either God or the Elements , must be Adoration , though we should wash it with foul water , and say , that there is no intention to tender Gods glory to these Elements . 3. Let it be considered what is said by the f Jesuit Joannes de Lugo , the Popes Professor at Rome , which I propound with some change : 1. There is a purpose of externall Adoring , with an inward submission of the heart ; whether this be an habituall or actuall intention , it ▪ is sure it is an Adoration , when it cometh forth in a gesture of Adoring . 2. A will to bow the body in scorn and derision , as the Souldiers bowed the knee before Iesus ; and this being not in a state of worshipping , but in a state and ●ase of disgracing , is not Religious bowing or Adoration : This is not a naturall expression of inward submission , but rather of disgrace . 3. There is a willed or voluntary Religious bowing for fear , for gain , or for glory ; yet without any internall estimation of the excellency of the thing Adored . This Suarez denyeth to be worshipping , it being only a faining of worship , not a worshipping . But I prove the contrary : 1. Because then no enacted worshipping of Idols , were indeed a worshipping of an Idol , and yet all the time that the Adorer boweth his knee to the Idol , though he have no inward purpose of heart to Adore the externall bowing , must be a naturall expression of actuall submission to the thing before which we bow , and a conciliating of an opinion with others , of Religious eminency and subjection of Divine dignity , to that thing before which we kneel . 2. Religious kissing of the Calves of Samaria , Hos . 8. is a naturall expression of Religious love to these Calves , though the kisser have no intention of worshipping ▪ 3. Act. 14. 11 , 12 , 13. The men of Lystra are reproved for Sacrificing , and so for Adoring-men ; 15. Sirs , Why do ye these things for we also , are men of like passions as you , and Preach to you that ye should turn from these Vanities to the living God ? Barnabas and Paul rebuketh the men of Lystra , because they worshipped men with humane passions ; yet did they not intend to worship men , for they were to them in that act of worshipping , Gods in mens shape , as they say , v. 11. Gods are come down to us in the likenesse of men ; if they conceived them not to be men indeed , but Gods come down from heaven ; then could they not intend to worship men , but Gods : So Iohn would not , nor had any purpose to worship a created Angel ; but taking him to be God , he fell down and worshipped , as is clear by the Angels reproofe , Rev. 19. 10. He said unto me , See thou do it not , I am thy fellow servant : Likewise , Act. 17. The Athenians set up an Altar not to the Pourtraict of gold , which yet they worshipped , v. 2. 4 , 5. but intended not to worship it ; But the God which made heaven and earth , whom Paul preached : So are the Gentiles said to offer to Devils , not to God ▪ what they offer , 1 Cor. 10. 20. Deut. 37. 17. Psal . 106. 37. and 2 Chron. 11. 15. Peroboams Calves are Devils ; and yet they intended not to worship Devils , but God , that brought them out of the Land of Aegypt , 1 King. 12. 28. 4. If Religious kneeling require that we intend to worship every thing , before which ; as an object , we do Religiously kneel ; then Religious kneeling should not signifie in ernall submission of the heart by natures impression or Divine institution ; but by the voluntary and the free institution of him that kneeleth : But this ●a●ter is absurd , for if kneeling should signifie , what it doth signifie by our free and voluntary appointment : Then we might 1. put upon naturall gestures what sig●ific●tion we pleased , and were not to stand to the signification which God and nature have put upon kneeling . 2. So it were in mans power to impose upon Religious kneeling to God , civill curtesie , such as a subject expresseth to his Prince , or a son to his Father , and it were free to us to kneel to a stock , and that Religiously , and yet put upon kneeling the negative reverence , that we give to the Bible ; and it were in the three childrens will to kneel to N●buchadnezzars Image , and impose this signification on the g●sture , that they were kneeling to God only , all which are manifestly false : so g Field saith , kneeling hath institution from the instinct of nature . They Object , 1. The externall act of kneeling signifyeth the inward submission of heart , but there is no inward submission of the heart to a thing to which we kneel , when we are compelled to kneel only for fear of men , or induced to kneel for hope of glory , or some by-respect without any intention or purpose to adore , therefore this externall Adoration is a false signe , and signifieth not a thing as it is , and so is no worship . Ans . That externall bowing is not true , but false : I distinguish , it is not true Morally , because it is a false signe , and a sinfull abusing of worship , for there ought to be a bow●d heart , when there is a bowed knee , but if the meaning be , this externall bowing is not true metaphysically , and partaketh not of the nature of Religious worshipping , it is false , for it is truly worship , and the essence and definition of worship agreeth to it : for from Religious bowing there resulteth by the nature of the externall Act , which is of divine institution , an honouring of that before which we do bow , as before a proposed object , what ever be the present purpose or intention of the bower : else if I bow to an Idol intending , and conveying in my heart-purpose all honour to God only , I should not worship an Idol : The three Children cast into the fiery Furnace did but refuse externall bowing to Nebuchadnezzar , and would hazard upon burning quick , before they should give that to the Image ; for the Kings commandment was not , that all should give and convey in purpose of heart to that Image all divine glory , but only Religious prostration before it ; yet the three Children say , Dan. 3. Well , be it known to thee , O king , that we will not serve thy Gods , nor worship thy golden Image , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They expresly refuse knee-bowing , & the reason is , because if ye bow your knee Religiously to a stock , it is not in your power or free choice , to stay the flux and motion of Religious honour off , or from the stock ; but because Religious bowing doth not convey honour to the thing before which ye bow by your free will , but by God and natures institution , even as weeping naturally expresseth sorrow , laughing , gladnesse , so doth Religious bowing signifie Religious honouring , without any act of the free choice of the worshipped intervening . It is impossible to adore God , in and through an Image , and give no Religious reverence to the Image at all ; as it is impossible to hear the word and tremble at it ; and yet none of that Religious trembling be bounded and terminated upon the Word ; as it is impossible to kneel to the Kings Ambassador conveying all and whole that civill honour to the King , but some honour must redound to the Ambassador ; a father cannot love the Doctor for his sons cause , but some love he must confer really upon the Doctor , if not absolute , yet relative , for his sons cause . Jacob could not kisse Joseph his sons coat , and yet refer that whole expressed affection to Ioseph and nothing at all to the coat , for then should there be no reason , why he should kisse the coat , rather then the skin of the beast supposed to be the devourer of his son ; if therefore the Communicant should kisse the Sacramentall Bread , as he boweth Religiously before it , as the object of his Sacramentall worship , which he receiveth , I hope it would be thought very like the kissing of the Calves of Samaria , and a Religious expression of love to the bread , and by the same case , Religious bowing to God , by the interveening of bread a representative object , must be an expression of Religious honouring of Bread , but no Religious honouring by Religious bowing can be expressed , but Adoration of bread ; for as I have proved , it is not in our free Election that Religious kneeling signifie what honour we please , as if it were in our power , that Religious kneeling signifie Religious , or civill honour , or more , or lesse Religious honour , but our will or thoughts cannot change the nature of things ; kneeling is essentially Religious , as a Iohannes Delugo defineth it , Nota submission is internae . 2. b Suarez objecteth , Adoration is a voluntary action proceeding from the will of the Adorer ; and therefore excluding this will , it is not Adorations , but only the materiall action of adoring ; also adoration is honouring , but none can honour without an intention of honoring , and therefore he who externally giveth signes of honour to an Idol without an intention to honour the Idol , doth not truly honour and adore the Idol , but only dissembleth . Ans . Qui bené distinguit benè solvit : Our third distinction doth well answer this : The naked materiall action of bowing Physically considered , wanting all Religious will of adoring is not an honouring ; if a Carpenter bow before an Image to drive a naile in it , he doth not worship the Image , because that is an action , In statu artis , non in statu Religionis ; In a state of Art , not in 〈◊〉 Religious state : But the voluntary bowing before any thing in a state of worship , or Religion , as it s here , is Adoration ; for there is voluntary bowing in a Religious way of a state , but there is not required a particular intention to Adore the signe , that is accidentall to the nature of worship . Suarez objecteth , The e●●●nce of Adoration requireth the intention of the Adorer , therefore the adoring of this , or that thing , requireth a proportionable intention of adoring the thing . Ans . 1. The Antecedent is not universally true , and is a begging of the question , because externall adoring of an Idol may be without intention to adore an Idol . 2. Though the Antecedent were true ; that an absolute Adoration of God requireth the intention of the doer , as it is not true ; Lawfull and sincere Adoration indeed requireth the intention , but not absolute adoration : Though ( I say ) it were true , yet it followeth not that a relative adoration requireth an intention of giving co-adoration or relative worship to the signe . Suarez . 3. Objecteth : The honouring of one thing cannot properly be called the honouring of another thing different therefrom , except that honouring be some way referred by the minde , to that other thing , or except they be partakers one of another ; but the Image , and first samplar , or prototype are different things , therefore the honouring of the first samplar cannot be called the honouring of the Image , except the honouring by the intention be referred to the Image . I answer , The Image and Samplar are one in a sinfull imagination , as Jehovah and the Golden Calf are one , but it followeth not , that there must be two distinct intentions , one in adoring the Prototype , and in coadoring the Image another : But he who intendeth to honour the King in his Ambassadors person , needeth not two intentions , one by which he intendeth to honour the King , another whereby he intendeth to honour his Ambassador . SECT . II. Whether the Idolatrous Jevvs were charged with the crime of Idolatry , because they adored the creature as such , or because they adored the Godhead in , with , or under the creatures shape ? and whether or no , do Papists commit Idolatry with them in this point : LEt these considerations go before . 1. That the Jews believed the Image to be God by vvay of representation , not essentially or really ; they believed the Image to be God objective , commemorative , representative , relative , declarative , significative ; Non essentialiter , non per se , non realiter . 2. There is an honour or negative r●verence due to any Image of God , ordained by himself , or to any mean of honouring God , because it is such , though it cannot be expressed in the act of Adoration ; but the question is , if the honour of adoration , either relative or absolute be due to the Image ? 3. The Jews intended to honour Jehovah in their Images , what inferiour intention they had to honour the Image , we are now to inquire . 4. We bow our knee two wayes before a creature , either before a creature as an object by accident , as while we pray , there of necessity must be before us some creature , a wall , a Table , a Pulpit , none of these are adored , because they are before us by accident , as having no Religious state . The Image before the Iew , and the Sacramentall elements before the kneeler , cannot be thus present : 2. The creature is before the kneeler , of Religious purpose , as a Religious object . 5. The Creature is Religiously present before the kneeler two wayes , 1. Active . 2. Passive . 1. In the meer and naked act of teaching and exciting the memory , so that when that act is past , I turne from the creature , and adore the Creator ; So at the sight of the Sun or Moon being taught and instructed of the wisdom and power of God , in creating such excellent creatures , I am to turn from them , and adore the Lord of these creatures . Thus the creatures are kindely and per se objects in the act of teaching , but not objects at all in the act of adoration : 2. The creatures are objects passive , when bodily bowing in a religious state is directed toward the creatures really and bodily present by a commandment of the Church , or of purpose , and so they are made objects of Adoration . I. Conclusion . The relative expression of God which is in the works of God , is no formall ground of any Adoration of the creatures . 1. Because Adoration upon this ground , though the creatures , the Hoast of Heaven be excellent , is forbidden , Deut. 4. 19. 2. Not only Images ( which cannot represent God ) and the Sacraments , but all the creatures , even , Rats , Mice , Flyes , Frogs , Worms , Iudas and wicked men , yea , and Devils are to be worshipped , because all things having being , are shadows and footsteps of God , their cause , first Author , and last end , Psal . 19. 1. Psal . 103. 22. Rom. 1. 19 , 20. Act. 17. 27 , 28 , Prov. 16. 4. Rev. 4. 11. Rom. 11. 36 , 37 ▪ 3. Because God is really , and by the diffusion of his blessed essenc● , present in all creatures , it followeth not that we should Adore them : The Formalists upon this ground , that Christ is really present in the Sacrament , though the manner we know not , think that Christ should be Adored in the Sacrament , according to that , Verbum audimus , motum sentimus , modum nescimus . But if this be good Logick , because we know not the way of the Spirit , and how the bones grow in a woman with childe , Eccles . 11. v. 5. And God , where he worketh , is present by the immediation of essence and power , though we know not the way of his presence , we are to Adore the soul of man , and the bones of a young childe in a womans belly ; & though they should say that God-man Christ is in a more powerfull and efficacious manner present in the Sacrament , then in the works of nature ; yet should it follow , that God is to be worshipped in the works of nature also ▪ for Magis & minus non variant speciem , for then we could not conclude any thing but this : Though there be not so reall a ground of Adoring Lice and Frogs , as Adoring of the Sacrament : Yet there is a ground , seeing God is , in the realli●y of his blessed essence , present in all creature● . II. Con●lusion . The Idolatrous Jews did not . Adore the golden Calf , as a crea●ure , but as God by representation , Exod. 32. 4. And when Aaron had made thereof a golden Calf , they said , These be thy Gods O Israel , which brought thee up out of the Land of Aegypt . 5. And when Aaron saw it , he built an Altar before it , and Aaron made Proclamation , and said ▪ To morrow is a Feast to Iehovah . Now that they believed not the golden Calf to be really and essentially Iehovah , is more then evident : 1. Because they believed not Moses to be essentially God , but their guide and leader under God ; but this Calf they made to supply the want of Moses , v. 1. The people gathered themselves together against Aaron , and said unto him , Vp ▪ make us gods which shall go before us : For as for this Moses the man that brought us up out of the Land of Aegypt , we know not what is become of him . They made then the Calf only a visible God under Iehovah , to lead them in Moses his place . 2. There is no reason why they should have made Aaron rather the maker of the Calf then another ; but because he being the Lords Priest , they thought by his holinesse , the God head of Jehovah did slide into this Calf ; and so they held the Calf to be a thing different from Iehovah . 3. They say to Aaron , Make us gods : Ergo , they believed Iehovah to be before this made Calf . 4. They saw the Calf melted before their eyes , & knew it was made of their ear-rings . 5. They call it Iehovah , & yet they made it Iehovah , and therefore they differenced betwixt the Calf & Iehovah : for they knew that Iehovah brought them out of Aegypt before the Calf was framed , but the Calf was an Image of that Iehovah . a Bellar. and b Gregor . de Valent. say , They worshipped not Iehovah , but a vain Idol : Else how is it said , Psa . 106. when they made this Calf , that they forgot the Lord , if they worshipped God in the Calf , they were mindefull of God. It is vain reasoning this , the wife that taketh another Husband to bed with her , Morally forgetteth her husband ; and to worship God in a memorative signe forbidden of God , is a forgetting of God , and a false God indeed . 2. Those who acknowledge that the Heathen believe that some Godhead dwelt in Images , and gave Responses and Answers out of them ; do thereby acknowledge , that the Image it self had not the honour of giving Responses , as God hath , but that the inclosed Godhead gave these Responses , and therefore the inclosed Godhead was that which they worshipped . So c Aquinas , and d Vasquez saith , The Heathen acknowledged a Godhead to dwell in the Images : And e Bellarmine saith , It is not improbable that the Iews believed that they worshipped the true God in an Idol : Papists then may take to them Heathens Idolatry , for Heathens worshipped God in Images , and not Images as they are such : and f Abulensis , and g Cajetan in the Commentaries of the first Edition , on Exodus , said this same . 3. Though the Iews believed the Calf to be essentially God , yet it was God as God ▪ that they intended to worship , not the work of mens hands as such : Papists believe that the Image is not God , and yet give the highest worship that is to them . 4. Bellarmine saith with us , when he saith , They saw a Calf in Aegypt and Adored it , they believed Jehovah himself to be a Calf , therefore they made the image of a Calf , and Dedicated it to Jehovah . But ( I Answer ) That Image so Dedicated , they worshipped as Iehovah , and called the very materiall Calf Iehovah , and Dedicated it to the Honour of Iehovah ; therefore they believed the Lord Iehovah , and the Calf Dedicated to his Honour , ( which Calf also they worshipped ) to be two divers things , as the Image and the thing signified are Relata and opposite : Ergo , they believed not that that Image which Aaron had made , was Iehovah essentially ; therefore in setting up that Image , they worshipped it not as a creature . All the Prophets ( saith he ) proveth that the Idols are not gods , because they speak not , they neither see , nor hear , Isa . 46. Psal . 113. But ( say some Papists ) there was no question if they did see and hear by way of naked representation , because they represented gods and men in shape , who see and hear . Ans . first , If all granted they were living things , which did hear and see by representation ; the Prophets did well to prove , they should not be trusted in , nor feared as Images , nor should that Godhead within them inclosed , be feared , because it cannot speak with the mouth , nor see , nor hear , nor walk , with their eyes , eares , and feet : and so it was a vain thing to make it a representation of God , who by serving these dead things did help them . But the Prophets strongly prove these Images , and the supposed Godheads in them , were dumbe , deafe , blinde , and dead ; and therefore neither sign , nor supposed deity represented by the sign , was to be Adored . Also , Isa . 40. 18. To whom then will ye liken God ? Or what likenesse will ye compare unto him ? 19. The Workman melteth a graven Image , and the Goldsmith spreadeth it over with gold , &c. Isa . 46. 5 , 6. To whom will ye liken me ? and make me equall , and compare me , that we may be alike ? 9. I am God , and there is none else ; I am God , and there is none like me . Then it is more then clear that they made a likenesse , a comparison , and a similitude betwixt the golden Image and Iehovah : Ergo , they believed not that the Image was essentially God ; for every thing like to another , must be divers from that to which it is like ( they being relatives and opposites ) the one cannot be essentially the other ; and he proveth they are not God by representation , Isa . 46. They cannot move out of their places , except they be born upon Asses or mens shoulders : And this is the Holy Ghosts Argument , I am God , Ergo , there is none like me by representation to be worshipped : All assimilation or comparative likenesse made by man , betwixt Iehovah and God , is an Idolatrous assimilation ; yea the Lords Argument , Isa . 46. is this , every thing made like unto me , before which ye fall down to worship , as a memorative Image of me , must be a living thing at least , that can move out of his place , and answer your cry when ye pray , and save you out of trouble , ver . 7. Isa . 46. And yet it is but a likenesse of God , ver . 6. Now I Assume , but the Papists Image , and the Formalists Sacramentall elements before which they Religiously kneel , cannot move out of their place , nor answer the Prayers of those who bow to them , nor save them out of trouble : Ergo , they cannot be Adored as Images , with Religious bowing ▪ nor can they say , the Images or Sacramentall elements can teach and represent God. I Answer , So did the Iewish Images represent God , and yet God convinceth them of Idolatry , Isa . 40. 18. Isa . 46. 6 , 7. Ier. 10. They were but Doctrines of Vanity and Lyes , and Hab. 2 19. Woe be to him who saith to the Wood , Awake , and to the dumbe stone , Arise , it shall teach . And though the Sacramentall elements be lawfull teaching and representing signes , as being the Ordinances of Christ Jesus ; yet the office of teaching cannot elevate and extoll them to the state of Religious worship , because though the elements be lawfull Images , and in this they differ from Iewish and Popish Images ; yet that which is Adored must be such as can hear Prayers , Isa . 46. 7. though it be the Image of God. But the Sacramentall elements are not such as can hear Prayer , &c. Also , that the Adoring of Images is not forbidden by a Ceremoniall Law only , is clear : 1. By Gods Argument , ( Isa . 40. 18. ) To whom will ye liken me ? That is , no created thing can represent God , which is of mans devising ( for the elements of Gods institution do represent Christ ) and Isa . 46. 9. I am God , and there is none beside me : Ergo , no invention of man can represent me . This Argument is taken from Gods nature , and therefore is of perpetuall verity . 2. The Apostle Paul in the New-Testament repeateth this same Argument , Act. 17. to the heathen Athenians who were tyed by no Ceremoniall Law of God , ver . 29. We ought not to think that the God-head is like unto Gold ; You see these people are challenged of Idolatry , who did but erect an Altar to the golden likenesse and Image of God , and yet they did not worship that golden Image , as such ; but they worshipped in , and by the Image , v. 23 , 24. The God preached by Paul who made the world . Hear what a Suarez b Bellarmine and Papists say , It is not Lawfull to represent God by a proper and formall similitude , which representeth his essence ; but it is Lawfull to represent him by Images Analogically , signifying such a forme or shape in the which he appeared in Scripture , according to these metaphors , and mysticall significations , that are given to him in Gods word . Ans . 1. Why should not unwritten Traditions ( which to Papists are Gods word ) expresse to us Gods nature in Images , no lesse then the written word ? 2. The Heathen did represent God by the Image of a man , with eyes , nose , tongue , ears , head , hands , feet , heart , understanding , all which are given to God in Scripture , yet were they Idolaters in so doing , because God saith , Isa . 46. 9. I am God , and there is none like to me . 3. If we may portraict ▪ God according to all metaphors given unto him in Scripture , then ye may Portraict him , in the shape of a Lyon , a Leopard , a Bear , a Man full of wine , a Theef stealing in the night , an unjust Iudge , a Gyant , a man of War on horse-back , &c. All which were folly ; and we might worship a Lyon , a Bear , an unjust Iudge , a theef stealing in the night , a man mad with the spirit of jealousie . 4. The Essence and specifick nature of nothing in Heaven and earth , can be portraicted or painted , no more then Gods essence ; all painted things are but such and such things by externall proportion and shape ; and it is unreasonable to say that Portraicts and Pictures of God , Physically impossible to the Art of Craftsmen , are forbidden only ( whereas the Lords word setteth down to us no precepts for Art , as for painting , Musick , speaking right Latine ) whereas the Lord forbiddeth universally Gods pictures in any thing in heaven , on earth , or under the earth , Deut. 4. 15. Take ye therefore good heed to your selves , for ye saw no manner of Image on the day that the Lord spake to you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire . Gregor de Valent. saith , We give not divine honour to the creature as to God , or to Christ , for that honour pertaineth to God or Christ , which conciliateth to him reverence due to God only , and that opinion of divine honour is conciliated to God , or Christ , Coram , & in imaginibus , before , and in , or through the Image . Ans . The people of God had not that opinion every way of Egypt , and their horses , that they had of God ; and yet when they , Isa . 31. give that to Egypt and horses , which is due to God , to wit , their Faith and confidence , that they could save in the time of trouble , therefore interpretatively they made Gods of them ; otherwayes they knew literally , that Pharaohs horses were flesh and not spirit : but Morally and spiritually they knew them not to be no Gods to save them : It is no more absurd that the Prophets say , The Idol hath eyes and see not , and that it is not God , though by sense they knew it not to be God , but by representation they trusting in the Idol as in God , then it was for Isaiah to say , The horses of Egypt are flesh and not spirit : A wife , if she give her body to a stranger , though not with that opinion of love and respect which is only due to her husband , is yet an harlot , and the people who sware by Iehovah , and by Malcome , who worship Iehovah , and Ieroboams Calves , and those who worship the Image of an Ash-Tree , representing Iehovah , Isa . 40. 18. Isa . 46. 6 , 7. did not give honour to Malcom , to the Calves , to the Images , Sicut Iehovae , as to God. See Roinalds Answer . But ( saith he ) we cannot worship God , but we must conceive some Image of God in our minde , are we therefore Idolaters , because in these Images we worship God ? and Valent. saith , and so doth the Formalist Lindsey say , That God may be adored before the Sacramentall elements as Images . Ans . We are not forbidden to adore God in the inward conception of minde , Deut. 4. Ye saw no manner of similitude , but not , yea thought no manner of thoughts of God. 2. The internall image of God in the minde is the objective conception of God as conceived in the minde there is no hazard of Idolatry there , for that Image is not adorable at all , because then it must be conceived by a new different Image , and that new different Image must be cognoscible by another new Image , and so in infinitum . The externall Image is both made an active object to represent God , and when we religiously bow to it , it is made an object passive , that is adored with God. Lastly , If the Iews and heathen had adored their Images , as they were such creatures consecrated , and as essentially Gods , the Lord would not have rebuked them for making an Ash Tree the similitude of a God , as he doth , Isa . 40. 18. Isa . 44. 9 , &c. And all that I said in the former question proveth the same . So that though Divine honour in the Act of kneeling before the elements be intended to Christ , yet because the elements are there as actuall signes , and Vicegerent Images of Christ , if we kneel to Christ Religiously through them , we give them divine honour , though we should intend to honour Christ Iesus only . SECT . III. Whether Papists and Formalists give that divine honour that is proper only to God and his son Iesus Christ to Images , and the elements of Bread and Wine ? I. Con. TO adore Images is to give worship to God before Images , or , in , or through the Images without any Faith of a Godhead , or divine power in the Image according to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome . I prove this out of their Councels . a The Councell of Trent saith , Due honour and veneration is due to the Images , not because it is believed , that there is any Divinity and vertue in them , for the which they should be worshipped ; but because the honour given to them is referred to the samplar , which they represent ; that by these Images vvhich vve kisse , and before vvhich vve uncover our head and bow dovvn ; vve may adore Christ , and the Saints which these Images resembleth : Hence 1. the Image doth but , as a memorative object , excite the affection to give honour to God , in , and through the Images ; but 2. Let these words be examined , the Councell denyeth any divinity to be in Images , but if they mean no divinity really to be in Images , so they say nothing against us ; for we do not ascribe to Papists that they teach there is a reall God-head in the Image , but that all that is really in it , is Wood , Gold , or Mettall , and so did the Gentiles believe their Images to be teaching books , Hab. 29. Ier. 10 , 8. Deut. 4. 19. Isa . 40. 18. & 46. 6 , 7. Act. 17. 29. and gold and silver ; but say they , What needed the Prophets to prove that gold and silver could not see , nor hear , nor deliver in time of trouble , reason would here convince them to be ten times blinde , who believed any such thing . Ans . The Prophets do well to do so : Nor that the Heathen believed there was any Godhead in them formally , but because they ascribed actions to these images , that were due to living creatures , and made them to be such as did see , hear , move , deliver ; So Isaiah proveth Egypts horses not to be God , but flesh , yet they did not believe there was a Godhead in the horses , but Consequenter , by good consequence , when they laid that hope on the horse , that they were to lay upon God , he had need to say the horse vvas flesh and not God : So when men give to these things , bowing of the body , and say unto a stock , Thou art my Father : God may prove the stock is not a living man , and hath no sences , to convince them the more , that they can far lesse be Gods Vicar ; for a Vicar or Deputy creature representing the living God , should be such as can do what God doth ; else we should put on it the honour due to God : But if the Councell mean , They have no divinity in them , but by way of representation , because they be Vicaria dei signa , signes resembling the Creator God ; Now if this be denyed , the images must be naked memorials before which people do adore God , as Mirandula , Durandus and others said , and yet latter Papists say more of their own Images : But I would have it remembred , that there be two sorts of deputed or Vicar-Images ; some that do only signifie , as the darknesse of the Skie going before the morning light in the East , that doth nothing at all which the morning light doth , but nakedly signifieth that the Sun is rising : There be other Depute signes that can exercise acts , which the samplar would do , if it were present , as the deputy is not a naked Vicar or depute signe of the King , for he doth not only signifie the Kings minde , but can do Royall Acts in the Kings name : Images are depute signes of God , of the first sort , that do only rub the memory and understanding , and therefore deserve no honour except the honour due to the means of worship , as the Bible , Sacraments , which deserve not Adoration , but onely a Negative Reverence , or a not dispising or contemptuous handling of them , Images being unlawfull meanes , and not Commanded of God , deserve no Veneration at all ; and though it be true , that the Ambassadour deserve Princely Honour , for the Princes Place , whom he representeth ; yet he can act the person of the Prince , and is not a naked deputed sign , but Images are therefore convinced to be unlawfull deputies representing ( as Idolaters made them to be , Isa . 40. 18. Isa . 46. 6 , 7. ) Because they can do no acts at all , nor exercise any actions proper to the samplar , for Psal . 115. v. 6. They have mouths , but they speak not , eyes they have , but they see not , 7. They have eares , but they hear not ; and therefore should not be trusted in , as in means and deputed representations of God , for which cause the Prophet inferreth ver . 8. They that made them , are like unto them , so are every one that trusteth in them . ver . 9. O Israel trust thou in the Lord. Therefore Religious trusting in them is Idolatry : But the Canon of Trent saith this same of their Images , to wit , that there be no Godhead or vertue in them . 2. If the worship of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the higher service due to God , be given to Images , as I prove hereafter , then also some deity or Divine vertue ; for Gods highest honour can no more be communicated to any , save to God , then the Godhead it self ; for a Relative Godhead is as due to stocks , as a relative worship . 3. If the Tridentine Canonists will have divine Adoration given to God Coram imaginibus , before Images , or at their presence , as only memorative signes , & active objects exciting us to worship God , then is our Thesis proved : But if they mean that God is Adored , Coram imaginibus , before images , as not only memorative and active objects , but also before them as passive objects , that are compartners under God of some divine adoration ; then I say 1. they contradicted themselves , for Gods highest honour called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , can not be given to them but by a figure , because they are Gods , & have divinity in them only by a figure , and not really : for Suarez & Vasquez denieth that we can fix our hope and faith in Images , or make prayers to them , Nisi modo figurativo & tropo duriore , by a figure , and a hard troop , and most improperly and by that same reason must be given to stocks and stones most improperly , and that is , men do religiously bow before them , as before memorative objects . 2. Gabriel b Vasquez saith well , There can be no footstep of holinesse in the image , beside the excellency of the samplar , nor any divine vertue wherefore it should be worshipped ; for there is nothing in the image of it self , but that which is senslesse , and lifelesse , and spiritlesse and no man can in a Religious way submit himself to such a creature ? Hence it must be a naked memorative sign , and therefore the kissing of the Image , though Physically it be reall , and not Metaphysicall , yet moral it is not propper , seeing all religious affection in that kissing is transferred to God. And we know Vasquez alloweth , that every thing , as it is a being , and resembleth God the first being , is to be Adored , and so stones , — Frogs , the Devil , Judas lips that kissed Christ , are to be Adored . So their seventh pretended Synod c faith , That the Honour due to God is not to be given to images , according to our faith , only at the beholding of Pictures we are put in minde of the samplar : And the same saith Mr. Lindesey , is the way of Adoring God in the Sacrament . But so the Gentiles , as saith d Arnobius , and e Lactantius , yea , and the Apostle f Paul ●aith Adored images ; yea , and God would g not forbid similitudes of God to be Adored , except he did teach that the heathen Idolaters worshipped similitudes , and so the Papists in that vulgar verse said , they Adored not the Images , but the thing signified by the Images . Effigiem Christi dum transis , semper Adora : Non tamen effigiem , sed quod designat , Honora . Let me adde these reasons to prove they cannot Adore the Image , but as a memorative sign : 1. The Image and the elements in any consideration , either as creatures , or as the honourable act of representation is put upon them , are but creatures ; for the act of representation is a temporary Godhead , and maketh them but Time-Gods ; Ergo , they cannot be Adored . 2. If there be two Adorations here , one given to God , and another to the Image , and if both be divine honour , there must be two collaterall Gods ; if Adoration prove Christ to be God , two divine honours put upon things , one upon God , and another upon the Creature ; there must be two Gods , or then the Creature remaining a Creature , must have Communion with Gods high honour , which is Idolatry . 3. Images and elements are either worshipped for themselves ▪ or for some other thing ; if for themselves , they are God , for only God for himself is worshipped with Divine honour ; if for God they be worshipped , then it is an inferiotr , and improper worship , and therefore they must be worshipped as memorative objects . 4. Images and elements , if they partake of externall worship proper to God : Why may not Sacrifices and Incense be offered unto them , and faith and hope fixed on Images ? They do not partake of internall worship : for as Vasquez saith well , inward worship consisteth in Apprehensione primi principii , & in motu ad illud ; in apprehension of the first Author and Creator of all things , and in the wills motion toward it . But this apprehension cannot be put upon Images or elements , therefore they be here significant objects only . So their second Councell h of Nice , as Epiphanius a Deacon , in name of the Synod saith , Images were present before the kneelers , as our elements are , only as memorative objects . 2. That the singular affection of Adoring , was bounded only upon God : And i Concilium Senonense saith , Images are to be Adored , not because there is any Godhead in them , but for the memory of the samplar : And k Concilium Moguntinum , Images are not propounded that we should worship them , but that we may call to minde the things which we are to worship . If therefore we Adore God at the presence of the elements , as memorative signes we do Adore the elements ; but if the kneeler direct all his worship before the elements , to Christ up at the right hand of the Father : Why then ( as Lactantius said well to the Gentiles ) do they not turn away their senses and eyes off the elements ? For Christ is not substantially inclosed in them , and lift them up toward heaven , where they believe Christ to be ? But in so doing the elements should not be received as Sacraments , for in the act of receiving we are to fixe our souls upon the visible elements : If the Athenians did believe the golden image , Act. 17. 29. was essentially God , and kneeled to it as to God ; Paul did in vain rebuke them for believing that the Godhead was like silver or gold ; and if the men of Lystra believed the shapes of men , and the likenesse of men to be essentially God , and in that respect gave the honour of Sacrificing due to God , to these shapes ; then the Scripture in vain should bring these men of Lystra in , as putting a difference betwixt the shapes of men , and the Godhead of Jupiter and Mercurius , to which they were about to give Divine Sacrifice . And if Formalists kneel before the elements , and give a transitive glory to Christ through them , they are in the same sense Idolaters that the Gentiles were . So the Councel of Moguntine , l and Alphonsus de Castro m deny that they Adore the letters of the Name ( Jesus ) drawn with base ink ▪ or the Tree of the Crosse ; but they Adore the signified thing : Yea , saith n Waldensis , He that beholdeth the image , almost forgetteth the image , while as he is ravished with the thing signified : as many see a man clothed , and yet being asked , they cannot declare the colour of his clothes , the minde is so much set upon the man : Yea , the Adorer may hate the painted image of Christ , because the rude ignorance of the painter , when he Adoreth Christ in the same image , though he may love some morall representation in it . This Doctrine is taught by o Gregorius , and by p Adrianus , and q approved by a Councel at Rome under Stephanus the third . II. Conclusion . Grosser Papists go a subtiler way to work , and do avouch that the very Latreia and supream worship that is proper to God , is given to the Image . Though the creature saith r Suarez cannot , Primo , & per se , principally , kindly , and of it self be worshipped or adored with Latreia , the supream worship due to God , yet it may be co-adored , with the same honour that is given to Christ , as is the Kings purple Robe : So the first Distinction is of Adoration and co-Adoration , or Adoration kindely , and by it self , and Adoration with another . Henriquez ſ saith , It is a fault that it is not preached to the people , that the image of Christ is to be adored with supream worship called Latreia t . Crabrera saith , many Schoolmen are of this mind ; and so doth w Azorius x Archangelus Rubeo y Iacobus de Graphiis , Let us worship ( saith he ) every Image with that same worship , with which we worship the samplar : That is , let us bestow the worship highest of Latreia , upon the Image of God and Christ , and the signe of the Crosse , as it bringeth us in minde of Christs suffering : The second distinction is , that the Image is truly properly adored , as the materiall object no lesse then the samplar : Hence they reprove Durandus , Picus Mirandula , Hulcot , and others , who say that Images are improperly adored , & a Raphael de la Torres answering to that of Durandus and Mirandula , That Images are adored by accident , in respect that before them , and at their naked presence , as before memorative objects , we adore God and Christ ( saith he ) ( are adored by accident ) is thus to be understood , Images are adored , Ratione Alterius , by reason of another , Vel per aliud , by another thing , but this argueth not that Images are improperly adored , hereby onely is denyed that there is any adoration of the proper excellency of the thing adored . Hence he would say that the borrowed honour of Adoration given to the Image is truly and properly the Adoration that is due to God , but it is given to the Image in reference to God , and not for any inherent Excellency that is in the Image : For ( saith he ) If we do not properly adore the Image , we do but exercise the materiall action of kissing and kneeling to the image , without any internall affection of submission to the Samplar : He addeth that it is enough that the intention of submission is referred to the samplar , and the external Adoration to the Image , for if any shall ( saith he ) kisse the earth ( as the rude multitude in some place doth ) upon an intention of inward submission of heart to God , Nequaquam vere & proprie adorat terram , he doth not truly and properly adore the earth , but only he exerciseth a materiall action of kissing toward the earth : But I answer , all this is vanity , for such a one worshippeth the earth , but referreth the internall submission to God , and all this , is to say the Image doth truly partake of the Religious honour ( Latreia ) due to God only . A third distinction is here , of b Gabriel Biel on the Canon of the Masse , In the Adoring of images ( saith he ) and of other things which are adored by accident , though there be an externall act of bowing both to the images and the samplar , yet there be two internall acts which are different , vvhereof one is terminated and bounded upon the image , not absolutely as it is such a materiall thing of stone , or mettall , but as it is an image : This is an acknowledgement whereby I esteem the Image a thing ordained to represent Christ , or a complacency whereby I rest on such a thing , as to be honoured for Christ , and the other i● a recognition , and acknowledgement immediatly terminated and bounded upon the samplar , whereby it is acknowledged to be the chiefest good . But the truth is , Religious geniculation before the image , or at the presence of the image ( saith c Durandus ) as if the samplar were there present , is one and the same adoration given to the image and the samplar ; and all that d Gregorius de Valentia saith against this , is , that Durandus minus circumspect● locutus , he spake not so warily , as need were : And so did their e seventh pretended synod speak , as f Leontius expoundeth them , Non liguorum aut colorum naturam adoro , absit , and g Vasquez saith , They displease some in so speaking , but they mean well : They meant all that which our Formalists do ▪ and there is no discord ( saith h Gabriel Biel ) in re , in the matter it self ; for both say ; 1. that the creature should not be adored with the highest honour ( Lateria ) of it self , as if it were the object of Adoration : 2. Both teach that the minde and affection is carried toward the samplar , which is adored : 3. Both mean that the adorer exerciseth some act upon the image , as it representeth the samplar , only the diversity is , if this act terminated on the Image , should be called an adoring of the Image ; and all these three Formalists do to the elements in the supper : Hence I require of the Formalists , one difference betwixt the objective presence of the elements before the kneeler , in the act of receiving , and the objective presence of the Heathens image of God , Isa . 40. 18. & 46. 6 , 7 , 8. and the Papists image of dumb wood , and blinde stone : Mr. Lindsey answered me once in a conference , That the elements were present as the Ordinances of God , but the Popish and Heathen images as the inventions of men . I replied to him , That is no answer : for images and elements ( I know ) do differ , Physicâ specie ; The Sun adored by Persians , and Satan by Indians differ . Satan and the Sun , are not Ejusdem speciei , of that same nature , but it is idolatry to worship either ; images and bread in the kind of means of worship differ , but , as touching the objective presence before the kneeler kneeling to these , there is no difference : as 1. To memorative objects : 2. As to objects vicarious and standing in the room of Christ : 3. At their presence and through them God is adored . i Suarez , is not content with the doctrine of Durandus here , By this , images are ( saith he ) but occasions , Vel signa excitantia hominem ad prototypum adorandum , non vero ●es quae adorantur , or signes moving the m●n to adore the samplar , but they are not things adored : for ( saith he ) the man , vvho seeing a beautifull creature , ariseth in ●is minde to the consideration of the Creator , and therefore praiseth and loveth th● Creator , cannot be truly said to praise and love that fair creature , thoug● the presence of that creature have stirred up the love of the Creator , and by this means images are reserved only for memory . Thus he will have images adored with the same worship that is given to God : But I answer : 1. if he shall kisse that creature and direct Religious bowing toward it , and and through that external Religious act , convey his worship to God , and give no other externall adoration and signe of heart submission to God , then that which is tyed and alligated of purpose to that fair creature , as Papists and Jews did of old , who kissed the calves , and fell down before the images , as Isa . 44. 17. which yet were but memorials of Iehovah teaching them of Iehovah , Esa . 40. 18. Esa . 46. 6 , 7. Hab. 2. 18 , 19. Such a one should also worship that fair creature : Our Formalists do not make the elements memorative signes representing Christ , for that they have by divine institution , but upon that ground they kneel before them , and tie , by the Churches Commandment , the externall Religious bowing toward them , and that ( saith the act of our new Assembly at Perth ) in reverence of God , and in due regard ( Religious regard they must mean ) of so divine a mystery , and in remembrance of so mysticall a union : 2. God hath no other externall bowing made to him in the act of receiving , then is made before these elements , in due regard of so divine a mystery , and because of so mysticall union ; the union is reall , whether it be by consubstantiation , or transubstantiation , they wil not define , the Lord Iesus is present in the elements , in a more reall and spirituall manner , then he is in any groundlesse image of mettall or wood ; and therefore the image and elements do most really partake even by Durandus and Hulcot , and Mirandula their minde of that worship of ( Latreia ) due to God ; only Durandus ( as Vasquez , and Gregor . Valent. say ) spake not so warily , but not so grossely , as to say , What ever is given to God , is given to the image : 2. It is not in the Adorers power that kneeling should be a signe of lesse worship , as referred to the image , and of greater , as referred to God ; for the same materiall kissing , and Religious Prostration , which would immediatly be conveyed to Christ , if he were in person present in the image and elements , is done to the image and elements , and Religious kissing , and Religious kneeling signifieth internall divine submission of heart to God , as the first author of all , and the last end , not by mans will , but by divine institution . 3. Kneeling to God is a protestation ( saith k Gregor , de Valent. ) That we are willing to raise an opinion of excellency in God , as this excellency is in some manner , and relatively in the image . If therefore kneeling of its own nature , without any act of mans will , or the Churches institution , wanting Gods Word , do conciliate an opinion of excellency ; to whomsoever kneeling is directed , in this it must conciliate the same opinion : if then it it be given to Images and elements , it must be a protestation that we are willing to conciliate an opinion of Divine excellency in these lifelesse creatures , which is all we give to God by kneeling . 4. It is not enough that Valentia saith , This honour belongeth to Christ , in so far as it conciliateth to Christ the honour due only to God , and is expressed by kneeling , & it belongeth to the images so , as Coram , & in illis , before , and in them this opinion is conciliated to Christ : But if the image be God only representatively , and by way of signification , then is it not God of it self and really , Quod est tale tantum significativé , non est tale per se , & realiter , as a painted man is not of it self , and really a man ; the word ( Iesus ) as written with base ink , is not infinite Iesus , the mighty God , the Prince of Peace , really , but only in meer signification : therefore to give Gods honour and externall Religious bowing ( which essentially doth note the highest excellency of God ) to them , is Idolatry : It is a vain thing to say , The Ambassadour is not really the King ; yet the reall honour due to the King , is done to him . I Answer , where the King declareth that it is his will , that his Ambassadour be really honoured as himself ; this is not the giving of the Kings glory to another against his will : But here expresly contrary to that ( Thou shalt not bow down to them ) expounded especially of similitudes , Deut. 4. 15. Ye saw no manner of similitude . The glory of Religious bowing contrary to Gods will , ( Who will not give his glory to another ) is given to images , and to Bread. 2. It redoundeth kindely to the King , who is absent , and to be obeyed in his absence , that His Vicegerent and Deputy be honoured as himself , and presupposeth an infirmity in the King that he cannot be in many places to receive immediately the honour due to him , and therefore will have that due paid to himself , mediately , by the honoured person of a Deputy . God infinite is in all places , to receive immediately the pay of Religious knee-honour , and it dishonoureth God to have his glory laid down in the hand of any creature ; as it dishonoureth the Husband that his wife give her body to another , representing his person : For this cause l Bernardus Puiol faith , Images are properly to be Adored , contrary to that which Durandus saith : And m Azorius saith , It is the common opinion that Images are to be worshipped with ( Latreia ) the highest honour due to God : So ( saith he ) Thomas , Alexander , Bonaventura , Richardus , Albertus , Paludanus , Alman , Marsilius , Capreolus , Cajetanus , & caeteri juniores sic sentiunt . The fourth expression of wit , is this distinction of n Vasquez , That that internall submission to God , as to the Creator and chief God , is due to God only ; and that the image , seeing it is a Creature , is not capable of that high honour . But the externall act of kissing and kneeling , he will have due to the image , for the excellency of the Samplar . And so he denyeth contrary to Suarez , That the image separated from the Samplar , or the humanity of Christ separated from Divinity , can be Adored : But if externall Adoration may be given to images ; so also internall submission : ( Thou shalt not bow down to them ) Religiously it is expounded in the second Commandment , ( Thou shalt not Worship them . ) It is grossenesse in Vasquez to say , The Worshipping of images was forbidden the Iews in the second Commandment , as a Ceremoniall inhibition , because of the Iews propension to idolatry : But Act. 17. 29. Paul expoundeth the second Commandment , Forbidding the similitude of God : And the Athenians were not under the Law of Ceremonies . Ioannes o de Lugo saith , This is a probable opinion : But it is clear , Cornelius a devout man , one who feared and worshipped God , whose Prayers were heard in heaven for Christs sake , knew that Peter was a man which lodged in the house of Simon a Tanner ; yet his Religious externall bowing ( though he knew Peter was not God , but a Divine man resembling God ) by Peter is rebuked as idolatry , Act. 10. v. 25 , 26. I cannot help Ioan. p de Lugo , to say , That Peter forbade Cornelius to worship him , not because it was a sin , but for modesties cause . But 1. Peters Argument striketh against idolatry , ver . 26. ( Stand up , ( he forbiddeth Religious kneeling ) for I my self also a man ) The very Argument that Paul and Barnabas useth , Act. 14. ●er . 15. We also are men &c. and used against the idolatry of Lystra , expresly condemned in that place : And the Angels Argument against the idolatry of Iohn , Rev. 19. 10. I am thy fellow servant , Worship God ; Ergo , externall Religious bowing should not be given to any , save to God. 2. Peter and the Angel should have opened the Jesuits and Formalists distinction , if worshipping of Saints and dumbe images be worshipping of God , and the honour principally of inward acknowledgment of the Supremacy and Soveraignty of God , be intended , in bowing to images , and modesty should not forbid honouring of God : And whereas Ioannes de Lugo saith , Iohn was forbidden to Worship the Angel , to signifie that our nature in Christ was advanced to a dignity above the Angels . But 1. then it is unlawfull to any to worship Angels . 2. Nor is it Lawfull to give the Virgine Mary Divine worship , as Suarez saith : 1. For her excellency in touching Christ . 2. For her Grace and Sanctity . 3. For her mothers place in bearing Christ ; because her nature in Christ is not exalted above the nature of other believers , for the nature common to all believers , and Eadem specie , was assumed by Christ . 3. The Angel saith , ( Worship God ) he therefore believed the Worshipping of Angels was not the Worshipping of God. All these fight against Religious bowing before the elements , in due regard of so Divine mysteries : the Bread would say ( if it could speak ) See thou do it not , for I also am a Creature . The fifth trick of wit , is a distinction of q Suarez , That one and the same act of Adoration may be given , and is given in externall Worship to the image and to God , but in reference to God , it is Latreia , the high Honouring of God , and in reference to the image , it is an inferior Veneration : So do our Formalists say , as r Burges saith ▪ Adoration and Veneration differ not but by mens will ; and if it be lawfull to Adore God before the Ark , s Why not at the Sacrament ? The Bread and the Wine are Christ significative , ( as the Ark had the title of Iehovah ) by occasion of the elements , not as they are , but as they signify ; we may tender a knee-worship , not at all to them , but only to God or Christ . And again , t he holdeth it lawfull to Adore the elements , but then Adoration as given to the elements , is Veneration , and Adoration in a large sence , 1 Chron. 29. 20. The people Worshipped God and the King : The outward Adoration was one , as the word by which it is expressed was one ; but the Religious and Civill worship were distinct in the minde and intention of the worshippers . Edward , the 6. Book w saith , Kneeling is to eschew prophaning of the Sacrament . Opposit to prophaning is externall Religious honouring , expressed by kneeling , and that is Adoring . Hence one and that same Adoration and externall bowing , is given to Bread and to Christ ; but the minde and will of the Adorer maketh the same act in reference to Christ , Adoration , or Latreia , of the highest degree of honour ; but in reference to the Bread , lawfull Veneration of an inferior nature . Answer 1. If it were possible that the Wise could transmit her body in the act of Harlotry , by , or through a strange Lover to her Husband , her will and minde might change Adultery ; if she saith , she giveth her body to a stranger , but in her minde and will intendeth to bring forth children to her own Husband : So if divers acts of the minde , make Religious kneeling to a stock or Bread lawfull , if one should Adore the man Iudas as a memoriall of Christ , his intention of will might save his Soul ; if he say , I give one and the same externall worship to Iudas and to Christ : Or if Cornelius should say , I give one and the same knee ▪ worship , to Peter and to Christ ; but in my intention they be far different : For I Worship Iudas and Peter in that act with Civill homage Commanded in the fifth Commandment , as they be Christs Apostles , and represent him ; but in that same I Worship Christ with the highest honour , called Latreia : Vasquez and Burges make them one externall Worship . The three Children might have kneeled to the Image of Nebuchadnezzer , for their minde and will ( as Formalists say ) might have put another signification of honouring the Lord Iehovah , upon their knee-worship ; and externall kneeling could not have been denyed to the Lord Iehovah ; and so the three Children should not have given Divine honour and knee-glory to the Image , and they were fooles who did hazard their bodies to the fire : But wisemen think , if they had given knee-worship ( what ever their heart thought ) they should have obeyed the King , yet they professe disobedience , Dan. 3. 18. We will not worship thy graven image . 2. Neither think we the Athenians gave that same honour to the similitude Act. 17. 29. of God , that they gave to the God that Paul Preached , who made Heaven and earth , v. 23 , 24. Yet in giving Worship externall to both , they were Idolaters , ver . 29. Nor did the men of Lystra give the same heart-honour to the Deities of Iupiter and Mercury , which they gave to the shapes of men ; yet are they Idolaters in that . 3. Mr. Burges saith , Israel 1 Chron. 29. 20. in one and the same act ( externall ) Worshipped God and the King , because one and the same word expresseth honour both to God and the King. But how shall we call that act ? Civill , or Religious , or mixt ? and did they transmit Latreia , divine honour through the King to God ? he hath a Metaphysicall faith who beleeveth such dreames , because one word is used to expresse both the worshipping of God and the King , therefore it was one externall act of worshipping , and differenced in the minde and intention of the worshippers ; the consequence is most weake , 1 Sam. 12. 18. All the people greatly feared the Lord and Samuel , Prov. 24. 21. My son , feare the Lord and the King , is it one manner of feare really , that is both religious to God , and to Samuel , and to the Lord , and the King ▪ because one word expresseth both ? I see not but one & the same action of bowing may be made to God , to Christ , to the water in Baptisme , to the Bible , to the Sun and Moon , and we might kneel and Adore a Toad , a straw , and Satan , as they represent Gods wisdom and power , and through that same externall knee-worship also Adore God : What , may we not then Religiously Adore all things and Creatures , as they represent God the first being . Presentemque refert quaelibet herba Deum . A man may Adore himself , his own hands , his legs , his Mothers Wombe that bare him , &c. As for Adoring of the Ark and foot-stool of God : 1. Ioan. x Gisenius , a Lutheran saith , The Iews had precept and promise to Worship God before the Ark , we have no Command to tye externall Adoration to any place or Creature . 2. y Didoclavius saith , It is lawfull to Adore God before the Ark , and the Symboles of his immediate presence , because God is there to receive his own Worship himself , by an immediate indwelling presence : For saith z Mr. Weames , He appeared in glory above the Ark , betwixt the Cherubims , and it was a type of Christ who dvvelt in our flesh ; but it is not lavvfull to Worship him , before the Symboles of his grace . 3. The Ark was a type in the act of teaching , we grant ; but that it was in the act of Adoring , God who was immediately present , and a Symboll Vicegerent of God , we reade not . There is no need of mediate signes , where God is immediately present , and Adored as he was in the Ark ; they were to fixe both senses and thoughts immediately upon God. 4. They were to worship , not the Ark , but the precept is , & incurvate vos scabello , Worship tovvard the Ark. a Arias Mont. turneth it , Worship to the Ark : The Greek Fathers of the second Nicen. Councel , ignorant of the Hebrew Tongue , would have the Lord Commanding to Adore his foot-stool ; whereas the Particle ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) is a note of the Dative case , and often it signifieth motion to a thing , or at a place , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad dextram , and doth not absolutely signifie the accusative case . b Musculus ad Scabellum , he maketh it the Ark of the Testament . Calvine , c the Temple . Iunius , d maketh it well to signifie the measure of bowing , bow to the foot-stool , or ground , or pavement of the Temple where the Lords feet are , as he sate on the Cherubims , 1 Chron. 28. 1. For there is no ground for Adoring the Ark ; but the words are to be read , Exalt the Lord our God , and bow your selves , ( to wit , to Iehovah , who sheweth himself , or dwelleth at his foot-stool ) that is , betwixt the Cherubims , 2 Sam. 6. 1. For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at his foot-stool , is not constructed with the Verb , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 incurvate vos : Jesuits and Formalists , devised that construction , but it is to be constructed with the word , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to be repeated from the former part of the verse , Bow your selves to Jehovah who dwelleth in the Ark , or in the Temple : A familiar eleipsis to the Hebrews , Psal . 5. 8. I will bow my self ( to the Iehovah dwelling ) in the Temple of thy holinesse , as we are taught , Our Father which art in Heaven : So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and it is a description of God from the place where he dwelt , and exhibited his presence to his rude people . 4. It is ignorance in Burges to prove God may be Adored in the elements , because they are as excellent Symbols of Gods presence as the Ark : for created excellency is no ground of Adoring the elements , except it be a Godhead , and uncreated excellency : We condemne Pope e Anastasius , who directeth Reverend bowing at the hearing of the Gospel , and not of the Epistles , as if the Gospel were holier then the Epistles . But if Adoration may be given to the elements , because knee-worship signifieth according to humane institution , and mans will , and are taken from customes of men , and so doth signifie lesse honour then is due to God : Let me be resolved of this doubt , words of Prayer signifie according to mens institution and their will , no lesse then Religious gestures do , and we may say to a stock , ( Thou art my Father ) and it is in our will that ( Father ) signifie a representative Father , not an infinite and Independent Father , such as God only is . And if the image in externall kneeling , be Adored Per aliud , or co-adored with the Samplar , because it is one with the Samplar ; Why may we not pray to the image , and fixe our faith and hope on the image and elements by co-adoration , or in relative praying and trusting in them ? Yet f the Fathers of Trent for shame deny that we should pray to images , and put our trust in them : yet do Formalists turn the enunciative words of Christ ( This is my body ) in an optative mood , and a Prayer , The body and blood of Christ ( they mean the elements in their hands ) preserve thee to eternall life : And we are not ignorant , that faith and hope are ascribed to the Crosse , and this sung in the Church of Rome : O crux ave spes unica , Hoc passion is tempore , Auge pi●● justitiam , Reisque dona veniam . A Learned Papist , g Raphael de la Torres saith plainly , It is lawfull to pray to images , so the inward devotion be directed to God : But if the Iews in their Idolatrous worship acknoweledged the image to be but a representation of God , and a Book , Jer. 10. 8. They did no wrong who said Ier. 2. ver . 27. to a stock , Thou art my father , and to a stone , Thou hast brought me forth : For condition maketh all , if they speak by a figure ; for the Papists when they speak to the Crosse , and call the Crosse their only hope , the Crosse is not better born nor a stock , it is but timber or dumbe wood : Now how doth not the dumbe wood to which Prayers are made , as if Christ himself were present , partake of Prayers and Gods honour , in an inferior and relative way ? For the wood standeth before him who prayeth to it , as God by representation , and as an actuall Vicegerent , and tree-deputy of God and Christ ; it is no lesse worshipfull by mouth-worship , by praying to it , as to the passive object of Adoration , as capable of knee-worship by bowing down to it ; and a distinction may save idolatry in the one , as well as in the other : And our Formalists bowing Religiously to bread , do not Adore bread , ( as our half Papists say ) and so may they pray to bread , and not Adore bread , for they are as well masters of Grammar , to impose significations at their will upon words , as they be Lords of gestures and Ceremonies , to cause kneeling expresse Veneration to the images , and to elements , and not Divine Adoration . Here two great Iesuites , Suarez and Vasquez helpe the matter for h Suarez saith , There be some acts of worship as faith and prayer , which precisely respect a reasonable and intelligent person , therefore this prayer ( Haile * crosse ) it is a figurative speech , and a Metonymie , continens pro re contenta ; and the speech is directed to him who was crucified , and therefore a prayer ( saith this Idolater ) is considered ut petitio , vel ut honor quidam , either as a petition , and so it is not directed but to God , but as prayer is an honour expressed in such words and signes , the image also is thought to be honoured by praying to it , as the samplar to wit Christ , is honoured ; soft words . Answ . 1. If praying and beleeving doe properly respect a reasonable creature , so doth positive honouring which is esteemed , by the law of nature , praemium virtutis , a reward of vertue ; now vertue morall to be a foundation of honour , is as vainly given to a tree , or a stocke , as faith and prayer , but to speak to any in prayer , and make our requests known to them may be thought proper onely to a reasonable person , who onely can understand our prayer , and in reason answer our necessities , which a stock cannot doe : but secondly , I answer a stock is by Analogie , and as it is God representatively , as capable of reason to answer , and helpe us , and pitty us , in respect it can notably well represent the Majestie of God , who can answer , helpe , and pitty , as our Idolaters teach , as it is capable of knee-worship , and that honour which is given to God , though in an higher degree ; for the formall reason why Images and elements are capable of knee-glory , due to him who sweareth that all knees shall how to him , is , because they represent God , and not because of themselves they have any divinity or Godhead in them . Now the same formall reason holdeth here , for the crosse , stone , tree , or elements that are prayed unto in that religious state , as they are the object of praying , doe represent God , therefore they are also capable of faith and prayer , glory , as of knee-worship , or knee-glory . 2. Faith , hope , and charity ( as i Suarez saith ) in so farre as they are given to God , for giving of honour to him as to the supream Lord , they put on the nature of adoration , and in that same place he defineth adoration to be the exhibition of honour due to any in the acknowlegement of excellency and submission and service due to him : Now Suarez reprooveth Durandus and Pic. Mirandula , because they denied that the Image was adored , but would onely have honour given to God , at the naked presence of the Image , as a memorable signe , but it is certaine , as to trust in God , and to pray to him is incommunicable to the creature , so to adore any in acknowledgement of supreame excellencie is incommunicable to the creature , therefore either the image is adored with the same knee-worship that is given to God , and that improperly and by a figure , as Durandus and Mirandula taught contrary to the mind of Suarez , and idolatrous Iesuites and F●rmalists , or else prayers may be made to wood and stone , as to God , and that properly and without a figure ; as knee-worship is tendered to wood and stone by Iesuits doctrine , prope●●y and without a figure . 3. Papists deny that sacrifices may be offered to Images , yet they burne incense to images ; but that is not , saith k a Fransciscan Antonius Capellus , a sacrifice , for it is tendred to men , to dead carions , and to things that are blessed , and requireth neither Altar , nor Priest : It is true , they say so , but burning incense to the brazen Serpent is condemned as Idolatry , and Altar and Priest is not of the essence of a sacrifice ; but however as sacrificing is a recognition that we hold all we have of God , and therefore we sacrifice creatures to him , so any adoring of stocks is an acknowledgement that these stocks or stones are by way of representation , that God of whom we hold all the creatures : and doe not Papists for the honour of God , make oblations to Ministers , and burn incense to Saints ? and why may not prayers be offered to them also ? 4. It is a wild distinction where he faith that prayers as honour may be tendered to Images , but not prayers as petitions , whereas the very act of calling upon God in the day of trouble , Psal . 50. 15. is an honouring and glorifying God , and praying to God is due to God , as he is to be beleeved in , and to be preached amongst men , Rom. 10. 14. 15. And so is he worthy to be glorified as the subject of preaching ; then it is a vaine thing to difference betwixt peti●ioning to God , and honouring God , because in that I petition God , in my necessities , I submit to him as to God , who can answer and heare prayers : If therefore the Image and the wood be capable of the honour of praying , it is also capable of the honour of petitioning , so as we may as properly petition and supplicate the stocke , as give to it the glory of prayers . 5. If Formalists say in the third person , ( the body Sacramentall of the Lord save thee , ) they may upon the same ground say , ( O thou Sacramentall body of the Lord save me ) for this is a prayer to God , ( O that God would save his people , ) no lesse then this , ( O God save thy people , ) the variation of persons in the Grammar , maketh not the one to be a prayer , and not the other . Vasquez l saith , There is not alike reason , why praises , prayers , and Sacrifices should be tendred to Idols , & knee-worship & Adoration , because from the affection of Adoring the samplar , there is derived an externall note of submission to the image , which by a common name is called the honour , Worship and Adoration tendred to the image in a bodily manner , and being done before the image , tendeth to the honouring of the samplar ; but the outward action of Praising , Praying , Sacrificing , is commonly called Praising , Praying , Sacrificing , in relation to the Samplar , to wit , God , and no way in relation to the image , or to things without life ; neither are they by accident referred to the images , only they be tendred to God before images , Coram illis . But I Answer , This is but to beg the Question , for we deny , that from Adoring the image , there resulteth any Adoring of God , but a great dishonouring of his Name . 2. Durandus , Mirandula , Hulcot , deny that Adoring of God , Coram imaginibus tanquam signis memorativis , before the images as memorials of God , should be an Adoring of the images : And Suarez saith , If images be only remembrances and memorials in the act of Adoration , this taketh much honour from the images , and is , saith m he , An Adoring of the Samplar , but not an Adoring of the image : Though n Vasquez ; expounding Gregories minde , ( which superstitious man calleth them , o good books ) contradict Suarez in this , yea , and himself also ; for he saith , The enemies of images ( he meaneth the Reformed Churches ) who use them only for memorials and books , ( it is a lye that we use them as books , ) will not bow their knee to them , for then ( saith he ) they should Adore them ; and therefore ( saith Vasquez , ) if Christ be not in very deed , in his presence in the Sacrament present , the knee-worship is tendred to bread and wine , which is ( saith he ) Idolatry ; therefore either our Formalists are Transubstantiators , or Idolaters , or both ; by this learned Iesuites judgement , and why by this same reason may we not say against p Vasquez , that the bodily offerings of prayers , prayses , and sacrifices to God , before the Image as the Image , is an honouring of the Image by prayer , they say to the tree of the Crosse . Auge piis justitiam , reisque dona veniam . Increase righteousnesse in us , and give remission of sinnes , O tree crosse to guilty sinners . Names at Rome goe as men will , but the honour it selfe is put upon the dumbe wood , which is due to Christ . O it is but a figure ( say they ) yea but ( say we ) prayers and praises in a bodily manner , and vocally are tendred to the wood , yet if the wife commit adultery with her husbands brother , because he representeth her husband , I thinke the matter should be washen with Inke , and badly excused to say , O the loving wife for strong love to her husband committeth figurative adultery , and that bodily harlotry is referred to the brother of her husband by accident , and to her husband kindly , and per se , for himselfe . The same way , if Formalists bow their knee to bread , that such a holy mystery be not prophaned . We know they cannot understand civill or countrey non-prophanation , that they intend ; for kneeling and evill maners at the Lords table doe well consist together . Now religious non-prophanation by knee-worship , is adoring of these mysterious elements . Ergo they make prayers and sing praises , and offer sacrifices to the bread , Let them see to this and answer to it if they can . The sixt evasion of wit , I find in q Johannes de Lugo , who saith , 1. That the image and samplar making one and the same object , by aggregation , the inward affection besides externall knee-worship is given to both , but to the Image relatively , and for God or the samplar , and not for proper divine excellencie in it , and therefore the Councels ( saith he ) call it not adoration in spiritu , but it is tendered to God absolutely . 2. We give adoration of internall submission to God , or the samplar as the debt of potestative justice , but we doe not so worship the Image , we have no civill or politick communication with the Image , because it is not a reasonable creature , and therefore the worship of the Image is as it were a materiall and livelesse action ; when we uncover our head to the Image , by that action we would say or signifie nothing to the Image , but to the samplar , or to God onely . 3. The inward submission that we tender to the Image , is not that we submit to it , as to a thing more excellent then we , for that were a foolish lye ; yet ( saith he ) ( that the man might fulfill the cup of the iniquity of his Fathers ) we kisse not the Image in recto directly tendring honour to it , but to God and the samplar before it . 1. Because then I should adore my owne breast when I knocke upon it adoring the Eucharist . 2. Because so I bow to the wall before me . 3. If I have no honourable opinion of the Image , I doe not adore it at all . 4. By kneeling to the Image , I have a will of submitting externally my affection to the Image , I yeeld to it ▪ as a thing above me , giving to it the higher place 4. The act of adoration is simply terminated upon the Image , as a thing contra distinguished from the samplar , though it be adored with the same action with which the samplar is adored . Thus the ●e●uite . Answ . But here all men may see many contradictions , and that he casteth downe all that formerly he hath said , ●● . Images even as they represent God are dead things , and lesse then a redeemed Saint , Ergo , I can give them no submission of externall honour . 2. I signifie and say nothing of honour to the Image , even as it respecteth God , and representeth him , because the dignity of representing God doth not elevate it to be a reasonable creature , therefore I cannot honour it , and it were a foolish lye to say that the Image as representing God , were a reasonable creature . 3. As it representeth God , it cannot heare payers , nor deliver in trouble , as the Holy One of Israel can doe ; Ergo by the Holy Ghosts argument , I cannot bow to a lye , Esa . 44. 17. and 46. 9. Hab. 2. 19. 20. it made not the heaven and the earth , but by a figure , because it representeth the maker of heaven and earth , wherefore it should have but figurative honour at the best , and that is no reall honour , Jer. 10. 8 , 11 , 12 , 4. There is no debt of justice due to the dumb wood , or element , honour of externall submission is a debt of potestative justice due to a superiour , the Images and Elements are not my superiour . 1. They be meanes , I the end . 2. They bee void of life and reason which I have . 3. They are not redeemed , sanctified , and to be glorified as I am . Ioan. de Lugo answereth , As I may love Peter for the goodnesse that is not in Peter but in another , as I may love and desire good to Peter , for the goodnesse that is in his father , and not in himself , and so pay the debt of affection to him for another , so I may honour an Image for the debt of honour that I owe to the samplar represented by the Image , therefore it is not required to the essence of adoration , that we acknowledge debt due to every thing adored for another ; it is sufficient a debt be acknowledged , either to the Image , or the samplar . Answ . The debt of love and the debt of honour are not alike . I owe honour to superiours onely as superiours , I owe love to superiours , equals , inferiours . If I truly adore an Image , I truly acknowledge excellency in the Image , I truly yeeld to it , a worthier place then I deserve to have my selfe , ( saith r de Lugo ) Ergo , by the fifth Commandement according to the debt of justice , I owe feare , honour , and reverence to it , else I adore it by a figure , which the Iesuite doth deny . I am not afraid that they say , Damascen , s a superstitious Monke alloweth Images to be adored . So doeth t that pretended seventh Synod , or ( u ) the second Nicene Synod , and x Stephanus and Adrianus , as we may read in Juo . y Nicephorus speaketh many fables for Images , he sheweth us that Luke the Evangelist should have painted the Images of Christ and the Virgin Mary . z And that a holy Silvester had the Images of Peter and Paul , and shewed them to the Emperour Constantine , and b Canisius a fabulous man saith , there appeared to Silvester at the dedication feast of Saint Salvators church the picture of Christ in the Wall , but the originall of Images seemeth to be the vanity of man , saith c the Wiseman . 2. The keeping of the dead in memory , saith d Cyprian , ad defunctorum vultus per imaginem detinendos expressa sunt simulachra , inde posteris facta sunt sacra quae primitus assumpta fuerunt solatia , in aliis codicibus ad solatia . 3. The blinde heathen wanting the light of Scripture , began to worship Images . e Eusebius saith it began first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from the Heathenish custome it came that Peter and Pauls Images were first made . Men did it saith f Augustine , ut Paganorum concilient benevolentiam , to conciliate the favour of Pagans , it may bee seene out of Gregorius g Magnus , saith h Voetius , that the worshiping of Images crept in but the sixt age . In the first three hundred yeeres , Images were not admitted ( saith our Country-man i Patrick Sympson ) into the place of worship , in the fourth , fifth and sixt Centurie , they were admitted into temples , but for the most part without opinion of adoration . In the second Nicene Councell , an obscure age , ( saith k Petrus Molinaeus ) when the scriptures were taken away , it is ordained that Images should be adored , but not the Images of the Father . Quoniamquis sit non novimus , deique natura spectanda proponi non potest ac pingi . But onely the Image of the Son. This Councell was Anno 787. as saith l Bellarmine . But this wicked Fathers argument proves also that the Image of God the Father may be painted , while they prove worshipping of Images , because the Psalmist saith , The Lord arose as a mighty man after Wine . But m Genebrard saith this Councell of Nice , was controuled by a Councell in the West . n Barronius mentioneth two Epistles written by Gregorious 2. a defender of Images , wherein he saith , the Sonne may be painted , not the Father . This Councell was approved by Constantine , Ireneus , and a Greeke copie of the Synod sent to o Adrian the Pope . But 1. this wicked Synod did not maintaine adoration of Images , such as Suarez , Bellarmine , Vasquez , Peri●rius , &c. now hold , but onely veneration . 2. Images were placed in the Churches , saith p Paul. Diaconus , multis contra dicentibus , many speaking against i● . And q Bergomens . saith , the Emperour Constantine himselfe not long after did abrogate the Acts of this Synod , and r the Synod of Franckford condemned this Synod . See s Aventinus ; t Hincmarus saith it is true they of Franckford allowed Images to be in Churches , but not to be adored . w Vrspergensis saith that this synod did write a book against the second Councell of Nice , called otherwise the seventh generall Councell . A booke came out ▪ in France , and after in Germany under the name of Charles the Great , condemning by strong reasons the adoration of Images , and answereth all the arguments of the Nicene Fathers on the contrary , Tannerus the Iesuite saith this was a forged Booke . But against famous and learned Authors saying the contrary , and so x Hincmarius and y Ectius make mention of this book , and Pope Adrianus ( as z Hospinianus doth well observe ) doth approve of this Synod of Francford by his Letters written to the Emperour of Constantinople , and the Patriarch Tharasius . The first five hundred years ( saith a Calvin ) images were not worshipped . Caj●s Caligula a proud Tyrant , commanded the Iews to set up his image in the Temple : the Iews answered they should rather die then pollute the Temple of God with images , as ●aith b Iosephus and c Eusebius , and this fell out while the Apostles lived . Ann. 108. Plunius 2. writeth to Trajanus under the third Persecution , That Christians were men of good conversation , and detested vices , worshipped Christ , and would not worship Images d , as that Letter beareth : and e Eusebius , reporteth Adrian had a purpose , ( as saith f Bucol . ) to build a Church for the honour of Christ void of Images . See g Symson that ancient Writer : h Justine Martyr in this Age ; Omnes imagines ad cultum proposit as simpliciter damnant Christiani . i Tertullian , a most ancient writer , who lived under Severus in time of the fifth Persecution , as k the Magdeburgenses testifie ; saith , Nos adoramus oculis ad caelum sublatis , non adimagines seu picturas , and , indignum ut imago Dei vivi imagini idoli , & mortu : fiat similis , ( saith l he also ) and not only thinketh it unlawfull to represent God by an Image , but also saith , that Craftsmen , who professe themselves Christians , ought no● to make Images of God. An ancient Writer m Clemens Alexandrinus , Non est nobis imago sensibilis de materiâ sensibili , nisi quae precipitur intelligentiâ . Deus enim qui solus est verè Deas , intelligentiâ precipitur , non sensu : We have no sensible Image of sensible matter , because God is taken up by the understanding , not by the sense : and n Nihil in rebus genitis potest referre Dei imaginem . This ancient Writer flourished , saith o Catolog . Testium veritat . Anno 150. or as p Hospinian saith Ann , 200. and q Ireneus , the disciple of Polycarpus , an hearer of John the Apostle maketh it the Heresie of the Gnosticks , that they held that Pilate made the Image of Iesus : Et quod imagines baberent Christi , Apostolorum atque Philosophorum ▪ easque coronarent , ac colendas propo●erent . a Cyprian saith , Idols , or Images , be not only against the Law of God , but against the nature of man ; b Origen said , The Images of Christians are Christians indeed , with Gods Image : and , Nos veno ideo non honor amus simulachrá , quia quantū possumus , cavemnus , ne in●idamus in eam crudelitatem , ut et iis tribuamus divinitatis aliquid . c Grave Athanasius saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The invention of Images is from an evil fountain , and not from good , and whatsoever hath a bad beginning , cannot be deemed in any thing good , being altogether bad : The Papist Harding bringeth in a counterfeit Dialogue of Athanasius , betwixt Christ and his Church ; and Christ comforting his Church , because she was persecuted for worshipping Christs Image ; but when and where this persecution was , none knoweth , for many times hath the Church been persecured for not worshipping Images ; but see the answer of the learned d Jewell thereunto ; e Epiphanius , who lived , Anno 370. proveth against the Collyridiams , That Mary nor no creature should be adored . Vnde est simulachrificum hoc studium et diabolious conantus ? praetext● enim justitiae sempersubiens hominum , mentem drabolus , mortalem naturam in hominum oculis deificans , Statuas humanas , imagines pre se ferentes per artum , veritatem expressit , et mortui quidem sunt qui adorantur : Item , Revera sanctum erat corpus Mariae , non tamen Deus , honorata , non in adorationem data . Mary was not God , and therefore is not to be adored : He professeth that he did rive a vail , that had painted in it the Image of Christ , or of some man ▪ Cum ego videssem in Ecclesia Christi ▪ contra authoritatem scripturarum , hominis pendere imaginem , scidi illud , &c. Lactantius Formianus , Images are to represent these who are absent . God is every where present , it is vanity therefore to forme an image of God. Also h There is no Religion , where there is an image : Also i your gods be either in Heaven , or not ; if they be not in Heaven , why do ye worship them ? If they be in Heaven , why do ye not lift your eyes to Heaven while you adore them ? Why do you convert your eyes toward walls , stocks and stones , rather then toward that place where you imagine your gods to be ? k His Arguments against Images be these : l 1. They forget reason , when they fear the work of their own hands : 2. m God is not absent , but present every where : 3. n The image is a dead thing void of sense , God is the eternall and everliving God : 4. o Nothing mortall should be worshipped . 5. p What vanity to hope for protection from these things , which cannot defend themselves ● 6. q The image is lesse and viler then the worshipper : 7. r Man according to Gods image , is the image of God. 8. ( s ) God needeth nothing , neither torches because he made the light , nor images . This man lived , Anno 300. Before which time the Church of Christ being persecuted , they had no Churches , nor Images to be ornaments in their Churches , as saith ( t ) Ambrosius , and also u Chrysostom , who was displeased with the fooleries in Temples in his time , and saith , They were not like the Templ●s of the Apostolick Churches : and x Tertullian , and y Eusebius saith , They had then , Simplices domos , Simple houses , void of paintries and pictures : And the want of Temples was objected against Christian Religion , as z Origen cleareth in the time of Constantine , the son of Chlorus , as saith , a Sozomen , and b Eusebius , Temples were builded , but as c Joan. Quintinus expoundeth Tertullian , without the ornaments of images , and d Tertullian himself maketh building of Altars , and portracts , Idol●tricos cultus , Idolatrous worship . In the fourty years space , betwixt the reign of Valerian , and the 19. year of Dicclesian , there were Oratories and Temples builded , but neither painted Pictures , nor Images in them , as saith [ e ] Eusebius : Yea , of thirty Bishops of Rome , even from Peter and Paul to Sylvester , and Constantine the Emperour ; to wit , three hundred years , there were none , who were not persecuted to blood , or to death , or some other way . It is a vain thing to say , they had breathing time to build Temples , and erect Altars , and golden Images of Christ , and the Virgin Mary , and the Saints . It is true , in the two hundreth year after Christ , under Alexander Severus , Gordianus , Philippus , Gallienus ; Churches were builded , as f Nicephorus saith , but again under Dioclesian they were demolished to the ground , but observe well there were no Images of Christ broken , which that Tyrant in despite of Christ , would not have omitted ; see g Eusebius , they were builded again under great Constantine , so h Sozomen , i Otho Phrisingensis k and Nicephorus . The dream of Platina , for the building of a Church , by the donation of Constantine , with twelve portions of earth , equall to the number of the twelve Apostles , and of another Church , with the title of the holy Crosse at Ierusalem , which Helena found in that place , and Constantine placed in this Church at Rome , is refuted by l Hospinian : yet is there no word of any Images in these Churches . m Arnobius An. 330. maintaineth against the heathen , that the Christians ought to have no Images : 1. Because the device of images is a novelty , and was not before two thousand years , but God and Religion are no new things . 2. n Because either the Gods dwelleth in their images , against their will , or of their own accord ; if the former be said , they are compelled , which is absurd . If the latter , then they do either bide alwayes in their images , and so are miserable , or they go out of the images when they please , and then the images are empty things . a Eusebius Caesariensis who lived , An. 300. when Constantia Augusta wrote to him for the Image of Christ , answered . That could not be : 1. Because his manhood was joyned with his Godhead , and could not be separated therefrom . 2. Because his Godhead cannot be represented , Mortuis , & inanimatis coloribus , with dead and livelesse colours . b Hieronimus , who lived , An. 331. under Constantine , denyeth that any Creature , Angel , or Virgin Mary should be worshipped . c Ruffinus faith , Helena the mother of Constantine adored crucified Christ , but antiquity saith not , that she adored the nails that fixed him to the Crosse , because they were but creatures . d Ambrosius , who lived , Anno 370. condemneth Images . 1. Because they change the images of the dead , in the glory of God , who worshippeth images : 2. The living serve the dead . 3. They take from stocks and stones what they are , and give to them , what they are not . 4. e Idols are unclean . 5. It is undecent f , to worship what men maketh with their hands . 6. Because g images are but shadows . h Augustine condemneth Images . 1. Because they infect the vveak mindes of rude people , to worship them . 2. They have eyes and see not . 3. The creatures are images of God , not stocks . 4. Idols i are huskes and empty . 5. These k who brought in Images , tooke away the feare of God , and increased error . 6. Martyrs l are not gods . 7. Confounded m be they who worship stones , our living stone Christ is in heaven . 8. a Though worshippers of Images say , they worship God in Images , yet they worship devills ; for good men , as Paul and Barnabas , Angels , and Cornelius forbade men to worship them . 9. It is a shame to adore a beast endowed with sense and life , farre more to adore a dumbe and livelesse creature , August , ps . 113. b Chrysostome is against Images . 1. Because the Law of God forbiddeth them . 2. c God must be honoured , as he willeth himselfe . 3. It is d a depressing of soules to worship Images . e It commeth from Satan to take Gods glory from him , f it is mockerie that man should be the creator of God , the Creator of all things . g Cyrillus Alexandrin . who lived An. 415. saith , We neither beleeve the martyrs to be gods , nor doe we adore them . h Damascen a superstitious man much for Images acknowledgeth two things . 1. That Images are but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwritten traditions . 2. He ackowledgeth that the brazen Serpent , the Cherubims were made for signification , not for imitation or adoration . ( i ) Gregorius Magnus , though he be alledged by Papists for adoration of Images . Yet in his Epistle to Serenus Bishop of Massilia , An. 600. he forbiddeth the adoration of Images , and alloweth onely the Historicall use of them , as is observed by k Fran. White , l by Hospinian and m Catol . testum veritatis , and n this man being the first who brought Images into the Church hath this Caveat , atque indica ( saith he to Sirenus ) quod non tibi , ipsa visio historiae quae , pictura teste , pandebatur , displicueri● : sed illa adoratio quae picturis fuerit in competenter exhibita , & si quis imagines facere voluerit , minimè prohibe , adorare vero imagines omnibus modis divita , sed hoc solicitè admoneas , ut ex visione rei gestae , ardorem conjunctionis percipiant , & in adoratione solius Trinitatis prosternantur . It is cleare that this man teacheth an adoration of Images , though he make them onely bookes to the rude . This same o Gregorius will have the signe of the crosse adored , because when the Devill came to a Iew sleeping in the night in the Temple of an Idoll , the Iew being afraid , signed himselfe with the Crosse , and the Divell fled ; but when doth Iewes come in any Christian Churches , or Idoll-Temples , who abhorre the name of Christ , and so hate both the Crosse and Christ , and what can be proved from a fact of Sathan ? In the eighth age , p Beda Imaginum cultus & adoratio , the worshipping and adoring of Images is unlawfull . 1. Because they have no office in the doctrine of the Gospell . 2. q We are forbidden to adore , salute , or worship them . 3. The ( d ) r Church is not taught to seeke the Lord by Images , but by faith and good workes . 4. The ſ Apostolique Church did not worship God in Images . 5. Images t want , documento antiquitatis , antiquity , example , and the Scripture . 6. We w frustrate God of worship due to him . 7. Peter u Paul , Angels forbad to worship them , but God only . We forbid the Church ( saith the civill Law ) to be obscured with Images . Have the Image of God , ( saith x Ephrem ) in thy heart , non colorum varietate in ligno , not in Images and colours . Who can make ( saith y Damascen ) a representation of the invisible God. z Gretserus saith , the Iewes would not admit of Ensignes and Trophies of the Romans for fear Images should be hidden under them . So said Josephus a before him . Their own men say with us , b Hulcot who lived an . 1346. saith Latreia , divine worship belongeth to God onely , the Image is not God , neither the Crosse ; ( saith Ioan. Pic. Mirandula , Concl. 3. ) nor the Image of Christ is to be adored ( adoratione Latreia eo modo quo ponit Thomas ) with divine worship , the guise of Thomas Aquinas c Peresius Ajala a Popish Bishop , for adoration of Images , saith he , there is neither Scripture , nor Church tradition , nor consent of Fathers , nor good reason to make it good . For saith d Gabriel Biel , The image either considered in it self as it is mettall or stone , or as it is a holy signe , is a sensible Creature , to which Latreia , Divine honour should not be given : and the Romish c Decrees saith , We commend you that you forbid images of Saints to be Worshipped : The d Doway Doctors say , Idols have eyes and cannot see , &c. Now if they have Images of God and Christ which can see , and hear , and speak , we exceedingly desire to know : e Alexander Allensis , f Durandus say , That images in themselves , and properly , are not to be Worshipped . g Geo : Cassander wisheth , That they had continued ( in majorum suorum sententia ) in the minde of their forefathers , and that the Superstition of people in , Worshipping images had been suppressed . The Councell convened by h Constantius Capronimus condemneth Worshipping of Images , or placing them in Churches . 1. Because it is forbidden in the second Commandment . 2. The Picturing of Christ is a dividing of the two Natures . 3. It is against the Ancients , Epiphanius , Nazianzen , Chrysostome , Athanasius , Amphylocius , Theodorus , Eusebius Pamphili . The Councell of Nice is builded upon lies . Adrian Bishiop of Rome , writeth to the Councell of Nice , That the Emperour Constantine being a Leaper , and labouring to cure his Leprosie by shedding of innocent Babes blood ; Peter and Paul appeared to him by night , in a Vision , and bade him go to be Baptized by Sylvester , and that he , to be cured by Sylvesters Baptizing , builded a Temple with the Images of Peter and Paul. This is as true as the Image of Christ spake to Tho : Aquinas at Naples , Bene Scripsistti de me , Thoma , Why is not all Evangell that Aquinas hath written then ? For their own Platina a saith , The story of Constantines Leprosie is a fable ; and Socrates saith , That Constantine was sick when he was 65. years , and he maketh no mention of his leprosie ; so b Hospinianus saith , and our own c Simson saith , That Sylvester and Marcus his successor were both dead before Constantine was Baptized : d Genebradus a Papist saith , down right , that the Councell of Frankford condemned the second Nicene Councell ; But e Bellarmine , f Suarez , g Sanderus ' h Alanus , deny that the Doctrine of the second Nicene Councell for Adoring images , is Condemned by the Councell of Frankford ; they say it is onely expounded , and that the right way of Adoring images is made manifest : Yea , saith i Nauclerus , k Sabellicus , and l Blandus : The Councell of Frankford reserveth due honour to images , and saith nothing against the Councell of Nice . But this is to deny daylight at Noon-day : For m Annonius is most clear in it , and n Abbot Vspergens . o the Book of Charles the Great saith the same . The Synod of Frankford was convened An. 794. of purpose to condemne the second Synod of Nice , called the seventh pretended and false Synod : p Aventinus saith expresly , Scita Grecorum ( in Synodo Nicena decreta ) de imaginibus adorandis in concili● francofurtensi rescissa & abolita sunt : and a Vspergensis saith , in this Synod it was decreed , Vt septima & universalis Synodus , nec septima nec aliquid diceretur , quasi supervacua ab omnibus abdica tu est ; and the same saith b Eginradus , c Geo● Cassander : But the very Arguments in the Nicene Councell are set down , and dissolved in the Frankford Councell , as our own Master d Simson observeth : As the Nicene Councell reasoneth from the Cherubims , and the brazen Serpent . Frankfoord Answereth , These were made at Gods Commandment , images not so . 2. Yea , say they , and with them e Lorinus , The Cherubims and brazen Serpent were not made to be Worshipped ; see these and many other Arguments , set down and Answered by the Councell of Frankfoord : As also saith f the Learned Author of Catol . Test . Verit. The Arguments used by this Councell , proveth that no Adoration is due to Images , as may be hence collected : As also out of the book of g Charles against the dreames of Tarasius , whose entry to the Priesthood was unlawfull , and was a grosse Idolater , and against the Idolater Pope Adrian ; Because 1. There is no holinesse in images , either as they are figures or colours , or as they are Consecrated . 2. Because to Adore is to glorifie , h but only God is to be glorified . 3. God Commandedus not to love images , but men , and sent his son in the flesh for men , and not for images ; and if i they be not to be believed on , neither are they to be Adored . 4. It cannot be proved that the honour of the image , is the honour of the Samplar : Christ said not , What ye do to images , ye do to me , nor he that receiveth images , receiveth me . This Argument proveth , that Veneration is not due to the Images , as to books of the Trinity ; because that the Veneration of the Image , is an honouring of God , there must be an union betwixt the Images and God or Christ , betwixt the Tree and Christ . 1. There is no union lawfull , that can be a Warrant of honouring any thing ; but an union Warranted of God , betwixt Crossing in the Air , and Dedication to Christs Service , betwixt Surplice and Pastorall Sanctity ; There is no union , nor is there a personall union betwixt Christ and the Image : Nor 2. an union of parts , as betwixt the shoulders and the head . Nor 3. is there a Divine relative union , as betwixt the mean or the end , the Servant or the Lord : for as a John White saith well ; and b the Scripture proveth , all union betwixt God and the meanes of Worship , which are to be reverenced as meanes of Worship in relation to God , is by divine institution ; now certainly if by divine ordination there had been an union betwixt the Image and God , then had it been lawfull to lay the Image in the heart , to say : How love I thy Image ? ( the painted pictures and wooden portracts of Christ , the wood of the Crosse are my delight ) ( I hope in the wood ) ( I have taken images for my heritage , they are sweeter to me , nor the honey or the honey combe ) ( hovv pleasant are the wooden feet of these dead and senslesse Ambassadors of Christ , who bring to my soul news of God , or of my Redeemer Iesus . ) c Ambrose , d Gregorius , e Augustine f Chrysostom saith , The honour of the servant redoundeth to the Master , when he is a servant by appointment of the Master , and he that heareth faithfull Pastors , heareth Christ who sent them : And a Athanasius , and b Basill , to prove the honouring and adoring of Christ , the substantiall Image of God , to be the honouring of God the Father , say ; The hearing of the Image , or of the servant of the King , is the hearing of the King. But the Image is formally made an Image of God , and the saints by mens imagination ▪ not by Gods word or his ordination : Their own c Peresius saith , If the imagination were carried upon the image or samplar with one motion , yet it cannot be concluded , that the same is to be done in Adoration : And d we are not to worship God by our fantasies , saith Augustine , nor by our e carnall thoughts . Suarez , Bellarmine , Vasquez , Gretserus , buildeth all their Adoration of images , upon the saying of Aristotle ; De memor & remiscen , cap. 2. Hence the f Fathers of Trent , g dreaming Damascene , h doting Nicephorus ; if we believe i Suarez , make this a principle of their Bible of Idoll worship ; That God and the Image are one , but we see not how they be one , nor can we say that God is present in the Image as in a place : for if he be present in the Image , In loco ut sic , as in such a place , then he is there as in a consecrated place , and by promise , and so they must give us the word of God , for Gods presence in Images ; but if God be present in Images , as In loco simpliciter , non ut in loco ut sic : As he is in all places , then is he not present in images , as in images , but as in all creatures , and then let us say Amen , to k Vasquez , who saith , all things which have a being , A Mouse and Frog are to be adored , as having resemblance with God the first being : And he saith , this is the opinion of a Cajetanus , and citeth b Leontius the dreamer , who was at the Councell of Nice the seventh false Synod ; who saith , all Creatures visible and invisible are to be adored . And the Popes Professor c Joannes de Lugo proveth by four great reasons , that all creatures should be adored . 1. Because all creatures are the effects , and as it were the hand writing of God. 2. Because we use to kisse and adore materiall places , and the stone , or field where an Angel , or Saint hath been , for the touching and propinquity of the place and that holy thing , but Gods omnipresence sanctifieth all creatures . Be doing then , Masters , kisse , and adore the sanctified Devil and Hell fire , but take heed you scald not your lips . 3. We kisse and worship a gift of a Prince , but all creatures , even the most abject and contemptible , are the gifts of God the Creator . 4. Man in a speciall manner is the living image of God. But true it is , God is to be praised for all his creatures ; but externall Adoration before them , and laying a part of Gods glory upon them , for that is forbidden by your own , for d Leo the first saith the contrary , and e Salmeron saith ; The body of f Moses was hidden of old for fear of Idolatry , and the use of Images and pictures were by God forbidden to the Iews in the second command , saith [ f ] Alexander Alens . g Albertus , h Bonaventura , i Martinus de Ajala , k Abulensis , who I am sure have with them in this , Albertus and Bonaventura , that the Images of God , because ( say they ) he is an invisible Spirit , are forbidden by the Law of nature . But I return to the Synod of Franckeford : 5. l Because images are void of senses and reason . 6. It cannot be proved by the example of the Apostles , m Ergo , ( say I ) Images are neither to be teaching books , nor adored creatures : 7. The ancient Fathers n were ignorant of this worship . 8 ▪ Only the rich a who are able to sustain Images , should be saved , and not the poor . 9. There b is no profit , but great vanity in adoring Images . To the Arguments from miracles it is answered , c that these miracles are lying signes : for , Ea miracula , nulla Evangelii lectio tradit . 2. They deny that all things are to be adored , in the which , or by the which d God wrought miracles . Gregorius Nyssenus bowed his knee to the Image of Abraham : What then ? the Councell saith , these books of Nyssenus are perished . The fable of Agbarus , to whom the Image of Christs face painted in a cloath was sent , was not in the world till the year of God , 700. It is a counterfeit work ascribed to Athanasius , in stile and phrase of writing not like to him , where it is said , that it was the image of Christ crucified by the Iews in Berythus a Town in Syria , out of whose side flowed blood and water , which being mixed with water , could cure all diseases ; e so Symson . The Testimony f of the Councell of Eliberia is clear , that images should not be in Churches g Canus , h Surjus and your own men say , this Councell condemneth images . For 370. years there were no Images in Churches ; in this age Martyrs were admired , and the Grecians first , especially Gregorius Nyssenus the brother of Basilus had Images in Churches ; i Sozomen saith , Christians took into Churches pieces of Christs image , broken by Iulian the Apostat , in the first age , when Religion was born down and holy Pastors killed . Gregorius Magnus first defended that images should be in Churches . It s like the Apostate Iulian would hate any thing , bearing the name of Christ most falsly , yea , and Antiquity beareth contradictions most aparent touching images . But b Nicephorus saith , the creatures of God are the Lawfull Images of God. But it is more then evident , by what I have said , that ancient Papists and Synods used images to be memorials of God , and not to be adored . CAP. II. QUEST . 1. Whither kneeling or sitting be the most convenient and Lawfull gesture in the Act of receiving the Sacrament of Christs Body and blood ? 1. Conclus . SItting is the most and only lawfull gesture , That gesture , that Christ and his Disciples used upon morall and unalterable grounds , which doth not concern the first Supper as first , but as a Supper , and that not upon no occasionall and temporary reasons , belonging to that Supper , more then to all the Suppers of that kinde , that we are to follow as a pattern , and must be most Lawfull . But the gesture of sitting is such , Ergo : The Proposition is evident in Scripture , c . I prove the Assumption . 1. Sitting was either : 1. Miraculous . 2. Customable . 3. Occasionall ; or 4. Morall . None in reason can say the first ; that sitting was a miracle : 2. Nor is it customable . For 1. Customes laudable are grounded upon decency and reason , and so morall , or grounded upon no reason at all . But Christ did nothing in Gods worship , nor did he any humane morall actions for the meer fact and will of others going before , for these were not reasonable humane actions , and if it be customable only , it is not lawfull to put away a customable action out of worship , and to put a morall action of kneeling and Divine signification in the place thereof , for so we might change places , times , persons and all physicall circumstances , and make them supernaturall . 2. The action could not be occasionall : for then the occasion of the Supper as first , and because of such persons , such time at night , such place , an upper chamber , should have moved Christ to sitting , rather then to kneeling , or to any other gesture ; but kneeling or any other gesture might have consisted well with that first Supper , with the upper chamber , with the time and persons , as well as sitting , except the Law givers will had been a reason of the contrary . Some object . Christ choosed an upper chamber , not the Temple , twelve persons , not ten , not twenty , at night , for he might have celebrated it at dinner , but we are not holden to imitate Christ in these ; Ergo , neither in sitting . Ans . Occasionall , properly is that which hath a reason , not from the nature of the thing it self , but from such occasionall occurrences of Providence , as God will not alter , and its that which hath no morall nor sacred conveniency with the nature of worship , but hath only a conveniency for such a time and place , as Christs preaching in a ship , when he is at the sea side , and a multitude are to hear him , the ship hath no agreement with the nature of preaching , more then an house hath , time , place , and persons are clearly such as agreed with that supper , as first , not as a sacred worship , and therefore were meerly occasionall , and so not imitable , and though Christ might have altered them , yet had they been occasionall , and they have no sacred conveniency with this Supper , as this Supper ; and if Christ had altered these for meer will , upon no reasons that concerneth all Suppers , they had not been occasionall , but positive points of worship , and so had obliged us ; yea , the upper chamber , and these twelve persons by no possibility , can concern all Suppers , to the end of the world , but sitting agreeth kindly and natively to all Suppers in generall , as kneeling to all praying indefinitely . Christ might have changed bread and wine , in flesh , and milk , or water , will it hence follow , we are not to imitate Christ in bread and wine ? And that bread and wine are occasionall ? Lastly , Pauls practise in passing from an upper chamber , and from twelve men , to a Church full of men and women , 1 Cor. 11. 23 , 17 , 18 , 22. warranteth us to passe from these , we have not the like reason to warrant us to passe from sitting . 2. That gesture which Christ choosed , and that refusing all other , even kneeling , having the same Religious reasons , at the first supper as now , that must be most convenient and lawfull . But sitting is such ; Ergo , The Proposition is clear : The Assumption is proved from Matth. 26. While they did eat ( the Passeover ) he took bread , Mar. 14 ▪ 22. As they did eat , Jesus took bread . But while they did eat the Passeover , they sate . Ergo , while they took the Supper they sate : I prove the Assumption , Matth. 26. 20. And , when the evening was come , he sate down with the twelve , Mark 14. 18. And as they sate , and did eat , Jesus said , &c. v. 22. And as they did eat , Iesus took bread ▪ eating the Passeover , and sitting were co-existent , and taking the Sacramentall bread of the Supper , and eating the Passeover were co-existent ; Ergo , Taking the bread of the Supper , and sitting were co-existent . Paybodie saith , Paul expoundeth , ( as they did eat ) after they had ended eating , and so after they had ended sitting , and possibly passed to another gesture , 1 Cor. 11. After Supper he took the Cup. Ans . If you wholly remove the Passeover , you remove the Table also . 2. Though the Suppers were not mingled , yet the holy Ghost expresseth the co-existence of sitting , and taking the Sacramentall bread , as Ezech. 8. 1. As I sate in mine house , the hand of Iehovah fell upon me , 2 Sam. 18 14. Ioab thrust three darts in him , while he vvas yet alive , 1 Sam. 25. 16. The men vvere a vvall to us , all the time that vve vvere vvith them , Dan. 4. 3. and Matth. 26. 47. And vvhile he yet spake , Lo , Iudas came , Act. 10. 19. While Peter thought on the vision , the spirit said to him , Act. 22. 6. Rom. 5. 10. If praying interveened betwixt eating and taking the Supper , and the Passeover sitting , to put them to kneeling , this must be true , vvhile they vvere not eating , Christ took bread , a plain contradicting of Christ. 3. After Supper he took the cup , but they say not after Supper he took the bread , for praying , blessing , breaking , distributing , eating , interveened betwixt the Passeover and taking the Communion Cup , and therefore he had reason to say , After Supper he took the Cup , but not that reason , to say , after Supper he took the Bread. It is violent to describe Christs taking the Bread from the adjunct of time , while as they sate and did eate , if sitting and eating were not at this time , but were gone and past by many interveening actions of kneeling , praying , preaching , this were to describe supper from dinner . 3. By this , the gesture of no Table action can be cleared from Scripture , for when it is said , Luke 9. Iohn 6. He made the multitude sit downe and ●a●● , a cavillator might say , praying and blessing the meat went before , and possibly they sate on their knees , and Christ sate downe and taught the people ; it may bee he rose and kneeled before Sermon was ended . The Scripture saith , While Christ and his disciples did ●●● , and so while they did sit , he tooke bread . This taking of bread , whether it be an Hysterosis as many think , in respect the Evangelists mention but once taking of bread , or if it was preparatorie , and before the act of blessing , it was a sacramentall act performed by Christ , while they were sitting , which is much for sitting . That Christ passed not from passeover sitting , to Supper kneeling , I thinke these considerations move me . 1. Because the changes of all in the Passeover , to that in the Lords Supper , as of flesh in bread and wine , is positively set down . 2. No question the change unto an adoring gesture , had been upon the grounds of conciliating more reverence to that Sacrament , then to the Passeover , which must be morall , and tye to the end of the world . 3. Nor would the Holy Ghost have removed an ordinary table gesture into so insolent , and supernaturally significant gesture , as kneeling , without a grave reason expressed , or his owne will onely , which is onely the essentiall reason , why bread is a Sacrament rather then any other Element , and so would stand of necessary and essentiall use . 4. Sitting at the Idols table 1 Cor. 8. 10. declareth that in religious feasts , sitting was ordinary , and a signe indicant of honouring the spirituall Lord of the Banquet , and a religious communion with the Lord of the Feast was hence signified . But saith Paybodie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 26. 20. Mark. 14. 18. Luke 22. 14. Iohn ●3 . 12. signifieth lying , and M. Li●ds●y ●aith , it signifieth prostration on the earth rather then sitting ▪ Por Levit. 18. 23. standing and lying are confounded , and Calvin expoundeth it so . Ans . 1. Christ ▪ his reasoning to prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sit at meat is a greater honour , then to stand : Luke 22. 27. were null , if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie prostration , for religious bowing is alwaies an act of inferioritie . The same I say if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie falling downe to the ground . 2. Sitting or pitching about a place , and sitting and lying in sackcloath , may well signifie simply to be in a place , but table-sitting and table-inclining on Christs bosome must be more then simply being at the Table . Nor doth Calvin in that place expound sitting at table , for nothing but simply being at table , though elsewhere he doth . 3. Arg. That which representeth the honour of table-fellowship of fellow-banquetters with Christ , that is of necessary use ; But sitting at the Lords table representeth this ; Ergo , Luke 22. 27. The Minor is made good , to teach the Disciples humility , he would stand and have them to sit . Whether is greater he that sitteth , or he that standeth ? it is a greater honour to sit at table , then to stand ; Ergo it is an honour to sit , for we may well infer the positive from the comparative , Luk. 22. 29. upon the occasion of their striving who should be greatest , and Lord Bishop , he promiseth a sort of fellowship in a Kingdome . 2. In sitting on thrones with him , and the meaning that that fellowship should quench the fire of their appetite for Prelacy . 3. This sitting in Scripture , as table-sitting , is used to expresse our fellowship with Christ in the Gospell , Mat. 22. 1. 2. Luke 22. 30. Mat. 8. 11 , 12. Luke 14. 15 , 16 , 17. Cant. 1. 12. Cant. 5. 1. Rev. 19. 9. Rev. 3. 20. and our Communion with Christs body and his blood is sealed up in this Sacrament , 1 Cor. 10. 16. 4. This is confirmed , in that the Sacramentall food is not simply given as food , ( though that be a speciall fruit thereof ) for then there should be no more required to the essence and integrity of the Supper , but eating and drinking , and on his alone , eating and drinking and using the words of Christ , should receive a Sacrament , and the manner of eating should be accidentall , and in the Churches power ; but this food is given as food Table-wise , with the solemnities of a banquet , and of spirituall fellowship , which must be represented of purpose here , and that sitting wayes , so to eat and drink with Publicans is a signe of fellowship , as Christs eating and sitting with Publicans and sinners made him be construed to be a friend to them , 1 Cor. 5. 11. To refuse to eat with a fornicator , is to refuse fellowship with him , 1 Cor. 8. 10. 1 Cor. 10. 20 , 21. To sit at the Idols and Divels Table , is to partake of the idoll and Satans worship , as having fellowship with them ; Ergo , to sit at the Lord ▪ table is to have fellowship with him . 5. The Holy Ghost speaketh this fellowship , Luke 22. 14. He sate down and the twelve Apostles , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with him , see a fellowship , Math. 26. 20. He sate downe , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , with the twelve . 18. And as they did eate ( together at Table ) Marke 14. 15. Luke 22. 15. With desire have I desired to eat with you , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , table-wise , as ver . 14. Mat. 26. 29. I will not drinke , — untill I drinke it new 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The words carry a resemblance of drinking with them the well of life , so Augustine , Hilary , Musculus , Amesius expoundneth them , so ( as I take ) he draweth them from 1. This materiall wine . 2. From Sacramentall tabling . 3. From this old fruit of the Wine . 4. From fellowship here in the Kingdome of Grace , to 1. New wine in heaven . 2. To heavenly tabling . 3. To new and everlasting wine . 4. In the Fathers Kingdome . Neither am I much moved with what Paybodie saith , that our Saviour led the woman of Samaria , from Iacobs well to thirst for the water of life , yet is not , for that , Iacobs well made a type by divine institution . I answer , this would have some colour , if Christ did speake of common wine , as he did speake of Iacobs Well , as of common water . But all the three Evangelists speake of Sacramentall wine consecrated by word and prayer , else Christs calling bread his body should not prove that bread were a signe of his body by divine institution , but onely we were to make that spirituall use of bread and wine , that we make of ordinary bread and wine at our houses . Formalists then must say that Christ speaketh of wine here as common , not as Sacramentall , which is absurd when Christ is expounding the Elements , in their spirituall signification , Luke 5. 22 , 21. But behold the hand of him that betrayeth me is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with me , on the table . Mat. 26. 23. Marke 14. 20. If he had been kneeling or standing , ( gestures unpossible for them then ) he could not have his hand leaning on the table , and if he had not beene sitting ▪ table-wise , in a table-fellowship with Christ , then could not our Saviour have conveniently convinced the ingratitude of Iudas , as he doth . Now if Christ aime not to make Iudas his fault the greater , because Iudas and he sate at one table together , and that as an holy and Sacramentall table , he had in this no more argued Iudas of ingratitude , then any of the rest of the house who communicated not with Christ , because Christ and they did eate one materiall and ordinary bread together ▪ And in this Achitophel was a type of Iudas , as David of Christ , and that not onely in this , that Achitophel did eate bread with David , and so had a civill fellowship , but that they went together to Gods house , in company together , Psal . 55. 14. So had Christ and Iudas fellowship together , at that same Sacramentall table : And as tabling together signifieth civil fellowship , so must fellow-tabling at one sacred Feast signifie Spirituall fellowship together . 6. Giving and not granting that fellow-sitting together were onely a common honour , not a misticall honour by divine Institution , yet since to sit at a table with a Ruler , is an honour , 1 Sam. 20. 5. 2 Sam. 9. 13. Esther 7. 7. Prov. 23. 1. Mat. 8. 11. Luk● 16. 23. Luke 22. 30. And the Lords Disciples are admitted to sit with him , as is cleare in that he sate down with the twelv● , and he sate ( Luke 24. 30. ) at meat with them , and tooke bread and blessed it . No power on earth should dare to deprive the people of God of this honour , for this honour was bestowed on the Lords Apostles , as communicants , not as Apostles , and the want of Christs bodily presence , diminisheth nothing of the honour , seeing he is really , but in a spirituall manner present , as the Lord of the feast , with us , as he was with them . Paybodie saith , When Christ sate at table in the Passeover , even then he schooled them from looking at honour in materiall or outvvard sitting , vvhile as Luke 22. 26. he would stand himselfe as a servant , and vvash his Disciples feet . Ansvv . His non-sitting and washing their feet , being a morall , not a Sacramentall teaching them humility , doth no more schoole them from not looking to sit , then his non-eating , and non-drinking while he stood servant-like , doth schoole them from not looking to the honour of eating and drinking Sacramentally . Christ teacheth lessons of humility , not to learne us not to seek the spirituall honour of communion with Christ , that were to teach us to be proud , and this man is that bold to insinuate that it was a spece of pride , for the Disciples to sit at table with Christ , and for Iohn to leane on his bosome . Mr. Paybodie thinketh to crush this argument ; Because the serving of God the Father and giving him glory , must be incompatible with a table-fellowship with his Sonne . The disputer ( saith he ) reasoneth thus ; Kneeling importeth an inferiority , therefore it is contrary to the person of co-heirs , which person we act by table-sitting , but do you ( saith he ) dream of a co-heirship , whereby you stand not in an inferiority to Christ , then when you take on you the person of co-heirs by sitting at Table , it were not lawfull either to esteem , or in a short ejaculation to call Christ your Lord and Superiour ; yea so faith must have no working at the Sacrament : for Faith importeth an inferiority and dependance : We respect Christ in his banquet , as a King inviting us to eat with him ; yea , I may kneel and call God my Father , and in so doing , I actuate the person of a co-heire . Ans . But in this the disputer and we mean no other thing , then that kneeling which is a note of submission , and never used in banquets , cannot formally expresse , as an apt signe , the dignity of fellow-table-ship with Christ : 2. Poor Logitian , it followeth not in sitting at table , which is the expressing signe of the honour of table-fellowship , we may not call Christ , Lord. David sitting at Table with his Prince Saul , might well term him ( my Lord the King ) but if ▪ David should be put to his knees at Table , and inhibited to eat at the Table , at which his Prince did eat ; no wise man will say , that Saul had honoured David with fellow-Tabling with him . For the Act of kneeling , and non-eating were no expressing signes of fellow-Tabling , but by the contrary of no fellow-Tabling ; the Disputer hath no minde to make us every way equall with Christ , so as there can be a case , wherein it is not Lawfull to esteem or call Christ our Lord ; King and Superiour , this is Paybodies consequence ; but take away Table-sitting , an honour put upon us by Christ in this Sacrament , Luk. 22. 27. and substitute kneeling for it , then you take away Gods expressing signe of Table-Fellowship in that gesture : for while the world standeth , kneeling shall never be a signe of Table-fellowship : sitting at Table is a signe , as the Scriptures clear , but sitting taketh never away our inferiority to Christ ; you may worship and actuate the person of a co-heir , but not worship in an expressing visible signe of co-heirship , and then kneel . Farther he reasoneth with us , as if Table-sitting inferred an equality betwixt us , and that Lord who is the head of men and Angels ; we reason for an honour of fellowship , not equality . David set at King Saul's Table , is not made equall with Saul , but in Table-sitting , he doth partake of Table-honour to feast with his Prince . If Christ should have sitten and caused his Disciples rise and wash his feet ▪ in that he could not have said , ( I have put the honour of Table-fellowship on you , for you stand and wash my feet , and I sit ) this ( I say ) had been no table-honour , but most contrary to it : It had been indeed servant-honour , Luk 22. 27. and more then sinfull men are worthy of . To kneel to Christ is an honour , but to kneel at Tabling with him , as kneeling , is no more an expressing signe of table-honour , nor standing and serving Christ , while he did eat is an honour of table-fellowship . Now if any shall take away eating with Christ , at that table , he taketh away table-honour , as Papists do in taking away drinking with Christ from the people , yet eating with Christ maketh us not equall to Christ , but take away eating , and you take away Table-honour , so take away sitting at Table , and you take away ( eatenus ) in so far the Table-honour . But by this mean ( say they ) you make it necessary to sit , and of Divine necessity . I answer , Table sitting is not so necessary , as that the want thereof doth annihilate the Sacrament , and make it to be no Sacrament at all , but it is ( as I think ) many wayes necessary , as first it is morally or Theologically necessary , as being gesture sanctified by the practice of Christ and his Apostles , upon Morall grounds , and so to be imitated by us : 2. It is necessary , by necessity of expediency , as free from hazard of Idolatry , of which crime kneeling in this act , is guilty . 3. It is necessary , sacramentally , for the integrity of the Sacrament , as signifying our honour of Table-fellowship . 4. It is by natures grounds necessary , that as this banquet is materiall , having bread , wine , taking , breaking , distribution , eating , drinking , so the externall solemnity of a banquet , such as is table-sitting , requireth the same . And 5. which is our 4. Argument , it is necessary by necessity of Divine precept ( Do this in remembrance of me ) that this is included in the precept we certainly believe : 1. Because nothing in reason can be excluded , from the precept of the first pattern , but what is meerly occasionall , such as sitting is not . 2. The practise of Christ and the Apostles cannot be a will-action , and therefore must fall under a precept : sitting cannot be occasionall , upon the reason that it was continued through occasion of the passeover ; for if this be good , then eating and drinking , and the Analogy betwixt the signe and Christ , shall be occasionall , and the singing of a Psalm , as was at the Passeover , shall be occasionall : for Christ retained what did equally belong to the Supper of the Iews , and this Christian Supper , as concerning the common nature of sacred Feasts . 5. What is proper to a table of solemn feasting , should not be denyed to this , But sitting was such ; Ergo , More of this may be seen in the Nullity of Pearth examination , and the re-examination of the five Articles of Pearth . QUEST . II. Whether humane Laws binde the consciences are not ? OUr Argument against Ceremonies is ▪ that they fail against the fifth Commandment , and the Authority of Rulers . What the Civill , or Church-Ruler can command must be good , necessary , apt to edifie , and not indifferent , or neither good nor evil ; Ceremonies are acknowledged by their Fathers to be indifferent , and neither good nor evil ; Ergo , They are such as cannot be lawfully commanded . The Proposition is clear ; the Ruler must command for good , Rom. 13. 4. He is the minister of God for thy good , and all for edification , 1 Cor. 10 , 23. 1 Cor. 14. 3. v. 12 , 17 , 26. And therefore all means injoyned for this end , good , and Edification must conduce thereunto of their own nature , and not by the will of men , else they edifie not . But that this may be further cleared , it is questioned , if humane Lawes binde the conscience : for which consider , 1. Dist . An humane Law is taken in Concreto , when judges command what God commandeth , as when they make a Law against murther . 2. In abstracto , when the judge forbiddeth what may tend to murther , as carrying Armour in a City in the night . 2. Dist . There is some morall equity in right humane Laws . 3. Something positive . 4. Dist . There be four things to be regarded in humane Laws : 1. Publick peace of the society . 2. The credit , honour and Majesty of the Ruler , even when the Law is unjust . 3. Obedience passive , and subjection , by patient suffering . 4. Obedience active by doing , which is now to be considered . Dist . 5. An humane Law Civill may oblige , Ratione generalis praecepti , In regard of the generall command to obey our superiors , as the fifth Command saith ▪ But the question is , if a humane Law , as meerly positive oblige in conscience , as if this which the Captain forbiddeth , as , ( not to speak the vvatch-word ) be in it self against the sixth Commandment ( Thou shalt not murther ) if no murther follow upon the not speaking of the watch-word , though it be against the fifth in the generall . Dist . 6. The question is not , whether we be obliged in conscience to obey superiors in things Lawfull , or whether we be obliged in conscience to obey Superiors , when they are sole authoritative relaters and carriers of Gods expresse Law to us , for then they bring nothing of their own , to lay upon us , and in these cases their laws are rather Gods Laws delivered by Superiors to us , and binde the conscience . But the question is , if positive laws , in particular matters , negatively only , conform to the word , as in matters of Oeconomy , and policy , as not to eat flesh in Lent , for the growth of cattell ; in matters of Art , and in ordering of war and Military Acts , commanded by Captains , if these commandments as such oblige the conscience . Now to oblige the conscience , is , when the not doing of such a thing bringeth an evil conscience ; now an evil conscience , as Pareus a saith , Is the sense of sin committed against God , and the fear of Gods judgement . Distinct . 7. The conscience i● obliged by doing , or not doing , two wayes : 1. Per se , kindly , when the fact of it self obligeth , and for no respect without , as to give almes to the poor at the Commandment of the superior : 2. When the fact obligeth for a reason from publick peace , good example , and order . 1. Conclusion . When Rulers command , what God expresly commandeth , their Laws obligeth the conscience , Psal . 34. 11. Come ye children hearken unto me , and I will teach you the fear of the Lord , Prov. 4 ▪ 1. Hear ye children the instruction of a Father . 2. Conclus . Publick peace in all the commandments of Superiors , in so far , as can be without sin , obligeth the conscience , as Heb. 12. 14. Follow peace with all men , and godlinesse , Psal . 34. 14. Seek peace , and follow after it , Rom. 12. 18. 3. Conclus . Subjection to the censures of Rulers by suffering patiently , is an obligation lying upon all private persons , 1 Pet. 2. 20. But if , vvhen ye do vvell , and suffer for it , ye take it patiently , this is acceptable to God , Rom. 13. 2. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power , resisteth the ordinance of God. 4. Conclus . Nothing in non-obeying unwarrantable Commandments must be done that redoundeth to the discredit of the Ruler or the hurting of his Majesty and honour , 1 Pet. 2. 17. Honour the King , Eccles . 10. 20. Curse not the King : For even when we deny subjection or obedience objective , to that which they command , yet owe we obedience officiall , and all due respect and reverence to the person and eminent place of the Ruler , as Act. 7. 2. Steven calleth them , Men , brethren , and fathers , Act. 7. 51. And yet stiffe-necked resisters of the holy Ghost . 5. Conclus . Humane Laws , whither civill or Ecclesiastick , in that particular positive matter , which they have of Art , Oeconomy , policy , and in Gods matters of meer humane coyne and stamp , do not bindes the conscience at all , per se , kindely and of themselves . 1. Nothing , but what is either Gods expresse word , or his word by consequence doth lay a band on the conscience of it self : But not to eat flesh in L●nt , upon civill reasons , Not to carry Armour in the night , To wear Surplice , and to Crosse infants in Baptisme , are neither Gods word expresly , nor by consequence . The major is sure ; because the word is the perfect and adequate object of matters of Faith , and morall practice , which concerneth the conscience , Psal . 19. 7. 8. Psal . 119. 9. Iohn 20. 31. Prov. 8. 9. 2. Because whatever thing layeth a band on the conscience , the not doing of that would be a sin before God , if the Ruler should never command it ( But the carrying Armour in the night ( the not wearing Surplice in Divine service ) should be no sin before God , if the ruler should never command them , as reason , Scriptures , and adversaries teach . The Proposition I instruct from the diffinition of an obligation of conscience , for to lay a band on the conscience is defined , to lay a command on the soul , which ye are obliged before God to do , as you would eschew sin , and obtain eternall salvation : So the learned Pareus b so c Dr. Field ; so d Gerson , and so teach e Gregorius de Valentia , and f Suarez . 3. None can lay on a band of not doing , under the hazard of sin , but they that can remit sins , for the power that looseth , the same bindeth : But mortall men cannot binde to sin , nor loose men from sin , but where God goeth before them in binding and loosing , for they cannot bestow the grace of pardoning sin : But he onely who hath the keys of David , who openeth , and no man shutteth , and shutteth , and no man openeth . 4. Whoever can lay on bands of Laws , to bring any under the debt of sin , must lay on bands of obligation to eternall punishment , but God only can do this , Mat. 10. 28. The Proposition is clear , because sin against God , essentially includeth a relative obligation to eternall punishment . 5. In matters of Gods worship this is clear . The School-men , as h Aquina● , i Suarez , k Ferrariensis , l Conradus teach us , that there is a twofold good . The first is , an objective and primordiall goodnesse , whereby things are agreeable to Gods Law , if rulers finde not this in that good which they command , they are not just , and so not to be obeyed . There is another goodnesse that cometh from the will of authority , & so only divine authority must make things good ; the will and authority of Rulers findeth objective goodnes in them , and therefore enacteth Laws of things , but because they enact Laws of things , they do not therefore become good and Lawfull , It is the will of the Creator of all beings which is the measure , rule , and cause of the goodnesse of things , as Adams not eating of the tree of knowledge is good and gratefull obedience , from Gods forbidding will , and it should have been as gratefull obedience to eat of that tree , if God had commanded so . Men cannot make worlds ; nor can their will create goodnesse in acts indifferent , nor can their forbidding will illegittimate or make evil any actions indifferent , and therefore things must be morally good , and so intrinsecally good without the creative influence of humane Authority , and from God only are they apt to edifie , and to oblige the conscience in the termes of goodnesse morall . And this is strengthened , by that which in reason cannot be denied , to wit , that it is essentiall to every human Law that layeth any obligation on the conscience , that it be just , nor is it to be called a Law , except it be just , and justice and equity humane Laws have from God , the law of nature , and his word , not from the Authority and will of men ; therefore Iurists expound that m What pleaseth the Prince , hath the vigour of a Law , of just things . Also the School-men , as n Carduba , o Thomas ▪ p Soto , q Medina , r Adrianus ſ Navar t Driedo u Castro , as I gather out of their writings , give strong reasons , why Rulers cannot lay an obligation on the conscience , when the matter of the Law is light and naughty , for this were to make a man a trangressor before God , for a word , a straw , a toy , which is unjust : Because the just weight of the matter is the only just ground of the Laws obligation : Ergo , the will of the Lawgiver , except he make a moat a mountaine , cannot lay an obligation of necessity on man. 2. It were a foolish law , and so no law to oblige to eternall punishment , and the offending of 2. God for a light thing , for this were to place the way of salvation in that wherein the way consisteth not . 3. Such a law were not for edification , but for destruction of soules . 4. This was the Pharises fault , Mat. 23. to lay on intollerable burthens on mens soules . 5. The law of God and nature freeth us in positive lawes from guilt , in case of necessity , as David did lawfully eat Shew-bread . 6. A Civill law may not take away a mans life for a straw , farre lesse can it bind to Gods wrath . 7. x Augustine saith , they be unjust ballances to esteeme things great or small , for our sole will. Out of all which I conclude , that no law as a Law , doth oblige the Conscience , but that which hath from the matter morall equity , and not from the intention of the Law-giver , as y Cajetan , z Silvester , a Angelus , and b Corduba teach , which intention must take a rule from the matter of the law , and not give a rule . c Gerson , No law ( saith he ) is a law to be called as necessary to salvation , ( as all good lavves should be ) but that vvhich de jure Divino , is according to Gods lavv , yea , vve are not ( saith d Durandus ) to obey the Pope if he command a Monke to doe somthing , vvhen he is not moved to command by the necessity , the profit of the Church , but by his ovvne free vvill , and if this be knovven . If the Pope ( faith he ) for his ovvne vvill , and vvithout necessity and utility should seclude vvorkes of supererogation , that command should tend to destruction , and vve are to obey Christ , vvho is above the Pope . And therefore his mind is , that all obligation of Conscience , in humane commandments commeth from Gods will and law , that is , from the just and necessary matter of the law , not from the will of men . 6. Conclus . All humane or Ecclesiastick lawes binding the conscience , have necessarie , and not probable deduction onely , by the warrant of both the M●jor Proposition and Assumption from the Word of God , and Law of Nature . This conclusion is against e Suarez , he seeketh onely a probable connexion betwixt obliging Lawes and the Divine law . And f Gregorius de valent . is in very deed against Gerson , who teacheth three things of all humane lawes . 1. That they are in so farre just . 2. That they in so farre oblige the Conscience , as they have necessary dependance upon natures law , or Gods word , and therefore compareth them to these precepts that Physitians give to sicke persons , they oblige the conscience of the sicke , ( as I thinke ) from the sixt Commandement , ( Thou shalt doe no murther , ) for if the patient sleepe at such a time , or drinke wine in such a case , he killeth himselfe , but they have not obliging power from the fift Commandement , not as if the King being sicke were obliged by the fift Commandement to obey the Physitian , as his superiour . 3. He will have all humane laws that properly obligeth , to be onely declaratory , and to manifest onely the Divine law , and to apply it to such and such a matter . The Conclusion is clear from what is said before , because all civil laws as meerly positive , in the cafe of non-contempt doe not oblige , and in the case of non-scandall , as g Medin . h Almaine , i Gerson teach . And it followeth from a sure ground , that k Vasquez layeth downe , and he hath it from l Driedo , to wit , that the efficacy of obligation in humane lawes , cometh not from the will of Lawgivers , or their intention , but from the dignity or waightines of the matter . If then the matter be not from Gods law , just , the obligation is none at all ; for if the law from mans will , shall lay on an obligation of three degrees , whereas Gods law from Gods vvill , before men inacted this in a Law , laid on an obligation of two degrees onely , tying the Conscience , then the will of man createth obligation , or the obligative power of conscience in the matter of the Law ▪ and by that same reason he createth goodnes , which is absurd , for that is proper to God onely . I grant it is hard , because of the variety of singular actions in mans life , to see the connexion , betwixt particulars of humane lawes and Gods lawes ; yet a connexion there is , and for this cause the learned worthy Divine , m Pareus will have humane lawes in particulari , & per se , in the particular and of themselves to binde the Conscience . Whereas n Calvin , and o Beza , Iunius , Tilenus , Sibrandus , Whittakerus and others deny this : But the truth is , humane civill lawes are two waies considered . 1. As they are meerly Positive & according to the letter of the Law. 2. As they have a connexion with 1. The principles of nature , of right and wrong . 2. With the end of the law , which is the supream law , The safety of the people , as the Civill law saith , he who entreth to an inheritance and maketh no Inventory of all his goods , shall pay debts above the-whole heritage , this law according to the letter in the Court of conscience is unjust , and so cannot oblige in Conscience ; so as he is guilty before God , and deserveth the vengeance of everlasting wrath , who doth not make an inventory of all his goods , and produce it to the Iudge ; so he that goeth up to the walls of a City , may by the Law be commanded to be put to death , yet is he not guiltie of eternall death before God , and therefore if the presumption which is the ground of the law cease , as this ; He that maketh not an inventory with a purpose to enjoy the whole inheritance and pay no debts , sinneth before God against conscience , as famous jurists , to wit p Jason , q Bartolus and others teach : for this Law considered as having connexion with a principle of nature , that every man should pay his debts , is a law binding the Conscience , and the truth is , the end of these Lawes oblige the Conscience , they being divine expressions of justice and righteousnesse , but not the Lawes themselves ; for whatever obligeth the conscience as a divine truth , the ignorance thereof is a sinfull ignorance , and maketh a man guilty of eternall wrath , but men are not guilty & lyable to the eternal wrath of God , because they are ignorant of all the civill Lawes in Iustinians book ; then were we obliged to be no lesse versed in all the civill lawes , that bindeth in foro humano , then of the Bible , and law of God. The adversaries strive to prove that these lawes oblige the conscience , we may heare r Bellarmine s Vasquez , t Valentinian , and the Formalist and Arminian , v Doctor Jackson say , To resist the Rulers in giving , and making lawes , is to resist God , as 1 Sam. 8. They have not refused thee , but they have refused me , that I should not raigne over them . Suarez ●aith , An humane law is the neerest cause of obligation of conscience , as the eternall law is the remote cause . And ●ackson as the immediate interposition of divine authority made the killing of Abrahams sonne , holy , which otherwise would have been cruelty ; so the interposition of authority derived from God , make some actions that barely considered would be apparently evill , and desperate , to be honest and lawfull ; to strike a Prophet would seem sin , but when a Prophet cōmandeth to strike , not to strike is disobedience , 1 ▪ Kin. 20. 35 , 36. to rob a Spaniard is Piracie , but to do it upon the Kings letter of Mart for wrongs done to the State , is obedience to the King. Answ . To resist the servant in that wherein he is a servant , and as a servant , is to resist God , as 1 Sam. 8. proveth well . But the assumption then is most false , for rulers in making lawes , and creating by their sole pleasure , goodnes morall , in particular matters without the word of God , are not Gods servants , nor is humane authoritie as humane , the nearest cause of obligation of conscience , instamped in these lawes , nor is it the cause at all , and therefore to resist them , is not to resist God. They be Gods instruments and Ministers in 1. Propounding and expounding Gods laws . 2. In executing them , and defending them from the violence of men . 3. In making positive and directory civil lawes , for civill government , that are lawes improperly so called , which bind the conscience as above is said , in so far , as they have dependance upon Gods Law : for Iames saith , There is but one Law-giver . As for Church-canons , all , except Physicall circumstances in them , are to be warranted by the word . Therefore it is a vaine consequence of Valentia , humane lawes oblige , dependenter a lege aeternâ , as they depend on the eternall law ▪ Ergo , they oblige in Conscience , it followeth not . They oblige in Conscience as their Major and Minor proposition , in that which is morall , can be proved out of Gods word , but so , in their morallity they are meerely divine , and not humane and positive , and so the argument concludeth not against us . They oblige in Conscience as they depend upon the eternall law , that is , as they are deduced from the eternall Law of God , in a Major proposition , without probation of the assumption , that we deny , and it is in question now . The people 1 Sam. 8. in rejecting Samuel from being their judge , rejected God , not because Samuel had a power of making lawes , without the warrant of Gods word . Neither Moses , nor Jeremiah , nor Ezekiel ▪ nor any Prophet were in that servants subordinate to God , for they vvere onely to heare the vvord at Gods mouth . 3. We could have no more at Bellarmines x hand , then Jackson saith . For Bellarmine saith , In a good sense Christ gave to Peter a power , to make that which is sinne , to be no sin , and that which is no sinne , to be sinne . So Iackson , the interposition of derived authority , maketh that which would be murther other wayes , to bee a good worke ; that is , men may doe what God onely can doe . If Isaac then at the commandement of Abraham his father , offer his sonne Iacob to God in a bloody Sacrifice , then Abrahams derived authority maketh that a lawfull sacrifice , as to strike a Prophet of it selfe , is a degree of murther , but when a Prophet commandeth another to strike a Prophet , it is lawfull . But can any blasphemer say , that this was humane derived authority without warrant of the word of the Lord , such as are humane positive lawes , and our humane ceremonies , see the text , 1 King. 20. 35. And a certaine man of the sonnes of the Prophets , said unto his neighbour in the word of the Lord ▪ smite me . This was immediate , divine and Propheticall authoritie , and not humane . Doth the Kings letter of Mart make robbing a Spaniard lawfull ? Court Parasites speake so , he refuteth himselfe . The Kings letter of Mart , for wrongs done to the State , maketh that which is Piracy lawfull , then the Kings authority doth not here by a nomothetick power , and a law laid upon the Conscience , but the wrongs of Piracy by Spaine , done to the State of England , may make the robbing of Spaniards an act of lawfull warre , and an act of justice flowing from the King as a lawfull Magistrate . Now Iackson is speaking of mandates of Rulers in that place , which have no warrant of the word of God. Yea , even Stapleton y a Papist saith , as Doctor Field also z observeth , That humane laws binde for the utility and neoessity of the matter , and not from the will of the Lawgiver . And so saith a Gerson , b Almain , c Decius , d Mencha , and our owne e Iunius saith , The plenitude of power of lawes is onely in the princpall agent , not in the instrument . f Doctor Iackson saith , unlimited and absolute faith or submission of conscience we owe not to rulers , that is due to God , but we owe to them conditionall assent and cautionary obedience , if they speake from God ▪ suppose they fetch not an expresse commission from Scripture , for if Pastors be then onely to be obeyed when they bring evident commission out of Scripture , I were no more bound to beleeve & obey my governours , then they are bound to beleeve and obey in Bellarm. contr . 3. lih . 4. cap. 6. not . 89. my Governours , then ther are bound to believe and obey me , for equals are oblieged to obey equalls , when they bring a warrant from Gods word ▪ and so the povver of Rulers vvere not reall , but titular , and the same do th g Sutluvius and h Bellarmine say . Answ . We owe to equalls , to Mahomet , conditionall and cautionary faith and obedience ; thus , I beleeve what Mahomet saith , so he speake Gods word , yea so Samaritans who worshipped they knew not what , John 4. 26. gave saith to their Teachers in a blinde way , so they speake according to Gods word . 2. It followeth in no sort , if Rulers are onely to be obeyed when they bring Gods Word , that then they are no more to be obeyed then equalls & Infetiours , because there is a double obedience , one of conscience , and objective coming from the thing commanded ; And in respect of this , the word hath no lesse authority , and doth no lesse challenge obedience of Confcience , and objective , when my equall speaketh it in a private way , yea , when I writ it in my muse , then when a Pastor speaketh it by publike authority ; for we teach against Papists , that the word borroweth ●o authority from men , nor is it with certainty of faith to be received as the Word of man , but as indeed the Word of God , as the Scripture saith : 1. There is another obedience officiall , which is also obedience of Conscience , because the fifth Commandement injoyneth it . Yet not obedience of Conscience coming from the particular , commanded in humane Lawes , as humane , so I owe obedience of subjection , and submission of affection , of feare , love , honour , respect , by vertue of the fift Commandement to Rulers , when they command according to Gods Word , and this I owe not to equals or inferiours ; and so it followeth not that the power of Rulers and Synods is titular , because they must warrant their mandates from the Word . But it s alwayes this mans hap to be against sound truth . But 3. That I owe no more objective subjection of conscience to this , ( Thou shalt not murther ) ( Beleeve in Iesus Christ ) when Rulers and Pastors command them , then when I read them in Gods word . I prove 1. If this from a Ruler ( Thou shalt not murther , ) challenge faith and subjection of Conscience of six degrees , but as I read it my selfe , or as my equall in a private way saith , ( Thou shalt not murther ) it challenge saith and subjection of foure degrees onely , then is it more obligatory of Conscience , and so of more intrinsecall authority , and so more the word of God when the Ruler commandeth it , then when I read it , or my equall speaketh it to me . This were absurd for the speaker , whether publike or private person , addeth not any intrinsecall authority to the word , for then the word should be more or lesse Gods word , as the bearers were publike , or private , more or lesse worthy . As Gods word spoken by Amos a Prophet , should not be a word of such intrinfecall authority , as spoken by Moses both a Prince and a Prophet . 2. My faith of subjection of Conscience , should be resolved , as concerning the two degrees of obedience of faith to the word spoken by the Ruler on the sole authority of the Ruler , and not on the authority of God , the Author of his own word . 4. I answer to Sutluvius , That Christ in the externall policy of his owne house is a Lawgiver , ordaining such and such officers himselfe , Ezek. 4. 11. commanding order and decency , and setting downe a perfect discipline in the New Testament , in all particulars that have influence , religious , morall , mystically significant in Gods worship , and there is reason that Synods and Pastors , should rather promulgate Gods Lawes , then the people . 1. Because God hath given to them by office , the key of knowledge . 2. Because by office they are watch-men , and so have authority of office to heare the Law at Gods mouth , and in Synods to give Directories or Canons according to that word , which people have not , and that their Canons must be according to Gods Word , is said in the word , Nehemiah 10. 32. Also we ●●ade ordinances for us , 34. as it is written in the law of the Lord. Iackson saith , Of things good in themselves and apprehended so by us , without any scruple of evil , every mans conselence htah sufficient authority to inioyn it , only the alacrity of doing in what time or measure it is to be done , or such circumstances , cometh within the subiect of obedience to governours . Answ . Then because faith in Christ is evidently good by the Doctors learning , the Pastor hath no more authority to command the people to beleeve in Christ , then the people hath to command the same to him . So in preaching all the necessary fundamentals of salvation , the authority of Pastors is meerely titular . There be then little necessitie of a publike Ministery , as Socinians teach us . 2. The ala●rity and manner and measure of beleeving , and doing things evidently good is as particularly set downe in Gods Word , as obliging the Conscience , as the Mandates themselves , God who commandeth us to love him , and to beleeve in his Sonne , hath not left that power to Prelates , that createth wretched Ceremonies , to command us to love God with all our heart , or not , and to serve God with alacrity or not , or to beleeve in Christ with all the heart or with halfe a heart ; the sincerity , measure and manner of the loving of God , is no more the subject of obedience to rulers then the loving of God. Rulers doe command both alike , Pari authoritate , except the man say that we obey Gods Law perfectly , when we give obedience to it , according to the substance of the acts , though we obey not sincerely . The Doctor giveth us Rules in obeying Rulers . We are not to adventure on the action , whereof we are perswaded there be much evil , and no good in it . Ans . Then we cannot venture upon Ceremonies , that bringeth adders to Gods word , under all the Plagues written in Gods word . 2. Gods word , not mens perswasions of conscience ( except in this also he be an Arminian ) is the rule of mens actions . The servants of Caiaphas may be perswaded there is no good , but much evil in confessing , Christ ▪ We are to lay aside the erroneous perswasion , and obey , if the action be good in itself . Iackson . Some actions apprehended as meerly evil , may be undertaken with lesse danger , then others which are apprehended , partly as evil , partly as good ; the action is evil as long as we fear the evil in it , to be greater then the good we can hope for . Ans . To do any thing as apprehended evil , of which sort are humane Ceremonies to us , for any respect , is to do with a doubting conscience , and to sin , Rom. 14. 23. 2 ▪ God 's word , not probabilities should lead us in adventuring upon actions . Iackson . 3. If the measure of the good apprehended , be as great as the evil feared ; in private choice , we may adventure upon the action , leaving the event to Gods providence , which favoureth actions , more then privations , works rather then idlenesse , and following of that which is good , rather then abstinence from evil : for vvhere this indifference of perswasion is ▪ authority may cast the ballance , and sway the private choice ? so also a Hooker . Ans . This is the Iesuit b Suarez his doctrine , and so saith the Iesuit of Corduba c Sanches , when the subject is in a doubt , whether the thing commanded by the Superiour be lawfull or not , he is obliged to obey , and he is to be excused because of the command of the superiour : 1. Because ( say they ) the Commanders condition is better , and for a speculative doubt , he is not to be spoiled of his power of commanding , where reason , saith he , commandeth nothing against reason : 2. Because the inferiour hath resigned his will to the superiour , Deut. 17. 2. Paral. 19. Ergo , In things doubtsome , God commanded to stand to the determination of the Priest , and it is a truth that the will of the Superiour doth not vary and change the nature of a thing in it self ; yet it varieth to the inferiours conscience . Now indifference of perswasion is all one to Doctor Iackson with indifferency of the thing , for so he dictates . If one have indifferency of reasons of twelve degrees on both sides , that Arianisme , or Arminianisme , is truth , if authority determine both to be truth , the weight of authority in indifferency of perswasion should cast the ballance , and to believe this , or not to believe it : where Arguments are of twelve grains of light of truth on both sides , it is to the doubting man , as if the thing were indifferent , so is the doubter to give up his soul , conscience , and faith to believe Arianisme to be truth , not from light of conscience , ( for equally as much light of conscience are in either side , as is supposed ) but for the meer will of humane authority , without Gods word . Now though the matter here be indifferent in it self , yet not so to the doubter ; for Ceremonies in our perswasion are not indifferent . See here Ignatius Loyola d say , Give over your self to your Ruler . Give the Prelate your faith to keep , while ye be in eternity , and at the last judgement he will restore the pawn ; And this is ( ●aith Gregory de Valent. e to give your two eyes to your guide : I had rather they stick in my own head . To these Iesuits I oppose the minde of f Vasquez , and g Salas , who say in that case the subject should first lay aside his errour , and then obey . 2 God requireth a full perswasion by the Lord Iesus , even in things indifferent , Rom. 14. 14 , 22 , 23. But poor naked humane authority cannot ingender perswasion of faith ; and here is doubting ▪ 3. It is false , That providence favoureth positive actions , more then privations , for Rom. 14. God loveth better abstinence from meats in themselves lawfull and clean , as the Apostle proveth , ver . 14. Because nothing is unclean of it self , then that the eater doubt , if he be not transgressing the Law of God in eating , though a great Apostle say , there is no danger in eating . And Jackson addeth of the same nature these ; The good of obedience is not a consequent only of the action , but either an essentiall part , or such a circumstance and motive precedent , as bringeth a new essence for its concomitant , whereby the evil , which we out of private perswasions fear , may be countervaled by the goodnesse that is in the purpose of sincere obedience to lawfull authority , as well as we conceited good probably included in the very obiect of the action , he that doth that which in his private opinion he suspecteth to be evil , because injoyned by lawfull authority , doth not evil that good may come of it , seeing the goodnesse of obedience is no consequent of the action , but a motive precedent — authority maketh actions indifferent to be good and necessary . Ans . He beggeth the question : The goodnesse of sincere obedience to authority ( saith he ) may countervail the evil , that we in our private choice fear to be in the action . But first , obedience to authority in things wanting Gods word ( whereof he speaketh now ) is not obedience , but sinning , because doing without faith . 2. I take the Doctor at his word , refusing obedience to mens will-worship , or to practise even to the ruin of the weak , things indifferent , for fear of the greatest evil , the offending of God , by adding to his worship , Rev. 22. 18 , 19. is obedience to God , and not a privation ; the purpose ( I say ) of this obedience to God , may countervail all evil that can be imagined in non-obedience to men , and sure obedience to God , though probably obedience is as good and better , then obedience to men , though probably obedience . Jesuites and Formalists say , Rulers are in possession to command ; Ergo , We cannot thrust them out of possession , where we are not perswaded that they command against reason , saith Sanches : So I say , God is in just possession commanding us to venture upon no indifferent action , where the conscience doubteth , and shall we not no lesse contend for Gods just possession , as time-servers do for mortall Rulers unjust possession in this ? 2. I prove that it were Lawfull then to sin against God : A Iew is alike perswaded , that Maries Son i● the true Messiah , and that he is a deceiver : Opinions about a man , might seem indifferent to the Iews , And it is all one ( saith Jackson ) as if the thing be indifferent . Now the Pharisees in a Councell , determine , that Maries Son is a deceiver ; Then it is lawfull for the Jew , upon purpose of sincere obedience to Pharisees , who sit in Moses chair , to believe , that Maries son is a deceiver ; because the conceit of sincere obedience is an essentiall motive to transubstantiate unbelief into sincere obedience , and the Iew may venture upon the faith , that Maries Son is a deceiver , and crucifie the Lord of glory : being commanded thereunto by his Commanders , because Gods providence favoureth more positive actions , then privations . 3. He saith , He that obeyeth for the sole authority of Rulers , doth not evil that good may come of it : 1. Because the goodnesse of obedience countervaileth the evil of the actions : But 1 ▪ The question is , if it be obedience ; Ergo , If it be no obedience , it cannot countervail the evil . 2. If it be the evil of sin , with a doubting conscience to do what judges commandeth , having no warrant of faith , but the will and lust of men , no purpose of good , though it were to save all the world , can counter-redeem the evil of sin against God. 2. Because ( saith he ) such a one doth not evil , that good may come of it . Then he that stealeth moneys to give to the poor doth not evil , that good may come of it , by Dr. Jacksons reason , Because the goodnesse of purposing to help the poor is not a consequent , but a precedent motive of the action , and so maketh it good : We all know , the intention of the end goeth in the intention before the action , but not as an essentiall cause to make an evil action good , or make an indifferent action necessary and honest : A good intention doth make a good action good and better , but that a good intention ( as Idolators are full of good intentions ) can never so season the means , as ( this Doctor saith ) that it can make evil to be good , i Vasquez condemneth the Fathers of ignorance , because they said , Propositum bonum excusat malum opus : so Cassianus k said , It was lawfull to lie for a good end , and l Chrysosto● , and m Ambrose said the same , as Vasquez saith : see n Aquinas for this . 3. It is the doctrine of the man of sin , That Pope or Rulers , sole and bare authority can make an action indifferent , and so neither good nor evil , to be indifferent and good , as o Bellarmine saith ; for God only by his institution createth morall goodnesse in actions ; mans will is no creatrix of goodnesse . 4. Neither resolutions nor skill are to be credited or followed , because private or publick , because authority of man as such , is no light nor warrant to the conscience to adventure upon moral actions ; and the Lord giveth light to private men to obey , Psal . 25. 8 , 9. 1 Cor. 2. 14 , 15. Ioh. 7. 17 , ●8 Ioh. 7. 27. 2 Cor ; 3. 18. 2 Cor. 4. 4. As he doth to Rulers to Command . So p Sylvester , q Tartaretus , so r Rivetus , ſ Doctot Field . I proceed to answer other Arguments : As 1. We must not obey , Not only for wrath , but for conscience , the violation of a speciall Law , necessarily draweth with it the violation of the generall Law of the fift Commandment ; But the violation of the generall , ( saith Learned t Pareus ) hurteth the Conscience ; and the Magistrate punisheth not for generall Violation , but for the Violation of this speciall Law ; Ergo , this speciall Law obligeth in Conscience . And it seemeth to carry reason . Every just punishment presupposeth essentially a sin , else it is not a just punishment ; but the Ruler doth justly punish the particular Transgression of an humane Law ; Ergo , the Transgression of a particular Law of Rulers is sin . The Proposition is confirmed by grave School-men , u Soto , x Sylvester , y and Ioan , Eselius , Who thinke that there cannot be a Law obliging to a punishment , and not to a fault ; because punishment hath an intrinsecall relation to a sin , nor can it be a just punishment that is not proportioned to a sin ; for the Law z saith , That cometh not under damage , which cometh not under fault . Ans . Though the Violation of the generall Law hurteth the Conscience , it being against the fifth Commandment ; it followeth not that the Violation of every particular Law , even that that is meerly Positive , hurteth the Conscience before God : For then the carrying of Armour in the Night , Suppose no Ruler on earth make a Law there anent , should be a sin before God , which no wise man can say . 2. The other reason is more important , and draweth with it that School-question agitated by Iurists also and Ganonists , An ulla detur lox pure paenalis ; If there be a Law purely Penall , without sin in it : And if the Law of Rulers in things meerly Positive , be meerly Penall and co-active , and not formally obliging to sin . But I Answer , Rulers do justly punish the Transgression of a Positive Law , not as particularly humane and Positive : But as 1. It hath connexion with the Morall Reason of the Law. 2. As the particular transgression is scandalous and against order , in which case the formall object of the just punishment inflicted by the Ruler , is in very deed not the simple omission of the positive act of a particular humane Law , but the violation of the morall goodnesse annexed to it , and of the scandall given . Now in this meaning , the transgression of the positive humane Law is not kindely , Per se , of it self punishable , but by accident , and so it bindeth the conscience by accident ; And in this sense , great Doctors , as a Ambrose , b Anselme , c Theodoret , d Chrysostom , e Navarra , f Felinus , g Taraquel say , That humane Laws oblige the conscience . But the most learned of the Canonists aver , that not to obey civill Laws , laying aside the evil of scandall , is no mortall sin , and so doth not involve the conscience in guiltinesse before God. 2. They object . To resist the Laws of the Magistrate , is to resist himself ; and to resist himself , is to resist the Ordinance of God. Ans . To resist the Laws positive and particular in connexion with the morall reason of the Law , is to resist the Ruler , true . But so the question is not concluded against us : for by accident in that sense , humane Laws binde the conscience ; but to resist the particular Laws , as particular Laws , as particular positive Laws , is not to resist the Ruler : A Ruler as a Ruler , doth never command a thing meerly indifferent as such , but as good , edificative , profitable , and except you resist the morality of the positive humane Law , you resist not the Ruler ; yea , nor yet is the Law resisted . 3. The Iesuit Lod. Meratius h objecteth : Every true Law obligeth , either to guiltinesse , or to punishment , but the civill and Canonick Laws are Laws properly so called . But they do not ever oblige to punishment only . Ergo , They oblige to sin . Ans . It is denied that Laws civill or Canonicall , as meerly particularly positive , do oblige as Laws , or that they are Laws , they be only Laws according to the morality in them , that can promove us to our last end , eternall felicity . It is also false that the Iesuit saith , If thou wilt be saved , keep the Commandments , doth command the keeping of all Civill and Canonick Laws , or that hence is concluded a Law obliging the conscience , that is , humane and positive , as if a Lent Fast , a Pilgrimage , and not carrying Armour in the night were commanded by Christ , as necessary to life eternall . The same i Meratius striveth to answer the Argument of Almain and Gerson , which is this ; Who ever can oblige to sin mortall before God , he can inflict eternall punishment , but no mortall man can inflict eternall punishment . 1. Saith he , This Argument would prove sins against the Law of nature , as homicide , and adultery , not to be deadly sins , for by the Law of nature , eternall punishment is not inflicted for sins against the Law of nature , but by the positive will of God. If any say , God is the author of the Law of nature , because he is the Creator of that humane nature , in the which this law is written : So , if that be sufficient that the law of nature oblige under eternall punishment , so also the civill and Ecclesiasticall lavv shall binde the conscience , because he is the author of that power which maketh Civill and Ecclesiastick laws , for there is no power , but it is of God. Ans . 1. By the Law of nature , sins against the Law of nature deserve eternall punishment , and that essentially , laying aside the positive will of God , to whom I grant it is free to inflict punishment , or not to inflict , and this agreeth to all sin . But to carry Armour in the night , laying aside the case of scandall , and the morality thereof , that no murther follow thereupon , deserveth neither temporall nor eternall punishment . And if this Argument of the Iesuits hold good , no mortall sin shall oblige to eternall punishment , because Gods positive will is the nearest cause of actuall punishment eternall in all sins . 2. God is not the Author of a propper no●othetick power in man , for that is the question . 2. He answereth , Distinguishing the Proposition . None can oblige to a mortall sin , but he who can inflict the eternall punishment of a mortall sin . It is true ( saith he ) of the punishment which wholly dependeth upon the will of the judge who made the Law : but it is not true of that punishment , which no way dependeth upon the will of the Iudge , such as is eternall punishment , excommunication dependeth upon the vvill of man , and it obligeth to eternall punishment , yet man cannot inflict that eternall punishment : for a man may command an act , the omission whereof , or the commission whereof , is of such moment , that it serveth much for the good of a community , and therefore he vvho of knowledge and vvillingly doth such an act , doth sin against right reason , and so against the eternall lavv of God. Ans . 1. The distinction of the Jesuit is but a begging of the question . He vvho can oblige to mortall sin by his Lavv , can also oblige to eternall punishment , if eternall punishment depend vvholly on his free vvill , as the Lavv doth ; What is that , but the inflicting of eternal punishment belongeth to him who maketh a Law obliging to sin mortal , so being the inflicting of eternall punishment belong to him ; But our Argument is , he who hath dominion and authority to make a Law , hath dominion and authority to inflict a punishment answerable to the transgression of that Law : for it is one dominion and power to make the Law , and to inflict the penalty of the Law : Man cannot make the penalty of eternall wrath : Ergo , he cannot make a Law obliging to eternall wrath . 2. Excommunication is not done by mans will , but by the power of the keys for a mortall sin deserving excommunication , and so eternall wrath . If any Excommunicate upon his sole will , as wicked Popes have done ; in that case the will of a man obligeth neither to punishment , nor to eternall punishment , it is but Brutum Fulmen , and not to be feared . 3. If any Commit an act that hurteth a whole Community , and is forbidden by men in Authority , he sinneth against the Law of God , though men had never forbidden that Act : And we deny not but humane Laws agreeing with the Law of Nature , doth oblige the Conscience both to sin and eternall punishment , but then they are not humane Laws , but Divine Laws , and in that case two guiltinesses , Duo reatus , are Committed , one against the fifth Commandment , in doing what Superiors according to Gods Word forbiddeth , and there is another guiltinesse against the matter it self , and a Divine Law , which also should stand as a sin before God , thought the Ruler had never forbidden it : But if any carry Armour in the Night , being forbidden by the Iudge , for eschewing of night homicide , if no homicide follow at all , and the matter be not known , and so not scandalous , the carrier of Armour is involved in no guiltinesse before God. CAP. III. Of the power of the Magistrate in matters Ecclesiasticall . QUEST . 1. That Christ hath a spirituall Kingdom , not only in the power of preaching the word , but also in the power of the keys by discipline . COncerning the Christian Magistrate we are to consider two heads , the one negative , what he cannot do in the matters of Christs Kingdom : 2. Positive , What he ought to do , for the opening of the former : We are to cleare whether or no all externall scandalls Ecclesiasticall , as well as civill , are to be punished by the Civill Magistrate ; and that as in Civill scandals , that disturbeth the peace of the Common-wealth , the Magistrate hath a twofold power , one to command what is good and just , another to reward and punish ; so the Lord Jesus in his Kingdom , hath not onely a directive power to teach and forbid , but also a power , by way of Discipline , upon the external man ecclesiastically to reward and punish , to binde and loose , in an externall Court on earth . It is granted by the Adversaries , that Christ as King hath a power of binding and loosing , but meerly internall , purely spirituall , in regard of the Conscience , by the Preaching of the Word ; but for any externall power to take in and cast out of the Visible Kingdom of Iesus Christ his Visible Church , This they deny , and so refuse all externall Ecclesiasticall censures of receiving into the bosome of the Church , and casting out by rebukes , or Excommunication ; and therefore that there is no externall Court in the Church to punish Ecclesiasticall scandals , all scandals and externall offences of the Church , are to be punished by the Christian Magistrate onely : In opposition to which error , I say , 1. Conclusion . There is not only a rebuking of an offender in the Church , by private admonition , as between Brother and Brother , common to all Christians , Col. 3. 16. Levit. 19. 17. And of the Pastor only , he applying the Word by way of Preaching to such and such offenders , and closing the Gates of the Kingdom of Heaven upon impenitent sinners , which is acknowledged by the Adversaries : But there is also a Church-rebuking by way of censure , which must presuppose an Ecclesiasticall Court , and a rebuking of a Publique sin , put forth by many ; whereas one only , not a Church or multitude may Preach the Word , and so rebuke by way of Preaching , which I make out from the Word of God , 2 Cor. 2. 6. Sufficient to such a man is this punishment which was inflicted of many : The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a rebuke or punishment , in the old Translation , it is Objurgatio , in the Newer , Increpatio ; Piscator Muleta , is a chastisement , whether this punishment was actuall excommunication , as many Learned Interpreters do not improbably gather out of the Text ; or if it was a Rebuke of the Church in order thereunto : Certain it included , a rebuking not of one man , but a Church-rebuking inflicted by many , 2 Cor. 2. 6. And by the Representative Church of Corinth , gathered together with Pauls spirit and the power of the the Lord Jesus , 1 Cor. 5. 4 , 5. And so presupposeth a Court or Convention of many inflicting this punishment . 2. The Adversaries who deny that there is such a thing as Excommunication , say it was onely a rebuke ; but if it was Excommunication , it must include a rebuke coming from the many who do excommunicate . 3. It is such a rebuke as must be taken off and pardoned by many , as ver . 7. So that contrariwise , ye ought rather to forgive him , and comfort him , ver . 10. To whom ye forgive any thing , I also forgive . So here is a rebuking put upon an offender by many convened in a Court , who did rebuke by way of judiciall Authority , and the power of the Lord Iesus ; Ergo , it was some higher censure which was inflicted by many , and taken off by many ; then that which was inflicted by one by way of Preaching , where there is no necessity that many either rebuke , or comfort the rebuked : for one Pastor is to give out the sentence of Death or Life , rebuking and comforting , toward any one offender , or a person Repenting , whether many be convened to consent and joyn or not . Yea , I may , being a Pastor of Iesus Christ , dispense rebukes and comforts by way of Preaching , against the will and minde of the whole flock : But a rebuke , and a forgiving by many , cannot be dispensed , except these many convene together in the Name of the Lord Iesus in a Church way and consent . 2. If the convened Church must be heard and obeyed when she rebuketh a Brother , for a fault done between Brother and Brother , and that upon the Testimony of two or three witnesses , then is the Church a Court that is to rebuke an offender , and so to convene him before her : and that is some other censure then by way of Preaching ; but the former is true , Matth. 18. 16 , 17. 3. If the Churches of Ierusalem and Antioch , convened in a Synod , do give forth an Ecclesiasticall rebuke on false Teachers , as those that troubled the Churches , and perverted their Souls with false Doctrine ; then is there rebuking of offenders by a Church or Churches , beside a Pastorall rebuking by one single Brother or Pastor : But the former is true , Act. 15. ver . 24 , 25. The Proposition is clear , in that a select company of Apostles , Elders and Brethren , doth not only Doctrinally conclude against their errour who did hold the necessity of Circumcision , but also against the Persons , and their Schismaticall way , of troubling the Church by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in making a side and Faction in the Church , ver . 2. 24. And this not any one single man could do in an ordinary way , except we say that it was an idle and unnecessary remedy which the Apostles used to quench the sire , as if any one man might have done all this , or as if they had rebuked these men publikely , not having heard and convinced them by the Word of God ; or as if an offence touching conversation and against the second Table , had risen betweene Church and Church , no lesse then in the present case of an offence in matter of doctrine , that the Apostles would not have taken the same course , all which are not to be imagined . And in very deed this was not a point of meer doctrine , but also of peace and charity , violated by a Faction , ver . 2. And a scandall in eating things strangled , was raised in the Churches , Acts 15. 24. 1 Cor. 10. 28 , 29. Rom. 14. 14 , 15 , 16 , 17. 4. If Timothy be to rebuke publikely , those that sin publikely , and that judicially upon the Testimony of Witnesses . Then is there a publike Church-rebuking by way of censure , beside the pastorall rebuking . But the former is expresly said , 1 Tim. 5. 19 , 20. This must be a rebuking in a Church-court , except we say Timothy his alone was the Church , and a Monarch of the Church , who hath power to lead witnesses against Elders . 2. Conclusion . There is such a censure as excommunication in the hands of the Church , by which scandalous offendors are to be debarred from the society of the Church , and other holy Ordinances , that they do not prophane them , which is proved from Mat. 18. 15 , 16 , 17 , 18. Thus , he who is to be of a brother esteemed as no brother , but as a Heathen and a Publican , and whose offence is bound in Heaven , as the Church bindeth on Earth , and that upon the testimony of Witnesses , he incurreth some other censure of reall ejection out of the society of brethren in a Church State , then Pastorall rebuking . But he who trespasseth against his brother , and will neither be gained by private admonition , nor by the Church rebuking him , is in such a case ; Ergo , such a one is to be excommunicated , and so Christ must have instituted such a censure . Divers reasons are alledged against this sense , as not favouring excommunication . Object . 1. If thy brother trespasse against thee , is , if thy brother trespasse against God , thou knowing him to be guilty , art to deal with him , and to bring his fault to publike hearing that he may be punished . Answ . 1. The same phrase in the same doctrine of scandals is , Luke 17. 3. Take heed to your selves , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : If thy brother trespasse against thee , rebuke him , and if he repent forgive him . But it cannot be said that if our brother transgress against God , we knowing of that , we are not to forgive him a sin committed against God , though he should come to us , and say that he repenteth , for then might any private brother pardon murthers and sorceries , and if this private brother were a Magistrate , by this he is to forgive bloods , and not use the sword against the evill doer , and is to dispence with it seventy seven times , if the offender say , he repenteth . 2. The text saith expresly , If thy brother trespasse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against thee , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against God. It is true , sinnes against a brother , are sins against God , but it is evident from the text , that Christ speakes of such sinnes in a speciall manner , committed against me , or a particular brother , which are within the verge of my power or his to pardon , as no● being yet publikely scandalous . 3. Camero saith , to sinne against any here , is not to sinne against God with the knowledge of a brother , but it is to sinne in private against a brother , so as the offended brother is in meeknes to labour to gaine him , and not bring his fault to publike , if he can be cured in private , and therefore with much lenity we are to proceed , whereas before Christ had exhorted not to contemne our brother , here he teacheth with what loving patience and longanimity we are to labour to gaine him when he is fallen , else Christ should say but the same thing over againe , that he said once . Object . 2. But by this place of Scripture , I should rebuke any brother whom I know to sinne against God , to the end I may gaine him to repentance , and that before two witnesses ? Now this is absurd : my Father , my King and Prince before two Witnesses ; And therfore by the Church is meant a number of private Christians before whom I am to convince my brother , and that I am not to rebuke any offender whatsoever , is cleare in that Solomon saith , it is a mans glory to passe by an offence , and we are not to over-heare our servant cursing us , Ergo , We are not to rebuke every one , nor to bring them before any Church Court. Answ . 1. This argument is against Christ , as well as against us , for it tendeth to conclude that it is not universally true , that I am to rebuke every offending brother , which I will grant in some sense . For 1. If the fault be small , and possibly a matter of goods , with which I may dispence , without lesse hurt to my brothers soule , then the evill of scandall may be , if I complaine to either the Church or Magistrate , I am rather to suffer wrong , 1 Cor. 6. 7. But because I am not to rebuke my brother imprudently , may I not conclude from Christs words , I may rebuke him ? Or because a meane person may not rebuke a Ruler , or a Prince , or King ? Will it follow that a Nathan may not rebuke King David , and because Ionathan may not rebuke King Saul his Father , shall it follow that no other may rebuke King Saul ? Or because I may not rebuke a scorner , though a professing brother , or because I may not rebuke my brother before two or three witnesses , who to my knowledge bear the offender ill will , and so I see my rebuking shall be so far from gaining him to repentance , that it shall provoke him to a greater offence , shall it therfore follow I am to suffer sin in my brother and not to rebuke him at all , which the Spirit of God calleth a hating of my brother in my heart , Lev. 19. v. 18. This argument concludeth not that I may not rebuke my brother , but onely that I may not rebuke my brother imprudently , or that any brother may not rebuke any brother , whoever he be , King or Ruler , Negatis modi non negat rem ipsam , so we are to passe by offences and to be willing to forgive them . Ergo , we are not to rebuke an offending brother , it doth not follow , I must be willing to forgive all , friend , or enemy , Ergo , by this reason I am not to rebuke any at all , and Solomon willeth us onely not to be swift , too glad and willing , or too quicke and sharpe eared to heare every ill word , Eccles . 7. 21. Also Heb. Give not thy heart to all words that are spoken , least thou hear thy servant curse thee . So is the same phrase , Eccles . 1. 13. Prov. 23. 26. Eccles . 1. 17. Not unlike this is the phrase Dan. 6. 14. The King set his heart to deliver Daniel , But this will not prove we are not to rebuke an offending brother . 2. That by the Church here , is meant a number of private Christians , is against the Text , for then three witnesses should be a Church , being three private Christians , but sure it is Christ ascendeth in his speech to an higher degree , to the Church who is to heare the Witnesses , the Plaintiffe and the Offender , who hath power to binde , and loose , which is nothing but a Church-court . 2. Thou hast gained thy brother , must be a spirituall gaining of him to repentance , as 1 Pet. 3. 1. That they may be gained by the conversation of the wives , 1 Cor. 9 , 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That I may gain those that are under the Law. Ver. 21. That I may gain those that are without Law. ver . 19. That I might gaine the more . Ver. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That I might gain the Iewes , so is the Word used for spirituall gaining , Mat. 2. 17 , 20 , 22. and Christ in his Sermons never speaketh of civill gaining of brethren : And 2. Because he speaketh of the brother , as he is a member of a society , where there be three or more brethren , and a Church of brethren whose helpe he may seeke to gaine a brother ; it is cleare he must speake of a Church-gaining , or of a gaining in order to a Church , and not with reference to any civill Sanedrim or Court of Magistrates . Object . 3. The place ( saith Erastus ) is to be understood of lighter faults , for which one brother may pardon another , and which a private brother hath power to conceale , it cannot therefore in good sense be extended to weighty scandals that are to be punished with Excommunication . Ans . 1. A fault may be light and small in its rise , so long as it is private , which deserveth not excommunication , but if contumacie shall come to the fault , as it is here in its growth and tendencie to scandalize many , it is not small . 2. A private fault is not hence concluded to be small ; because a brother may pardon it , and conconceale it . For Christ saith to scandalize on of the least of these that beleeveth in him , is so great an offence , that it were good for the man so offending , to be cast in the Sea , having a milstone hanged about his necke , ver . 6. And yet a brother is to forgive such an offence , Luke 17. 2 , 3 , 4. 3. In that a brother is obliged to gaine his brother , from this fault , it is cleare ; it is not so small a fault , and 2. Because it is a fault to be brought to the Church ; and 3. If the Offender remaine obstinate , he is therefore to be esteemed as an Heathen and a Publican , or as no brother , nor any member of the Church ; and 4. This sinne is bound in earth and heaven . 5. The text will not bear that all weigh y faults , such as Mu●ther , that defileth the Land , or solicitation to follow strange Gods may be transacted betweene brother and brother and concealed . Deut. 13. 8. Though Ioseph be in this called a just man , ( as Beza observeth ) in that he would not make Mary his wife a publike example , nor reveale her Adultery , which was by the Law to be punished by death , for so Ioseph conceived of her . Tell the Church , that is , ( saith Erastus ) tell the civill Synedry of the Iewes , and therefore this place is nothing for excommunication , or any Spirituall Church Discipline , and if the Offendor refuse to heare the Orthodoxe Magistrate , then may the offended brother plead his right before the Heathen Magistrate , and deale with the Offendor , as with a Heathen , and a Publican . Answ . In the Word of God , the word Ecclesia , Church , applyed to matters of Religion , ( as it is evidently here , where it is said that the offended brother , is to labour to gaine the soule of his offending brother ) doth never signifie a civill judicature and therefore the exposition is insolent , and the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can never beare such a sense , we desire one paralell place in the old or new Testament for it . 2. The scope of the place is the removall of scandals in Christs meek , brotherly and Christian way , ver . 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. Who ever shall scandalize , &c. and ver . 7. Wo to the world because of offences — ver . 8. Wherefore if thy hand or foot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , cause thee to offend , cut them off , ver . 10. Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones , &c. And then he cometh from active scandals , whereby we offend others , and the way of removall of them , to passive scandals , whereby others offendeth us , and the way of removall of them , ver . 15. Moreover if thy brother shall trespasse against thee , go tell him the fault betvveen thee and him . Now these sins that are to be punished by the sword of the Civill Magistrate , or not such sins as may be transacted between brother and brother , for homicide , blasphemy , sorcery , extortion are to be taken away by the publick sword , and this must have place , Thou shalt not conceal it , thy eye shall not spare him , and the Magistrate is the minister of God , a revenger , to execute wrath on him that doth evil , Rom. 13. 4. 3. Christ hinteth not , in any sort , at any word of blood , wrath , vengeance , the sword , evil doing , fear and terrour for the sword , such as are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the office of the civil magistrate is holden forth to us in other places , as Rom. 13. 1 Pet. 2. No man , except he intended violence to the text , can dream of such a latent , forrain and co-acted sense in the words , and if such a sense had been intended by our Saviour , he behoved in this place to erect a throne from a divine institution , for the Magistrate , which no impartiall interpreter , can with any half side of a shadow perceive in the words . 4. The end of this processe is spirituall : If he hear thee , thou hast gained thy brother to repentance , as is confirmed already from Scripture . But whether the offender be gained to repentance or not , the Magistrate is to use the sword , that others may fear ; as a Magistrate , he is to regard the peace of the Common-wealth , not the salvation of the offender directly . 5. Christs way of proceeding to take away scandals between brother and brother , is spirituall , Tell him , admonish the offender , tell the Church , that they may rebuke and admonish , and this is a Morall way all along : But the Magistrates proceeding is not Morall , by requests , orations , admonitions , but by the reall use of the sword to compell : for he beareth not the sword in vain , Rom. 13. 4. 6. The proceeding here is with much lenity , patience , and long suffering to gain an offender , but having recourse to the Magistrate to use his club and sword , is rather a way of irritation , to make the gap the wider , and therefore Paul , 1 Cor. 6. condemnes this as repugnant to love , that they should go to law one with another , before the heathen Magistrate . 7. Such an expression as this , ( Let him to thee as an heathen man and a Publican ) is never taken for the civill complaining of him before an Heathen judge , nor doth it expresse the use of the sword by the Magistrate ; it s so insolent a phrase , that all the Greek Authors that ever wrote , cannot parallel it ; for this is a Spirituall and Morall reproach put on the offender , the Magistrates way is a reall inflicting of punishment . 8. This remedy is contrary to Pauls , 1 Cor. 6. For there the offended brother , though the offending party be never so contumacious , hath not this remedy of Christs to implead his brother before an heathen Magistrate , that the Apostle taketh for a sinfull scandall , and sin cannot be Christs remedy : Pauls remedy is , Suffer rather wrong and defraudation ; Paul by this interpretation should have commanded them the contrary . 9. Where is ever the supreame Magistrate ( who cannot be excluded , if this exposition stand ) called by the name of the Church . 10. How incongruous is it , that Christ should direct the Jews , who were to be dispersed through all the earth ; to go up to Jerusalem for judgement , seeing Ierusalem was to be laid equall with the ground ; and the Iews , their state , Church ▪ policy , and the Scepter now removed from Iudah , let wise men judge . 11. The complaining to an Heathen Magistrate , or the punishing of an offender by the sword , by no Scripture , is such a binding on earth , by the power of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven , as this is expounded , Matth. 16. 19. And such a binding as is ratified in Heaven , and that by the joynt Prayers of two or three on earth , as is here spoken , ver . 18 , 19 , 20. A Heathen Magistrates Sentence , though never so just , should not be valued , except it were confirmed by the Prayers of the Church , as the Sentence of Excommunication must be . 12. The Iewish Saenedrim was now to take an end , and expire with all the Iewish policy ; it is not to be imagined that Iesus Christ would appoint a perishing remedy for a per●etuall and ever-enduring disease ; now offences and scandals between brother and brother were to be in the world to the end , ver . 15. If thy brother offend , &c. And Christ saith , Offences must be , and the remedy here is morall and perpetuall : as 1. That Christ shall have a Church visible on earth , against which the gates of Hell shall not prevail : 2. That we first deal to gain our brother in private , ere to his greater shame , he be brought in publick , before the Church . 3. The Lords ratifying in Heaven , what his servants shall binde and loose on earth . 4. The agreeing of two to pray together , the conv●ening of two or three in the name of Christ , with a promise of the presence of Christ , all these are Morall and perpetuall : The Lord never did the like of this , before or after . 13. In all the New-Testament we do not read , that Christ , who was the end of the Law , and the body now come in the flesh to abolish all Ceremonials and temporary Laws of the Iewish Church and policy , as Iewish , did institute any old-Testament Law , such as the Sanedrim was for offending brethren : if it be said that this was but the right expounding of an old divine Law , now almost buried through the corruption of men ; then must Erastus shew that this was an old Law of divine institution ▪ that the Iews were to keep this threefold order in gaining an offending brother , and that this is now abolished , and that the power of the Magistrate in Church-businesse , by this place is not established to the end of the world ; both which are contrary to the Principles of Erastus , not to say that there is not in this whole Chapter , or Luk. 17. where the same purpose is handled , any shadow of reason to assert that Christ is restoring any Ceremoniall or Iudiciall Law to its genuine and sound meaning and sense , but by the contrary Christ speaketh of the Morall and perpetuall Doctrine of scandall , and how we are to deal with an offending brother to gain him to repentance , either by our selves or the Church , and to forgive private injuries , even to seventy seven times : Lastly , since Publicans and Romans converted to the Christian saith from Paganisme , even at this time were Brethren , who might both give and take scandals , it shall follow that Christ commandeth Gentiles to submit to the Jewish Magistrates , this was against Christian liberty , and to take from Cesar those things that are Cesars , which is unjust . But , saith Erastus , Publicans were not in Iuda excluded from sacrifices , Lu● . 18. A Pharisee and a Publican went up to the Temple to pray , Christ himself did eat with Publicans and sinners : therefore this phrase ( Let him be unto thee as an Heathen and a Publican ) cannot expresse this ( Let him be excommunicated ) except you say , that all heathen and Publicans were so served by Christ , and the Iews , as if they had been excommunicated . Ans . 1. Publicans , that were by Nation Heathens , were excluded from sacrifices and the Temple , jure , by a Gods Law ; but not de facto , because the Iews being under bondage to the Romane Emperour , and spoiled of their Liberties and Laws , might not put their Laws in execution against Heathen and Publicans ; it is sufficient to us , saith Beza , that Publicans were execrable and hatefull to the Iews , and ( say I ) that Heathen and Publicans remaining such , are without the Church , b and not to be reputed as brethren , but enemies to the true Church of God , and this is that which to us is Excommunication . I do not doubt but Publicans went to the Temple to pray , but that is but to Argue , A facto ad jus , not the right way , A jure ad factum : Publicans ought not to have done so . 2. Christ the Supream Lawgiver , who is above the Law , did often dispense with sacrifice and positive Laws , for a work of mercy , and if he touched the dead , and touched the skin of the Leaper , and suffered his disciples to pluck the ears of Corne on the Sabbath day , what marvell then he did eat with Publicans and sinners , contrary to the Letter of a positive Law , Knowing his own , whom the Father had given to him from eternity were to be brought in to himself , by his familiar conversing with them ; why should not the Physitian converse with the sick ; the shepheard with the lost sheep ; the Redeemer with his ransomed ones ? But this is no warrant , that therefore the cleansed Leaper should not shevv himself to the Priest , or that an obstinate offender should not be reputed as a Heathen , and not admitted into the Sanctuary . 3. That simple Publicans , or Heathen remaining such , should sacrifice . I never read , sacrifices were offered for Iobs friends , who were not within the visible Church : But 1. by Gods own speciall and immediate command : as we read , Iob 42. 7 , 8. A positive Law for it ( which yet was requisite for ordinary worship of that kinde ) we read not . 2. I think Iobs friends cannot in knowledge , Religion , Profession , be esteemed meer Heathens , and therefore as God tied not himself to a positive and standing Law here , so neither was Christ , being the same God equall with the Father , so restrained from not familiar conversing with Heathen , and Publicans , but he might leap over a Ceremony to save a lost soul . Object . 6. But ( the adversaries say ) Christ here useth words proper to the Iewish Synedry and the Old-Testament , as witnesses , Ecclesia , or congregation , Heathen , Publican , and these are not New Testament words , nor was there such a thing as a New Testament Church on earth at this time , and Christ having not yet ascended to Heaven , nor sent down the holy spirit , cannot be thought to hold forth the power and jurisdiction of a thing yet destitute of all being , such as was the Christian Church , nor can he here speak of Christs spirituall Kingdom . Ans . 1. Christ did well to use these words , Witnesses , Church , Congregation , Heathen , Publican , as well known to his hearers , and these same words in use amongst the Iews are used in the New Testament , as 1 Cor. 16. 22. 1 Tim. 5. 19. Act. 15. 7 , 17. Revel . 11. 2 , 8. 1 Pet. 4. 3. 2 Pet. 1 19. 20 , 21. Anathema Maeranatha , Witnesses , Gentiles , sinners of the Gentiles , imposition of hands , &c. Indeed in ordinary , the Pastor under the New Testament is not called Priest , nor high Priest , nor the Communion Table an Altar : But the words here used are obvious and very significant ; and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Church is a most obvious word in both the Old and New Testament , and doth signifie any Assembly , Religious , civill or prophane , according as the nature , person and use or end of the meeting or Assembly was Religious and Prophane , as is evident by many places of the Old and New Testament ; where the seventy Interpreters use the word for a Church-Assembly ; for which see the due right of Presbyters , page 349 , 350. and page 473 , 474. And since the word Church here is cleerely , a company convened to gaine an offending brothers soule , by rebukes and censures , and which hath power to binde and loose on earth , so as their fact is ratified in heaven , it cannot be any other , then a New Testament Church-meeting , seeing we find the Church of Corinth commanded to conveene and exercise such a power , 1 Cor. 5. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. And therfore it cannot be expounded of the ●ivill judge ; not to adde , that Erastus , who objecteth this , saith the Syn●dre had both civill and spirituall or Eccl●siasticall power , and therefore he hath no ground to expound the place of the Civill Magistrate . 2. Because he was not yet ascended to heaven , and had not sent downe the Holy Spirit , it is no consequence to say he speaketh nothing of the Christian Church of the Nevv Testament , for before his Ascension he appointed the Ministery , the Sacraments , the power of Censures , and the keyes given to the Church of the New Testament , Math. 28. 19 , 20. Joh. 20. v. 2● , 22. Math. 26. 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , &c. Now it is as inconvenient , that precepts , such as ( Do this in remembrance of me , ) ( take yee , eate yee , ) and ( he that heareth you , heareth me , ) should be given to the christian Church , which yet had no being , as for Christ to hold forth the power of jurisdiction of a Christian church destitute of all being . Yea , this recurreth upon Erastus , who will have Christ here to hold forth the power of the Christian Magistrate , as yet remoter from being , all Magistrates being professed Enemies to Iesus Christ , whereas there was at this time a seed , a bottome of a christian visible Church : There being eleven Apostles , seventy Disciples , and many others who professed faith in Christ already come . Yea though there be no formed instituted visible Church of the New Testament , yet it became our great Prophet , who taught that Gospell , yea , all that he heard of the Father , Ioh. 15. 15. to his Disciples , which was to be a rule of the Faith of the Christian visible Church not yet instituted , and who erected a Ministery to teach them before his ascension , also to furnish that Ministery with the powerof the keyes & censures , as he expresly doth before his death , Mat. 16. 17 , 18 , 19. Not to adde what Camero saith , that he spake these words when he was now to offer himselfe on the Crosse , and Math. 2. 16. He mentioneth the edifying of the Church of the New Testament , and the Disciples aske vvho is to be greatest in the Kingdome of God , ver . 1. Object . 7. Let him be unto thee as an Heathen and Publican , can not meane as much as , Let him bee excommunicated , but onely , let him plead vvith his obstinate brother vvho contemneth the Christian Magistrate , before the heathen Magistrate , and in preserving the offendor , vvho is novv obstinate , let him deale vvith him as with a Heathen and a Publican , onely in this matter of pursuit , but otherwise the Publican was not excommunicate . 1. Because the Publicans place and office was good and lawfull and from God , then to repute him as a Publican is not to repute him as a prophane man. 2. When Iohn Baptist is demanded by the Publicans what they shall doe , he doth not bid them lay downe the office of a Publican , but onely not abuse it to rapine and extortion , nor is Zacheus compelled by Christ to lay downe his office , but onely to make restitution . Answ . 1. There is no necessity to condemne the office of the Publican , or the birth and condition of the Heathen as unlawfull . But a Publican went for a prophane man , and for a man who is a stranger to the true church of God , as Mat. 5. 46. If you love them that love you , what reward have you ? Doe not even the Publicans the same ? Ergo , It is Christs mind to exclude the Publicans from any spirituall or eternall reward , promised to these within the visible Church ; and when Christ was slandered by the Jewes , because he went in to be a Guest with a Publican , Luke 19. 7. And because hee did eate vvith Publicans , Mat. 9. 12 , 13. Christ taketh it as granted that Publicans were prophane men and sinners . But he saith they were sicke sinners and lost , that is , such as were sensible of their by-past prophanity , and desired the Physitian Christ to cure them ; and Gentiles or Heathen is taken for these who are without the Church , and are void of Religion , 1 Cor. 5. 1. Such fornication as is not so much as named amongst the Gentiles , 1 Pet. 4. 3. Let it suffice you , that ye have vvrought the vvill of the Gentiles , Eph. 2. 11. Ye vvere in times past Gentiles , what is that , but Ver. 2. Ye vvalked according to the course of the World ; according to the Prince of the povver of the aire ? So a Samaritan , is taken for one that hath a Devill , yet to be a Samaritan by birth and nation is not unlawfull , it is then a distinctive terme spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be an Heathen , or counted an Heathen and a Publican , that is , counted a prophane wicked person , not a brother , not a member of the church . Theophylact expoundeth this with us , If he heare not the Church , let him be an out-cast , least he rub any of his vvickednes upon others vvithin the Church . And these words Let him be to thee , is a word of command , as Mat. 5. 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let your speech be yea , yea , Mat. 20. he that vvould be greatest , let him be your servant ; and , let him be to thee , is not to exclude the Church , but it is set downe in a Law-manner in the second person , for farre more must the obstinate offender be as an Heathen and a Publican to the Church . Ver. 18. Verily I say unto you , What yee bind on earth , shall be bound in heaven , and what yee loose on earth , shall be loosed in heaven . These words contain a reason why he who contemneth the Church , is to be holden as a Heathen and a Publican . Why ? is it such an offence before God to despise the church ? Yea , saith our Saviour , with a grave asseveration , Verily I say unto you , they that despise the sentence of you the Ministers of the Gospel , being according to truth given out , they and their sinnes shall be bound in Heaven . Erastus saith , he is said to bind , who doth retaine the sinne , when he maketh the obstinate brother unexcusable ; and he looseth , who remitteth or pardoneth the injury , and gaineth to repentance his brother by a brotherly admonition , for except he speake of a brotherly composing of private injuries , to what end should Christ subjoyne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Again I say to you if two agree , &c. Answ . 1. Christ doth argue from the lesse to the more , he proveth what the Church bindeth on earth , shall be bound in Heaven , because if the prayers of two or three gathered together in the name of God , and agreeing together on earth , are not rejected in Heaven , farre more shall that be ratified in heaven , which the whole church of Christ decreeth on earth in the name of the head of the Church , Iesus Christ . 2. When in the chapter going before , Christ had ascribed to the Apostles and Pastors , which are the eyes of the Church , a power of the keyes , and here he ascribeth to them the power of binding and loosing , there was no cause to dreame that he speaketh here of a private forgiving of private finnes betweene Brother and brother , for then he might have said at the first step , Thou hast gained thy brother , that gaining or convincing of thy brother shall be bound or loosed in heaven , no lesse then the Churches judiciall binding and loosing in heaven , which yet is set downe as an higher degree of power . But I may here say with Beza in the whole Scripture , the word of binding and loosing is never spoken of any other but of these who are in publike places , and by a borrowed speech , here it is spoken in regard of Spirituall power . To bind and to loose , is by a judiciall power in subordination to Christ the King , to remit and retaine sinnes . So Iosephus saith , the Pharisees ruled all , so that they would banish or recall from banishment , loose and binde whom they pleased , and upon the Authority according to the which Christ sent his Disciples as the Father sent him , so he instructed his Ministers with power to remit and retaine sinnes , Ioh. 20. 23. and Mat. 16. 19. What thou bindest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , on earth , shall be bound in heaven , what thou loosest on earth , shall be loosed in heaven , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So doth Lucian bring in that prisoner speaking to Iupiter , Loose me , O Iupiter , for I have suffered grievous things , Mat. 22. 13. Then the King said to his servants , take him , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , binde him hand and foot ; binding here ( you see ) is done by the command of the great King , Acts 21. 11. So shall the Iewes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 binde Paul , they bound Paul with Law and authority , such as it was , Iohn 18. 12. The Captaine and Officers tooke Iesus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and bound him , they bound him not by private authority , Mat. 27. 2. and Act. 24. 27. Felix left Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bound ; if Lictors binde any Malefactors , they doe it by authoritie and Law. So do the Hebrews speake , Psal . 105. 20. The Ruler of the people loosed him , Psal . 102. 20. The Lord looketh downe from heaven , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to open or loose the children of death . Psal , 146. 7. The Lord looseth the Prisoners , Iob 12. 18. 3. It cannot be denyed , but when one private brother pardons another repenting Brother , God ratifieth that in heaven . But it is cleare the pardon here holden forth by our Saviour , is such a loosing , as hath witnesses going before . 2. Such an one as cometh higher to the knowledge of the Chuuch . Nor doth the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 again , signifie any thing but pretereà , moreover . 4. And who can say that binding and loosing here , is some other thing then binding and loosing in the Chap. 16. ver . 9. Where the same very phrase in the Greeke is one and the same , except that the Lord speaketh , Mat. 16. 19. in the singular number to Peter , as representing the teachers and Governours of the Church , and here Mat. 18. He speaketh in the Plurall number , relating to the Church . Now Mat. i6 . i8 , 19. binding on earth , and loosing , which is ratified in heaven , is evidently the exercise of the power of the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven , I will give to thee the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven . What be these keyes , he expoundeth in the same very verse , and whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth , shall be bound in heaven , whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth , shall be loosed in heaven ; then binding and loosing on earth , must be in these to whom Christ hath committed the power of the keyes : but 1. Christ hath not committed the keyes to all , but to Church-rulers , that are the Stewards of the House , and the dispensers of heavenly Mysteries . Hence the keyes in Scripture signifie authority and officiall dignity that is in Rulers , not in private men , as Esa . 22. 22. And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder . So Christ is said to have the key of David , to open and no man shutteth , to shut and no man openeth . By which out of doubt ( saith a Camero , ) is pointed forth the kingly authority and power of Christ , so saith b Vatablus . And our owne c Calvin , d Musculus , e Gualther , f Piscator , g Beza , h Pareus agree , that the keyes are insigne potestatis , an Ensigne of power given to the Steward or Master of a Noblemans house , who is a person in office ; The giving of the keyes ( sai●h worthy Mr. Cotton , ) is a giving power for the preaching of the word , the administring of the seales and censures , by which these invested with power doe open and shut the gates . Now we desire any Word of God , by which it can be made good , that the keyes and power to binde and loose is given to all that are in the house , even private Christians . But we can shew the Keyes , and binding and loosing , and opening and shutting to be given to the Officers and Rulers of the house . Hence I argue that interpretation that confoundeth the key-bearers , and the Children , with the Servants of the House ; and the Governours that are over the people in the Lord , with the governed , and putteth the Characters proper to the Officers and Stewards , con●usedly upon all that are in the house , is not to be holden ; but this interpretation is such ; Ergo , &c. also to binde and to loose is expounded by Christ , Ioh. 20. 21. to be a power to retain and remit sins on earth , which are accordingly retained and remitted in Heaven , and that by vertue of a calling , and Ministeriall mission , according to which the Father sent Christ Jesus ; and Iesus Christ sendeth his Apostles and Pastors to the end of the world , as is clear , if we compare Matth. 18. 18. and Matth. 16. 19. with Ioh. 20. 20 , 21 , 22. 23. Mar. 16. ver . 15 , 20. Matth. 28. 18 , 19 , 20. Luk. 24. 45 , 46 , 47 , 48. 5. It is against the course of the Text , that we should restrain this to private pardoning of light injuries between brother and brother : 1. Becase Christ labours to decline this , that one shall be both his brothers judge to put him in the condition of an Heathen and Publican , and binde his brothers sins in Heaven and Earth , and also , that he should be his party and accuser : Now Christ will have the private brother do no more personally , but admonish his brother and gain him . 2. If that prevail not , then he is to admonish him before two or three witnesses : See here , the brother is not both party and judge ; but witnesses have place . 3. If that prevail not , the businesse is to ascend higher , even to the Church , which undoubtedly is an Organicall body , 1 Cor. 12. 28. Rom. 8. 6 , 7 , &c. Act. 20. 28 , 29 , 30. Whereas two or three private Christians are not a Church , but an homogeneal body : Now who would believe that Christ is to bring down the businesse which is so high , as before the Church , to the lowest step again , to a private binding and loosing to one brother , who both as judge and party judgeth his brother ; yea , and may do this , though there were no Chu●ch on earth ? What power hath the Church above the offended brother , or the offender , if the one may binde the other under guiltinesse in earth and heaven ? 2. Erastus will have light and private offences only spoken of here : Now Christ speaketh of offences that God taketh notice of in Heaven and earth . 3. Christs way is a wise and meek way , that that which one cannot do , and the offence that two , three , four cannot remove , the Church shall remove , but Erastus maketh one private man to remove it , and to Excommunicate and binde in heaven and earth . I might cite , Tertullian , Cyprian , Augustine , Chrysostom , The ophylact , Hyeronimus , and all modern interpreters both Popish and Orthodox for this interpretation , not any of them dreaming of the insolent opinion of Erastus , who misapplieth Augustine and Theophylact for his own way , as Beza cleareth . CAP. IV. Quest . 1. That the place , 1 Corinthians 5. doth evince that Excommunication is an Ordinance of God. THE Argument for Excommunication may be thus framed , from 1 Cor. 5. If Paul command that the incestuous man should be delivered to Satan ver . 5. purged out of the Church , least as leaven he should corrupt the Church , ver . 6 , 7. That they should iudge him , ver . 12. And put him avvay from amongst them , ver . 13. So as they vvere not to eat vvith him , ver . 9. 10. Then is there a divine command for Excommunication ; for the Commandments of the Apostles are the Commandments of the Lord , 1 Cor. 14. 37. 2 Pet. 3. 2. But the former is true : Ergo , so is the latter . There is no ground or shadow of reason to expound this expelling of the incestuous man by the preaching of the word without any Church-censures , for all that is required in Excommunication is here ; 1. This putting out was not done by one single Pastor , as putting out by the preaching of the word is done , but by a company and Church , ver . 4. In the name of the Lord Iesus , vvhen ye are gathered together , and my spirit . 2. Paul should have written to any one Pastor to cast him out by preaching ; but here he writeth to a Church : 3. He forbiddeth company , or eating with such like men , v. 10. Now this is more then rebuking by preaching . 4. This is a judging of the incestuous man , and a casting of him out of their society , which is another thing then preaching the word . Erastus and others expound the giving to Satan , of a delivering of the man to Satan , to be miraculously killed , as were Ananias and Saphira , Act. 5. 5. And because at this time there was no Christian Magistrate to use the sword against the man , therefore he writeth to the Church , that they by their prayers would obtain of God , that Satan might take him out of the midst of them . Ans . This insolent interpretation wanteth all warrant of the word : For 1. To deliver to Satan , hath no Scripture to make this sense of it , to pray that Satan would destroy the man. 2. It wanteth an example in the old or new Testament , that the whole Church are fellow-Agents and joynt causes in the bodily destruction of any , or in working of miracles , such as was the killing of Ananias and Saphira : The Apostles wrought miracles , and that by their Faith and Prayers , and Christ and the Prophets ; but that the Believers , who should have mourned for this scandall , 1. Who were puffed up : 2. Who were in danger to be leavened with the mans sin , and had their consent in Excommunication , should joyn in a miraculous delivering to Satan , is an unparalleld practise in the word . 3. To deliver to Satan , cannot be expounded here : but as 1 Tim. 1. 20. Where Paul saith he had delivered Hymenaeus and Alexander to Satan , now that was not to kill them , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that they might receive instruction and be disciplined , by this medicinall Church-revenge , not to blaspheme : I know of no instructing of these who are dead ; if there be two deliverings to Satan , let Erastus and his expound it to us . 4. The Apostle expresly saith , he wrote to them , not to keep company with such men , nor with Fornicators , covetous men , Drunkards , Extortioners , Idolators : Now Erastus his minde must be , that the Apostles and Churches of Corinth , Philippi , Thessalonica , grievou●ly sinned against God , in that they did not miraculously kill all the Drunkards , the covetous persons , the fornicators , whereas they are commauded to admonish them as brethren , 2 Thess . 3 14 , 15. and to pray for them , if they sin not against the holy Ghost , 1 Ioh. . 5. 16. 1 Tim. ▪ 2. 3. 5. Paul rebuketh this as a morall fault amongst the Corinthians , such as is not to mourn for this mans fault , and to keep him as leaven in the midst of them , and not to cast him out : Whereas in all the Scripture you finde none ever rebuked , because they put not forth in Acts an extraordinary and miraculous power to work miracles ; working of miracles came upon persons called thereunto , by extraordinary rapts , and were in men not as habits under the power of free-will , but as immediate Acts of God , even as fire-flaughts are in the Aire : So I conceive , while I be better informed . 6. And shall it not follow , that now when the Churches have Christian Magistrates , it is the will of our meek saviour , that they kill with the sword all the Drunkards , Fornicators , and all that walketh unorderly ; which should make the Church of Christ a Butcher-house , whereas we are to admonish all such as brethren , 2 Thess . 3. 15. And to wait on them with all patience , if God peradventure may give them repentance . 7. The destruction of the flesh must be the destruction of the body . But the bodies of the godly are saved no lesse then their spirits in the day of the Lord. 8. And for many of the former reasons , by delivering to Satan , cannot be meant a miraculous tormenting of the body by Sathan , with the saving of the life ; Such as we read was the case of Iob ; for the delivering to Sathan , is to cast out of the Church , and declare such an offendor to be of the number of the wicked world , of which Sathan is Prince , Ioh. 12. 31. Ioh. 14. 30. and God , 2 Cor. 4. 4. and that which we assert as the essentials of excommunication , are , 1. Here is a member of the Church , one vvho is within , 1 Cor. 5. 12. one who hath fallen in a foul scandall , and had his fathers wife , ver . 1. who by the Church conveened in the name of our Lord Iesus , with that spirit of the Apostle given to them by Christ , v. 4. was delivered to Sathan , that his soule may be saved , ( for that is the genuine and intrinsecall end of Excommunication , ) and to be purged out of the Church , lest he should infect the Sheepe , ver . 7. and Christians were not to bear company with him , nor to eate with him , ver . 9. 10 ▪ and he was judged to be cast out as a Heathen and Publican , ver . 12. 13. and that by a convened court , having the name and authority of him who is King of the Church , ver . 4. and more wee doe not crave . Obj. To deliver any to the power of Sathan , is no mean of salvation . Answ . A morall delivering to the efficacy of error , and a reprobate minde , is not a mean of salvation , nor is excommunication such a mean , nor in the power of the Church , but a medicinall depriving of an offender of the comfortable communion of the Saints , and of the prayers of the Church , and meanes of grace , such is a means , and mighty through God to humble . CAP. V. Quest . 1. Whether the word doth warrant discipline and censures , even to the excluding of the scandalous from the Sacraments , beside the Pastorall rebukes inflicted by one . VVE are not to conceive that there was nothing Morall in the Lawes that God made to his people of Israel , to debar the unclean , from the society of Gods people , and from communion with them in the holy things of God , Numb . 5. 1. And the Lord spake unto Moses , saying : 2. Command the children of Israel that they put out of the Campe every leaper , and every one that hath an issue , and whosoever is defiled by the dead , Lev. 5. 2. If a soul touch any unclean thing , whither it be a carcase of an unclean beast , or the carcase of unclean cattell , or the carcase of unclean creeping things , and if it be hidden from him , he also shall be unclean and guilty — 6. And he shall bring his trespasse-offering unto the Lord for his sin , which he hath sinned , Lev. 7. 20. But the soul that eateth of the sacrifice of the peace offerings that pertaineth to the Lord , having his uncleannesse upon him , even that soul shall be cut off from the people : 21. Moreover the soul that shall touch any unclean thing , as the uncleannesse of man , or any unclean beast , or any abominable unclean thing , and eat of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace-offerings , which pertain unto the Lord , even that soul shall be cut off from his people . In the which observe , that here the soul that shall touch any unclean thing is to be cut off ; but Num. 5. 2. He is only to be put out of the Campe ; now these were not killed that were put out of the Campe , and therefore to be cut off from the people must be a morall cutting off by Excommunication , not by death ; also the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to make a Covenant , to cut off , either by death or any other way ▪ as by banishment , by which a thing leaveth off to be in use , though it be not destroyed , as when a branch is cut off a tree , 1 Sam. 31. 9. Yea , we have Isa . 50. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where is that Bill of cutting off or divorce : Now this was not a Bill of killing the wife that was divorced , but putting her from her husband , as our Saviour saith , It is not Lawfull to marry her that is divorced , Matth. 19. 9. A killed and dead woman is not capable of marriage ; yet the word is , Deut. 24 1. Ier. 3. 8. from that same Theame , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : The Hebrews have another more ordinary word to signifie death , as Exod. 31. 14. He that doth any work on the Sabbath , in dying he shall die : And it is expounded , he shall be cut off from the midst of the people : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Lev. 7. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is four times used without any such expression , ver . 20 , 21 , 25 , 27. To which may be added , that when zealous Hezechiah did finde that the people were not prepared , According to the purification of the Sanctuary , though they had celebrated the Passeover , the King did not only not kil them , but prayed , God might be mercifull to them , and the Lord killed them not ( saith the spirit of God ) but healed them , Exod. 12. 15. He that eateth unleavened bread , that soul shall be cut off from Israel : but it is expounded , ver . 19. That soul shall be cut off 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Church of Israel : Certainly , he that is killed is cut off from both State and Church , and from the company of all mortall men on earth , Isa . 38. 11. Then to be cut off from Israel is onely to be deprived of the comfortable society of the Church of Israel , as the holy Ghost expoundeth it : Also Lev. 4. If any commit any sin but of ignorance , and so if he touch any unclean thing , or eat unleavened bread , forbidden of God , he is excluded from the holy things of God , while the Priest offer for him , according to the Law : Now if he was presently to be killed , either by the Magistrate , or in that act killed by Gods own immediate hand , as Aarons sons were , there was not a journey to be made to the place , the Lord had chosen to sacrifice there , which might have been three dayes journey from his house , who was unclean ; yea , when the man that gathered sticks was stoned , and the false Prophet stoned , Deut. 13. there was no sacrifices offered for any of them before they were killed ; and I hope , there were no sacrifices in Moses his Law offered for the dead . Hence learn we : 1. That to cut off from the Congregation , was not to kill , but it was the Iewish Excommunication greater or lesse : 2. That Moral sins , under the Old Testament debarred men from the holy things of God , while the Priests sacrificed for them ▪ and brought them in a capacity to receive the holy things of God. Leviticus 10. 10. The Priests were not to drink wine , when they went into the Tabernacle : That ye may ( saith the Lord ) put difference between holy and unholy , and between unclean and clean : Now Haggai expresly saith , cap. 2. 11 , 12. That it was the Priests part to put this difference , and so to admit to , or exclude from the holy things of God. Hence for this cause it is said , as 2 Chron. 23. 19. Iehoiada appointed the officers of the Lords house , so he set porters at the gates of the house of the Lord , that none which are unclean in any thing , might enter in ; so Ezra 9. 21 , 22. None did eat the Passeover , but such as were pure , and had separated themselves from the filthinesse of the Heathen of the land ; for this cause doth the Lord complain of the Priests , Ezech. 22. 26. Her Priests have violated my law , and have polluted my holy things , they have put no difference between the holy and the prophane ; neither have they shewed the difference between the unclean and the clean , Ezech. 44. 6. And thou shalt say to the Rebellious , even to the house of Israel , thus saith the Lord God ; O ye house of Israel , let it suffice you of all your abominations : 7. That ye have brought into my sanctuary , strangers uncircumcised in heart , and uncircumcised in flesh , to be in my sanctuary to pollute it , even my house , when ye offered my bread , the fat and the blood , and they have broken my Covenant , because of all your abominations : 8. And ye have not kept the charge of my holy things : But ye have set keepers of my Charge in my Sanctuary for your selves . 9. Thus saith the Lord God , no stranger uncircumcised in heart , nor uncircumcised in flesh shall enter into my sanctuary , of any stranger that is among the children of Israel : Here is a complaint , that those that have the charge of the holy things , should suffer the holy things to be polluted : I grant it cannot bear this sense , that none should be admitted to be Members of the Visible Church under the New Testament , but such as are conceived to be regenerate ; except it can be proved that the Sanctuary was a type of the visible Church : 2. That the Apostles constituted their Churches thus ; but we read not in all the New Testament of any admission of Church Members at all : but only of baptizing of those who were willing to be baptized , and from this resulted the capacity of a Church Relation in all Churches visible : Nor , 2. Do we finde any shadow in all the word of God , of tryall of Church Members , by way of electing and choosing of such and such , as qualified by reason of a conceived regeneration in the persons chosen , or of rejecting and refusing others as conceived to have no inward work of grace in them ; this I believe can never be made good out of the word of God. 3. They must prove the Apostles admitted into the Sanctuary of the Visible Church Ananias , Saphira , Simon Magus , and others uncircumcised in heart , to pollute the holy things of God , and that the Apostles erred , and were deceived in the moulding of the first Apostolick Church in the world , which was to be a rule and pattern to all Churches in the New Testament , to all Ages : I deny not , but they might have erred according to the grounds of these , who urge the comparison for a Church of visible Saints , but that the Apostles De facto did erre in their Election and judgement , in that wherein the holy Ghost holdeth them forth and their acts to be our rule and pattern , I utterly deny : I grant Act. 15. In that Synod they did Act as men and Elders , not as Apostles , but that it could fall out , that they should uctually erre , and obtrude false Doctrine instead of truth to the Churches in that Synod which is the first rule and pattern of Synods , I shall not believe . But there is this Morall and perpetuall truth in these Scriptures ▪ 1. That there are under the New Testament , some over the people of God in the Lord , some that watch for their souls , and govern them ; as here there were Priests , Levites that taught and governed the people : 2. That the Rulers of the Churches , alwayes are to have the charge of the holy things ; and to see that these holy things , the Seals and Sacraments and word of promise be not polluted , and that therefore they have power given them to debar such and such profane from the Seals , and so are to discern between the clean and the unclean , and this which the Prophet speaketh , ver . 9. is a prophecie never fulfilled after this in the persons of the people of God ; therefore it must have its spirituall truth fulfilled under the New Testament , as is clear , ver . 11. Yet the Levites that are gone away far from me , shall be Ministers in my Sanctuarie , having charge at the gates of the House , and Ministering to the House — 14. And I will make them keepers of the charge of the House , for all the service thereof , and for all that shall be done therein , Ver. 15. And the Priests and the Levites the sons of Zadok , that kept the charge of my Sanctuary , when the children of Israel went astray from me — they shall enter into my Sanctuary , and they shall come neer to my Table to minister unto me , and to keep my charge — 23. And they shall teach my people the difference betweene the holy and prophane , and cause men to discerne between the uncleane and the cleane . 24. And in controversie they shall stand in judgement , and they shall judge it according to my judgement , and they shall keepe my Lawes and my Statutes , in all mine assemblies , and they shall hallow my Sabbaths . Now this Temple was another house , then Solomons Temple , as is evident out of the Text , it having roomes , dimensions , structures , so different that none can imagine them one house , and these chapters containe the division of the Holy Land , which after the captivity was never done , for the ten Tribes never returned , and this Temple is clearely a type of the new Ierusalem , and agreeth to that City spoken of , Revelation , chapters 21. and 22. As may appeare especially by the foure last chapters of Ezekiel , and in the last words of the last chapter , And the name of the city from that day shall be , The Lord is there . And the Priests after the captivity as well as before brake the covenant of Levi , Mal. 2. And therefore I see it not fulfilled , except in the visible Church of the New Testament , and in the Assemblies of Christian Churches , Mat. 18. Act. 15. and the rest of the Church-assemblies under the New Testament : As for the Lords personall raigne on earth , it is acknowledged there shall be no Church policy in it , no Word , Sacraments , Ordinances , no Temple , as they say from Rev. 21. 22. And with correction and submission , the Priests and Levites , that Ezek. 44. 15. are said to keep the charge of the Lords House , when others went astray , I take to be a prophecie of these Pastors under the New Testament , to wit , the Apostles of Iesus Christ , and Pastors , and teachers that Christ left in his Church ; for the edifying of his body , Ephes . 4. 11. 12. When these Scribes and Pharises did sit in Moses his chaire for a while , Mat. 23. but onely as porters and inferiour Officers in Gods house , yet they were to be heard , while God should cut them off , as he prophecied , Zach. 11. 8. We cannot say as some doe , that persons were deprived amongst the Iewes , of Church communion in the holy things of God , because of Ceremoniall , not of Morall uncleannes , but now under the new Testament only Morall uncleannes can exclude persons from the holy things of God ; and therefore to argue from ceremoniall uncleannes in the old , to morall uncleannesse in the new , is no good consequence . I answer , the Ceremoniall uncleannesse in the Old , which did exclude from the holy things of God , doth strongly conclude that morall uncleannesse under the New Testament doth exclude from the holy things of God , if that exclusion of the Leaper out of the campe seven dayes , and the touching of the dead , though imprudently , did typifie some other exclusion from the holy things of God , as no question it did , then the consequence must be strong . 2. It is also false that morall uncleannesse did not exclude from the holy things of God under the Old Testament , For 1. what was more ordinary , then that sacrifices should be offered for sins of ignorance , for trespas●es , and while this was done , the person was not admitted to partake of the holy things of God. 2. Whence was the Lords frequent complaints of wearying his soule with sacrifices , solemne assemblies , feast dayes , and new Moones , when they were morally uncleane , and their hands were full of blood , and they had not put away the evill of their doings , did not love judgement and justice , Isaiah 10. 11 , 12 , 13 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19. And when God complaineth so of them , Ier. 7. 8. Will ye steale , murther and commit adultery , and sweare falsely , and burne incense unto Baal , and walke after other Gods whom ye know not ? 10. And come and stand before me in this house , which is called by my Name ? Ergo , Murtherers and adulterers were debarred from entring into the Congregation of the Lord , and partaking of the holy things of God , while they repented . Let none say by prophecying , or the keyes of knowledge in preaching the Word , they were declared unworthy to enter into the Temple ; but that will not conclude that it was the Priests office by power of discipline to exclude them from coming unto the Sanctuary of God. Ans . But if the Porters were set at doores of the Lords house , to hold out the uncleane , and if the Lord charge the Priests with this crime , that they Ezek. 44. 8. set keepers of the charge of the Lords house for themselves , that is , for their owne carnall ends , and not for the honour of the Lord : And that ver . 7. They brought into the Sanctuary of the Lords house uncircumcised in heart , that is , such as were morally uncleane , then had the Priests a power to debarre from the Sanctuary such as were morally uncleane , and if the Priests are said to beare rule by their meanes , Ier. 5. 31. Then the Priests did beare rule and governe , though they abused their Power , and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to have dominion over any , Psal . 72. 8. Psal . 110. 2. 1 Kin. 4. 24. Levit. 26. 17. And the Scripture gives a power of judging and governing to the Priests . And 2 Chron. 30. 6 , 7. The Posts that Hezekiah and the Congregation of Israel sent through the Land , commandeth a morall preparation to those that were to keepe the Lords Passeover , to wit , that they should turne againe unto the Lord God of Abraham , and should not be like their Fathers , nor like their Brethren , that trespassed against the Lord God of their Fathers . And ver . 11. divers of Ashur , and Manasseh , and Zebulun humblid themselvs , and came to Ierusalem to keepe the feast of the Passeover . This proveth clearly that people under the Old Testament were no lesse to try and examine themselves , by the King and Priests commandment , carried to them by Postes before they should eate the Passeover ; then they are to try themselves before they eate and drinke at the Lords Supper : onely the adversaries say , the Priests by preaching were to debarre from the Passeover those who were morally unclean , but not to debarre those who were morally uncleane , so they were not typically and ceremonially unclean , by any power of Discipline , or by Porters set at the gates to keepe them out of the Sanctuary . But I answer , 1. How are the Priests Ezek. 22. 26. reproved for violating the Law of God , and prophaning his holy things , in that they put no difference between the holy and prophane , the clean and the unclean ? Surely the Priests prophaned in the highest way , the holy things of God , in admitting into the Sanctuary , those who were not onely ceremonially , but morally uncleane , as murtherers , adulterers , Who cryed the temple of the Lord , Ier. 7. And they put no difference betweene the Holy and Prophane , when they admitted to the holy things of God , and into the Sanctuary the uncircumcised in heart , for they doe more pollute the holy things of God , who partake of them being morally uncleane , and uncircumcised in heart , then those who are onely uncircumcised in flesh . Object . But the Church under the New Testament can no other way but morally , and by preaching ( as it would seeme ) onely debarre scandalous persons from the Seales and Prayers of the Church ; for should a scandalous person , or an excommunicate person obtrude himselfe on the Lords Supper , against the will and sentence of the Church , the Church cannot use any bodily violence to hinder such prophane intrusion upon the holy things of God , because the Churches weapons are not carnall but spirituall ; bodily violence can be no spirituall weapon , that the Church as the Church can use , so do the Remonstrant Arminians argue , and some other for the congregationall way . Ans . This Argument is against all Church-censures , but though the Church as the Church cannot hinder scandalous intruders upon the holy things of God , by bodily violence , it doth not follow ; Ergo , The Church can keep the holy things pure no way , but morally , that is , by preaching only , for we can give a third way : The rebukes , admonitions and Excommunication , or delivering to Satan are all transacted without any bodily and externnll violence , Christs Kingdom resigneth all such carnall weapons to the Magistrate , who is the only Governour of the Church of Christ , as the Opponents say , All Church Censures are by way of Declaration , applied to such men by name ; and there co-action , though penall , is not by bodily violence , but by acting upon the conscience of men and putting them to shame . Hence 2. We argue , if beside the preaching of the word , in which Commandments , Promises and threatnings are proposed to all in generall ; there be rebukes of the Church , the sentencing of such and such persons by name , as Hymeneus and Philetus , and other Blasphemers ; the Authoritative Declaration , that such a brother is to be esteemed as a Heathen and a Publican , and brotherly fellowship of eating and drinking with such an one denied , that he may be ashamed , if these be , then are some debarred from the holy things of God , by Church-Censures , beside the preaching of the word of God. But the former is true ; Ergo , so is the latter . The Proposition is proved , because all wicked persons and heart-hypocrites are excluded from the holy things of God , by the Preaching of the Word : But only these that are notoriously , and by testimony of witnesses , convinced to be scandalous or contumacious in atrocious sins , after they are by name rebuked , and are declared to be esteemed as Heathen and Publicans ; and from whom we are to withdraw brotherly fellowship , are excluded from the holy things of God , by Discipline and Church Censures . The Assumption I prove : Because the word is preached to all by one in office , and that a Steward and dispenser of the mysteries of God , and he excludeth all unworthy ones known to be such , or invisible only , from the kingdom of God. But the Censure , 1. Is inflicted by many , 2 Cor. 26. by the Church , Matth. 18. 17. conveened together , 1 Cor. 54. ( 2. ) It is applied to such persons by name , 1 Cor. 5. 5. He that hath done such a deed , ver . 2. Hymeneus , Alexander , 1 Tim. 1. 20. Jezabel , Rev. 2. 20. ( 3 ) The whole congregation is not to eat or Table with such an one , 1 Cor. 5. 11. We are to note and observe him , and to have no company with him , that he may b ashamed 2 Thes . 3. 14. to esteeme him as an Heathen and a Publican , and exclude him from the Seals of the Covenant , so long as he remaineth in that state . 3. Arg. If a person may for not hearing the Church , be judged as an Heathen and a Publican , and his sinnes bound in heaven by the Church ; then by discipline he is excluded from the holy things of God in a peculiar way , in the which contumacious persons , uncircumcised in heart are excluded , in foro interno Dei , in Gods secret Court ; But the former is true , Matt. 18. 15. 16 , 17 , 18. Ergo &c. Now if there be two Courts , one before God , Rom. 2. 16. Rom. 14. 4. 1 Cor. 14. 25. 1 Ioh. 3. 21. Another of the Church , Mat. 18. 15. 16 , &c. 1 Cor. 5. 4 , 5 , 6 , 11 , 12. and two sorts of bindings , two sorts of Witnesses , two sorts of Sentences , then can it not be dedenyed but the Church hath a spirituall Court for censures , as well as for preaching the Word . 4. Arg. Exclusion of an offender from the societie of the Saints , and not to eate or drinke with him , is some other reall visible censure accompanied with shame , then any censure by the preaching of the Word ; but there is such a censure inflicted by the Church , Ergo , The Proposition is cleare from Rom. 16. 17. Now I beseech you brethren , marke them that cause divisions and offences , contrary to the doctrine which yee learned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and avoid them . Here is a reall , visible , and personall note of shame put on Schismaticks , a bodily declining and avoiding of their company , which could not possibly be done by preaching of the Word . But ( some may say ) this was not done by the Church court , but every one as private christians were to eschew the society of Schismaticks , and by this you cannot conclude any Church censure . Answ . Not to say that it were unjustice to decline any , and renounce society with him , before he were convinced to be factious according to Christs order , Mat. 18. which to Erastus is a way of common and naturall equity . And so in order to some publique censure before the Church . Paul w●i●eth to a constitute Church at Rome , in which he prescribeth Rom. 12. the Officers duty , as what Pastor , Doctor , Elder , Deacon , ought to doe in a Church body ; We cannot imagine he could command every private Christian to inflict the censure and punishment , ( for a punishment it is in order to a publike sin ) of avoiding any in Church communion , professing they serve the Lord Iesus Christ , as these doe , verse 18. upon their owne private opinion : Iesus Christ and his Apostles must have left men loose in all order and discipline by this way , howbeit the adversary would deny a church punishment , here is a punishment inflicted by many , 2 Cor. 2. 6. And it is not inflicted by way of preaching , so 2 Thes . 3. 14. If any man obey not our word by this Epistle , note that man , have no company with him , that he may be ashamed , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the learned is to put a publike church note on him that he may be confounded , make him a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a publike wonder , that he may be ashamed , as Piscator and P. Baynes observe on the place expounding it of excommunication , and the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is here , is used toward the incestuous man , who was to be excommunicated , 1 Cor. 5. 9. I wrote unto you in an Epistle , not to keepe company with fornicators , the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver . 1. is ascribed to the incestuous man , and here they are not to be mixed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with fornicators , vers . 11. But now I have written unto you not to keepe company , if any man that is called a brother , be a fornicator , or covetous , or an idolater , or a railer , or an extortioner , with such a one , no not to eate . And that we may know that this is a church censure , he addeth ver . 12. For what have I to doe to judge them also that are without ? Ergo , this no keeping company with such , is a Church judging . 5. Arg. The Church of Pergamus is rebuked for having amongst them , such as hold the doctrine of Balaam , and Revel . 2. 14. and Thyatira , that they suffered Iezabel to preach and seduce the servants of God , ver . 20. as the Church of Ephesus is praised v. 2. that they cannot beare with them that are evill , but had tryed such that said they were ▪ Apostles , and were not , and had found them liars , Rev. 2. 3. Here is it clearely supposed that these churches were to censure false teachers , if any shall say they were to censure them no other waies , but by preaching against their errors ; 1. This would establish a Prelate above the Church contrary to that of Mat. 18. Tell the Church , and 1 Cor. 5. Where the Church gathered together was to excommunicate . 2. The Angel of the Church is taken collectively , for all the Rulers and the whole Church to whom Christ writeth , as is cleare , in that he saith so often ; He that hath an eare let him heare what the Spirit saith to the Churches , not to the Pastors only . 2. The removing of the Candlestick , is not from the Angel but from the Church ; and repentance , and the fighting and overcomming , a reward of the crown of life , and many other things are evidently spoken to the Churches , not to the Angels of the Churches . And therefore the tryall of false Apostles must be by a Church , a Court , a colledge of church rulers , as Paul speaketh unto , Act. 20. 17. Where it is said , Paul called the Elders of the Church of Ephesus , and exhorted them to beware of false teachers , that should not spare the flocke , and should teach perverse things , v. 28. 29. 30. and of this sort were these lying and seducing Apostles , now how can one Angell or many Pastors by preaching onely try false Apostles , and finde them lyars ? This trying and sentencing of lying seducers , Rev. 2. 2. must be by a court , such as we find to be the practise of the Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem , who in a Synod Act. 15. did finde these who taught a necessitie of Circumcision , to be perverters of soules and liars , saying , They had the Apostles authority for what they taught , whereas they had no such thing , and Schismatick troublers of the people , Acts 15. See what further I have said for Excommunication before , cap. 2. and sect . 7. which proveth also the same thing . The Church of Thyatira would not be rebuked for suffering Jezabel to teach , if they had no power of Church censures to hinder her ; It is not enough to say that the Angel of that Church did sufficiently hinder Jezabell to teach , when in publike he declared and preached against her false doctrine , and by the same reason Pastors exoner their conscience , if they preach that such and such scandalous persons are not to eate and drinke their owne damnation , though they debarre them not in a visible court by name from the Lords table , and though they never excommunicate them , and therefore there is not any censure but Pastorall rebukes by way of preaching , not any other by way of discipline . Ans . The Angel of Thyatira had not sufficiently hindered Jezabel to seduce the servants of God , by only preaching against her false doctrine , in regard that Paul and Barnabas not only hindred those that teached , that the Gentiles ought to be circumcised , Act. 14. cap. 16. by Preaching ; but also had recourse to the power and authority of a Synod , that in a Synod which is a Court essentially consisting of many Pastors and Elders , they might be declared to be perverters of souls , and liars , as indeed they were judicially declared to be such , Act. 15. 24. Hence I argue ; if the Apostles could not be said sufficiently to hinder Jezabels and Seducers , by only Preaching , and Disputing against their errors , except in case of their persisting in their errors , they should tell the Church convened in a Synod , as Christs order is , Mat. 18. Then the Angel of Thyatira , or any one Pastor do not sufficiently hinder scandals , but may be well said to suffer them by only private rebuking and publick Preaching , except they use all these means to hinder Iezabels , false Teachers , and all scandalous persons , that the Apostles used , and therefore the Angel of the Church of Thyatira must be rebuked for not using the Authority and power of the Church against Iezabel . And here by the way , when these false Teachers had sinned against their brethren in perverting their souls , they take not the course that Erastus dreameth to be taken according to Matth. 18. They complain not to the Synedrim , or Civill Magistrate , who should use the sword against them , but to the Church Synodically convened at Ierusalem , who used against them the Spirituall power that Christ the head of the Church had given them . 6. Arg. If there be an Ecclesiasticall debarring of scandalous persons from the holy things of God , especially from the Supper of the Lord by Censures , and not by the preaching of the word only , then there be Censures and power of jurisdiction in the word beside preaching of the word . But the former I make good by these following Arguments . 1. Arg. If the Stewards and dispensers of the mysteries of God , are to cut the word aright as approved workmen , 2 Tim. 2. 15. And are to give every one their portion of bread according to their need , and measure , Matth. 24. 45 , 46 , 47. 1 Cor. 4. 1. 2. 3. and must not s●ay the souls which should not die , by denouncing wrath against the righteous , nor save the souls alive that should not live , by lying words , Ezec. 13. 19. by offering mercy to the wicked and impenitent , then as they should not deny the seals of salvation to Believers , hungring and thirsting for Christ ; neither should they give the seals of life to those that are walking openly in the way of destruction . But the former is true ; Ergo ; so is the latter . The Proposition is clear : As the word should not be divided aright , if wrath should be Preached to believing Saints , and life and salvation offered to the obdurate and wicked , so neither should the Stewards cut the seals of the word aright , if the Supper were given to wicked men : If they should say , This is the blood of the Covenant , shed for the Remission of your sins , Drink ye all of it : They should save alive those that should die , with lying words ; for the seals speak to the Communicant , and apply to him in particular , the very promise that in generall is made to him ; and this will prove as the Magistrate being no Steward of the word , and not called of God thereunto , as Aaron was Heb. 5. 4. can no more distribute the word and seals to whom he pleaseth , Ex officio , then he can Preach and Administer the Sacraments , nor should another man , who is no Steward , but a Porter or Cook , Teach , and that by his office how , and to whom the Steward should distribute Bread : nor is it sufficient , to say , by this one man , not the Church , is to debar from the Sacraments , for the seals being proper to the Church , as the Church , he must act here , in , and with the power of the Church . 2. It is another question , whether by the Minister , or by the Church any ought to be debarred , and whether there be any such Censure as debarring from the Seals ; and it s another question , by what power , whether by the power of order , or by the power of jurisdiction , Ministers may debar the scandalous from the seals ; I conceive by both powers , they may keep the Ordinances pure ; and if it belong to the Magistrate to debar any more then to preach the word , and by the way of Erastus : The Magistrate by his office , as he is a Magistrate only is deputed of Iesus Christ to Steward the seals to whom he pleaseth : Ergo , ( say I ) to cut the word aright to whom he pleaseth , must be his due . 2. Arg. As the dispensers of the word must not partake of other mens sins , 1 Tim. 5. 22. so neither should they distribute to wicked and scandalous men , such Ordinances , as they see shall certainly be judgement and damnation to them , and as maketh the Communicants guilty of the body and blood of our Lord : Now that the Stewards Communicate with the sins of these manifestly scandalous , to whom they administrate the Supper : I prove : 1. Because they that sow pillows under the head of the openly wicked , preaching peace to these who should die , do hunt souls , Ezech. 13. 20. and partake of their presumption , and they that heal the wound of the people with smooth words , are false dealers , and concurreth to the wound of the people , Ier. 8. 10 , 11. As the Prophet that preacheth lies partaketh of the peoples presumption ; which believe those lies , Ier. 14. 14 , 15 , 16. 2. If Eve should but reach the fruit of the forbidden Tree to Adam , and say take and eat , she partakes of Adams sin , if the mother give poyson willingly and wittingly to a childe , she killeth her childe , though it be told the childe that it is poyson : The Supper to those who knowingly to us , eat unworthily , is forbidden meat , and poyson . 3. A third Argument is , from the nature of holy things . It is not lawfull to give that which is holy to dogs , nor to cast pearles before swine , least they trample them under their feet , Matth. 7. 6. But the Sacraments are holy things , saith Erastus , and no man can deny it ; Ergo , we are not to give the Sacraments to the scandalous and openly prophane . But Erastus answereth , That the Lord preached the word to Pharisees , and the word is a holy thing , and a pearl , and by Dogs , and swine , he meaneth open persecutors . They that will seem members of the Church , and confesse their fault , and promise amendment , are not such as will trample on the Sacraments , and will turn again to tear you : Et si quis talis reperiatur hunc ego admittendum minime censeo , for such ( saith he ) Are not to be admitted to the Sacrament . Ans . These holy things , which prophane men and openly scandalous can make no use of , but pollute them to their own destruction , and the abusing of the Ordinances , no more then Dogs and Swine can make use of Pearls to feed them , but onely trample on them , are not to be given to the prophane and openly scandalous : But the Lords Supper is such a thing , being Ordained only for those that have saving Grace , not for Dogs . Now the Assumption applied to the word , is most false , ( as it is applied to the Lords Supper , it is most true ) for the Word is Ordained by speciall Command to be Preached to Dogs and Lions , that thereby they may be made Isa . 11. 4 , 5 , 6 , 7. Isa . 2. 3. 4. Lambs and Converts ; the Supper is not a mean of Conversion ; and since Dogs can make no use of it , but trample it under foot , we are forbidden to give such holy things to them . It is true , They 'll trample the Pearl of the word ; but we are Commanded to offer the word to all , even while they turn Apostates . 2. If Christ Commanded the word to be Preached to Pharisees and Saduces ; these were such persecuters as sinned against the Holy Ghost , Dogs in the Superlative degree , Matth. 12. 31 , 32. Joh. 9. 39 , 40 , 41. Joh. 7. 28. Joh. 8. 21. Ergo , Christ Commanded some holy things , the word to be given to Dogs ; and yet his precept cannot be obeyed , if we give them the Sacrament . 3. By what Doctrine of Scripture will Erastus have these that trampleth on Ordinances , and turn again to tear us , debarred from the Supper ? For in his Thes . 26. 27 , 28 , 29. he holdeth it unlawfull to debar any Judas from the Supper ; doth he think there be no Dogs in the Visible Church ? Peter saith , There be such Dogs as have known the way of truth , and turn to their vomit ; and such may promise amendment , confesse their sin , and desire the Sacrament . 4. Arg. Those who will not hear the Church , but doth scandalize , not only their Brethren , but also a whole Church , and are to be esteemed as Heathen and Publicans , are not to be admitted to the highest priviledge , and to feast with Christ , when the Church knoweth they want their wedding garment : But there may be , and are many in the Church of this sort ; Ergo , such should not be admitted : For the Major , I set down the words of Erastus granting it . The Assumption , both Scripture and experience proveth ; for there be in the Visible Church , Dogs , Persecuters , Jezabels , as there be many called , and few chosen . 5. Arg. If the incestuous man must be cast out , lest he leaven the Church , then can he not be admitted to Communicate with the Church , in that which is the highest seal of Christs love ; but the incestuous man must be cast out , lest he leaven the whole Church , 1 Cor. 5. 4 , 5 , &c. Ergo , The Proposition is clear , because none can be put out of the Church , but they must be separated from the Table of the Children of the Church ; the Assumption is 1 Cor. 5 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Put him out , ver . 7. Purge him out . Now the Church hath no power by bodily violence to attempt a locall separating of him in person from them , as they are men , though they may separate themselves from him ; then it must be a declarative casting of him out , as unworthy to Communicate with the Church in such holy Ordinances , as distinguisheth the Church from other Societies , and these be the Seals of the Covenant . 6. We are not to suffer sin in any , Levit. 18. 17. Rev. 2. 20. but to hinder it so far as we can according to our vocation , 1 Sam. 3. 13. As the Priests hindred Vzziah to Sacrafice , 2 Chron. 26. 18 , 19 , 20. And must pull them out of the fire , Jude ver . 23. As the Law of nature would teach the Mother , not only , not to co-operate with her sonne attempting to kill himself ; but to hinder and stop him by pulling a knife or sword out of his hand , when he is about to destroy himself ; if so , then ought not the Church and her Officers to co-operate so far with those who do Eat and drink their own Damnation , as to exhibite and give to such the seals of the Covenant , to pray that these seals may be blessed to scandalons ones , which is to pray directly contrary to the revealed will of God in his word , and against that which the faithfull Pastors and Paul Preacheth , That every one should try and examine themselves , and so eat and drink : Now a reall and physicall co-operating of the Church , with such manifest impiety , must then be the Churches suffering of sin in a brother , or not hindring him ●o eat his own Damnation ; if the Lord have committed a power of dispensing the seals to Christians , not to Pagans and Turks : Let Erastus show any precept or practise , why we might not admit Jews , Turks , Indians , though never Baptized , to eat and drink the Lords body and blood , ( we are to Preach the Gospel to them , if they were amongst us ) except that such as are to communicate according to the will of Christ , are Christians , members of the Church , who doth try and examine themselves ; and Jews and Turks though dwelling and born amongst us are not such , yet Erastus would that such should never be admitted to the Lords Supper , though they should desire it : Officers also have a command not to dispense some parts of the word to all , as we are not to rebuke open Scorners : Should any of our Church turn Iew and blaspheme Christ , and pertinaciously after conviction persist in his Apostacy ; might not Erastus aske by what command of Christ will ye not Preach the Gospel to such an one ? Christ made no exception , but said , Preach to all Nations , why do you make Exceptions ? might we not answer , Christ hath given a power of dispensing the Gospel to all ; yet hath he excepted some , because it s against the will of Christ that such can obey the Gospel : We are bidden pray for all , yet are there some that we are not to pray for , because they sin unto death : so is the case here in some kinde . 7. It is for our instruction that the Priests were rebuked , for that they admitted into the Sanctuary the uncircumcised in flesh and heart , that they put no difference betweene the cleane and the uncleane , and prophaned the holy things of God , Ezek. 44. 9. Ezek. 22. 26. Hag. 2. 11 , 12 , 13. And this was a shadow of things to come , as was observed before , teaching us , that farre lesse should the Pastors of the New Testament suffer the holy things of God to be prophaned . 8. We read that Iohn Baptist and the Apostles baptized none but such as confessed their sinnes , and professed ●aith in Iesus Christ , it would then appeare to be the will of Christ , that every one should not be admitted to the Lords Supper , though some say , the Apostles baptized single persons not in Church communion , so that Pastors administer the Sacraments by reason of the power of order , as they are Pastors , not by power of jurisdiction , as having warrant from any Church , in regard Churches at the beginning had the Word and Sacraments before they had any Church Government , yet I conceive the Lords Supper is a Seale of a Church-communion , 1 Cor. 10. 16. 17. and the like I say of Baptisme typed by Noahs Arke , 1 Pet. 3. 19 , 20 , &c. and though the Apostles , partly by priviledge , partly through necessitie , the parts existing before the whole , were necessitated first to baptize , and then to plant Churches , yet the Churches being once constitute , these are ▪ Church priviledges to be dispensed both by the power of order , and the power of jurisdiction . CHAP. VI. Quest . 2. Some speciall Reasons of Thomas Erastus against Excommunication , examined . THomas Erastus a Physitian , who medled not much with Divinity , save in this , in which he was unsound , in his reply to Beza laboureth to make Excommunication a dreame , and nothing but a device of Pastors affecting domination . 1. Object . Onely Pet●r killed Ananias ; onely Paul excommunicated Alexander and Hymeneus , onely Paul said he would come to the Corinthians with the rod , and for a long time onely Bishops excommunicated , Presbyters gave advise onely . Ergo ▪ This power is not in the Church . Ans . ▪ The consequence is naught , Christ said only to his Disciples in person , Go teach and Baptize , Is it a good consequence therefore , that none hath power to teach and Baptize , but only the Apostles ? Only Paul exhorted the Corinthians , to mourn for the incestuou● mans fall , therefore no Pastors have power to exhort in the like kinde . 2. We grant the Apostles did many things out of their Apostolick power , which in a constitute Church , the Church onely may doe , as Paul his alone disputed against Circumcision of the Gentiles , Act. 15. 2. What ? Ergo , Paul in a Synod , and a Synod hath not power to dispute and determine the same , the contrary is evident , Act. 15. 12 , 22 , 23. 3. It is false that the Authority and rod , with which Paul said he would come to the Coriuthians , 2 Cor. 10. 8. was proper only to Paul an Apostle , the same he giveth to Timothy , and to all the Elders . 3. If Bishops exercised the same power for many ages , Erastus must shew us Bishops who could kill miraculously , such as Ananias and Elimas , and work miracles ; now beside that , Erastus must with his new opinion , hold up a new creature called a Prelate , unknown to the Apostles or Ierome and the Fathers , he must parallel Bishops for working of miracles to Paul and the Apostles . Obj. 2. The Apostles declared many to be excluded out of the kingdom of heaven , and so bound in heaven whom they did not excommunicate from the Sacraments , so also do the Ministers daily , and yet Christ in his word commanded not those to be debarred from the Lords Supper . Ans . It is very true , the Apostles and Pastors of Christ that now are , denounce eternall wrath , and that authoritatively against those that are invisibly to men heart-hypocrites , who yet before the Church ( who know not the heart ) go for Saints , and are neither excluded from Sacraments , nor so much as rebuked . But it is a vain collection , that therefore externally scandalous are not to be debarred from the Supper , and Excommunicated : The Prophets , 1 Cor. 14. did preach that Heathens remaining Heathens were excluded out of the Kingdom of God ; yet Heathens cannot be Excommunicated ; and yet ( I hope ) Erastus dare not deny , but Christ hath forbidden , that Heathen remaining Heathen be admitted to the Sacraments : Though I dare provoke any Erastian , and attest them by their new Doctrine , to shew me a warrant from Christs Testament , why the Church should refuse the Seals to a Turke ; they will say , A Turk is not willing to receive , and therefore the Seals may be denied to him , and yet cannot be denied to a member of the Church though scandalous , if he desire it , and professe repentance . But I answer , Though a Turk be unwilling to receive the Seals ; What if he should be willing , and require to be Baptized , yet remaining ignorant of Christ and the Gospel we should not Baptize him : Now by the Doctrine of Erastus , we have no more re warrant to deny the seals to him , then to deny them to Judas ; we desire a Scripture from the adversary , which will not conclude with equall strength of reason against the giving of the seals to any scandalous member of the Church ; it is true , a Turk ignorant of Christ , though he should desire the seals is uncapable , and he is unwilling vertually , in regard he as yet refuseth the knowledge of the Gospel , and so is the scandalous professor no lesse uncapable ( though we may grant degrees of incapacity ) for he is vertually unwilling to receive Christ in regard he is unwilling to part with his idol-sins : 2. Though a Turk should be unwilling ( as its like enough he will be ) yet we desire a Scripture , why we cannot make offer of the Sacraments to a Turk , and yet we may Preach the Gospel and make offer of Christ in the word to him , 1 Cor. 14. 23. And this Scripture shall also conclude , we are not to admit scandalous persons to the Sacraments , being both uncapable of them , as also because they can but trample on these pearls , , no lesse then the Turk should do ; the Argument then is just nothing : We exclude many from the Kingdom of Heaven , whom we do not excommunicate on earth ; But he should say , we Excommunicate many , whom we do not exclude out of Heaven . Erastus . These two are not one , to declare a person hatefull in Heaven to God , and to be cast out of the visible Church ; for if they be both one , then one private Pastor may Excommunicate , for he may declare from Gods word , that an offender is excluded out of Heaven : hath not the word of God in the mouth of one as much authority and power as out of the mouth of many ? the authority of the word dependeth not on a multitude , also why should this be as good a consequence ( God judgeth not this man worthy of the Kingdom of God ; Ergo , he is to be cast out of the visible Church ) as this ( God judgeth not this man worthy of life eternall : Ergo , God will not have him to live in this temporall life ) Are we ignorant that God esteemeth many not worthy of life eternall , to whom he hath given power to cast out devils in his name ? Matth. 7. Ans . All this is but with carnall reason to speak against the wayes of God ; for 1. Not every denouncing of a sinner unworthy of Heaven is Excommunication : So Iudas might have Excommunicated himself , and when one Pastor declareth an offender unworthy of Heaven ; he is not formally excommunicated out of the visible Church ; he is cast out of the invisible Church : But that is not Excommunication , except it be done for a publick scandall that offendeth the Church : 2. Except it be done by the visible Church . 3. According to the rule of Christ , Matth. 18. 4. That he may be ashamed , and repent and be saved : Gods binding of the offender in Heaven , is a part of Excommunication , but not all , nor the very same with Excommunication . 2. The Churches casting out for Christs institutions cause , is of more Authority then the Conscionall casting out performed by one Pastor , and yet the Conscional casting out by one , insuo genere is as valid as the other , subordinata non pugnant . 3. We are not to take our compasse and rule of Gods waies by his outward dispensation , but the revealed will of Christ is our Rule , God thinketh those who walketh inordinately , and causeth divisions , not worthie of the Christian society of the Saints ; and must binde them in heaven to that censure , in regard he expresly so commandeth in his Word , Rom. 16 , 17. 18. 2 Thes . 3. 14 , 15. 1 Cor. 5. 11. Yet he thinketh them worthy of Salvation , and may give repentance and Iesus Christ to many of these ; he may deny salvation to the wicked , and upon that feed them to the day of slaughter , dare flesh and blood quarrell this consequence ? God hath appointed the wicked for the day of wrath . Ergo , he giveth them more of this life then heart can wish . This consequence dependeth on the meer dispensation of God , nor is this our Consequence . God judgeth such unworthy of heaven ; Ergo , they must be cast out of the visible Church , we never made Excōmunication a necessary consequent of the Lords judging men unworthy of Heaven , for then all these that God judgeth unworthy of life eternall should be excommunicated , and only these , which is false ; for God may judge some worthy of life eternall in Christ , and yet they are to be excommunicated , if they refuse to hear the Church , as many regenerate may go that sar in scandalous obstinacy , and many whom God judges unworthy of life eternall , may so belie a Profession , as they deserve not to be excommunicated , and both these may fall out , and do fall out according to the revealed will of Christ . Erastus 4. objecteth . Excommunication must exclude men from only the externall society of the Church , for he only can joyne us to Christ , or separate us from internall and spirituall society of Christ , who can beget lively faith in us , and extinguish lively faith when it is begotten , for by faith only we are made living members of Christs body , and by only infidelity we leave off to be members of his bodie : But no Church , no creatures can either beget lively faith in us , or extinguish it in us : or thus , men can neither give to us , nor take from us salvation , therefore Excommunication should not be defined by cutting men off from salvation . Ans . This is the only Argument of Erastus , that seemeth to bear weight ; But it is false and groundlesse , it supposeth the false principle that Erastus goeth on , that Excommunication is a reall separation of a member from Christs Invisible and Mysticall body , and that the Excommunicated person who may be an Invisible member of Christ , and regenerated , may be an Apostate , and fall from Christ , and leave off to be a member . The contrary of which all our Protestant Divines teach against Papists ; whereas , Excommunication is only a Declarative ; but withall , an Authoritative Act or Sentence of the Church , and no reall cutting off of a believer from Christ : But you will say , It presupposeth a cutting off in heaven from Christ ; and therefore the Excommunicated person is declared to be cut off . Let me Answer , I conceive Excommunication hath neither Election nor Reprobation , Regeneration or non-Regeneration , for its object , or terminus , but only it cutteth a contumacious person off from the Visible Church on earth , and from the head Christ in heaven , not in regard of his state of Regeneration , as if Christ ratifying the Sentence in heaven , did cut him off so much as conditionally from being a member of his body : No , but in regard of the second Acts of the life of God , and the sweet efficacy and operation of the spirit , by which the Ordinances are lesse lively , lesse operative , and lesse vigorous , the man being as the Learned and Reverend Mr. Cotton saith , As a palsie Member , in which life remaineth , but a little withered and blunted , and he in Satans power to ve● his spirit , and therefore I grant all , to wit , that Excommunication is not a reall separating of a member from Christs body , only unbelief doth that ; but it followeth not , Ergo , it is a separation only from the externall society of the Church : For 1. This externall cutting off , is ratified in heaven : And 2. Christ hath ratified it by a real internal suspension of the influence of his spirit in heaven : But I deny that this universall doth follow from Christs binding in heaven , That whomever God judgeth unworthy of heaven , all these are to be cast out of the Church ; he cannot prove this consequence from our grounds . Erastus Argueth thus : If God dam any as a sinner in heaven , he will have the Elders to cast him out of the Church Visible in earth , so they know him to be such ; yet this is not sure . Ans . It is most sure , so all the Church know him ( Elders only Iudicially Excommunicate , the people also by consent , and by Execution of the Sentence , and avoiding the offender ) and if it be Iudicially proved , the Church is to Excommunicate . But 1. he must not be without the Church , 1 Cor. 5. 12. Though the Church know Turks and Pagans , and those who live without Christ , to be damned in heaven ; yet they Excommunicate them not , for they are without the Church , 1 Cor. 5. 12. and yet damned , Act. 4. 12. 2. They may know many unregenerated , Ioh. 15. 18. Yet they cannot Excommunicate them for non-regeneration , or non ▪ election to glory , which they cannot know judicially , except they be externally scandalous , Matth. 18. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 1. 2. Erastus , By Preaching , Drunkards are excluded out of Heaven , and God declareth by the Preaching of the word , that they are not of the faithfull on earth ; but you cannot prove these four from Scripture . 1. That God hath Commanded to cast them out of the Church , whom he hath judged unworthy of life Eternall . 2. That they should not be admitted to the Sacrament , who have polluted themselves with some sin , though they say they repent , except it please the Elders . 3. That it is Gods will that they ●e debarred from the Sacrament , by the voyces of a Court of Elders . 4. That God hath Commanded such a Court of Elders under a Christian Magistrate , who should have a power of jurisdiction , different from the power of the Magistrate . Ans . 1. Declaring by Preaching , that a Drunkard is not of the number of the faithfull in the Visible Church , is materially Excommunication : This Erastus saith , We want only a Court of Elders : But how proveth he that one Pastor should cast out of the Church by Preaching , all those that God judgeth unworthy of life eternall . Erastus saith , A Presbytery cannot do this : 1. Because the heart is known to God only , pag. 83. And doth one single Pastor know the heart , and a Senate of Pastors knoweth it not ? 2. Must Pastors know the heart , which God only knoweth , 2 Chron. 29 , 30. Ier. 17. 10. Otherwise they cannot judicially Excommunicate , and one Pastor may by way of Preaching , Excommunicate , and yet he knoweth not the heart . 3. For the first of his four , we need not prove it , we assert it not . 4. Though a Turk or an Apostate should say that he repents , yet he lyes ; and Erastus saith , l. 3. cap. 3. pag. 207. Hunc ego minime admittendum censeo . I think such a one is not to be admitted to the Sacrament . 5. What Christ saith , Matth. 18. we take to be Gods will. 6. If there were no Christian Magistrate , belike a Church-Court might excommunicate ; and shall the Magistrate , because Christian , spoil the Church of the power she had while she wanted a Magistrate ? 7. The power of Excommunicating , and binding and loosing in earth and heaven , must then be principally in the Magistrate : And who gave the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to the Magistrate ? Erastus . If Excommunication be a cutting off from Salvation : then all who are Excommunicated must perish ; But many Excommunicated persons are saved , many relaxed are Condemned . Ans . We define not so Excommunication : Nor did Beza put mens Salvation in hazard , because they are Excommunicated so they repent , if their sins be retained in Heaven , and they never repent . Let Erastus see how they shall be saved . 2. Those against whom one Pastor denounceth the just deserved wrath of God , are Conscionally cut off from Salvation : But many of those are saved . Let Erastus Answer this himself . Erastus . He only can cast out of the Church who seeth the heart ; But men , or the Church , seeth not the heart ; Ergo , men can do no more but debar from the Sacraments : It is not enough to say , that whom they cast out , as the Ambassadors of God in the name of Christ , declaring those to be bound on earth , whom Christ hath bound in heaven are excommunicated : for the Argument is not , whether Pastors may pro●ounce on earth , that which God hath ratified in Heav●n ; but whether they may so cast out of the Church , as they may cut men off from Salvation ; and whether one Pastor may not do this , no lesse then a Presbytery . An● . So I may Argue a Prophet cannot warn a wicked man , that he shall dye eternally ▪ because a Prophet in ordinary , knoweth not the heart more then a Senate of prophets , yet are all prophets to exclude from Salvation , wicked and impenitent men , but conditionally , so they repent not , in which God goeth before them , Ezech. 3. 18 , 19 , 20. Cap. 33. 6 , 7. Act. 20. 20. Nor are we to doubt , but all Prophets to the end of the world must do the same . 2. If men debar from the Sacraments , as having warrant from Christ , they do also exclude men from Christ and Salvation offered in the Word ; and is there not need that Pastors see the heart , if they exclude men from Christ and Salvation in the Word and Seals , as from Salvation simply ? And how can men know binding in Heaven , more then the hearts of men on earth ? The one is as far from our intuitive knowledge , as the other , except that we know both by fruits and effects ; otherwise , this is but a Popish Argument , if the Church do binde on earth , as God bindeth in Heaven , say Stapleton , Becanus , Suarez , and other Papists ; then must the Church be infallible in judgement : But we deny the Consequence in the one , as in the other . 2. It is that which offendeth Erastus , 1. That a Senate , not one man doth this . 2. That the Christian Magistrate doth it not : But I pray you , doth one Pastor , or the Christian Magistrate know the heart ; but a Presbytery cannot do it , because a Presbytery knoweth not the heart : Is not this too partiall Logick ? Erastus . Many Excommunicated persons have repented in the end of their life , and dyed devoutly ; then he who is cast out of the Visible Society of the Church , is not cast out of the internall and spirituall Society of Christ . Ans . This is as much against Christs words , as against us ; may not many whose sins are bound in heaven , and against whom the Pastors denounce exclusion out of heaven , repent in the end of their life , and die devoutly ? Ergo , The very threatnings of the Gospel must be wind ▪ and by these , none are excluded from Heaven . 2. Excommunication is but a conditionall excluding out of Heaven ▪ if men repent , the condition not being placed , Nihil ponitur in esse , they are saved ; though it may fall out that they want the externall relaxation of the Church , not through their own fault , but by some externall providence insuperable to them . But it is to beg the Question , to say , Those that are justly Excommuniated , and seek not to be reconciled to the Church , do repent and die devoutly . Beza saith , Pastors should give food to the hungry sheep , though they know not the moment when they do repent . Erastus Replyeth , Then give Word and Sacraments to those who seek them . Ans . This is more Charity then the Scripture knoweth , belike Erastus will have all those that seek God daily , and delight to know his wayes , and ask for the Ordinances of Iustice , and take delight in approaching to God , to be all hungry souls , hungring for Righteousnesse , and so blessed , Matth. 5. 6. Luk. 1. 52. Isa . 55. 1. Whereas Isaiah saith , They may do all that , and be but plaistred Hypocrites , Isa . 58. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6. Erastus . But if the Excommunicated man repent , whether soon or late , he was never cut off from inward communion with Christ , for then the elect might perish ; if David and Manasseh had been excommunicate , and died , they had been saved , except we deny the perseverance of the Saints . Ans . Erastus evidenceth , he hath little skill in Divinity , he thinks a regenerate man not capable of Excommunication , why ? and the sad falls of David , Peter and others prove , they may fall in as great sins , as not hearing of the Church 2. If one repent in his death , as the repenting Theef , will that infer he was never all his life separated from Christ ? The contrary is true and cleare in the Ephes . 2. 1● , 12 , 13. Tit. 3. 3. ● Tim. 1. 13 , 14 , 15. 3. This is as strong ( as it is weake as water ) against all the threatnings denounced against such sinners as the Lord gisteth with Repentance , for Excommunication to the regenerated is a sort of Evangelick conditionall threatning . Erastus . To give internall communion with Christ is a spirituall thing , Ergo , The Church cannot take it from any , and that same power that giveth , taketh away , then the Presbytery cannot by loosing , give salvation , nor by binding , take it away . Excommunication on earth is nothing , except God binde first in heaven , then it is but a declaration of what God doth , to shew the sentence that another judge hath given out , is not to judge ; there is a difference between those that by authority give out a sentence , and those who as servants doth promulgate the sentence . So Luther tom . German . 1. fol. 239. Excommunicare non est , ut quidam opinantur , animam Satanae tradere , & precum fructu à piis factarum spoliare . Nam ubi vera fides & charîtas in corde remanent , etiam vera communio Dei , & precum Christianitatis fructus permanent , postquam aliud est excommunicatio , nec fieri aliud potest , quam privatio externi Sacramenti , ac commercii cum hominibus ac si in custodiam traditus externâ amicorum consuetudine priver , amore & favore eorum interea non spolier . Ans . This is but the old argument of Erastus , repeated almost a hundred times to please the people . We never taught that either Presbytery or Minister can give , or take away inward Communion with God. But hence it will not follow , that Excommunication is an empty thing , for all we doe is but , a Ministery , Christ doth make the whole Gospel , promises , threatning , Sacraments , effectuall , else , What is Paul ? What is Apollo ? but the Ministers by whom ye beleeve ? And what is the planting of Paul , or the watering of Apollo , except God give the increase ? If this anull Excommunication , because Excommunicators are not properly judges , but onely Servants and Heralds to declare what Christ doth in Heaven , then may Erastus prove that the Word , Promises , threatnings of the Gospel ; The Apostles , Evangelists , Pastors , Teachers are nothing , for all of themselves are meere declarations of Gods will. 2. Those who Excommunicate because they judge not , but declare the will of Christ , they are not for that void of all authority , for their declaration is authoritative . What did Ieremiah but declare Gods will , yet it is such a propheticall and authoritative declaration , as I conceive Baruch or any other not sent as a Prophet of God , could not beare that which God putteth on Ieremiah , c. 1. 10. See , I have this day set thee over the Nations , and over the Kingdomes to root out , and to pull downe , to destroy , and to pull downe , to build and to plant : Hath Ieremiah no Propheticall authority over the Nations and Kingdomes to whom he prophesieth in the Name of the Lord , to build and destroy , to root out , and to plant , because he declareth and prophesieth , that such Nations shall be destroyed and rooted out for their wickednes , and such shall be builded and planted ? Then meer declaration saith nothing against Excommunication ; Paul , saith he , and the rest of the Apostles were nothing but Ministers , 1 Cor. 3. 5. and yet authoritie they had , else he could not say , 2 Cor. ●0 . 6. We have in readinesse vengeance against all disobedience , Verse 8. For though I should boast somewhat more of our Authority , &c. I should not be ashamed , and 2 Cor. 5. 20. Now then we are Ambassadors for Christ , but I pray you 1 Cor. 12. 29. Are all Apostles ? Are all Prophets ? Are all Teachers ? 3. What Luther saith is true , Excommunication can put none out of the state of saving Faith and inward Communion with God , nor doth deprive men of the fruit of the Prayers of the godly , for the godly pray that Excommunication may be medicine effectually blessed of God , for the saving of the mans soul , yea , Gods not hearing of the prayers of the godly , praying in a Church way , that he may be humbled , is a mean to humble the cast out man , nor is the man delivered to Satan morally to be hardned ; but judicially and withall medicinally to be softned , that his spirit may be saved . Nor is the Church to hate him , but to admonish him as a brother , 2 Thes . 3. 15. And he is so deprived of the externall society and meanes , as the operation of the ordinances is suspended . Erastus . If any should die in their typicall uncleannesse , were they so Excommunicated , that their salvation was in hazard ? Ans . Not , so they repented : What then ? Ergo , Excommunication was not ratified in Heaven , it followeth not . Erastus . Beza saith , Those that were morally polluted with hainous sins , were more unclean then those who were typically only unclean : Ergo , They should be far rather excluded from the holy things of God. Erastus answers , If God had commanded them to be punished with the same punishment , and not with diverse ; it would follow , that those that are morally impure , should rather be debarred then the other . Ans . But the Ceremoniall uncleannesse was punished so to signifie Gods detestation of morall uncleannesse , and how hatefull they were , who would multiply sacrifices , and yet had hands full of blood , Esa . 1. And who would steal , murther , whore , and yet come and stand before God in his house , and cry , The Temple of the Lord are these , Ier. 7. 49. And that God punished the one with heavier plagues then the other , is much for us , that adulterers far more and the uncircumcised in heart were to be holden out of the Sanctuary , as the Lord saith , Ezech. 44. 7 , 8 , 9. then those who were only uncircumcised in flesh . Erastus . Those that morally sinned , were not debarred from the holie things , because they were invited to come and offer sacrifice for their sins . Ans . And because they might not enter into the Temple , while the Priests offered a sacrifice for them , they were no lesse excluded from the holy things of God , then an Excommunicated person is , while the Church see him swallowed up of grief , and do relaxe and forgive , 2 Cor. 2. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. Is this a good Argument ? The Excommunicate person is invited to come again , that the Church may pardon , then it will follow he was cast out . Erastus . Paul forbiddeth to eat with fornicators , 1 Cor. 5. It shall never follow that they are worthie of holy convention that are worthy of a common Table , and that they are unvvorthy of the Supper , who are unworthie of a common Table , they vvere debarred from a familiar Communion with the godlie : 1. That they might be ashamed : 2. Least they should infect them ; Paul saith , be not mixed vvith them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but he saith not , exclude them from the Lords Table , and other holy things : In the Sacrament I must try my self , not others ; in my familiar Tabling with others , I am to try them , that I may gain them ; yea , 2 Thes . 3. Though we are to eschew familiar conversing with those that walk unorderly , yet are we to keep communion in holy things with them , and to admonish them as brethren . Ans . Erastus propounds an Argument of his own , 1 Cor. 5. in place of ours ; we said never that they that are unworthy of the holy Supper , are unworthy to be Tabled with in common familiarity , as brethren , though that be most true : But we reason thus , Those that are to be delivered to Satan , and cast out , as , 1 Cor. 5. 5 , 13. of the Church , and judged , ver . 12. and with whom we may not eat , ver . 11. These are not to be admitted to the Lords Supper , which is the proper feast of the Church : But such are all incestuous and scandalous persons , and therefore Paul doth indeed command them to be excluded from the holy feast . 2. To say the Church and her Officers must try themselves , not others , ere they come to the Lords Supper , is to beg the question , for ere they be admitted into the Sanctuary , they are to be tried , whither they be uncircumcised in heart and flesh , or not , Ezek. 44. 7 , 8 , 9. Ezek. 22. 26. As we have proved . 3. Paul not only useth a passive verb , be not mixed with them , but 1 Cor. 5. 5. he useth four active words , v. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 2. v. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 purge him out . 3. v. 12. He willeth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to judge him ▪ 4. He saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , put away that evil one . Hence I argue , The men whom they convened together were to judge , to deliver to Satan , to purge out , to put away 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of the midst of them , ver . 2. or from amongst them , v. 13. This man they did Authoritatively either put from amongst them , as they were Christians , from their common Table , or out of their fellowship , as they were men , to kill him , Or 3. out of their Church-Communion , that they should not keep the feast of the Lords Supper with them : Let Erastus give a fourth : now we cannot dream of the first two : for 1. Would the Apostle command a Church-meeting , to interdict a man of Tabling with them in common eating and drinking ? What needeth a Church-court , for they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , when they did this ? And what needed a judging Court for this ? for , not to eat with him , was no censure of the Church , as Erastus saith . 2. It is no Grammar , nor can it bear sense , that the Corinthians could say , we Corinthians gathered together in the name and power of the Lord Iesus , do cast out such a one out of the midst of us , that is , from our common-Table , this would say , they had all one common Table ; and that all the Church of Corinth met at this time to some Feast , to cast him out of their love-Feasts ; a dream no man ever conceived . 3. The Text speaketh of eating in their houses : could they cast the man out of his own house , and from his own Table ? they had no power so to do . But ye will say , they might forbid any brother to go into this mans house to his Table : True , but this was not to put the man out of the midst of them , as Paul saith . Nor fourthly , was Pauls spirit , and the name and power of the Lord Iesus required for eschewing of a common Table with this man. Erastus saith , Paul commanded this , Rom. 16. 17. 2 Thes . 3. 14 , 15. To all and every beleever at Rome , and Thessalonica by themselves . Nor 2. were they to kill him : Never did a Church conveen to kill a man. This is so insolent that Erastus must give precept for it , or a practise beside the present case : therefore here must be some Church out-casting . 4. Though Paul will have us admonish a cast out man as a brother , 2 Thes . 3. It s private admonition that I owe to all men , Lev. 19. 17. And that one woman is to performe to another , Col. 3. 15. But not any of the holy things of the Sanctuary . Erastus . The Iews accused Paul of nothing , but that they lied that he brought Greeks into the Temple . The Law bad all the clean eat the Passeover , and excepteth none for their wickednesse , Christ admitted Iudas to the Passeover , and said , Drink ye all of this . Paul reciteth a Catologue of wicked men in Corinth , 1 Cor. 5. With whom we are not to have private dealing , but he commandeth never to exclude any who are willing to come , from the Lords Supper : We are to trie our selves , not one another , nor is it a sin to eat at the Lords Table with wicked men . Ans . Belike it was a crime then to bring the Greeks into the Temple : 2. It is a begging of the question to say , all were admitted to the Passeover : See how this is before answered . 3. Christ admitted Iudas into the Passeover ; What then ? may Timothie lay hands suddenly on all he knows to be Iudases , that they come in and lap the blood of souls ? contrary to 1 Tim. 3. Christ is above the Law , and if his practise in this were the rule , because Christ admitted Iudas whom he knew to be a Traitor , and did eat ordinarily at Table with him , and committed the flock to such a known wolfe . We are also to eat with covetous extortioners , which Paul forbiddeth , 1 Cor. 5. 11. And we are to commit the flock of God to known Wolves , where we have a precept on the contrary , 2 Tim. 2. 2. Christ would rather teach that we are to admit to the seals all not ignorant and scandalous , and not be too curious in striking up a window in the conscience of others : 4. Pauls practise at Corinth is but a negative ex particulari , and not concludent : The heathen came to hear the word at Corinth , 1 Cor. 14. 23. And Paul doth no where command the Heathen should be excluded from the Sacraments : Will Erastus then have them admitted ? 5. When Paul saith , that unworthy Communicants were guilty of the Lords body and blood , and required fidelity in the Stewards , 1 Cor. 4. He taketh for confessed , scandalous persons should not be admitted by the Church ; its true , the sin of others who communicate unworthily , is not the sin of another fellow-communicant , who hath not authority to debar his fellow-communicant . Erastus . The Scripture debarred no Iews of old , neither from sacrifices , nor other sacraments , but commandeth that all the male children , Iews or Strangers , that were not legally unclean , nor from their homes , should thrice a year appear before the Lord in Ierusalem , for to partake of the holy things of God ; Ergo , None were Excommunicated from the holy things of God , for morall wickednesse . Ans . Erastus counteth this an Argument that cannot be Answered ; but it Answers it self to me : And Erastus proposeth a Law that is Catholick to all the males ; yet he maketh it not Catholick himself , but propoundeth a number of males that are excepted , as he excepteth those that were legally unclean , those that are from home : and yet , Deut. 16. 16. Exod. 23. 17. Exod. 34. 23. in the Letter of the Law , there is no such exception as Erastus maketh : I hope if he make an exception , so may we , according to the word of God. Though we should give , but not grant , that there was no Excommunica●ion amongst the Iews , but only for Ceremoniall uncleannesse ; yet it proveth not , there is no Excommunication in the Christian Church , but the contrary ; for if for touching the dead by Gods Law , men were separated from the holy things ; in that Church , far more , for Morall uncleannesse , are men to be separated from the holy things of God under the New Testament , for undeniably Ceremoniall separation signified and typed out Morall separation , Col. 2. 21. 2. What ground Erastus hath to except those that were Ceremonially unclean , and so as uncircumcised in flesh , that they were not to appeare before the Lord , ( let him shew the Letter of Scripture for it , ) the same ground have we to shew that the uncircumcised in heart are not to appeare before the Lord , Ezek. 44. 7 , 8 , 9. Ezek. 22. 26. Nor shall I thinke God would both command all the male without exception , to compeare before him thrice a yeare , whether they were Adulterers , Theeves , Murtherers , Idolaters , or not such : but truly sanctified and holy ; and that he would expresly rebuke the Males that were Adulterers , Theeves , Murtherers , Idolaters , because they compeared for him in his House , Ier. 7. 8 , 9 , 10. So then as he commandeth the the Males to compeare , except they be legally uncleane , or Lepers , and would rebuke them , if they should appeare before him being Ceremonially unclean ; and therefore in that case God would have them not to come . So also , if they should be Morally unclean , he would have them not to come , that is , it is not their sin , that they appeare before the Lord , quoad substantiam actus , but their obedience , but it is their sinne that they appeare ●ali m●do , in their unrepented guiltinesse , yet is it the sinne of the Priests in not differencing betweene the cleane and the uncleane , that they suffer them to come tali modo , that as Swine they pollute the holy things of God , to the Male it is their sinne , that they come so , and so guilty ; and that they come not , it is their sinne , but to the Priests it is their sinne , that they admit the uncleane , and cast Pearles to Dogs . But as God would not rebuke unworthy Eaters at the Lords Table , 1 Cor. 11. if they might eate unworthily by Gods Law , so neither would he rebuke Theeves and Murtherers for appearing before him in his Temple , if they ought not , by Law , not to appeare in that state . No doubt ( saith Erastus ) pag. 106. there were many wicked persons in the time of Ioshua , Iudges , and the Kings , in such a multitude , yet they were bidden all to compeare before the Lord , and none are excepted for their wickednesse , and it is certaine God would not both bid them compeare and not compeare . Ans . All that sinned in Israel were bidden offer Sacrifice , yet those who are wicked , as Sodom , are expresly debarred from Sacrifices , except they were morally clean , Esai . 1. 13. Bring me no more vaine oblation , incense is an abomination unto me , — 16 Wash you , make you cleane . So say I here , God said expresly , Ier. 7. 9 , 10. Except you be washed from your lying , stealing , come not before me to stand in my house , to prophane my holy Name . Ergo , the Morally unclean are excommunicated from those holy things , so all the wicked by the same reason were forbidden , they remaining in their wickednes , without Repentance , to eate the Passeover , yea , to take the Name of God in their mouth , Psal . 50. 16 , 17. to Sacrifice , Esai . 66. 3. to touch the Altar of God , except their hands were washed in innocency , Psal . 26. 6. And the Priests had the charge of the house of God , to put difference betweene the cleane , and the uncleane , and the Priests are said to violate the holy things of God , if the wicked as well as the Ceremonially unclean were not debarred , Hag. 2. 11 , 12. Ezek. 22. 25 , 26. Ezek. 44. 7 , 8 , 9. and certainly , the Males that were Leapers were expresly excepted , and forbidden to come in the Congregation of Gods people , as is before proved . Erastus . The Pharisees and Sadduces debarred none from the Sacraments for their wicked life . Ans . What ? will Erastus make the Pharisees practise our Rule , they killed the Lord of Glory , and then eat the Passeover with bloody hearts and hands : Is such a Practise our Rule ? Erastus . Iohn Baptist refused Baptisme to none willing to bee baptized , and referred the inward Baptisme , by the Spirit and fire to Iesus Christ . Ans . Iohn baptized those who confessed their sinnes , and professed their Repentance ; and the like we crave of those that are admitted to the other Sacrament . And the instance of Iohn or an Apostles baptizing , cannot warrant the Baptizing of all Murtherers , Idolatrous persons , or the wickedst living , as Erastus saith , and the vildest on earth , if they should but desire Baptisme , and give no confession of their Faith , nor profession of their Repentance . Erastus . Christ who rebuked many abuses , and cast the buyers and sellers out of the Temple , would have rebuked the pollution of the Sacraments also ; but that he never did : and Christ said that Peter should forgive his offending Brother often in one day , if he but say , It repenteth me : and he saith , This transaction shall be ratified in heaven . Will you be more cruell then God ? Do not we often lie to God in our Confession to God ? He meaneth well , who desires to come to the Supper : Be not Iudges of mens Conscience . Ans . Christ Commanding not to cast Pearls to Swine , and scourging out those that polluted that Temple that was a type of his body , doth Argue clearly , that the holy things of God should not be prophaned : But that Christ rebuked all abuses in the worship of God , in particular , Erastus cannot say . 2. It is one thing to forgive our brother , by putting away private grudge , and a church-pardoning in the name of Christ is another ; in the former sense we are to forgive our enemy , though he repent not , Mat. 6. 12. 14 , 15. Rom. 12. 19 , 20. Luk. 23. 34. But this forgivenesse , Luk. 17. is not said to be ratified in heaven ; for God doth not alway forgive when we forgive , God doth forgive when the sinner repenteth . Erastus will have a lying confession ratified in Heaven . 3. When the Church in Christs Name forgiveth not upon words and lies ; but upon Visible Testimonies of repentance , they are no more Iudges of the heart , then Isaiah when he said , Except ye believe , ye shall not be established : and Paul when he said to the Jaylor ▪ Believe and thou shalt be saved : for without more then lying words of mouth , yea , without true lively faith ; neither could the one be established , nor the other saved . Erastus . When Paul dehorteth the Corinthians to eat things Sacrificed to Idols , in the Idols Temple , because they could not be partakers of the Table of the Lord , and of the Table of Devils ; he bids them not forsake the Supper of the Lord , but only not to go to the Feast of Idols ; because the Supper , and these Tables of Devils are inconsistant ; therefore he saith , I will not have you to have fellowship with Devils ; but he saith not , I will not have you to come to the Supper of the Lord ; nor deth he bid them approve their repentance ●re they come to some ( I know not what ) Presbyters . And in this place he speaketh of an externall Communion , as the purpose and words prove ; because he speaketh of Israel according to the flesh . 3. Because those that eat things Sacrificed to Idols , were perswaded there was no difference between those meats , and other meats . Ans . Erastus his Argument is this , being reduced to form ; is , if Paul say not , 1 Cor. 10. I will not have you come to the Lords Supper ; but only , I will not have you to have fellowship with the Devil in his Table ; then he will have none debarred by the Elders from the Lords Supper : But the latter is true . I deny the Proposition , it is a connexion , that one who taketh on him to refute such a precious and eminent divine as Theod. Beza , may be ashamed of ; and yet his book from head to foot standeth most upon a negative Argument from some particular place of Scripture ; for he speaketh nothing of the power of Elders , to keep the holy things of God pure . What if he should say , Moses in the first of Genesis saith not , I will not have you not to come to the Lords Supper ; Ergo , there is no authoritative debarring of men from the Lords Supper : Such sandy consequences no learned Divines would ever dream of : 2. Beza , nor any of our Divines never dreamed that God in the Old or New Testament said , Nolo vos ad mensam domini ( ad sacramenta ) venire , which are the words of Erastus ; so his conclusion cometh not near the controversie ▪ Iews and Gentiles are invited , and commanded to come to Christ , and so to all the Ordinances and Sacraments , but I hope this will not infer that all should come to the Sacraments hand over head , and whether they be clean or unclean , circumcised or Baptized , or not circumcised , not Baptized . God commanded Aarons sons to serve in the sanctuary , and appear before him in their charge : What , Ergo , it is not Gods will , that they come not to the Sanctuary , and before him unwashed ; and with strange fire , and without their holy garments ▪ this is the very consequence of Erastus : Our question I conceive is , whither all must be admitted promiscuously , and whether even those that come immediatly from the Devils Table , without any preparation known to the Church , should be set at Christs elbow to eat the Lords body and blood ? Erastus saith , Paul never said , Nolo vos ad mensam domini venire ; then because two negatives make one affirmative , Paul must say , I will that all that are partakers of the table of the Devil , come and be partakers of the Lords body : But the conclusion is contradicent to Erastus himself , who faith right down : I judge , that he , vvho vvill but trample the Sacraments , should not be admitted unto them , and to Paul , 1 Cor. 11. 27 , &c. 3. Erastus confoundeth two Questions ; one is , whither all should be admitted to the Lords Supper : ( Erastus saith , every where in his book none are to be debarred ; ) & another by whom are they to be admitted or debarred ? By the civill Magistrates , saith Erastus ; by the Stew●rds and Officers of the house of God , the rest of the Church consenting , say we . 4. The Argument will conclude , that not onely the Church or Magistrate ought to admit those that have fellowship with the Devil to the Table of Christ , but they ought to command them to come , it being Christs will they should be admitted , and that they themselves who are Communicants are obliged , though keeping fellowship with the Devil , to come , and eat their own damnation : for Paul saith , by this reason in the place , 1 Cor. 10. No more ( I will not have the partakers of the Devils table , to come to the Lords table ) nor he saith , ( I will not have the Elders to debar them ) if Erastus say , they should try and examine themselves and come : He flees from the controversie , which is not , whether the worthy , but whether the scandalous and unworthy should come ; Erastus saith , all should come . 5. Whereas Erastus will have the Apostle to speak of the externall Communion of the Elements onely : 1. It is false . 2. Nothing to the purpose , it is false , 1. ver . 16. It is called the Communion of the body and blood of Christ , and that must be more then externall Communion . 2. ver . 17. We many are one body ; this is not an externall body only , for it is the unity of the body of Christ signified by one bread . 3. It is not externall only , but internall and spiritual fellowship with Devils that is condemned , ver . 20. 21. Ergo , It must be internall Communion with Christ in his death that is sealed and commanded . 4. This is meer Socinianisme , to have the Sacraments only memorative signes , as is clear . 2. It is not to a purpose , for if the Church debar only from externall society , from the Church and externall Seals ; this debarring being ratified in Heaven , Matth. 18. It is sufficient for our conclusion . 5. Paul his condemning of eating at the Idols Table , as inconsistent with eating and drinking of the Lords body , he must expresly forbid those who eateth in the Idoll-Temple , to come to the Lords Table , except they repent , and try themselves : Hence it must follow , that if Christ have commanded his Stewards , to dispense the word of promise and threatnings , and comforts , according to the temper of the flock , so must they dispense the Seals , and so by good consequence Paul said ( I will not have the Lord and Satan mingled , nor a partaker of Satans Table admitted to the Lords Table ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Erastus his Arg. 13. 1 Cor. 10. God spared not idolaters and murmurers ; yet they eat , we , and they of the same spirituall meat , and drinke the same spirituall drinke , and so had the same Sacraments ( otherwise the Argument of the Apostle were nothing ; if ours and their Sacraments were not all one ) if then , those that were idolators , fornicators , were admitted to their Sacraments ; then also to ou●● under the New Testament . Ans . Beza answereth well to that . Manna and the water ouf of the Rock , as they had a spirituall Relation to Christ , were holy things and types of Christ , just as our Sacraments are signes of Christ already come in the flesh , and so agreed in the kinde of holy signes with our Sacraments : yet Manna , and the water out of the Rock , were also ordained to be bodily food , for the famishing and thirsty people , good or bad , holy or unholy , these two , Manna and water out of the Rock were given by the Commandment of God and the Priests , to the people , both as Gods people in Covenant with God , and to them , as men starving in the wildernesse , and dying for thirst ; for they had not plowing , earing , harvest , bread , vineyards , wine , fountains in the wildernesse , and therefore no marvell then such holy things being ; also beside that they were holy things , such as were necessary to keep them from starving and bodily death , as the shewbread , which was also a type of the word of life ▪ revealed to the Ministers of God , was given to keep David and his men from starving : No marvell ( I say ) then these bodily helps ( though in another higher signification they were Sacramentalls ) were by Gods command bestowed on many wicked men , who often partake both of outward Ordinances and temporall deliverance from death and famishing , because they are mixt with the people of God. But Erastus , if he would prove any thing against us , should have proved that circumcision , the Passeover , and other holy things of God , ordained for the visible Saints to shew forth our spirituall Communion with Christ , and which were never ordained for necessiry helps to sustain the naturall life , were to be administred to those that were openly prophane and wicked ; and therefore we deny this connexion : Manna signified the very same thing ; to wit , Christ our food of life , which bread and wine signifies ; Ergo , As Manna was given both as a holy signe to figure out Christ our life , and to feed the bodies of openly holy , or openly prophane , to sustain their bodily life , so also baptisme and the Lords Supper , which serve for no bodily use , should be administred to those that are openly prophane . Erastus is put to a poor shift with this solid Answer of that Reverend , Learned , and holy Divine , Theod. Bez● , he saith , Vis dicam quod sentio ? Tui ubique similises : The sea and the cloud , saith he , were not necessary to feed the body . It is true , Erastus the Physician would think the cloud and pillar of fire can neither be Physick for the sick , nor food for the whole , yet Physitians say , Manna is apt for both ; not is the dvided Red-Sea , food or Physick : But good man , he knowes the cloud was their guide and convey by night and day through the wildernesse , and appointed by God to convey the Leapers , the unclean , and all those who were Excommunicated from the holy things , and the Idolators and openly wicked , as well as the clean and the holy , and he knew the s●me that the people had no food but Manna a holy signe , that those who were unclean seven dayes , and often many times longer , were not to starve for hunger , but must eat Manna though a holy , yet their only necessary food then , without which they could not live . But I hope Erastus cannot prove , while they were unclean , or put out of the Camp , or yet extreamly wicked , that they might eat the Passeover which was a meer holy Sacrament , not ordained for the feeding of the body , as Manna and water out of the Rock were . Erastus may know the dividing of the Sea , was necessary to preserve the life of the most wicked and unclean ( God being pleased for his Churches cause , to bestow Temporall deliverances on wicked men , mingled with the godly ) from being drowned with the Egyptians , and that God , who will have mercy , and not sacrifice , may well by a positive Law appoint that holy and unholy , clean and unclean , shall have the use of such holy things , as are not meerly holy , but mixt , being both means of Divine institution , and also necessary Subsidies for mans life , but it followeth not therefore holy things , that are purely holy , should be prostitute to holy and unholy , the clean and unclean . Erastus . God in the Church of the Jews punished wicked men with bodily punishments , not with Exclusion from the Sacraments , and Paul threatneth death and sicknesse , not Excommunication to those that did eat and drink unworthily . Ans . Then putting out of the Campe was no Exclusion from the holy things of God , all the world not onely will cry shame on this Divinity : But they will say , Erastus , his Logick is bad . God punisheth some wicked men with death , and the sword of the Magistrate , and stoning ; Ergo , he appointed no Ecclesiasticall debarring of the unclean from Circumcision : 2. It is false that Paul threatneth death to unworthy Communicants ; only he saith , God ●lew many of them for that sin ; and hence it follows well , the Officers should ▪ hinder the scandalous to rush into such a sin , as is the not discerning the Lords body , which bringeth death and diseases on the actors : What consequence is this ? God punisheth wicked men ; Ergo , the Officers should not rebuke them for those sins , nor the Magistrate or Church punish wicked men : God punisheth ●●ubborn Rebels to parents ; Ergo , the judge should not stone them , the contrary Logick is the arguing of the Spirit of God. Erastus . Every one is to try himself , therefore there is no need of any other to try him , for Paul speaketh of that which is proper to every mans conscience . Ans . It is an unlearned and vain consequence : It is commanded , that every one try if he be in the Faith or no ; for the peace of his conscience , and this is so proper to a man himself , and so personall ▪ that no man can try , or know certainly , whether be in the state of grace , but he himself , 2 Cor. 13. 5. Rev. 2. 17. None can joyn with him in this , as none can joyn with a man to try if he have faith to discern the Lords body , and eat worthily , but will it follow therefore the Pastor should not watch over him to try in another way in a Pastorall way , by his walking , profession , and practicall knowledge , whether he be in Christ or no. The contrary is Heb. 13. 17. They watch for the souls of the people , as they that must give an accompt . And they are so far to try that are Shepherds , that they are obliged in a Pastorall way , to know those of the flock that are diseased , Ezech. 34. 4. Sick , broken , driven away , and lost . And to what end should they try themselves , least they eat damnation to themselves ? Ergo , the Stewards should try the stomacks , that they eat not poyson : If then , the Lords Law bid men beware they be not tempted to Sorcery , Sodomy , Murthers ; and if every man ought to have personall watchfulnesse over his own conscience , that he be not insnared to those sins ; and Achan was to try if his heart was ingaged to the wedge of Gold , and to be wary to meddle with it , but it doth not follow that Magistrates , as Joshua should not try out Sorcerers , Sodomites , and other Achans to punish them . Erastus , 2 Cor. 13. is against this ; a person is to try himselfe : Will it follow when he hath tryed himselfe , that he cannot come to the Lords Supper , except he seem meet to the Elders . And this not our consequence , let Erastus owne it , we care not ▪ In a constitute Church he should , else Erastus provides no way against a Pagan , who hath heard the Word , as he may doe , 1 Cor. 14. 23. may without the Elders and Church sit downe at the Lords Supper , for Erastus provides no stop for him , but only his own pagan Conscience , and so may one by that rule but trample on the Sacrament , his owne Conscience is all his rule , contrary to what he saith himselfe , lib. 3. c. ● . p. 207. Erastus 1 Cor. 11. Paul forbiddeth none to come to the Supper , but upon supposition that they come as the manner is , he biddeth them come worthily , as all are bidden hear the Word , though they ●e forbidden to he are it , as if it were some prophane History ; nor doth the Lord command sinfull coming , for no act commanded of God is evill . Ans . 1. Paul then forbiddeth not Pagans , more to come to the Supper , and Children , then he forbiddeth them to heare the Word , which is absurd ; he commandeth all to heare , but he commandeth not all to come to the Supper , but those onely that can discerne the Lords body , for to heare the Word , though I be not prepared , is simply necessary , if I would be saved ; and to sacrifice , if I would be reconciled ; and to pray , if I would obtaine any blessing : though the manner of doing all these be commanded , that I heare , sacrifice , and pray in faith . But to come to the Supper is not commanded to all , not to Pagans , not to children , not to the unregenerated ; but onely to the regenerated , and to those who discerne the Lords body : and for a child to come to the Lords Supper , or an unrenewed man , is forbidden , not commanded , and no ill act is commanded , and it is a sinne that they come at all : But Erastus will have it lawfull as it is to heare the Word , then doth Christ command Turks and children to come to the Supper , for he commandeth them to heare the Word , and Peter bade Simon Magus pray , Act. 8. 22. but he neither bids give the Supper to him , nor bids he him receive it , but by the contrary , forbids pearles to be cast unto Swine . Erastus Arg. 16. God will not have fewer Christians to be members of the Church now , then of Iewes to be members of the Iewish Church . But God would have all circumcised , even the most flagitious , that were punished by the Magistrate , to be members of the Iewes Church , Ergo , God will have all the baptized to be Members of the Church . Ans . This will prove , that all baptized , even children , should come to the Supper . 2. I deny the Minor , to wit , that all the most wicked remained Members of the visible Iewish Church , jure before God , the wicked Iewes to God , were as Sodom and Gomorrah , Esa . 1. 10. Yea he saith , Amos 9. 7. Are ye not unto me as children of Ethiopians , O children of Israel , saith the Lord ? What they were de facto , and not cast out , was the fault of the Priests , and that the Church does tollerate Iezabels , Wolves , Lions in the flock , and admitteth them to holy things , is their sin . Erastus . But Repentance was not alwaies commanded to those Iewes especially who were unclean , by touching an unclean thing against their will and ignorantly , and the purging of them depended on their owne will , so they observed the Ceremonies of Moses . Ans . That is much for us , if those who were uncleane , against their will , and cast out of the campe , it being a trying Type , that far more those that are wickedly scandalous are to be cast out of the Church . Erastus . The Church is a draw-●et , a field , a marriage Supper , there be good and ill in it , and it was not the sinne of the inviters , who are bidden invite all good and bad , Mat. 22. But the man that came himselfe , without the wedding garment , he is cast into utter darkenesse : Ergo , The Officers are to invite all , and forbid none . Ans . They are to invite all , to all Ordinances , and Seals , even Dogs and Swine , that is false : They are to invite all to some Ordinances ; to heare the Law and Gospel preached , but not the Seales , that were to cast Pearles to Swine . 2. The way of Erastus is , that none are to be debarred , nor to debarre themselves from the Seales , more then from the Word . The Lords forbidding Adam to touch the tree of Life , and his casting of him out of Paradise , and Cains being cast out from the presence of the Lord , to me are rather Types presignifying Excommunication , and that God will have wicked men debarred from holy things , then patternes of Excommunications , and so are they alledged by Beza and our Divines . CHAP. VII . Quest . 3. Whether Erastus doth justly deny that Excommunication was typified in the Old Testament ? VVEe take types of uncleannesse in the Old Testament , to be rightly expounded , when the holy Ghost in the New-Testament doth expound them . Now that Ceremoniall uncleannes did typifie Morall uncleannesse is cleare , 2 Cor. 7. 17. Touch no uncleane thing , and I will receive you , 18. And I will be a Father unto you , and yee shall be my Sonnes and Daughters , saith the Lord Almighty . This is a manifest Exposition of the Ceremoniall holinesse and cleannesse , commanded in the booke of Leviticus , for after the Lord hath given them a number of Lawes , about eschewing of uncleane things , he saith in generall , Lev. 26. 3. If ye walke in my Statutes , and keepe my Commandements , and doe them . 11. I will set my Tabernacle amongst you , and I will be your God , and ye shall be my people . And it is a cleare allusion to Numb . 19. 11. He that toucheth the dead body of any man , shall be unclean seven dayes . 16. He that toucheth one that is slaine with the sword , in the open field , is uncleane . 22. Whatsoever the uncleane person toucheth shall be uncleane : So Paul , Tit. 1. 15. To them that are defiled and unbeleeving , nothing is pure , but even their minde and conscience is defiled . 2. The Prophets expound it so , Ezek. 36. 25. Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you , and yee shall be clean . From all your filthinesse , and all your Idols will I cleanse you . Hath he not a cleare reference to the water of Separation , Num. 19. ? With this water the unclean person , and his clothes were washed , yea , the Tents and the Vessels , ver . 17 , 21. According to which , saith Paul , 2 Cor. 7. 1. Having therefore these promises ( dearly beloved , ) let us cleanse our selves , from all filthinesse of the flesh and spirit : Here a cleare Allusion to Ceremoniall filthines bodily , and of the flesh ▪ and of Tents and Vessels , Heb. 10. 22. To both these washings there is a reference . Let us draw neere , having our hearts sprinkled from an evill conscience , and our bodies washed with pure water . And Heb. 9. 13. If the blood of buls and goates , and the ashes of an heifer ( mingled with running water , Num. 19. 17. which purged vessels that were but capable of Ceremoniall uncleannesse ) sprinkling the unclean , sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh . 14. How much more shall the bloud of Christ , — purge your conscience from dead works ? It is cleare also , that the unclean were separated and the Leper put out of the campe , so as the children of Israel might not touch any thing Ceremonially unclean , and all uncleane persons were put out of the Congregation . Hence the Hypocrites word alluding to that separation , Esa . 64. 5. Stand by thy selfe , come not neere to me ; for I am holier then thou . So was Miriam removed , and leprous King Vzziah out of the Congregation of the Lord. Erastus . We deny that the Ceremoniall uncleannes , signified the wickednes of conversation , so that it can be proved that both these uncleannesses were punished with the same punishment . 1. Because many against their will were polluted legally , as the night pollutions , the diseases monethly of women , when they were necessitated to be with Children , Parents , Wife , brethren when they died ; sometimes they touched unclean things ignorantly , but no man lives wickedly against his will. 2. God could not forbid in every time and place the touching of the dead , onely God commanded the polluted to be purified according to the Law : God vvould have his people neere their dying friends , but God never gave leave to any to live vvickedly . 3. A holy man not sinning in his thought , remaining holy , might be legally unclean , vvithout either his vvill or knovvledge , by touching some uncleane thing , that he knevv not to be unclean . But a vvicked man doth not at one time both doe vvickedly , and remaine pure and holy . Ans . All this is a meere cavilling at the wisedome of God , in making such Ceremoniall lawes , and such punishments against the transgressors of them , as the wise Law-giver of his free-will thought fit , because these Lawes seeme ridiculous . But the foolishnes of God is wiser then men . 1. We say not , that the punishment of legall and morall uncleannesse is all one every way , and alwayes ; it is enough for our purpose that God will have those who are legally uncleane separated from holy things , while they bee purified , and little sinne and guiltinesse seeme to bee in legall uncleannesse , as when bodily Leprosie came on persons against their will , yet when God will have them punished with being removed from the people of God , from the Sanctuary and the holy things , this could not be for it selfe ; for as Paul saith , Doth God take care of Oxen ? So we , doth God hate bodily diseases , which are his owne just actions , not our sinfull doings ? since I say God hateth them not , and putteth not punishment on them for themselves ; therefore it must be to signifie what detestation and punishment the Lord our God , would have his Church to put upon morall wickednesse : So we thinke Erastus might have spared paper and paines , in proving a difference ( which no Divine denieth , ) between Ceremoniall and Morall uncleannesse , and the punishment of the one and of the other , for it can never prove his conclusion . Ergo , Separation for legall uncleannesse , cannot typifie separation for Morall uncleannesse . I could give eight and twenty differences between Isaac and Christ , as Erastus giveth seventeen or eighteen between Legall and Morall uncleannesse , and the punishment of both : But I hope that should never conclude against the Holy Ghost , Heb. 11. 17 , 18 , 19. Gal. 4. 28 , 29 , 30. Rom. 9. 9. that Isaac was not a type of Iesus Christ . 2. Night pollutions are not altogether against our will , they are sinfull pollutions , except concupiscence , and lustfull habituall day lusts , the cause of them , be not sinfull pollutions ; yea , and forbidden in the seventh Commandement . 3. These pollutions Legall caused by invincible ignorance , were types or symbolicall signes of our originall iniquity , and give me leave to doubt , if all actuall touching of things unclean , was no Morall sinfulnesse . I conceive the Iewes , as the Christians also were obliged to walk 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Ephes . 5. 15. and were to take heed to the outer-man , that they should come neere no uncleane thing , in some cases leprosie and other legall uncleannes came on them without either will or knowledge . 4. If the standing beside the dying friends be all one with touching the dead , I remit to the principles of Physicke , and if the touching of any dead be excepted in the Law Ceremoniall , let the learned judge . All the other differences assigned by Erastus I leave , as not concludent against us , they tend all either to blame God , who should punish some legall uncleannes , that is , altogether against the will of man , with any punishment at all , as the three first differences insinuate . Or , 2. that God punished some Legall uncleannes more severely then homicide and Morall uncleannes , as the 5. difference doth insinuate , and the 4. difference . And this is to challenge God , to whom I desire to ascribe a Soveraignty , both in punishing , or pardoning as he thinketh good : Or in punishing more severely , or more mildely these same sinnes , or in punishing greater sins with lighter punishment , and with a heavier rod lighter sinnes . Erastus . Any legally unclean was debarred from the Temple , the difference was onely in the time , but you debarre not all wicked men from the Supper . Ans . The most that were legally unclean , were also morally unclean , in that they willingly transgressed a known Law ; Ergo , Legall uncleannes , was also Morall uncleannes . 2. Though we debar not all wicked men , but onely the scandalous , yet we have in readinesse vengeance against all , and so against latent disobedience , which is a high censure , in debarring hypocrites from heaven ; and we conceive Legall uncleannes as the monthly diseases of women , night pollutions , want of Circumcision did typifie much naturall and originall heart corruption , which cannot be punished by men or the Church ; but it followes not , because Legall uncleannesse signifieth some other uncleannesse then that which is scandalous and censurable by the Church ; Ergo , it signifieth not sinnes scandalous and censurable by the Church . Erastus . He that was legally unclean a long time , or all his life , as a Leper ; was not esteemed as no Iew , or uncircumcised , or a damned man , he was to keepe the Sabbath ; yea , none unclean were excluded from the Sacrament of the generall expiation in the 10. Moneth , Lev. 16. and 23. Yea , every soul under the pain of cutting off , was to afflict his soule that day : then the Lepers were not as Heathen and Publicans and condemned men , yea the Magistrate could not punish a man for Leprosie . Ans . This is a poor argument , because Ceremoniall Excommunication differeth from Christian Excommunication ; Ergo , the former is not a type of the latter , it followeth not . Isaacs blood was never really shed , Christ was really crucified , Isaac was not mocked , spitted on , did not wear a crown of Thornes , Iews and Gentiles crucified him not , between two Theevs . Ergo , Isaac was no figure of Christ offered for our sins , it followeth not . 2. Nor are Lepers no Iews , but in some respect , they might no more come to the Temple . 2. Nor amongst the people of God , nor 3. Eate the Passeover , then Heathens might doe ; and so are the Excommunicated with u● , they are not exempted from faith , repenting , afflicting their soule for the sinnes of the Land , nor are they eternally damned , so they repent . But Erastus hath no ground to say , because the unclean were to afflict their soules , and abstaine from servile worke in the day of atonement , ( as our Excommunicants are not loosed from the duties of the ten Commandements wholly , but from some publike Church duties ) but I see not how it followes ; Ergo , The uncleane were to come to the holy convocation in the day of expiation , and to observe the publike solemnities with Gods people ; One Law of God is not contradicent to another , and the Leper and unclean were separated , Ergo , God could not tie them to be mingled with his people . 3. The Leper was not punished by the Magistrate , for he suffered onely for his Leprosie . But it followeth not that the Magistrate should not punish a person obstinate to the Church . Erastus . When some uncleane persons were debarred from the Tabernacle and sacrifices , many wickedmen were admitted : Ergo. Moses both commanded men , at the same time , to come to the holy things , and not to come . Answ . Moses bade the unclean come , he bade all clean , so they were not scandalously and openly wicked , come ; and some came that were not bidden , but rebuked for their coming , as Ier. 7. 8. 9. Psal . 50. 15. Here is no contradiction . Erastus . There be no figures of things present , but of things to come ; morall uncleannesse was present , at least there be no figures of things that incurre in the senses , as theft and homicide . Ans . Circumcision , the Lords Supper , are signes and Symbols of things present , as of Originall sinne , our present union with Christ , and communion of love amongst our selves , Col. 2. 11. 1 Cor. 10. 16 , 17 , 18. 2. Scandals , as they are spirituall wickednes , incurre not in our senses , yet other wayes they are visible . 3. Christs dying was both tyipfied to Iohn the Apostle , and Mary , and his death incurred in their senses , they saw him die . So was Christ raised from the dead , typified by Ionas in the belly of the Whale , and with their eyes they saw him , after he rose againe . Erastus . Houses , cloaths , trees , stones , were capable of legall uncleannes , men onely of Morall ; Legall uncleannes is a qualitie , wickednes morall is in actions . Ans . I am ashamed and wearied to put in Paper such childish things , all this will not prove that Legall uncleannes is no type of Morall uncleannes ; Isaac was but a man , Moses a man onely ; Ergo , they cannot be Types of Christ who is more then a man ; Bread and Wine are some other thing then Christ , then cannot these be symbols of Christ , and our spirituall communion with him . I see nothing here , but a challenging of Gods wisedome , who hath chosen leprosie bodily , to figure out sinnes spirituall Leprosie . Erastus will say not so , Leprosie is in the category of quality , and sinfull actions in the category of actions . Erastus . Legall uncleannes , signifieth naturall corruption , not scandals . Ans . Yea but Leprosie and other uncleannes legall , was contagious and infectious , and did relate to wicked actions that infect as a canker ; sin originall being common to all ▪ is not that contagious from one to many ; nor did the Lord ever command Separation for sinne Originall , but for transgression of Ceremoniall Lawes he did . Erastus . The Ceremoniall uncleannes does typifie the justification , and washing of a sinner in Christs blood , because no unclean thing can enter in the New Ierusalem , and so the Scripture , Rev. 21. Esa . 4● . Ioel 3. Acts 15. And it shadowes out no such thing as Excommunication out of the Church . Ans . All the arguments that Erastusmade to prove that legall separation and uncleannes , proveth not Excommunication and Morall uncleannes , will with the same force conclude , that Legall uncleannes is not that which excludes men out of heaven , As for instance ; to begin with the last , Legall uncleannesse signifieth sinne originall , not wicked actions , therefore it signifieth not scandals , then by this Legall uncleannes that caused legall separation , is signified mens exclusion out of the high Jerusalem , for onely sinne Originall , not for actuall sins . This type must be a lying type , for actuall sins especially deba●res us out of the New Jerusalem , Rev. 21. 8. c. 22. 15. 1 Cor. 6. 9. 2. Legall uncleannes and corruption of nature , differ as much as legall uncleannes and actuall wickednesse . But Erastus said the former cannot typifie the latter . 1. Because Legall uncleannes is often involuntary , 2. It is not universally forbidden . 3. Many godly men may be legally unclean , but actuall morall wickednesse is not so , even so say I. 1. All naturall or originall uncleannes is voluntary in Adam . 2. Is universally forbidden . 3. It cannot consist with that holines which we must have , or we cannot see God. 3. By Erastus his fourth difference , legall uncleannes was otherwise punished then naturall corruption , for naturall corruption is punished with the first and second death , Ephes . 2. 2. Rom. 5. 15 , 16. the like may be said of all the rest . 4. Numb . 12. 14. Shame was unseparably annexed to Leprosie with contagion , so leavening of others , and shame is annexed to ●oul scandals , and annexed to casting out of the Church , 1 Cor. 5 , 6 , 7. 2 Thes . 3. 14. Gal. 5. 9 , 10. But though a necessity of washing may be holden forth to us in Legall uncleannes , ere we enter into Heaven ; yet not so directly as in legall separation , for in it men scandalous are excluded out of the church , least the uncleane should infect the clean , as is cleare as the light , Num. 19. 22. Hag. 2. 13. Gal. 5. 9. 10. 1 Cor. 5. 6 , 7. but wicked men are not excluded out of the New Ierusalem in heaven , for fear they should infect and defile any person in heaven . 2. Separation from the Church is medicinall , Num. 12. 14. that the party may be humbled and pardoned , 2 Cor. 5 , 6 , 7. that the Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord , 1 Cor. 5. 5. and the man shamed for his further good , 2 Thes . 3. 14. But exclusion of men out of the New Jerusalem for their uncleannes , Rev. 21. is not medicinall , that they may be humbled , but for their everlasting shame and destruction ; and therfore a separation from the Church by way of discipline is here intended , not any exclusion out of heaven . Erastus . All Legall uncleannes is punished with exclusion , but no man for corruption of nature is excluded out of the Church . Ans . We grant all , and therefore legall uncleannes did hold forth actuall scandalousnesse , not naturall corruption . Erastus . The actions of unclean men were punished by death , Ergo , Not by exclusion out of the Church . Ans . The Antecedent is not universally true : Capitall faults , as I said before , were onely thus punished ; the consequence is null . Erastus . He that was legally unclean did defile all beside him , even vessels , places , garments ; but Theeves , adulterers doe not defile , but these that consent to their wickednes ; nor did they defile the places ; The adulterous women brought to the Priest and temple , did not defile the Priest or Temple , Ioh. 8. Nor did Moses and others abstain from the worship , the Manna , &c. because many wicked men did partake thereof , nor were the vessels purified after wicked men touched them ; therefore it followeth not , because God is more offended with the sacrifices of the wicked , then of those that are onely legally uncleane , that therefore wicked men are no lesse to be debarred from the holy things , then those that are legally unclean . Ans . This is to dispute with God ; God made a law , that he who being legally unclean , should touch men or things legally unclean , should pollute ; This Law , God freely made as a positive statute ; who can tye God to make the like Law touching those that are morally uncleane ? no man : now because God made no such Law , it leaveth not off to be the sinne of the Priests , that they brought the uncircumcised in heart to the Sanctuary , as God complaineth , Ezek. 44. 8 , 9. c. 22 , 26. And that the Church should hinder the wicked to pollute the holy things of God. 2. The adulterous woman was brought to the Priest and Temple to be judged , God had so commanded , and therefore no wonder she polluted neither Priest nor Temple , but had shee not polluted the Passeover Morally , though I say not Ceremonially , if she had eaten without Repentance and offering for her sinne ? I thinke she would . Erastus . Though God punish not pollution of holy things , by debarring men from them , it followeth not that he winketh at them , for he punisheth them with death , and more grievously . Ans . But by this that God punisheth the pollution of non-converting Ordinances with death , we gather that the Church should also hinder the pollutions of them , and punish Swine that trample on Pearles , and not prostitute holy things to their lust . Beza said , those that were unclean , had need of Sacrifices , Ergo , They were guilty of sinne . Erastus saith , that externall uncleannes was not sinne , but because it put us in mind of our naturall corruption , that had need to be purged in Christs blood . Ans . The breach of a Law is sin , a Ceremoniall Law is a Law. 2. It was punished often with cutting off from the Congregation , but God did not cut off men from the Congregation for naturall corruption , as Erastus granteth . Erastus . If legall uncleannes were sinne , God would not have commanded it : But God commanded , or at least permitted the Priests and others to pollute themselves with the dead , Levit. 21. Ezek. 44. Ans . It is weakly argued , for the father to kill the sonne , then should be no sinne ; God commanded Abraham to offer up his son Isaac ; it is not properly a defiling , nor a sinne , when God Levit. 21. willeth the Priest to be neer those of his kin when they die , it is Gods owne exception from the Law , though to come neere to others when they are dead be sin . Gods commanding and forbidding will is the formall cause and rule of obedience and sinne . Erastus . Where finde you that the Priests were to judge whether any had repented , that so he might be admitted to the Temple ? Ans . It is written , Ezek. 44. 99. c. 22. 26. the Priests should not have admitted the uncircumcised in heart to the Sanctuary ; Ergo , they should have tryed if they were such ere they admitted them . Yea , if in the very day of his oblation ere he offer , the sinner must first restore what he hath unjustly taken away , Lev. 6. 4 , 5 , 6. Ergo , The Priest except he rule unjustly , should judge whether he have first restored it in the principall , and added the fift part more into it , Levit . 6. 5. As Ezra the Priest stood up , and said unto them , yee have transgressed , and have taken strange wives , — now therefore make confession , and separate your selfe from the people of the Land , and from the strange wives , Ezra , c. 10. v. 11 , 12. And this they did ere they sacrificed ; Ergo , the Priests judged of their repentance , before they were admitted to Sacrifice : and the washing of the hands in Innocency before the person compassed the Altar , Psal . 26. 6. must be tryed by the Priest , if not , the Priest offered to God the Sacrifice of fooles , and did eate the sinnes of the people , in offering for contumacious impenitents . Erastus saith , the putting away of their wives was a civill busines , and belonged to the Magistrate . Ans . Ezra was a Priest , and Shechaniah saith , ver . 5. Arise , this matter belongs to thee , and he is ordinarily called Ezra the Priest . CHAP. 8. Quest . 4. How Erastus acquitteth himselfe , in proving that the place Mat. 18. maketh nothing for Excommunication . ERastus . The scope of the Lord is to teach how great an evill scandall is , and how without offence scandals of vveake may be removed , because vvhen vve referre an injury to the judge , the vveak may be scandalized : he speaketh not here of great injuries to be removed by Excommunication , but of lesser , and private ones betvveen brother and brother , before we bring them before heathen judicatures proper to Heathens and Publicans . Ans . There is no scope of our Saviour to prevent heathen judicatures dreamed of in the Text , nor a shadow thereof , Vel per decimam tertiam consequentiam . 2. He speakes not of small injuries onely . 1. Christ must not be straitned in his words ; he speaks of scandals in generall , ver . 7. Woe to the vvorld , because of offences , they be not light that bringeth a woe upon the world . 2. He saith indefinitè , If thy brother shall trespasse against thee , this is comprehensive of all offences . 3. Hee speakes of such offences , from which I am to gaine my brother . Verse 15. But I am to gaine him from all , great or small . 4. He speaketh of such as I must bring before the Church , in case of my brothers obstinacy ; but that is comprehensive of all , verse 17. 5. He speaketh of such as are bound in heaven , these be great and small , verse 19. 6. He speakes of such as I must forgive , v. 15. but I must forgive all to seventy seven times as Luke 17. 7. He speaketh of such as being persisted in , maketh a brother no brother , but as a Heathen and a Publican , but great and publike Scandals rather doe this , then small and private ones . Erastus . The sense is when thy brother , that is , any Iew , doth thee an injurie , study to reconcile him to thee thy self alone ; if thou speed not so , assay the same before two or three Witnesses : but if neither so thou can free thy self of injurie , tell the Synedrie , that is , tell the Magistrate of thy people , or thy own Religion ; but if he will not heare the Magistrate , then thou mayest without the offence of any , deale against him , as a Publican , and aninjurious Heathen , who will acknowledge onely the Roman judicature , and pursue him there . Ans . If this be the sense , it is farther from the understanding many miles then the words ; a common reader may come after , and finde a more native sense . 1. If thy brother offend thee , &c. should not be restricted to the Iews onely , nor the Gentiles onely , the Disciples , for the most were Gentiles and neerer Christians then Iewes . 2. Brother is as large as the offender , as those of the Church . 3. As large as the offender , to be gained , Paul was to doe what he could to gaine Iewes and Gentiles , and both may offend . 2. Christs scope is not so much to free the Plaintiffe from injuries , ( it is a carnall like glosse ) as to remove Scandals and Stumbling blocks out of the way of both ; and gaine the offenders soule . Observe that the Exposition of Erastus is so wilde , that sense , scriptures , or Greeke Authors cannot dream that ( let him be as a Heathen ) can be in sense all one with this , Pursue him for his injury before the Roman judicatures . But the Exposition we give according to the word in its first notion , doth offer it selfe to the understanding : For , Let him be to thee , as an Heathen , is , let him be counted as one that is without the Church , and not of the people of God , as the word Heathen is t●●en , Levit. 25. 44. 2 King. 17. 8. Psal . 2. 1. Psal . 44. 2. Psal . 46. 6. Jer. 9. 16. Lam. 1. 3. Ezek. 20. 23. Lam. 1. 10. Act. 4. 27. Cor. 5. 1. Eph. 2. 11. 1 Thes . 4. 5. 1 Pet. 2. 12. Rev. 11. 12. 3. It will be long , ere Scripture make a parallell to this ; Tell the Church , that is , Tell the King , tell the civill judge , that is , tell not the Church ; For the Church dealeth with spirituall Armour ( and the King is not the Church ) 2. with no force or violence , but the word and discipline ; 3. with the mans conscience , to gain the man to repentance , for so all Christs three steps is to save the soul and to gain him to repentance . Erastus layes a good Iron club over the offenders shoulders , and brings the offender to a Civilian , to whom Christ never committed the Gospel : What ? shall the justice of peace , preach Christ to the offender , and wield the rod of Christs power out of Zion to him ? Is there no way but that to gain a soul ? 2. He brings him to one who hath no weapon , to a Magistrate , but a weapon of steel , the sharp sword ; or 3. will this Magistrate not labour to gain him , which clearly is Christs intent ( O he is greedy in his stairs to have the lost gained , as is ver . 11. 12. ) then Christ misseth his end . But whether the man repent or no ( saith Erastus ) the Magistrate as such , must cudgell the offender . 4. It is admirable that ( Let him be to thee as a publican and a Heathen ) must be a new Judicature , and this is to drive him to Cesars Tribunall ; a strange glosse : but 1. This will loose him out of hand ; will Nero and the Heathen judge , Preach him back a submissive Lamb to the Iews ? But. 2. How do you this Citrà offensionem , without scandalizing ? Paul cannot advise what Erastus doth ; he thinks Christians should rather suffer injuries , then to implead a brother before a Heathen judge , 1 Cor. 6. Yea , but ere you suffer so ( saith Erastus ) cause him to compear , and answer the highest Heathen judge on earth , to teach him better manners : This is a vindictive-like way : 2. Scandalous heathens will say , See how these Disciples of Jesus agree : 3. It s the highest rupture of love , 1 Cor. 6. Erastus . By my exposition , I do not , as Beza saith , take away a brotherly pardoning of all injuries , for though Christ teach us how to compose and remove only private iniuries piously , and without the scandalizing of the vveak , it followeth not therefore Christ teacheth that only private injuries are to be pardoned , doth Christ teach no other thing ? I never thought that only light injuries are to 〈◊〉 pardoned : when either we chide him , or he vvillingly acknovvledge his fault , vve are to pardon him , for if vve must bring a small injury to the Church , far more must vve bring a greater injury . Ans . 1. Christ would so many injuries to be pardoned , as is comprehended in this generall ( If thy brother trespasse against thee , rebuke him ) but this comprehendeth great injuries , and all injurie● : It being as Erastus saith , parallel to Lev. 19. 18. Thou shalt not suffer sin in thy Brother . What ? must we not suffer a small sin in our Brother , because that were to hate him in our heart ? But we may suffer great sins in him , and not rebuke him ; yet that should not be hatred of our Brother . 2. Christ is not only teaching how to remove scandals ; but how to remove them by gaining our Brother , even by telling the Church ; If need be , that they may labour to gain him also , if one brother , and if one with two or three witnesses cannot gain him to repentance ; and so he would have all injuries pardoned , out of which we are to gain our brother . 3. It is too narrow a compasse , to which Erastus draweth Christ in his words , only to remove the scandall without offending the weak , to labour to remove only petty scandals and not great ; yea , and publick to our whole Church : 4. Erastus seemeth to imagine , if we draw our brother before the Church , that is , the Civill Magistrate , we do not then forgive him , it being now a great injury , but he is deceived , we are to forgive our brother , and to pray for his forgivenesse ; even when we make the offence publick , and when he repenteth not , as Christ did forgive as man , those that Crucified him , though they did not repent , 1 Pet. 2. 21 , 22 , 23. Luk. 24. 35 , 36 , 5. Erastus cannot deny but great injuries should be brought before the Magistrate , and a little injury , when an offender refuseth to obey the Christian Magistrate , must be a great injury , which maketh the man , as a heathen and a publican ; What is before answered , I shall not need to trouble the Reader withall to repeat . Erastus . The reason , vvhy Christ speaketh here of the transaction of private iniuries , is because he speaketh alvvaies in the singular numher , if thy brother offend thee , rebuke him betvveen him and thee alone , take tvvo other , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , tell thou the Church , Let him be to thee , as a Publican ; he that is Excommunicated , is not Excommunicated to one only , but to all the Church . Ans . This shall make the whole ten Commandments , Exod. 20 and the whole Gospel and the profession of it , Rom. 10. 9. which are all spoken to one in the singular number , often in the second person to command private vertues , and forbid private sins only , and not to be Laws obliging the Church in publick duties , and to eschew publick sins . Erastus Answereth , Let him be to thee vvho art injured , and to all that are injured , as a Publican , not to the vvhole Church , for there be some lawes that agree privatly to the Magistrate , and to none other , some to Parents , not to children , to Masters , not servants , so neither is this precept to all Christians as the Decalogue is , and such like , but only to those that are privately hurt ; he saith not , rebuke every brother thou meetest with , but the brother that sins against thee . Christ speaketh not in the third person , nor to the Church , for the Disciples were not the Synedrie , or that Church . Ans . 1. It s most false , that all the precepts of the Decalogue are all of them spoken to all and every man : Honour thy Father and mother that begat thee , is one of the Commandments ; and it is not spoken to those that are onely Parents themselves , and have their naturall parents dead : but doth it follow that that Command doth injoyne private obedience , and forbid onely private , not publick disobedience to naturall Parents : So the sixth Command saith , If thy brother fall in a Lyons den to the hazard of his life , pull him out ; if thou cannot rescue him thy self alone , take three with thee and assay it ; if thou cannot so rescue him , tell it to twenty : The man is not to rescue every brother here , but onely the brother that is in danger to be devoured with the Lyon : will any say the Law of the sixth Commandment is given here , to one private man to help another in a private danger ? This ( rebuke thy brother ) is the Law of nature , and it is under this , Levit. 19. 17. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart : And if I rebuke him not for sinne , any sinne , and the most publick , and so most offensive and scandalous to many ; I hate him ; nay , I am not so much to rebuke him and gain his soul , because the sin is an injury done to me , as because it is done against the Majesty of God , and destructive to the offenders soule , and I must labour to gaine his soule . 2. Erastus dreames that that is a private sin , which is done to one man , or one ranke of men ; to a Magistrate , not a subject ; he is beguiled , an offence and publick stumbling-block may be laid before one man , and it is often a publick sin . 3. The speaking of it in the second person is nothing , for , If thou beleeve thou art saved , Rom. 10. 9. is as publike and universall , as Iohn 3. 16. Whosoever beleeveth he is saved . The second person in all precepts of Law and Gospel ( and this , rebuke an offending brother , is both , ) is as broad as the third person , and as large in extent , except you say the verse Iohn 3. 16. comprehendeth some more beleevers that are saved , then Rom. 10. 9. which is against sense . 4. Christ ought not to have spoken to his Disciples as a Church , because he is directing them as members and parts of a Church , how to deale with an offender : but if he heare not the Church , that is , the Christian Magistrate , he should die , saith Beza . Erastus answereth , But the Church or Iewish Synedrie had not power of life and death now they were under the Roman Empire . Ans . Christ here then sheweth not a way to remove Scandals , because the Roman Emperors sword is not Christs Spirituall way , 2 Cor. 10. The weapons of our warfare are not carnall , but mighty through God. Erastus . By this same place , I cannot prove there is such a thing as Excommunication , what is said to one is said to the whole Church ; but it is said to one , that he should forgive an offending brother , seventy seven times in one day , if he acknowledge his fault ; Ergo , there can be no just cause vvhy the vvhole Church should not doe ▪ that vvhich every member is obliged to doe , but your Presbyters vvill punish though any one should confesse his fault . Ans . There is a twofold forgiving , one private , in passing the private revenge of the fault and grudge against the person of the offender : thus the whole argument is granted , for Members and Church both are to pray , Forgive us our sinnes , as vve forgive them that sin against us : I hope the Synedrie , the Roman President , the Magistrate , thus are obliged to forgive those whose heads they justly take from them , so Luke 17. We are to forgive our brother seventy seven times a day , though he neither repent nor crave pardon , but far more , if he crave pardon . But by this Argument the Christian Magistrate should use the sword against no bloody Parracide , for he is thus to forgive him , and much more , if he say he repenteth . 2. To forgive , is to remit all punishment , and so what is said to one Member of the Church , is not said to the whole Church . Private men have not power of Church-punishment to forgive it . The Church hath a power limited by Christ , that is to forgive and open heaven , in so farre as they see Christ goe before , and see the man penitent , and therefore Erastus his consequence is short , it followes not , that the Church should no more excommunicate then one Member . Erastus looks farre beside the booke , in that he thinkes it is all one to forgive an injury , and to remove a scandall in the way of Christ in labouring to gaine a brother . I may forgive one that offendeth me , and not labour at all to gaine his soul . Erastus . We cannot expound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against thee , against the Church , because he saith after , tell the Church , then the sense should be , O Church tell the Church . Ans . It is not denyed by us , but that the Scandall in the rise may be private , but Erastus will have our Saviour to speake onely of private Scandals . 2. If one Church shall offend another , the offended may admonish , and if the Church be not gained , the offended Church is to tell more Churches Synodically conveened , as may be gathered from Christs Scope , to remove all Scandals between brother and brother , Church and Church . Erastus . Tell him between thee and him , if it be told me conscio , I onely knowing , then he hath sinned against me privately ; should I not reprove him before others , if he have sinned against others ? but Christ will not have me to take any Witnesses at the first . Ans . 1. I may tell him between me and him , a publike fault : this proveth onely my admonition to be private , when the fault is known to twenty and scandalizeth them , and it proveth not the fault to to be private . But you will say , then I must take these twenty who are offended , no lesse then I am to goe my selfe . I answer , not so ; For 1. I may be ignorant that any knowes it , and I am not to uncover what God hath covered , except it were a sin that bringeth wrath on the whole Land , as blood , and the Canaanites sinnes . 2. Though I should know twenty were offended , charity will bid me try , if I onely can gaine him , and then love maketh the worke easier to twenty . Erastus . But Matthew and Luke compared together , doe teach that Christ speaketh of such sinnes , as one Brother may pardon another seventy seven times ; and the question of Peter to Christ , how oft shall my brother offend , and I forgive him ? saith that Christ speaketh not of the sinnes , that the Church onely can forgive , for Peter knew well , that he his alone could not forgive these sins , which onely the Church and a multitude can pardon . Ans . Though it be true , Matthew and Luke c. 17. speake both of scandals and scandalous sins in generall , yet it is evident they speak of two sorts of scandalls ; Luke speaketh v. 3. of scandals between brother and brother , which may at first be taken away by rebukes ; but he hath nothing of the Churches part touching these . But Matthew hath it at length , chap. 18. ver . 15 , 16. 17 , 18. 19. 20. The Luke 17. 4. and Matthew more distinctly , chap. 18. ver . 21. upon the occasion of Peters question , resolveth a case of conscience ; how Christians are to passe by in love the faults one of another , even to seventy times seven ; they are not scandals of one and the same nature , as Erastus conceiveth : The former is , how we may gain an offending brother from the guilt of active scandall in giving offence to us , and that is by free rebuking ; and if that gain him not , then by taking witnesses and rebuking him ; and if neither that can do it , by telling the Church , to which Christ hath given a more powerfull way , to binde and loose in earth and heaven , saith Matthew : Luke speaketh onely of simple rebuking , which tendeth to the other two . The latter way , is how we our selves may be freed from passive scandall , if our brother provoke us seven times , or seventy seven times a day : this must be by a private pardoning , and laying aside all grudge , or hints of revenge toward our brother , and this is a great mistake in Erastus , that he confoundeth those two scandals , which by two Evangelists are distinguished , for Peter upon occasion of the former Church-scandals , proposeth the second , Mat. 18 21. then came Peter to him , and said , Lord , how often shall my brother sin against me , and I forgive him ? Peter asketh nothing of gaining the offender , and Christ answereth nothing of gaining him , having satisfied them fully in that before : But Peter came in with a new question , concerning private forgiving . 2. It is evident in the former , that Christ speaks not of sins , that one brother may forgive another ; for then it were free to the offended , after two admonitions ineffectuall to gain the offender , to forgive and desist , as he doth in the matter of forgiving : But it is not free to him to desist ; if the offender refuse to be gained , and adde contumacy ; the offended cannot pardon the punishment ( he ought to remit the private grudge ) he is under a command of Christ to tell the Church , that is one punishment , and if he yet be obstinate , he is to be reputed as a Heathen and a Publican , that is another punishment , which a private man cannot dispense with : 1. He cannot dispense with Christs command . 2. He cannot omit all Lawfull means of gaining the soul of his brother ; for the Law of nature tyeth him to it . Erastus will have it a matter of holding off of an injury , only by complaining to the Roman Emperour , a carnall way . Christ is on a higher and more spirituall strain to gain a soul , as is clear , If he hear thee , thou hast gained thy brother , rest there : But if he hear thee not , go yet on to gain him : Take with thee two or three , then if he had been gained at first , a second admonition before two or three were needlesse . But if yet he be not gained , then go yet on , to seek the gaining of his soul ; and tell the Church , and if the Church cannot gain him : then let him be as a Publican , and cast out : This is also a way of gaining , that his spirit may be saved , 1 Cor. 5. Therefore this is most false , that Christ speaketh of those sins which we may forgive : Who can believe that it is credible that our Saviour hath a more noble end , and more excellent then to gain a brothers soule ? or that he doth teach us in these words to discend from such a spirituall end , as the repentance of an offender , to a far baser end , to hold off injuries by fleeing to a heathen Iudicature ? Erastus . Christ speaks of such sins , as the offender cannot deny before witnesses . But sins to be punished by Excommunication , so hainous , as deserveth to be delivered to Satan , he would deny ; Ergo , he must speak of smaller sins . Ans . This is for us , he speaketh of such sins that the offender will persist in , against the Authority of witnesses , Synedrie , or Church and Magistrates , as Erastus thinketh while he be as a Profane Heathen ; Ergo , he may deny them : 2. If we suppose three faithfull witnesses , who have seen and heard , such as will testifie the sin before the Church , it is like to be a grievous and publick trespasse . Nor would Christ have the Magistrate troubled , and the Church offended for such sins as may fall out , in a brother , seven times ; yea , seventy seven times in one day , and may be , by private transactions pardoned , as Erastus saith : How should Erastus his civill throne , sink under threescore and ten scandalls in one day ? Erastus . The Church punisheth not the man for such sins , but dismisseth him as an injurious person . Ans . True , if we believe Erastus begging the question . 2. To declare a brother , no brother , but a prophane Heathen , without Christ in the world , nad out of the Covenant of Grace , must be the highest Church-censure , & must be more highly punished then so . Erastus . I call them light faults only compared with crimes punished by the Law. Ans . Such as contumaciously defended , makes a man none of Christs , but the prophanest living ; yea , of a believing Jew , an Apostate , and a Heathen , deserveth to be punished by the judge . Erastus . If the offended be willinger to suffer the injury then to compeer before a heathen judge , he may . Ans . There be no smell of an Heathen , or Roman Judge in the Text , Id Erastus adjecit de suo . 2. It is not free to gain , or not gain , my brothers soul , or obey Christs command , or not obey it . Paul , 1 Cor. 6. forbiddeth us to implead our brethren before Heathen Judges ; Erastus saith , Christ commandeth the contrary : Erastus answers , Paul saith in these that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in smaller matters , as of goods we should not . Ans . It s true , Paul giveth instance , in those that he calleth things of this life , but in opposition to the great matter of Judging the world and Angels : 2. Paul saith generally ; Ye go to law one vvith another , 1 Cor. 6. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. And he esteemeth it such a fault , that he saith of it , v. 9. Knovv ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God. Erastus . Paul himself appealed to a heathen judge Cesar . Ans . True , but not for small offences falling out seventy seven times a day , for which the Magistrate will not punish , such as these offences be , saith Erastus , pag. 181. pag. 28. Thes . 42. But being accused of a high crime of life and death . 2. He appealed not from a godly Magistracy , such as the Syned●y holdeth forth , but from bloody judges : 3. In matters not with Saints , as 1 Cor. 6. And brethren to whom you are to grant pardons , seven , and seventy seven times a day , but with Blasphemers , and Murtherers of Christ , Act. 18. 6. 1 Thes . 2. 15. Erastus . Christ teacheth how private iniuries may be removed , vvithout offence by the Magistrate , but not hovv vve may reduce to repentance a brother that giveth scandall . Ans . There 's not a footstep of injuries , or Magistrate , or sword in the Text : 2. ver . 7. And all along he speaketh of scandalls that may hinder our entring to heaven , and these words ; rebuke him , Thou hast gained thy brother , are clear as the Sun , that he intendeth the offended , in all these steps , is to gain the soul of the offender . Erastus . This is no Argument at all , he speaketh of gaining an offending brother : Ergo , His scope is not to repair any civill losse : But I pray you , a brother argueth an iniurious man , and convinceth him of his error ; hath he not first gained him to God , and then to himself , vvhile he maketh him of his enemy his friend ? can there be a better way of compounding private iniuries ? if his conscience be healed , will he not leave off to be iniurious ? Ans . I may say , as he saith to that Apostolick servant of God , holy Beza , Egregia vero ratiocinatio : The question is now touching the scope of Christ , Matth. 18. Erastus proveth repairing of civill injuries to be Christs scope , and how proveth he it ? Because he that is gained to God by repentance , is a made friend , and vvill leave off to do civill vvrongs : Iust as if one should say , the scope of the holy Ghost , in the history of the Creation , in the two first chapters of Genesis , is to make the Reader a good Philosopher : Why ? because he that understandeth the works of Creation , the Heaven , Stars , Sun , Moon , Seas , dry Land , Trees , Herbs , &c. Must not this man be an excellent Astronomer , Geographer , Physiloge , & c ? So may he say , the scope of the holy Ghost , in the ten Commandments , is to make a man an excellent Citizen of London , or Paris , Why ? how is that the scope of the ten Commandments ? by Erastus his Argument , What better way can there be to make a good sociall Civilian , then if he be well versed in the Doctrine of the ten Commandments ? so may I say , the scope of Paul in the first eleven Chapters of the Epistle to the Romanes , is to make a man love his brother , why ? Because if he know God , and free justification by faith in Christ , and our freedom from the Law , and the Doctrine of Election by Free-grace , and the like , he cannot but love his brother ▪ Now how can that be Christs scope , which is neither spoken In terminis ? Nor so much as insinuated ? Now to gain an offending brother is In terminis spoken , ver . 15. Thou hast gained thy brother : so Erastus granteth this is Christs scope , but not his last scope ; and gaining of his soul he will have , but a scope for a civil end to hold off injuries : How carnall is the glos●e of Erastus ? Now the scope of Erastus is never spoken , never hinted at : Erastus cannot deny our scope , onely he will not have it the chief scope of the words ; the best ground he hath for his scope is that , Tell the Church , is , Tell the Civill Magistrate . Erastus to put a good face on the businesse , saith , scanning on the sense of the words , Christ therefore saith rebuke him , Matth. 18. That we may understand , that he is to be convinced of his error , and iniquity , that he may acknowledge it not onely to us , and before men , but far more to God , and so thou hast gained thy brother , and lost him , if he refuse to hear thee , that is , If he suffer not himself to be convinced , and do not acknowledge his fault , he is bound in Heaven , and this is that which I would say , this gaining of him is the pardoning ( of a civill wrong ) that he may be received in friendship . Ans . If Christs inten●ion be , that he may rather acknowledge his fault to God then to the offender , as Erastus granteth , then Christs scope in these words , must be his spirituall gaining to God , not a civil depulsion of a civill wrong , but the former ▪ Erastus granteth : 2. If spirituall gaining be intended in all the steps of our Saviours progresse , and when this is obtained , the progresse doth cease ; then means rather crossing and thwarting that scope , then suitable spiritually thereunto , are not to be attempted : then is not civill depulsion of injuries our Saviours scope in the words , but the former is true ; Ergo , So is the latter ; the Proposition is evident , from the nature of a scope , and end in any speech . I prove the Assumption by parts . 1. If rebuking of an offending brother , gain him to repentance , then it is clear the offended man is to rest there , and not to Tell the Church or Magistrate , for he hath obtained even the end , for which Erastus contendeth , and who goeth about new means to compasse an end already obtained ? Christ would never command that ; yea , when Christ saith , ver . 16. If he hear not thee , then take with thee one or two more ; Ergo , If he had heard him , he was not to take one or two more , and ver . 17. If he should neglect to hear them , he ▪ was to tell the Church : Ergo , If he should hear them , he was gained , and was not to tell the Church ; Ergo , spirituall gaining must be Christs scope . 2. If to tell the Church , be as Erastus dreameth , to tell the Civill Magistrate , and then the Roman Emperour ; this was no suitable mean to gain the mans soul ; a club was never dreamed of by our Saviour to compasse the spirituall end , or neerest scope of gaining any to repentance ; for the end of the Magistrate , as a Magistrate , is to bring no man to repentance , but to take avvay evil out of the land , to cause Israel fear , and do so no more , to be an avenger of evil doing , far lesse is there any shadow of reason to dream that Christ intended by Cesars , or any Heathen Magistrates sword , to gain an offending brother to repentance , and that he commandeth the offended brother to use such a carnal mean so unsuitable to such a spirituall end . Lastly , How a private brother cannot be said to binde and loose , I have cleared already . Erastus . Least these words ( Let him be to thee as an Heathen ) should seem to make the offender every way as an Heathen ; therefore he addeth a restrictive word , ( and a Publican ) and he addeth the article ● common to them both , so as he speaketh not of every Heathen and Publican , but of those who were conversant amongst the Jews , and none of those would answer to any Judge , but the Roman Emperour or his deputies , being the servants of the Romans , to vex the people of the Jews . Ans . Here is a groundlesse conjecture , for a Publican was large as odious as a Heathen , being a companion to sinners , and the worst of the Heathen . 2. How proveth he that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that Heathen is meant of those Heathen only , that were servants to the Romans , and would acknowledge no Iudge but Cesar . 1. The Iews themselves said , We have no King but Cesar : 2. The holy Ghost doth not restrict the Heathen so ; What warrant hath Erastus to be narrower in his glosse then the holy Ghost is in the Text. If in these , ( Let him be as an Heathen ) the threatning be perpetuall , to remove all scandals , to the end of the world ; when most of the Heathen shall not acknowledge the Iudicatures of Heathen Rome , then the word Heathen must be as large as all Heathen , all wicked and all scandalous men , such as Publicans , and so there is no hint at the Heathen Romish Iudge here , which is the way of Erastus . But the former is true ; or this Law of Christ is to remove scandals amongst the Disciples when the Roman Empire shall fall as the Lord in his word hath prophecied . The Scripture speaks not so , Mat. 6. 7. Vse no vain repitition in prayer . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Here is the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : Can Erastus say none use babling prayers but such heathen as were subject to the Roman Empire ? Gal. 2. 9. That we should goe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to the Heathen , here is an Article also ; belike Paul should preach to no Gentiles but those under the Roman Empire : A frothie dream , Gal. 3. 8. The Scripture foreseeing God would justifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Gentiles . Here also an Article ; belike then no Gentiles are justified by faith , but these that are Officers to the Romans , and vexed the Iewes , Act. 18. 6. Henceforth I will goe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to the Gentiles , Act. 21. 19. Paul told what things the Lord had done by his Ministery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , amongst the Heathen , Act. 26. 23. that Christ should shew light to the people , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and to the Heathen , not the Romish heathen onely , except Christ be a Saviour to no other Heathen in the world : I need not weary the Reader to resute these unsolid conjectures of Erastus . Erastus . Converted Publicans were not scandalous , as touching their office ; Ergo , A publican signifieth not one that is none of the Church ; Zachens after his conversion remained a Publican . Ans . Converted Publicans left not off to be Publicans , but they left off to be such as went under the name of Publicans ; that is , abominable Extortioners and grinders of the Poore : and therefore it followes well , that to be as a Publican in the common speech of the Iewes familiar to our Saviour , was to be a wretched godlesse prophane man , without the Church , and without God and Christ in the world , as also the Heathen were , Eph. 2. 11 , 12. 1 Cor. 5. 1. 1 Pet. 4. 3 , 4. Acts 21. 11. Rom. 2. 24 blasphemers of the Name of God , and 1 Cor. 12. 2. Yee know that yee were Gentiles carried away with dumbe Idols , Eph. 4. 17. That ye walke not as other Gentiles , in the vanity of their minde . 18. Having the understanding darkned , being strangers from the life of God : These and many other Scriptures confirmeth me much , that in Christs time to be as a Heathen and a Publican , was to be cast out , whereas the man was once a brother , a beleever , and a member of the Church , and in profession in the covenant of God , and a brother to Peter , Iohn and the Lords Disciples , and a Christian and professing Saint , as the disciples of Christ were ; but now one who is turned out of that society , and as a Gentile serving Satan , walking in the vanity of the minde , as an uncircumcised man , &c. This is as like Excommunication , as one egge is like another , we have cleare Scripture for this Exposition , but it is good Erastus never gave us one syllable of Scripture for his exposition ▪ Nor can it be shewen that to be as a Heathen and a Publican by Scripture , or any that ever spoke Greeke , is to be in subjection to the Roman Empire , or lyable to their lawes , onely we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Erastus for it . Erastus . Who ever by no law of God or command was execrable , and could for no just cause be hated , by no Law of God could bee debarred from the Temple and holy things of God. But such were the Publicans ; Ergo , Ans . 1. The Major is false . The Leper because a Leper was by no Law of God cursed , and execrable , nor was he worthy of hatred , but of pitty ; yet was he by an expresse Law debarred from the Temple and holy things of God. 2. The Minor is false in the sense we contend for , the office of a Publican in abstracto was not execrable , nor worthy of hatred : but the thing signified , and that which proverbially went under the name of a Publican amongst the Iewes , to wit , a professed extortioner , a robber , a grinder of the face of the poore , is both execrable and hatefull : the conclusion in the former sense is granted , and it is nothing against us : But in the latter sense , the Assumption being false , the conclusion followeth not ; not to say that in ordinary , none was a Publican , but he that was either an heathen , and so execrable , or then an Apostate wretched leud Iew. Erastus . But I have demonstrated that no man was debarred from holy things for Morall uncleannesse , then neither should a Publican be counted a separated man , will Christ command him to be cast out whom the Iewes could by no Law cast out ? Ans . If we give the matter to Erastus his word , all he sayes are demonstrations : Let the reader read and judge . 2. All his argument here proceedeth on a false ground , while he contendeth so much to justifie Publicans he presumeth ( to be as a Publican ) to ●e in our sense all one with this , ( to be excommunicated . ) But 1. we lay the least weight on the word ( Publican ) and more on this , ( to be as an heathen . ) 2. We take them not divisively , but as Christ speaketh them , copulatively . We say , not to be excommunicated , is all one , as , let him be as a Publican , but that to be excommunicated , is to be as an Heathen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and as a Publican . Erastus . The article ● is set before both the word ( Heathen ) and the word ( Publican ) by the holy Spirit , which signifies either the very nature of the predicate ( heathen and Publican ) or must put a great Emphasis , and a great edge of difference between the Heathen and Publican here , and in other places , as these be not one , Petrus est , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , et Petrus est , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( Peter is a man , ) and Peter is the man , or that man. ) So when we say , pleasure is that good thing , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that chiefe happinesse ; We say more then when we say pleasure is good , so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Publican must signifie a Publican , as a Publican , if there be an Emphasis here common to both the heathen and the Publican , now there can be no other thing in the matter of eschewing Scandals common to both , but that both acknowledged no other but the Roman Magistrate , and therefore , except you make ( to be a Publican , ) & ( to be debarred from the Sacraments ) all one ; you have not another place in all the New Testament for your Excommunication , for no Publican because a Publican , was debarred by Gods Law , Jure divino , from the Sacraments . Ans . 2. All the wits on earth cannot make us see another place for Erastus his explication of this place Matth. 18. and of 1 Cor. 5. But we hope it shall appeare we have more from Scripture , to say for Excommunication then this one place , or then Erastus and all his party can say against it ; here is all that Erastus can say against this strong place , builded upon one Article ● ; a poore and ignorant Grammattication . 1. He culleth out the word ( Publican ) of lesse weight with us , from the word ( Heathen ) and would prove that no Publican because a Publican , and for the office , was debarred from the Iewish Sacraments , which we grant ; for no office or place lawfull in it selfe , debarred any from ▪ Christ ; Centurions were hatefull to the Iewes , and put over them by the Romans , yet I should conceive the Centurion , whose servant Christ cured , Luke 7. was a Proselite , and a member of the Iewish Church , a lover of the Nation , else I see not how the Iewes would have accepted that he should build them a Synagogue , as he did v 5. and Publicans might have bin Proseli●es also , but that which was signified by a Publican to the Iews , was no lesse odious then the name of a hangman or a most wicked and flagitio●s man , as Matth. 5. 45 , 46 , 47. and by Christ decourted from the number of the children of our heavenly Father : Amongst the Iews it was counted abomination to eat with Publicans , Matth. 9. 11. Matth. 11. 19. Luk. 7. 34. And when Christ saith , Matth. 21. 31. of the Rebellious Iews ; Verely , I say unto you , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the publicans and harlots shall enter into the Kingdom of God before you : He clearly maketh Publicans the wickedst of men ▪ shall these two , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make us think Erastus were not dreaming , if he should from these words gather that Christ , meaneth only of such Publicans and Harlots as acknowledged no other Magistrate , but the Roman Magistrate ? And the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is doubled in the following verse also . 2. Let us retort this Argument , he that heareth not the admonitions of brethren in secret , and of the Church in publick , is to be reputed , not as a Iew , or a brother and member of the Church having right to the holy things of God , but as a Heathen . Now a Heathen to the Iews was no brother , and had no right to the Sacraments , either of the Iewish , or Christian Church , as is clear by the word of God , therfore he that heareth not a brother in secret , or the Church in publick , is to be reputed as no brother ( I mean in that publick visible way he once was ) but as a Heathen , who hath no right , Iure divino , by Gods Law to the Sacraments . 3. What means all this trifling about the Article : ? Say that the Article ; should restrict Heathens and Publicans , to such and such Heathens and Publicans : I shall deny , In eternum , this consequence , Ergo , He means no other but only such Heathens and Publicans , as did acknowledge no other Magistrate , but a Roman Magistrate . There is no shadow in the Scripture , or any Greek author for the Word , but rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth the qualitie and spirituall condition of any , especially when Christ speaketh of gaining of souls , as here , Mat. 18. 15. so I am sure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth Ioh. 1. 14. Ma● . 6 ●0 . 1 Pet. 1. 19. so doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie Mat. 6. 5. and elsewhere , enough I deny not but it may signifie a civill or naturall si●●●●tude , but Christ doth here speake of neither , as is cleare . 4. If here a Publican as a Publican be meant , as Erastus saith ; Ergo , All Heathens and all Publicans are here to be understood ; Ergo , Not these only that had this common to them both , to wit , that they both acknowledged no civill Magistrate but the Romans , the contrary of which Erastus asserteth . 5. Yea , this is not emphatick and discretive of Heathen and Publican , Christ acknowledged no civill Iudge as King over the Iewes at this time but onely Cesar , when he said Mat. 22. Give unto Cesar , the things that are Cesars , and to God the things that are Gods. And the Iewes themselves did so when they said , We have no King but Cesar ; If then to be as an Heathen and a Publican , bee all one as to acknowledge no King , nor judge but Cesar , then to be as a Heathen and Publican , must be all one with this , to be as Christ and the Iewes , for this was common to Heathens , Publicans , Iewes and Christ , to acknowledge Cesar was their onely King and civill Judge . 6. They were the worst of the Heathens and Publicans , who in a peculiar manner acknowledged no lawfull Iudge but Cesar , and hated the Iewes , the onely Church of God most at this time ; Ergo , If the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inferre that a disobedient brother is most like these Heathen , they must be greatest enemies to the Iewes , and so remotest from Circumcision , and all right to the holy things of God , being the worst of the Heathen , and so Erastus hath gained nothing , but lost much by his poore Grammattication . Yea , if the offended brother should repute the offender as the worst of the Heathen , he is to esteeme him who was once a Member of the Church , in that he was obliged to heare the Church , now as a Heathen , and so no brother , no Member of the Church , and here Erastus must grant that one brother may un-church and Excommunicate any other for disobedience to the Church , but the Church may not . Erastus . They are as absurd who say , by Publicans here are understood wicked men , for then by Heathen must be understood also the wickedest of the Heathen , and not all the Heathen dwelling in Judea . Ans . I deny the consequence , for by Publicans are meant men wicked and unpure by conversation , and by Heathen men unclean by condition , because without the Church , and strangers to the Israel of God , and without Christ and God in the world . 2. We have proved what is meant by a Publican , by evident Scriptures , but that by a Publican is understood one who acknowledged no Magistrate , but a Roman , no Scripture ; no Greeke Author warranteth us to thinke it , never man dreamed it , but Erastus . Erastus . The Pharises hindred not Christ and his Apostles to come to the Temple . Ans . Christ was a born Jew and circumcised ; yea , and what can the Practise of the Murtherers of Christ prove ? It is no Law. But the Romans never sacrificed in the Temple , but gave Liberty to the Iews to serve God , according to his word , and to hear Christ preach , and that Christ kept the Ceremoniall Law , and taught others , even the cleansed Leapers so to do , Matth. 8. is clear . Erastus . Private men do forgive , sins . Matth. 18. Luk. 17. Ergo , to binde and loose is not a proper judiciall act of a Court , Matth. 16. Christ speaketh not to Peter only , but to all the faithfull , who by teaching one another , may bring one another to acknowledge their sin , and if they do it they are pardoned , if not , their sins are bound in Heaven . Ans . To these the keys are given , who retain and remit sins , as Erastus saith : But these be such as are sent of Christ , as the Father sent his son , Ioh. 20. 2. Either in this place there is given power to binde and loose by publick preaching the word , or by some other place ; but this power to binde and loose by publick preaching , is only given to Pastors and Teachers , 1 Cor. 12. 29. Eph. 4. 11. 12. And Erastus granteth elsewhere , that every private man by his office cannot preach , nor administer the Sacraments , and by no other place is this given to Pastors , for I could elude all places , with the like answer , and say there is a publick Baptizing and Administration of the Supper , by Ministers and sent Pastors only , and a private also performed by private Christians ; yea , by a woman , and both are valid in Heaven , and the binding and loosing of both ratified in Heaven . 3. Christ spake this to the Disciples , who before were sent to Preach , and cast out Devils , Matth. 10. and saith not , Whom thou bindes on earth , but in the plurall number , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , What things you binde on earth , shall be bound in Heaven . Erastus saith all this upon the fancy , that binding and loosing of the Church , and Peters private forgiving of his brother seven times a day must be all one , which I do prove in another place to be different , and amongst other reasons this is one , because the Church pardoning hath a threefold order : 1. between brother and brother : 2. before two or three : 3. Before the Church , and the end of all is the gaining of the offending brother , Matth. 18 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20. But the private forgiving of a brother , of which Peter speaketh , Mat. 18. 21 , 22 , 23. and Luke 17 4 , 5. is of an inferiour nature ; for I know not , if you can gain a brothers soule seven times a day , if he but say , It repenteth me , Luke 17. 4. or seventy seven times , Mat. 18. 22. These words , It repenteth me , said seventy times a day to the Church cannot satisfie to the gaining of a soule , whereas to the private remitting of revenge , it were enough . We have the Text to warrant us , that Christ spa●e to Stewards to whom the keyes are committed . Erastus doth but wickedly assert , he spoke to those who were as Christians in that act , but the Text is cleare he speaketh of binding and loosing spiri●ually , which is nothing to the holding off of a civill injurie , which Erastus saith is the scope of our Saviour here , and how hungry must that sense be : That you deal with him as with an Heathen , who acknowledgeth no Iudge , but a Roman judge , is a matter ratified in heaven ? 4. A private man is to forgive an injury even though the offender repent not , Mat. 14. 15. Rom. 12. 19 , 20. Col. 3. 13. but that pardon cannot be ratified in heaven . 5. See what we have said of binding and loosing before . Erastus . Though Christ should speake this onely to Ministers , yet it followeth not that he speaketh this to other Presbyters . Ans . That dependeth on the proving that there be ruling Elders in the Church , which I conceived have proved else where , from Rom. 12. 8. 1 Cor. 12. 28. 1 Tim. 5. 17. I conceive when Christ spake this , there was neither a formed Presbytery , nor a formed Church . Erastus . Christ saith not , if two or three Presbyters , or two or three Ministers agree in one , I will heare them , but where two or three Christians agree . Ans . Nor doe we say , that two or three can make an Excommunicating Church , but Christ argueth a minore , if the Lord heare two or three on earth , farre more will he heare a Church , and ratifie in heaven what they doe in binding and loosing offenders in Earth ; But how shall these words agree to the interpretation of Erastus ? for he expoundeth two or three and the whole Church , to be but one Christian Magistrate ; can he be said to agree to himselfe ? Or can one or two or three meet together in Christs Name ? And what coherence is here ? Two or three conveeneth to pray that he that will not hear the Christian Magistrate may be dealt with as a Heathen man before the Roman judge , how violent and farre off is this glosse , and how unsuitable to the Text ? Erastus . What other thing is it to a private brother , to gain another to himselfe , and to God , then binding and loosing in Heaven ? Ans . To bring him before the civill Magistrate either Christian or Heathen , whose intrinsecall end by vertue of their office , is not to gaine , soules , but to draw the blood of ill doers , is farre from gaining of Souls . Erastus . Though binding and loosing be judiciall and forinsecall words , they agree not to the Ministery onely , but rather to the Magistrate , except you say that in the time of Christ amongst the Iewes , there was a Church court beside the Magistrates court . Ans . That they argue authority judiciall , is proved already by many Scriptures , and judiciall authority Ecclesiasticall it must be , which agreeth to the Church , and it was never heard that the Church especially in the New Testament , doth signifie the Magistrate . 2. There is no necessity to say there was a Christian Church court in Christs time , because there was not a Christian Magistrate at this time , but the Iewes had then a Church-court , before which Christ was conveened . Caiphas being President , and the blinde man , Iohn 9. who was cast out of the Synagogue , for that he confessed Christ . 3. Christ speaketh of that which was to be , though in its frame not yet erected . Erastus . Christ hath the like words of binding and loosing , Mat. 16. which signifieth also to preach the Gospell , that he who beleeveth may be loosed , and he who beleeveth not may be made inexcusable , and therefore it is no other , but to pray a brother to desist from his injury , shewing him that that is acceptable to God : for to binde and loose in all the Scripture , is never to debarre any from the Sacraments ; if you divert your brother from doing an injurie , by declaring the will and wrath of God , out of his Word , thou hast gained him , and loosed him , if he will not be perswaded , the wrath of God abides on him , and thou hast bound him . Ans . If loosing and binding Matth. 16. be preaching of the Word of God , and loosing be Christian forgiving of an injury , then are women who are taught in the prayer of Christ , Mat. 6. to forgive one another , invested with the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven , to preach the Gospell ; and why not also to administer the Seals ? and so are all private men clothed with the keyes to take in and cast out at their pleasure , and what are Ministers that are over the people in the Lord , and watch for their soules ? 2. We never said , to binde was to debarre from the Sacraments , except consequently onely , to binde , is to declare an obstinate man as a Heathen , and so no member of the house of Christ , and consequently to have no right to the bread of the children of the house , nor say we , that to Excommunicate is formally to debarre men from the Sacraments , it is to cast them out of the house : hence it must follow that the priviledges of the house belongeth not to them . 3. You may disswade a man from doing a civill injurie , and never gaine his soule , but the Magistrates club , for which Erastus contendeth in these words , cannot reach the soule . Erastus . None can remit a debt but the creditor , nor pardon an injury but he who suffereth the injurie . Ans . Then none can binde and loose but private men , and the keyes of heaven are given to all private persons , nor can private persons by forgiving , so remit the person as he is loosed in heaven . 2. The Church is offended at Scandals , and are sufferers ; Ergo , The Church must binde and loose : Let Erastus teach us the way except by Church-censures . Erastus . Casting out of the unclean is not to binde , because to purifie is not to absolve , the unclean might be purified by any cleane , and not by the Priests onely . Ans . The legall purging of the Leper , was onely by pronouncing him ▪ cleane , and could not be done but by the Priest , and it was a loosing of him . Erastus . Where Christ instituteth any new ordinance , he omitteth nothing that is substantiall , but here he speaketh nothing of publike sins , for which you doe especially excommunicate . Ans . Christ according to the minde of Erastus does here institute a throne for the Christian Magistrate , how doth he then institute a way how the Christian Magistrate may remove private Scandals and not publike ? for publike Scandals hurt the Church ten to one more then private doe . Christ speaks of sins in their rise private , betweene brother and brother , but he speaketh of publike Scandals , of such as will not heare the Church , and for these onely we Excommunicate . 2. Tha● is not true , that any one place of Scripture , where an institution is that all the substantials of that institution , should be expresly set down in that place , it is enough that all be held forth in either one Scripture , or other , as in Christs sufferings , Baptisme , Pastors , &c. Erastus . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Again I say unto you , if two of you shall agree on earth , these words must referre to private men , not to the Church , it is cleare that Christ speaketh nothing of two , as hee doth in this verse , but when he saith that one private man is to rebuke and gain another private man ; nor is it enough to say its an argument à comparatis , for if the same thing be not kept in both extreames , it is a vaine comparison if you say a childe understandeth this ; Ergo , An aged man understandeth it , it followeth well . But if you say a child understandeth this ; Ergo , An aged man is rich and good ; who would not laugh ? But if God heare the prayer of two ; Ergo , farre more will he heare the prayers of the Church , it followeth not , except you say , if those things that two or three bindes on earth be ratified , how shall we thinke , that that is ratified which the Church bindes and looses ? Ans . Here is nothing but Grammatications that cannot convince : it is true , that Christ speaking of two , he speaketh of private men , but many will not grant so much , for they say , that by two the smallest number is meant , a Church of the fewest , by a Synecdoche , and two may be taken for a small convention and number which doe literally exceed two , Jer. 3. 14. Rev. 11. 3. I will give power to my two Witnesses ; they be more Martyrs who witnessed against Babylon then two literally , and this Exposition seemeth to me as good as the other , and then if the smallest Church doe binde and loose in heaven and earth , so much more the Church ; and so all shadow of this unsolid Grammattication is removed . 2. The proportion is well kept , if two praying on Earth be so heard in Heaven , as by their prayers , they may obtaine that these be ratified in Heaven which they aske on earth ; farre more is that ratified in heaven , which the Church in a judiciall and authoritative way , doth on earth , in the Name of Christ : for praying of private Christians , and publike and authoritative binding of the Church doe both agree in this , that the Father of Christ ratifieth both in heaven , which is a due keeping of proportion , and not such a crooked comparison as Erastus would make between an aged man , & a rich & good man 3. Though two private men have the same Analogicall binding in Heaven and earth with the Church , it followeth not that the binding of the Church is not a Church-binding , as the binding of the two private men is also a binding , but no publick , no Church-binding . 4. How shall Christs words keep either sense or Logick with the exposition of Erastus ? If he will not hear the Christian Magistrate , complain to the Heathen Magistrate ; and again I say , if the Lord hear two praying on earth , far more will he ratifie in Heaven , what a prophane Heathen Magistrate doth on earth against a Christian offender ; judge what sense is in this glosse . Erastus hath no reason to divide these words , ver . 19. Again I say , if two agree , &c. from ver . 17. 18. Because they are meant of the Magistrate ( saith Erastus ) against all sense , and joyne them to the words of the. 15. and 16. verses : for there is no mention of binding and loosing by prayer , ver . 15 , 16. But only of rebuking , and here Erastus shall be as far from keeping his proportion , of rebuking and praying , as he saith , we do keep proportion between Church-sentencing and praying . To Theophylact Chrisostom and Augustine , Beza answered well , and Erastus cannot reply : 6. If there be binding and loosing between brother and brother in the first and second Admonition , before the cause be brought to the Church , what need is there of binding the man as a Heathen before the Heathen Magistrate ? And what need of the Heathen Magistrates prayer to binde in Heaven ? Was there ever such Divinity dreamed of in the world ? Erastus . These words , Tell the Church prove only that the Church hath the same povver to rebuke the injurious man , that a private man hath , this then is poor reason : The Church hath power to rebuke an offender ; Ergo , it hath power to Excommunicate him . Ans . All know that Christ ascendeth in these three steps : 2. Erastus granteth the cause is not brought to the Church , but by two or three witnesses which is a judiciall power , as in the Law of Moses and in all Laws is evident : if he hear not a brother , he is not to be esteemed , as a Heathen and a Publican , but if he hear not the Church , he is to be reputed so . 3. We reason never from power of rebuking to the power of Excommunication ; but thus , The Church hath power to rebuke an offender , and if he will not hear the Church , then is the man to thee , that is , to all men , as a Heathen and a Publican ; Ergo , The Church hath power to Excommunicate . Erastus . Christ speaketh of the Church that then was : How could he bid them go to a Church that was not in the world ; they having heard nothing of the constitution of i● ? did he bid them erect a new frame of Government , not in the world ? Ans . He could as well direct them to remove scandals for time to come , as he could after his Resurrection say , Mat. 28. 19 , 20. Go teach and baptize all Nations , which commandment they were not presently to follow , but Act. 1. 4. to stay at Jerusalem , and not To teach all Nations , while the Holy Ghost should come : I ask of Erastus , how Christ could lay a Ministery on his Disciples , which was not in the world ? What directions doth Christ , Mat. 24. and Luk. 21. give to his Church and Disciples that they had not occasion to obey many years after ? is how they should behave themselves , when they should be called , before Kings and Rulers : 2. Nor were the Apostles who were already in the room of Priests and Prophets to Teach and Baptize ( he after being to institute the other Sacrament ) to wonder at a new forme already half instituted , and which differed not in nature from the former Government , save that the Ceremonies were to be abol●shed . Erastus . Only Matthew mentioneth this pretended new institution , not Luke , not Mark , the Disciples understood him well , they aske no questions of him , as of a thing unknown , only Peter asked how often he should forgive his brother . Ans . This wil prove nothing , Iohn hath much which we believe with equall certainty of Faith , as we do any Divine institutions ; shall therefore Erastus call the turning of water into wine , the raising of Lazarus : The healing of the man , born blinde , and of him that lay at the Pool of Bethesda , Christs heavenly Sermons , Io● . cap. 14. 15 , 16. his prayer ▪ cap. 17 ▪ which the other Evangelists mention not , Fi●men●a hominum , mens fancies , as he calleth Excommunication ? 2. Did the Disciples understand well the dream that Erastus hath on the place , and took they it as granted , that to tell the Church is to tell the civill Magistrate ? And that not to hear the Church is civill Rebellion , and to be as a Heathen is to be impleaded before Cesar or his Deputies only ? This is a wonder to me ; Matthew setteth up this way , an institution of all Church-Government , which no Evangelist , no word in the Old , or New Testament establisheth . Erastus . Christ would not draw his disciples , who were otherwise most observant of the Law , from the Synedry then in use , to a new Court , where witnesses are led before a multitude and sentences judicially set up , it had been much against the Authority of the civil Magistrate , and a scandall to the Pharisees , and the people had no power in Christs time to choose their own Magistrate , therefore he must mean the Jewish Synedry : If by the Church we understand the multitude , we must understand such a multitude as hath power to choose such a Senate , but there was no such Church in the Jews at this time . Ans . That the Church here is the multitude of Believers , men , women , and children , is not easily believed by us . 2. And we are as far from the dream of a meer civill Synedry , which to me is no suitable mean of gaining a soul to Christ , which is our Saviours intention in the Text. 3. Erastus setteth up a christian Magistrate to intercept causes and persons , to examine , rebuke , lead witnesses against a Iew before ever Cesar their only King of the Iews , or his Deputies hear any such thing , this is as far against the only supream Magistrate , and as scandalous to the Pharisees , as any thing else could be : 4. Had not Iohn Baptist , and Christs disciples drawn many of the Iews and Profylites to a new Sacrament of Baptisme , and to the Lamb of God , now in his flesh , present amongst them ? this was a more new Law , then any Ordinance of Excommunication was , especially since this Church was not to be in its full constitution , till after the Lords Ascension . Erastus . It is known this anedrim delivered Christ bound unto Pilate , condemned Steven , commanded the Apostles to be scour●e● and put in Prison . Tertullins saith of Paul before Felix , we would have judged him according to our Law ; Paul said , Act. 23. to Anani●s , thou sittest to judge me according to the Law , Act. 26. P●ul confesseth before Agrippa and Festus , that he obtained power from the high Priests , to hale to prison and beat the Christians , and Paul for fear of the iniquity of this Church or Sanedrim , dealt with them as Heathen , and appealed to Cesar . Ans . But by what Law of God did they this ? It is not denyed but the Iews Synedrim being two courts did inflict punishment ; But that Christ establisheth a civill Sanedrim as a mean , Matth. 18. To gain the soul of a brother is now the question ; we utterly deny this , and gave reasons before thereof , to which I adde , if any obeyed not the Church , that is , the Sanedrim , as Erastus saith , they might be stoned to death as Steven was : Was this Christs milde way , to cite them onely before the Romane Senate ? Were dead men capable of answering to any further Iudicatures ? 2. The last step of conveening Heathens and Publicans before the Romane Senate , according to Christs order is not to be observed with them , for even Heathens and Publicans , are so far forth our brethren : that 1. We are not , when they offend us , to suffer sin in them , but to rebuke them as Christians , Lev. 19. 18. For this is the Law of nature : The Law of nature will teach us not to hate an Heathen in our heart . 2. We are to labour to gain all , even those that are without the Church , 1 Cor. 9. 19 , 20 , 21 , 22. 1 Pet. 3. 1. And this is Christs way of gaining all , to rebuke and admonish them : Ergo , it was never Christs meaning to deal with Heathens and Publicans so , as at the first we are to drag them before the Heathen Magistrate , that by his sword he may gain them , or take away their life ; yea , and Erastus granteth in Ecclesiasticall crimes , that the Iews had power of life and death , in the matter of Steven and of Paul , if he had not appealed to Cesar to save his head : Josephus de bel . Judaic . Lib. 5. Cap. 26. Antiquit. Lib. 14. Cap. 12. But in things politick , Cesar took all power of life and death from them : Hence only is Christs time the footsteps of the two distinct courts remained , and the Priests , not the civill Magistrate had the power of Church-discipline . But all was now corrupt . CHAP. IX . Quest . 5. The place 1 Cor. 5. for Excommunication , vindicated from the Objections of Erastus . Erastus . Paul did nothing contrary to the Command of Christ : But Christ excluded no man from the Passeover , not Iudas ; Ergo , Neither minded ●e to exclude the incestuous man ; he saith not , 1 Cor. 5. Why debarred you him not from the Sacrament ? But why did you not obtain by your tears and prayers , as Augustine expoundeth it , that the man might be cut off by death ? Ans . Christ would not take the part of a visible Church on him , to teachus that none should be cast out of the Church for secret and latent crimes : 2. Paul did nothing without the Command of Christ : But Christ neither in the Old , or New Testament , commanded his Church to pray for the miraculous cutting off of a scandalous person ; give an instance in all Scripture , except you make this one which is contraverted , your instance . Erastus . Paul 2 Cor. 2. absolveth the man from all punishment , and nameth onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rebuking ; Ergo , He was not excluded from the Sacrament . Ans . Exclusion from the Sacrament , is but one of the fruits of Excommunication ; not formally Excommunication ; yet he harpeth on this alway , that to be excommunicated , or to be delivered to Satan , is but to be debarred from the Sacrament . 2. The answer presupposeth he was Excommunicated , we urge the place for a precept only of Excommunication , if he repented to the satisfying of the Church , there was no need of Excommunication . 3. If the man 2 Cor. 2. was delivered from rebuke onely , and if that was all his punishment ; Ergo , he was not miraculously cut off , for then he must have been miraculously cut off , and raised from death to life againe , unlesse miraculous cutting off had been no punishment : But if he was not miraculously cut off , because he prevented it , then with what faith could the whole Church pray for the miraculous killing of a brother , and not rather that he might repent and live ? 4. In all the Word of God , the intrinsecall end of putting to death a Malefactor , is to avenge Gods quarrell , Rom. 13. 4. That all Israel may hear and feare , and doe no more any such wickednes , Deut. 13. 11. To put away the guilt of sinne off the Land , Numb . 34. 33 , 34. that the Lords anger may be turned away , and a common plague on the Church stayed , when justice is executed on the ill doer , Psal . 106. 28 , 29 , 30 , 31. And it concerneth the Church and Common-wealth , more then the soule of the Malefactor , and there is nothing of such an end here . But the intrinsecall end here , is , that the mans Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus , and this delivering to Satan is in the Name and authority , and by the power of the Lord Iesus , 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. Now the Sonne of man came to save soules , not to destroy bodies , and burne cities ; and though by the power of Christ , Peter miraculously killed Ananias and Saphira , and Paul stroke Elimas the Socererer blinde , yet these being Miracles , we heare not that this was done by any interveening act of the Church conveened , or by their prayers to bring vengeance , by a miracle , on the ill do●r . Peter and Paul doe both these not asking any consent , or intervention of the peoples prayers , but by immediate power in themselves from the Lord Jesus . 2. If any such power were given to the Church , by their Prayers to obtain from God a miraculous killing of all scandalous persons , who infecteth the Church , in case the civill Magistrate were an Heathen , and an enemy to Christian Religion and refused to purge the Church ; Christ , who provideth standing remedies for standing diseases must have left this miraculous power to all the christian Churches in the earth that are under Heathen Magistrates , or some power by way of Analogie like to this , to remove the scandalous person , but we finde not any such power in the Churches under Heathen Magistrates , except power of refusing to the offender the Communion , and rejecting him as an Heathen and Publican that he may be ashamed and repent . 3. The whole faithfull at Corinth , men , women and children and all the Saints ( for to those all , i● this power given , as Erastus saith ) must have had a word of promise ( if they ought to have prayed in faith as the Prophets and Apostles prayed in faith , that they might work miracles ) that Paul was miraculously to kill the incestuous man ▪ But that all and every one who were puffed up , and mourned not at this mans fall , had any such word of promise I conceive not imaginable by the Scriptures , for the Proposition I take it as undeniable ; if Paul rebuked the Corinthians all and every one , because they prayed not , and mourned not to God , that Paul wrought not this miracle in killing the incestuous man , they behoved to have a word of God , for their warrant , commanding them to pray : O Lord give power to Paul , to kill such ▪ an incestuous man miraculously : For such Faith of miracles had Christ , and all the Prophets and Apostles , Joh. 11. 41. So did Sampson pray in faith , Judg. 16. 28. and Elias 1 Kings 18. 36 , 37 , 38. and so did the Apostles pray , Act. 4. 24 , 29 , 30. and with them the Church of believers , for working of miracles in generall ; for the Apostles had a word of promise in the generall for working of miracles , Mar. 16. 17 , 18. But that the Apostles had before hand revealed to them all the miracles they were to work : I cannot believe by any Scripture , But that it was revealed to them upon occasion only , by an occasionall immediate Revelation , Do this particular miracle , Hic & nunc : And this I am confirmed to believe : Because Elisha , 2 Kin. 4. was mistaken in sending his servant with his staffe to raise the dead son of the Shunamite ( a Pastor with nothing but a club and naked words cannot give life to the dead ) ver . 31. and therefore the working of a miracle in particular Hic & nunc was not alwayes revealed to the most eminent Prophets , such as Elisha was ; and so I beleeve , as working of miracles on this ; and this man , came not from an habit in the Prophets and Apostles , far lesse from a habit subject to their free will , but God reserved that liberty to himself , to act his servants immediatly , both to pray by the faith of this miracle , Hic & nunc , and to work this miracle , Hic & nunc . Now to the Assumption : How can Erastus or any of his followers assure our conscience that God had given the Faith of miracles to all the sanctified in Christ Jesus at Corinth , whom Paul so sharply rebuketh , 1 Cor. 5. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. That this being revealed to them by God , and they having the faith , that it was the will of Iesus Christ , that Paul should kill , or ( as some say ) deliver to Satan this incestuous man to be miracuously tormented in the body or flesh , as Iob was , that he might repent ; is it like Christ would reveal more of his will , touching every particular miracle to be done by Paul , to all and every secure one in the Church of Corinth that were puffed up , and mourned not for this mans fall , then he revealed to the Apostles themselves ? But I have proved that the Apostles and Prophets knew not , nor had they the particular Faith of this , and this miracle , how then had all and every one of the Church of Corinth this Faith ? Now they behoved to have this light of Faith of this miracle revealed to them , that this was Christs will , that Paul should work a miracle for the destruction of the man ; else the Corinthians could no more be justly rebuked , because they prayed not to God , that Paul might work this miraculous destruction of the man ( which yet he never wrought , as its clear , 2. Cor. 2. he was not killed , but repented , and was pardoned ) then because they prayed not , that he miraculously might cure the criple man at Lystra , Act. 14. or that he might work any other miracle . Now how was this revealed to all of the Church of Corinth that this was Christs will ? If it be said , they were to pray conditionally that God would either by a miracle take him away , or then in mercy give him repentance to prevent destruction : 1. We have no surer ground for a conditionall and dis-junctive Faith of miracles in the Corinthians , then for an absolute Faith : 2. If it was the will of Christ , that the man should by himself be miraculously killed , why did not the Apostle immediatly by himself kill him ? Why ? It was the Apostles fault as well as the sin of the Corinthians , that the man remained as a leaven to sowre and infect the Church ; yea , it was more the Apostles fault then theirs , for he had only the immediate power miraculously to purge the Church ; some may say , as the Lord Iesus was hindred some time to work miracles , because of the peoples unbelief , Matth. 13. 58. So here Paul was hindred to work this miracle on the scandalous man , because of their unbeliefe . Ans . Paul could not professe this ; for he had not assayed to work any miracle of this kinde , as Christ had done , Matth. 13. But only sheweth them of a report came to him of the fact , and of their security , and not mourning : 2. Paul should then rather have rebuked their unbelief , and not praying that God would miraculously destroy the man ; but this Paul doth not . 3. Paul rebuketh them , for not judging him , not putting him out of the midst of them : Must that be Pauls meaning ; pray to God that I may have grace and strength immediatly from God , to kill him miraculously , and to judge him . Now they knew the Apostle miraculously thus judged those that are without , as he stroke with blindnesse ; Elymas who was without the visible Church : I conceive the whole Churches were to pray , as the Apostles do with the Saints , Act. 4. 29. 30. That miracles may be wrought both on those that are without and within : But of this judging he saith , ver . 12. What have I to do to judge them also that are without ? Do not ye judge them that are within ? 4. It is directly contrary to Christs direction , Matth. 18. Which is , that by rebukes we gaine the offending brothers soul : Now Erastus will have him gained to Christ , by removing his soule from his body , and by killing him . Yea , the Apostle writing of the censuring of those in Thessalonica , who walked unorderly , and obeyed not the Apostles Word , which doth include such as breake out in Incest , Adulteries , Murthers , is so farre from giving direction to kill them miraculously , that he biddeth onely keep no Church company , nor Christian fellowship with them , but yet they are to be admonished as brethren ; Ergo , they were not to be miraculously killed , for then they should be capable of no admonition at all being killed ; And could there be worse men then was amongst the Phillipians , Enemies of the crosse of Christ , whose end is destruction , whose God was their belly ? Yet there was no blood in the Apostles pen , he chides not the Phillipians , nor the Galathians who had amongst them men of the same mettall , Gal. 5. 7 , 8 , 9 , 10. Ver. 19. 20 , 21. Nor the Timothies who would have to doe with farre worse men , 2 Tim , 3. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. Nor Titus who had to doe with wicked Cretians , Tit. 1. because they cryed not to God , for Pauls bloodie sword of vengeance , that these wicked men might be cut off by Satan , nor doth the Apostle to the Hebrewes draw this Sword against those who sinned against the Holy Ghost , c. 10. c. 6. Nor Iames against bloody warriours , Murtherers , Adulterers , Oppressors , c. 4. c. 5. Nor doth Peter and Iude use this sword , or command the Churches to use such carnall weapons against the wickedest of men , but recommended long-suffering , rebuking , the rod of Church-discipline , to reject Hereticks after admonitions . Hence I argue negatively ; in all the Scripture , never did the Lord command that they should pray to God and mourne , that he would inflict bodily vengeance and death , or yet sicknesse on any scandalous professor , nor is there promise , precept , or practise in any Scripture of this Church censure . 5. Erastus doth thinke a court of the Church , that hath power to lead Witnesses , judge and censure offenders an extream wronging of the Magistrate , and an incroaching on his Liberties , but here is a more bloody Court , for if the whole faithfull are to pray for bodily death by the Ministery of the Devill , upon one of their own brethren , because he hath lyen with his fathers wife , or fallen in Adultery , or Murther , as David did : Surely they must pray in faith , and upon certaine knowledge that he is guilty ; the Law of God and Nature must then have warranted the whole Saints , Women and Children , to meet in a grand Jurie and Inquest , either to have the fact proved by Witnesses , or to heare his owne confession ; else how could they pray in faith , if it was not sure to their conscience that the man had done this deed ? Here is a Jury of men and women , I am sure unknowne to the Apostolique Church . 2. A greater abridging of the Magistrates power then we teach : The Church shall take away the life of a Subject & never aske the Magistrates leave . 6. It is against Christs minde , Mat. 18. ●s Erastus expoundeth it , that Christians should go any further against an offending brother , then implead him before an Heathen , though he adde injurie to injurie : But this wa● maketh the Holy Ghost sharply to rebuke all the Saints when they are off●●ded , before the barre of Heaven , by crying miraculous blood●e vengeance upon the Offender . 7. It is evident this man repen●ed , and that the Corinthians confirmed their love to him , and did forgive him , 2 Cor. 2. 7. 10. Ergo , He was not miraculously killed . But we never read , where it was Gods will and Law that an ●ll doers life should be spared , though he should repent , because his taking away is for example that others may feare . 2. That evill , and as it is here , leaven may be taken away ; if then it had been bodily death , I see not how Paul and the Corinthians could have dispensed with it . 8. Erastus doth not , nor can he confirme his unknown Exposition by any parallel Scripture of the Old and New Testament , which I objected to him in his Exposition of Matth. 18. Let the Reader therefore observe how weak Erastus is , in arguing against pregnant Scriptures , for Excommunication . Erastus . You must prove , that to mourn , because the man is not taken away , is all one , as to mourn that he is not debarred from the Sacraments by the Ministers and Elders . Ans . That is denyed ; to be debarred from the Sacraments , is but a consequent of Excommunication : 2. It is a putting of the man from amongst them , not by death , that we have refuted ; not from eating and drinking with him onely , that I improved before : Ergo , it must be a Church ou●-casting . Erastus . Paul might deliver the man to Satan , though he did Repent ; as the Magistrate did punish Malefactors , whether they Repented or no● . An. Ergo , he repen : ed , and was pardoned by the Corinthians , 2 Cor. 2. 10. after he had been killed , which is absurd . Erastus . If to deliver to Satan , were nothing but to debar the man from the Sacraments , ever while he should repent ; Why should Paul with a great deal of pains and many words , have excused himself to the Corinthians , 2 Cor. 2. and cap. 7. and as it were deprecate the offending of them ; for they should know , that this manner of coercing and punishing , was , and ought to be exercised in the Church ; if it was but a saving remedy and invitation to repentance , Why were they sad ? They should rather have rejoyced , as the Angels of Heaven doth at the Conversion of a sinner , then Paul must have intended another thing . Ans . This is a meer conjecture as Erastus granteth most he saith against the place is ; for he saith , Aliam conjecturam etiam addidi , such a violent remedy of repentance , as is the cutting off of a member from Christs body , being the most dreadfull sentence of the King of the Church , nearest to the last sentence , was to Paul , and ought to be a matter of sorrow to all the Servants of God , as the foretelling of sad Iudgements , moved Christ to tears , Matth. 23. 37 ▪ Luke 19. 41 , 42. And moved Ieremiah to sorrow , cap. 9. 1. And yet Christ was glad at the home-coming of sinners , Luke 15. 6 , 7 , &c. These two are not contrary as Erastus dreameth , but subordinate ; to wit , ( That Christ should inflict the extreamest vengeance of Excommunication , which also being blessed of God , is a saving , though a violent remedy of repentance , ) and ( To rejoyce at the blessed fruit of Excommunication , which is the mans repentance : ) And the Apostle 2 Cor. 7. professeth his sorrow , That he made them sad , ver . 8. and also rejoyceth at their gracious disposition who were made sorry : He is far from excusing himself , as if he had done any thing in weaknesse ; this were enough , and it is an Argument of our Protestant Divines , to prove that the Books of the Macabees , are not Dited by the Holy Ghost , as Canonick Scripture is ; because the Author 2 Macab . 15. 38. excuseth himself in that History , as if he might have erred , which no Pen-man of holy Scripture can do : And Erastus layeth the like blame on Paul , as if he had repented that he made them sorry , by chiding them , for not praying for a miraculous killing of a Brother : This is enough to make the Epistles of Paul to be suspected as not Canonick Scripture ; yea , Paul saith the contrary , 2 Cor. 7. 9. Now I reioyce , not that yee were made sorry , but that yee sorrowed to repentance , for yee were made sorry after a godly manner , that ye might receive dammage by us in nothing , and 2 Cor. 2. 8 , 9. he exhorteth them to rejoycing , at the mans Repentance , and to confirme their love to him , ( which demonstrates that he was now a living man , and not miraculously killed , ) and commendeth their obedience , v. 9. in sorrowing , as he did chide them that they sorrowed not , 1 Cor. 5. 2. So that Paul is so farre from accusing himselfe for making them sad , that by the contrary , he commends himselfe for that , and rejoyceth thereat . And if the matter had been Excommunication , while the man should repent , ( saith Erastus ) they knowing this ought to be in the Church , they should rather have reioyced , then bin sorry . And I answer , if the matter had been a miraculous killing of him , that his Spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord : should they not reioyce at his saving in the day of the Lord , whether this saving be wrought by bodily killing , or by Excommunication ? And so this conjecture may well be retorted . 2. They were not to bee sorry at the mans repentance , but to rejoyce ; yet were they to be sorry at the violent mean of cutting him off from Christs body , as a father may be glad at the life and health of his childe , and and yet be sorry that by no other mean his health can be procured , but by cutting off a finger , or a hand of his childe . 3. They knew that miraculous killing ( as Erastus dreameth ) was also a saving ordinance ( the remaining in the Church , or not remaining is all one ) because Paul chideth them , ( as he dreameth , ) that the man might be miraculously killed . Erastus . What need was there that the Corinthians with such diligence should intercede for the man , if they knew when he repented , he was to be received againe into the Church ? Now that they interceded for him is clear , for Paul saith , 2 Cor. 2. 10. To whom yee forgive any thing , I forgive also . Ans . Because there is a great hazard in Excommunication , of an higher degree of obduration and condemnation ; if the party be not gained . 2. I see no ground for this conjecture , that the Corinthians interceded for him at Pauls hand , for if he ought to have been miraculously killed , then whether he repented or repented not , both Paul and the interceders sinned ; Paul in being broken , they in requesting for a dispensation of a Law , in which God would not dispense , as he that would request to spare the life of a repenting Murtherer against Gods expresse Law , should sinne ; and Paul should sinne in pardoning upon request , where God would not pardon . Erastus . How excuseth Paul himselfe that he would try their obedience , that c. 7. he would have their care for him made manifest , if he had not commanded a greater thing , then to debarre a wicked man from the Sacraments ? Ans . This is but a shadow of a reason against the Word of God , for to be cast out of Christs body , and not acknowledged for an Israelite of God , and that in heaven and earth : and so to be debarred from the Seals , is a higher thing then bodily killing , as to be received as a Member againe , and to be written amongst the living in Ierusalem , is like the rising from the dead , as may be gathered from Rom. 11. 15. and is farre more then deliverance from miraculous killing . Erastus . These words , ye was made sorry according to God , that ye might receive dammage of us in nothing , cannot agree with the purpose , they should have suffered no losse by obtaining pardon to a miserable man excluded from the Sacraments , while he should repent ; but if he was to be killed , they should have lost a brother , and so suffered dammage . Ans . The hazard of losing his soule , repentance not being so easie , as Erastus imagineth , had been a greater losse , then the losse of a temporall life , the soule being to be saved in the day of the Lord. Erastus . Paul requireth his Spirit , and the power of the Lord Iesus to this worke ; Ergo , It was more then to debarre from the Sacraments . Ans . Erastus should prove ; Ergo , It was more then to Excommunicate . 2. Ergo , It was rather more then bodily death . His seventh reason I hope after to examine . Erastus . Paul saith , he decreed to doe this , and does not command the Church to doe it , or that the Church alone should doe it : We never read that Paul , whether alive or dead , did write to one , or many , to deliver any to Satan , for the destruction of the flesh , that was proper to the Apostles onely , as the gift of healing was , Act. 5. and c. 13. and he writeth , he will come himselfe with the rod , and he himself 1 Tim. 1. delivered Hymeneus and Alexander to Satan . Ans . This is much for us , you never read that Paul did write to one or many , and did chide them , because they prayed not that he might worke this and this particular miracle ; or that without error he might write this or that Canonick Scripture , and therefore because this delivering to Satan , was commanded to the conveened together Church , with his Apostolique spirit , and warrant to deliver such a one to Satan , and to judge him . v. 12. And to purge him out , and cast him out , therefore am I perswaded it was no miracle proper to Paul onely . 2. How prove you that Paul , his alone without the Church Excommunicated Hymeneus ? Paul saith that Timothy received the gift of God , by his laying on him hands , 2 Tim. 1. 6. Ergo , By the laying on of his hands onely , and not of the whole Presbytery ? It followeth not , the contrary is , 1 Tim. 4. 14. 3. Delivering to Satan , v. 5. is all one with purging out , v. 7. as is cleare by the Illation . I have decreed , though absent , to deliver such a one to Satan . Hence his consequence , v. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Purge out therefore . 2. To deliver to Satan , is either all one with judgeing those that are within , v. 12. And so with judging this man , and with putting of him out , v. 13. or it is not all one ; if these be all one , then hath the Church a hand in this delivering to Satan , and so it is not a miraculous killing . Erastus granteth the consequence , if these be not all one , this is two judgings of the man , one of Pauls v. 5. by miraculous killing , and another of Pauls and the Church , v. 12. This latter must be some Church judgeing of those that are within the Church , common to Paul and the Corinthians , as the words cleare , and which is opposed to Gods judging of those that are without ; and this is so like Excommunication , that Erastus must make some other thing of it . Now we cannot say that there was any miraculous judging of this man , common to Paul as an Apostle , and to the Corinthians , the ordinary beleevers and Saints , as Erastus yeeldeth . 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to put away the man , which is expresly commanded to the Church of Corinth , v. 13. must be the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and putting away , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , v. 2. But that taking out of the midst of them is a miraculous killing of the man , as Erastus saith , now this cannot be , for then the people must be joyned in the same work of miraculous killing with the Apostle Paul ; now both we and Erastus must disclaim this ; Ergo , there must be some common Church casting out , common to both . Erastus . To put away out of the midst of them , is not to debar from the Sacraments , but to kill ; if it were but to extrude the man out of the society of the faithfull , what need was there of publick mourning ? and if he had been to be cast out amongst the heathen , how could the spirit be saved ? as is said , for without the Church there is no salvation . Ans . To put away out of the midst of them , is to put the man out of the Congregation , as the word Careh is expounded before , and is not to kill : were Hymeneus and Alexander delivered to Satan , that they might learn not to blaspheme ? what learning or Discipline can dead men be capable of ? 2. There 's need of mourning when any is cut off from Christs body , it being the highest judgement of God on earth . 3. Without the visible Church altogether as Heathens are , there is no salvation ; But to be so without the Church , as the casting out is a medicinall punishment , That the soul may be saved in the day of the Lord , is a mean to bring the soul in , to both the invisible and visible Church , and putteth none in that state , that they cannot be saved , but by the contrary in a way to be saved ; so the man periret , nisi periret . Erastus . It would seem , it may be proved from the Text , that the man persevered not in that wickednesse , for the Text saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : He that hath done , and that hath wrought this deed , not he that doth this deed ; and therefore it seems Paul would inflict punishment as a good Magistrate useth to do ( even though the man repent ) and he saith , that his spirit may be saved , then the man repented . Ans . 1. Reconcile these two ( Paul was as a good Magistrate to kill the man , though he should repent ) and ( yet at their intercession ( saith Erastus ) he did forgive him ; ) durst Paul at the request of men , pardon a Malefactor contrary to the duty of a good Magistrate ? 2. Can Paul intend , in miraculous killing , only the saving of the mans soul , and knowing that he was saved , and having obtained his end , yet he will use the mean , that is , he will kill him ? or if he intended another end also , that others might fear , how could he not kill for this end ? A good Magistrates zeal should not be softned and blunted , for the request of men . Erastus he saith , He decreed to deliver the man to Satan , for the destruction of the flesh , that the soul may be saved ; now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to give over , to permit ; here a person given , a person to whom , a person giving , to wit , Paul , and the end ; wherefore , that the spirit may be saved ; it is , as if I would give my son to a Master , either to be instructed , or chastised , so 1 Tim. 1. Act. 27. 28. Matth. 5. 18. Matth. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Mar. 15. The brother shall deliver the brother to death , and the Lord saith to Satan , behold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , I give him to thee , this is to deliver one afflicted , killed , condemned . Ans . All this is needlesse ; to be delivered over , is to be recommended and taken in a good sense also , Act. 14. 26. Commended to the grace of God , Act. 15. 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and we deny not but to be delivered to Satan , is to be delivered to be afflicted , but the question is , what affliction is meant here ; the affliction of the flesh say we , or of the unrenewed part , opposed to a saved spirit . Erastus . It is unpossible that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 destruction , can be shown to signifie the destruction of the desires of sinfull flesh in all the New-Testament , it alwayes signifieth killing , death , destruction ; nor doth the thing it self compell us to take it other wayes here , nor for killing and death , as 1 Thes . 5. It is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to kill , destroy , crucifie , are so taken , but never 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in either sacred or prophane Authors . Ans . I conceive Chrysostom knew Greek better then Erastus , the man was delivered to Satan , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That he might scourge him ( as he did Job ) with a hurtfull boyle or some other sicknesse . Hence as that learned and judicious Divine , who hath deserved excellently of the Protestant Churches , Petrus Molineus saith on the place , Chrysostom , Homo Grece eloquentiae R●rum exemplum , A rare example of Grecian eloquence , doth think per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the word destruction , not death , but some heavy torment to be meant ; And I am sure Hieronymus , a man in the tongues incomparably skilled said , by destruction here , was meant jejunia & egrotationes , fasting and diseases : 2. Nor need we contend for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which in all Authors of the world , signifieth destruction , for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to destroy ; the question will rather be , what is meant by the flesh , but certainly it is in prophane Greek Authors as unusuall ( I except sacred Greek Authors , such as Basil , Chrysostom , who knew what mortification meant ) to speak as Paul doth , Rom. 8. 13. If ye mortifie the deeds of the flesh , ye shall live : Let Erastus finde me a parallel to that in the New Testament , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I think Erastus may not deny that this is to mortifie the sinfull works of the body of sin , yet Aristotle , Plato , Lucian , Plutarch , H●siod , Homer , nor any prophane Greek Author ever spake so : We shall therefore deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth never to Greek Authors any thing but bodily death : for 2 Thess . 1. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 everlasting destruction , is some more then bodily destruction . 3. We say it is unpossible that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can be showen to signifie in either Old or New Testament , a miraculous destroying of the body by Satan , we retort this reason back upon Erastus , his Exposition is not tollerable , because it wanteth a parallel place , it is his own reason . Erastus . The destruction of the flesh must be the destruction of the body , not of concupiscence , because he addeth that the spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be saved , here the soul is opposed to the body . Ans . Though we should grant , that by the flesh is meant the body , yet it followeth not , it is the miraculous killing of the man , as I observed before . 2. It maketh nothing against Excommunication ; for many learned Protestants teach , that though to deliver to Satan were a bodily punishment or conjoyned therewith , as the Learned Anto. Waleus doth observe ; yet the Apostle is clear for Excommunication in this chapter ; & the learned Molineus denyeth delivering to Satan to be expounded of Excommunication , and will have the destruction of the flesh to be some bodily tormenting of his body by Satan , & so doth sundry of the Fathers , especially Ambrose , Hyeronimus , Augustinus , and Chrysostom ; though Augustine be doubtful : Yet Molineus saith , Certum est paulum velle hunc incestum moveri communione Ecclesia : sed id vult fieri ab ipsa Ecclesia Cor●nthiacâ , dicens , ver . 13. Tollite istum sceleratum è medio vèstrúm : And that grave and judicious Divine Piscator saith , on the place ; That the forme of Excommunication is this delivering to Satan : but the destruction of the flesh , he thinketh to be the exhausting of the naturall strength of the body with sorrow for his sin , according to that Prov. 17. 22. A broken heart dryeth the bones : And therefore it is to be observed that ●rastily , Erastus insisteth most on those points and syllables of a Text , whereon all Divines , Ancient and Modern do place least strength for Excommunication ; I might therefore passe all Erastus his force against Excommunication in these , and he shall be not a whit nearer his point . 2. But I shall follow him ; when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the flesh , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirit are put together , I see no reason that the one should signifie the body , the other the soul : I know the contrary to be , Rom. 8. 1. Those that walketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the inordinate affections , and lusts of the flesh , are opposed to those that walk , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the spirit , and Gal. 5. 17. the flesh , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) lusteth against the spirit , and the spirit ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) against the flesh , Joh. 3. 6. That which is born of the flesh , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is flesh , it is not that which is born of the body as body , and that which is born 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the spirit is spirit , so Rom. 8. 9. 13 , 14. Erastus should have shewed us such places wherein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the flesh and the spirit signifieth the body and the soul , when the matter of salvation is spoken of as here , That the spirit may be saved , ver . 5. then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the flesh is for the most part , if not alwayes , taken in an evil part , for the corruption of mans nature . Erastus . How could they desire the Apostle not to deliver him to Satan , that he might ( as Beza expoundeth it ) destroy his flesh , that is , bring him to repentance ? How could Paul assent to such a Petition ? How could the Apostle write that he did forgive him ? Did Paul by forgiving him , permit him not to mortifie and destroy his flesh , and sinfull lusts ? Ans . Let Erastus answer , How could the Corinthians beseech Paul not to kill him , that his soul may be saved in the day of the Lord ? How could Paul grant such a Petition , as that the man should not be saved in the day of the Lord ? How could Paul by pardoning the man , permit , that he should not be saved in the day of the Lord ? for the saving of the mans soul , is no lesse a fruit of this delivering to Satan , then is the destroying of the lusts of the flesh . 2. They might well desire that upon the mans repentance Paul would take a milder way and course to effectuate these two desirable ends , the mortification of his lust , and the saving of his soul , then the last and most dreadfull remedy , which is the censure of Excommunication . 3. The destruction of the lusts of the flesh is a Scripturall remedy for saving of the soul in the day of Christ , at is clear , Rom. 7. 7 , 8 , 9 , 10. Gal. 5. 24 , 25. But whether miraculous killing be such a mean ordained of God is the question , and ought to be proved by some word of God , beside this place in controversie . Erastus . These words , that the soul may be saved in the day of the Lord , do hold forth , that the miserable man was presently to die . Ans . That they hold forth no such thing , is evidently proved , for how were they to cast him out and judge him ? And how was Paul to pardon him , and they and Paul to confirme their love ? 2. When Peter saith , 1 Pet. 1. 7. That your faith may be found unto praise , honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ ? were all these presently ? Because Paul and the faithfull Philippians were waiting for their Saviours second coming , who should change their vilde bodies , were they to die presently ? When Paul prayeth , that Onesiphorus may finde mercy in that day , 2 Tim. 1. 18. I pray you , will it follow that Onesiphorus was presently to die ? Erastus . The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rebuke , doth not signifie rejecting from the Sacraments , 1. Rejecting from the Sacraments is never put for punishment in Scripture . 2. It is but a rebuke inflicted by many ; and Paul , 2 Cor. 2. absolveth him from this as a sufficient punishment , a rebuke is no punishment . Ans . 1. To be debarred from the society of the faithfull , as Hagar was , as Cain was ; as David was , Cast out of the Lords inheritance by Saul ; yea , to be rebuked , Ezech. 3. 25 , 26. are evils , but they are not evils of sin ; Ergo , He speaks not like a Divine , who will not have them punishments ; if to injoy the Sanctuary , Church , holy things of God , and the society of the Saints be a rich , blessing of God , as the Scripture saith it is , Psal . 42. 4. Psal . 27. 4. Psal . 84. 10. Psal , 110. 3. Psal . 63. 1 , 2 , 3. Cant. 1. 7. 8. Cant. 2. 16. 17. Cant. 5. 1. Cant. 6. 1 , 2 , 3. Rev. 2 , 1. and to deny this be a symtome of prophanity , then to be separated from these as a Heathen , must be to the children of God , the greatest evil of punishment and matter of sorrow on earth , it smelleth not of piety to deny this . Erastus . If the man was only rebuked ; How was he to be delivered to Satan to be tormented and killed ? Some Ancients answer , he was but delivered to Satan to be afflicted in his body with sicknesse , and at length delivered by Paul , others say more congruously to the minde of Paul ; that Paul purposed not by himself to deliver the man to Satan , but to do it , with the Church congregated together , and when the Church saw him swallowed up with griefe , they deferred while they tryed Pauls minde , and obtained pardon to him , and in the means time threatned him , if he should not repent ; and obtained at length , that Paul should pardon him . Ans . Many learned Divines hold the former , yet so as they conclude Excommunication out of this Chapter ; of this I say no more . But Erastus hath a way of his own . To which I say , 1. There is no Scripture , but this controverted one to warrant that the Apostles who had the gift of Miracles , 1. Suspended the working of Miracles , either on the prayers , or free consent of the whole multitude of beleevers . 2. That the execution of a miraculous work , was committed to Deputies and substitutes under Paul , who had it in their power miraculously to kill him , or in their free will and Christian compassion , to suspend the miracle , and not kill . 3. That the Apostles in acts of miraculous justice , sought advise of any , or might be broken by requests , to desist from miracles as they saw the party repent , or not repent , or friends intercede , or not intercede . 4. So many circumstances of the Text , laying a command on the Church of Corinth , to put him out and judge him , and yet the matter remaine a miracle . These to me are riddles , if God had told us such a History , I could have beleeved it ; but to gather these by uncertaine conjectures . without any ground of other Scriptures , is a thing I can hardly beleeve . But since Excommunication is an ordinary censure , the Church might well , as they see the man penitent , or contumacious , cast him out , or not , pardon , or not pardon . Erastus . Paul delivered to Satan Hymeneus and Alexander , that they might learne not to blaspheme , not that the dead are capable to learne , or to be blasphemed ; but this be saith as a Magistrate , when he saith he will give an ill doer to the hangman , that he may learn to steale no more , and to rob no more . Ans . 1 Tim. 1. 20. I delivered them to Satan . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It is like to edifying discipline , and agreeable to Pauls use of the rod of discipline , 2 Cor. 10. 8. Though I should boast somewhat more of our authoritie , which the Lord hath given us for edification , and not for destruction . Now it were safer to give a sense congruous to the intrinsecall end of discipline , which was not for destruction of the body , but for the edifying of souls . 2. Yea , so Paul had no lesse the Sword , then the rod of the Word , Nero had not so heavy a sword , as miraculous killing : Should not Paul speake rather as a Pastor of Christ , then as a bloody Magistrate ? Erastus . If to deliver to Satan , be all one with debarring from the Supper onely , yet it is not all one , with being cast out of the Church , without which there is no salvation , but the Supper is not absolutely necessary to Salvation . Ans . Nor doe we put that necessity on the Sacraments , but where the man is excluded from the Sacraments , for such a sinne as if he repent not , he is excluded from Salvation ; it concerneth him much to thinke it a weighty judgement to be excluded from the Seales . Erastus . These two are inconsistent which you teach , to wit , that he is not debarred from the Sacraments , who desireth them , and that his desire whether it be a right , or a wrong and unlawfull desire , shall depend on the judgement of others , to wit , the Presbytery . Ans . Erastus should have made others see how these two fights together , I see no inconsistencie , no more then to say a childe that desireth food is not debarred from food , and yet his desire of food may be subject to wise Stewards , whether every desire of food be right or no , as whether he should be answered by the Stewards , when he desireth poyson or bread , not to ea●e , but to cast to dogs ; and this will fight against preaching of the Word , the Professor that longeth for the comforts of the promises of the Gospel is not debarred from them , yet are preachers to try whether threatnings be not fitter for him in his security , then the comforts of the promises . Erastus . Paul , 2 Cor. 12. and 13. threatneth not exclusion from the Lords Supper , to those who had not repented of their schisme , drunkennesse , denying of the resurrection , but he saith he would severely punish them according to the authority and power given him of God , and he did this frequently , but we read not exclusion from the sacraments . Answ . 1. It is true , he threatneth those who had not repented of their uncleannesse , and fornication , and lascivionsnesse , 2. Cor. 12. 20 , 21. and c. 13. v. 2. threatneth that he will not spare , but use his authority , but doth Erastus read that he either threatneth , or doth actually , miraculously kill any of the beleevers at Corinth ? and let him answer why the Apostle did not write to the Church ▪ that they would conveene , and take course with them , as he did with the incestuous man , 1 Cor. 5. 2. when he saith , He will not spare when he comes , he must be expounded according to Erastus , to come as a miraculous Magistrate to kill them . 3. He saith not they were impenitent , but he feareth it should be so . 4. We hold if any should be contumacious , he would not onely deny pearls to such Swine , as his Master commanded , Mat. 7. But also follow that rule , Mat. 18. 4. Erastus himselfe granteth , if there shall be found a man that tramples upon the Pearles and holy things of God , as there must be some one or other , which is such as deserveth to be miraculously killed : By this Argument he granteth ( I say ) that such a one should not be admitted . Hunc ego minimè admittendum censeo , but how shall he be not admitted by this Argument ? Erastus . There were many amongst the Ancients who deferred their Baptisme to the end of their life , when therefore it is not written , that these are damned , who are excluded from the Supper , against their will , and not those who willingly exclude themselves from Baptisme , why should the one more then the other be delivered to Satan ? for he is in a better condition , who is excluded by the Presbyters against his will from the Supper , then he who doth of his owne free will exclude him selfe from Baptisme . Ans . That the Ancients in the Apostolique Church , which is our rule , did deferre baptisme till they died , Erastus cannot prove , the Ancients after them is not our rule . 2. That these were admitted to the Supper , a Sacrament of the nourishment of these in whom Christ liveth , before they were baptized , which is the Sacrament of Regeneration , and our first birth , cannot be defended by Erastus , and so he argues from an unlawfull practise . 3. We reach not that any is damned , because he is excluded from the Supper , that Exclusion is a punishment ; men are damned for sins , not for meer punishments , but his sin is bound in heaven , because of a great scandall ; such as incest , and that , if he repent not , is the cause of damnation : and therefore Erastus should have compared sinne with sinne , the scandall with sinfull refusing of Baptisme , and not have made a halting and lame comparilon , an argument that concludeth nothing . 4. Though those who deferred baptisme till death , should not have been delivered to Satan , yet will Erastus say , they should not have been otherwise censured ? for these behooved with Socinians to hold Baptisme but an indifferent rite , and by this many lived in the contempt of a necessary ordinance , ( though not simply necessary ) and so died with the sinfull want of Baptisme many times . Erastus . The exclusion of men from the Sacraments did creep into the Church when men did ascribe salvation to the Sacraments , therefore the Supper was given to dying men , though excommunicate ; as the deniall of the Supper damneth , Ergo , the receiving of it saveth . And so of Baptisme they reasoned . Answ . Erastus nameth this his own probable conjecture . But it is to beg the question , he may know how singular Augustine was for the necessity of Baptisme , and how many of the Ancients were against him in it . 2. He may know this consequence to be a conjecture , and that it is not stronger , because it is his owne . 3. He granteth that exclusion of the unworthy from the Sacraments is ancient , so much gain we by his conjectures . Erastus . When the Church wanted a Magistrate and the sword ▪ Paul commanded that the Corinthians might obtain by their prayers , that the incestuous man might be put from amongst them , that is , that he might be killed ; if he command not that the man be killed , but cast out of the Church only , he should say as much as if one should bid preserve the chastity of a Virgin by casting her out of the society of chaste matrons , into a bordell-house ; and Paul biddeth not the Corinthians deliver the man to Sathan ; but only that they would convene , that he might , as present ▪ in Spirit , deliver him to Sathan ; and that they would deliver him to Sathan , and put him out of the midst of them , by prayers and mourning : for in my corrected Thesis , I said , that this , put away evill out of the midst of you , Deut. 13. was in sillabs Deut. 17. & 19 & 21. 22 . ●er . &c. 24. once , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in them all . Answ . 1. That the Church wanted the sword is no wonder ; the Church as the Church , hath no such carnall weapons as the Sword , and that Peter in killing Ananias and Saphira , and Paul in striking Elymas with blindnesse , did supply the place of a Christian Magistrate which the Church then wanted , so as it was the Christian Magistrate his place , if there had been any to strike Ananias and Saphyra with sudden death ▪ I doe not beleeve upon Erastus his word , because I finde Nadab and Abihu killed immediately by the Lord from heaven with fire , Lev. 10. 1. and at that time when there was Moses and ordinary Magistrates to have killed them , and God immediately caused the earth to open her mouth and swallow up quick Cor●h and his company , and yet there was a Magistrate to doe justice on them , for their ●reasonable conspiracie ; and I see not how this may not warrant Ministers , when either heathen or Tyrannous Magistrates refuse to use the sword , to fall to as Pastors , and in an extraordinary manner use the sword against murtherers in the visible Church . It is true , Peters miraculous killing of Ananias , may possibly hold forth the duty analogically of punishing ill doers in a Magistrate , where he is a Christian member of the Church . But it is a conjecture without Scripture , that here Paul doth call the Corinthians in to come and be co-actors with him by their prayers in a particular miracle which was never wrought , for Erastus granteth he was never killed . 1. Paul reprehendeth their not mourning , v. 2. And you are puffed up , and have not rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mourned . This was an ordinary , Christian , not a miraculous duty , which they should have performed as a Church , though he should not have written to them . Let Erastus cleare how Paul chideth them , for want of an habituall Faith of Miracles , and of a sorrow proportioned thereunto . 2. That Gal. 5. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would God they were cut off that trouble you ; if this was in Pauls power , by a miracle to cut off the false Apostles , how could Paul wish to doe a Miracle and did it not ? 2. If he wished these should be cut off by the Galathians , then as Beza de Presbyt . page 82. saith , It was in the Galathians power so to doe ; and why should not they have prayed miraculously for the destruction of such ? 3. In all the word , to deliver to Satan , is never to kill by Satan ; as Beza saith , and Erastus can answer nothing to it . 4. That Paul here tooke the Magistrates Sword , because the Magistrate was a Heathen . 5. That the Church , when a Magistrate doth not his duty , is to pray , that God would by some miraculous and immediate providence , supply the Magistrates place . 6. That Paul doth rebuke the Corinthians , not for the omission of an ordinary duty , and the want of an ordinary faith , but because of the want of extraordinary sorrow , and of the faith of Miracles , in old and young , and women who could pray for the miraculous killing of this man , all these look beside the Text , for ver . 2. he saith such a hainous sin is committed , and ye are puffed up , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 blowen up , and have not rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mourned : this is the defect of an ordinary grace , and hardnesse and security that Paul rebuketh in them , as the first word signifieth , 1 Cor. 8. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 knowledge puffeth up , 1 Cor. 13. 4. Love 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not blown up , 1 Cor. 4. 6. 1 Cor. 4. 18. Col. 2. 18. and the other word signifieth ordinary sorrow , Mat. 5. 4 Blessed are they that mourn , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Luk. 6. 25. 2 Cor. 12. 21. Iam. 4. 9. Mat. 9. 15. There is not one word of praying by the faith of miracles in the Text ( for such a faith is required to such a prayer ) that God would miraculously destroy the man , or that Paul rebuked them for not praying in this miraculous faith : it is the way of Erastus to obtrude Expositions on the Scripture , so unknown and violent , as they are darker and harder to be beleeved then the Text. 5. The Apostle commandeth them to put out the man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , to kill him : What killing is this ? to pray to God that Paul miraculously may put him out , and kill him , give us any word of God , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Old or New Testament signifieth any such thing , there is not one word of Prayer in the Text : 6. They were to conveen , not simply , as Christians , to pray , but with the vertue of his spirit , as present in minde , but absent in body ; this must put some more in them then a mourning spirit , for the want of which he rebuked them ; it is as much as he and they together were to joyn in putting out the man and judging him , as he speaketh , ver . 12. 7. Nor is this all one , as to put a woman out of the company of chaste Matrons to the bordel house to keep her chastity , no more then the wisdom of God in Paul doth , Rom. 16. 17. 2 Thess . 3. 14. 15. put unordinate walkers out of the society of those who walk according to the truth of the Gospel , that they may preserve their sound walking , especially when exclusion from the godly causeth shame , and so humiliation , and this reason is against Gods wisdom , as much as against us : 8. That to put away evil , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Deut. 17. and 19. and 21. and 22. is to kill , is not denied , and that in divers places , but not to pray that evil may be miraculously put away , as Erastus saith : But we are to see , whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Hebrew ( of which Language Erastus professeth his ignorance ) signifie that alwayes : The contrary I have already shown , the learned Pagnine and Mercer say the contrary , that it signifieth , to cur , devide , or strike a Covenant , Gen. 15. 18. Deut. 19. 5. Jer. 34. 8. Esa . 55. 3. and Master Leigh in his late Critica Sacra on the Old Testament , saith , it signifieth to stay , to cut off by death , by banishment , or any other way , whereby a thing in use before , afterward ceaseth , Joel . 1. 8. Amos 1. 5. Yea , to cut off by divorce , as I noted before , and Exod. 12. 15. To cut off from Israel , is expounded , ver . 19. to cut off from the Church of Israel : Yea , the Law forbiddeth that not only in the time of the Passeover , they should not eat leaven , but it should not be in their houses ; Now must they be killed , if it was found in their houses , beside their knowledge ? see Deut. 16. 3. Exod. 13. 7. What Erastus saith to the end of the Chapter ; is but repeated reasons before answered . CHAP. X. Quest . 6. Arguments for Excommunication , from 1 Corinthians 5. vindicated . REverend Beza said , The world is the Kingdom of Satan , and he that is delivered to Satan , is cast out of Christs Kingdom to Satans Kingdom . Erastus saith , Is it not easier to heal them by remaining in the Church , having the Magistrate to compell them to their duty , then to cast them out of the Church ? The world is a kingdom of wickednesse and impiety , may you not more easily reforme a wanton and lascivious virgin within the house , then by casting her out of the house into a Bordel ? Will not slaves of Satan be more easily healed amongst the children of God , then amongst wicked men ? Ans . Whether , to be delivered to Satan , be to be put formally in his power , that he may vex the spirit , that the man may be humbled for sin , or if it be to be given to Satan only , consequenter , and cast out of the Church , that is , Christs office-house of Grace , to live as the world , of which Satan is God and Prince , 2 Cor. 4. 4. Joh. 12. 31. Ioh. 14. 30. It is not much to be disputed : But this reason is against the wisdom of God , who hath appointed that the shame , grief and sorrow of being put out of Christs family , should exceedingly humble the spirit of any in whom there is any thing of God. And Erastus might as well say to Paul , why dost thou command the Saints not to eat and drink with those that are called brethren , and yet are fornicators , covetous , extortioners , 1 Cor. 4. 11. and such as cause divisions and walk inordinately , as Rom. 16. 17. 2 Thes . 3. 14 , 15. and to withdraw from their company ? they must then converse only with the slaves of Satan , and the wicked of the world , when they are deprived of the society of the godly , and that is the way to loose them ; were it not better to command the just contrary , that the godly should eat , drink and converse with inordinate walkers ? for they may turn them from their evil way ; for will an unchaste virgin be made chaste by being cast out of her fathers house into a Bordel-house ? Will not slaves of Satan rather be healed amongst the children of God , then amongst the wicked ? But Erastus seeth not , that Gods aime in this separation , is not only , that the cast out man may be ashamed , 2 Thes . 3. 14 , 15. and so humbled and brought to repentance , when he findeth he is deprived of the blessings of the Saints , of their society , Ordinances : But also God hath a higher aime , to the end , the whole lump of Christs body , be not leavened and infected with the contagion of one man , 1 Cor. 4. 6 , 7. Gal. 5. 9. 10. Erastus . The similitude of a rotten Member , proveth nothing : for 1. There be no such sinners desperately uncurable , of whom there is no hope so long as they live , except pertinacious Hereticks erring in the foundation of salvation , and such as sin against the holy Ghost : 2. It is not necessary that men using reason and free will , be defiled and corrupted by other sinners , as the whole Member is by the rotten Member ; for as a Tree cannot but be burnt by the fire that seaseth on it , so neither can the Members continuated by touching , escape corruption . 3. None can be cast out of the Church into the world , as it is the kingdom of Satan , for if they keep the faith , though they were amongst Turks , they are not in the world , that is , in the Kingdom of Satan , nor in the world : 4. Paul would not have him cast out into the world , that his soul may be saved , for this were to make the weak dispair , and make them hypocrites . Ans . This similitude is the holy Ghosts in the very sense we use it , 2 Tim. 2. 17. Their word shall eat as a canker , a Metaphor ( as Calvin , Piscator , Marlorate observe ) from a rotten member that corrupteth the whole body , and to say , because a man hath reason and so free-will , that he will not be corrupted ; whereas the whole member by necessity of nature cannot but be corrupted by a rotten member , is to speak not like a Divine , but as Pelagius speaketh ; for except we use the remedy appointed of God , to eschew the contagion of the wicked , and eschew their company , as we are commanded , and as the godly have done , and the wicked have not done , and therefore have been infected with the way of other evil men , Prov. 22. 24. Prov. 5 ▪ 8 , 9. Psa . 26. 4 , 5. Esa . 2. 6 , 7. Psa . 119. 63. Psa . 139. 21 , 22. Rev. 18. 4. 2 Chro. 19. 2. ( though we should not actually be corrupted ) yet we sin and tempt the Lord , in that we seek a temptation to our selves ; yea , as all the reasons of Erastus are naturall and against the wisdom of God in his Ordinances , so expresly this ; God forbiddeth his people to marry with the Canaanites , or to make Covenants with them , Exod. 34. 12 , &c. Because ( saith the Lord ) they will insnare thee , and draw away thy heart after their Gods : May not Erastus say , But men have reason and free-will not to consent to the inticing counsels of the Canaanites , though they be joyned in Covenant , and marriage with them : Preterea non est necesse sic alios a malis contaminari . 3. It is good , that Erastus granteth , that pertinacious Hereticks , because uncurable , may infect others , for so the word expresly saith , what shall be done with them ? Erastus granteth they be rotten members : Ergo , either they must , by Excommunication be separated from the body , as we teach , or the body must seperate from them ; if this latter be said , all that Erastus inferreth against us , shall fall against himself : 1. We shall not need to be infected with the Heresie of such : Vtimur ratione , We have the Armour of reason and freewill , against this rotten and rotting member , saith Erastus : 2. We shall expose Hereticks to the Kingdom of Satan , and the world , by which they shall be hardned in their pernicious Heresies : Beside 3. We make them Hypocrites : 4. I see no warrant Erastus hath to say , That Hereticks erring in fundamentals are more contagious and rotten members then slaves of Satan , failing against the second Table : 5. He that is cast out of the Church , though amongst the Turkes , is in the world , but not of the world : If he keep the faith , and if he do so , he shall repent and come home to Christs visible Kingdom , but because he keepeth the faith , yet he is not a member of a visible Church , except he professe it , and repent ; for even the sound in faith , if obstinate in Scandals , may deserve Excommunication . 6. There is nothing said against Excommunication in the two last Reasons , but what striketh against Timothy his publike rebuking , and threatning wrath against those that sin openly , for they may through their owne corruption , so farre abuse publike threatnings , as they may be led on despaire and hypocrisie . Now Erastus as we shall hear , granteth those are to be rebuked openly , who sin openly . 7. We say not to deliver to Satan any man , is to deliver him to the World , but to cast him out of the Church , that consequenter he may be left to the World ; but that he should sinne , and be led away with the World , is neither the intrinsecall end of Excommunication , or of the Church , but an event or end by accident ▪ the intrinsecall end is the Salvation of the man. Beza saith , that Paul speaketh of a spirituall punishment , and not of a corporall . Erastus saith . When Peter killed Ananias corporally , was not this corporall punishment ? When Paul gave some to Satan for the destruction of the flesh , and God punisheth our sinnes with temporall death , how shall you prove that God , and the Apostles punisheth not sinnes with corporall , or politicke punishment ? Ans . The instance of Peters killing Ananias is in vain brought in ▪ It s but a begging os the question , for it is not said Peter delivered Ananias to Satan , that his Spirit might be saved . Who revealed this secret to Erastus , that Peter used the Ministery of Satan in killing Ananias ? We have as good reason to say , Peter delivered Ananias to a good Angell to be killed , as Erastus hath for his dreame . 2. We deny not , but God and the Apostles did punish sinne with corporall punishment , but let him show without the bounds of the place in controversie ; ( for we must expound Scripture by Scripture ) where ever the Church conveened together in the Name of the Lord Jesus , did judge and miraculously kill any member of the Church , that the Spirit may be saved in the day of God. Beza said , This killing by the people , would be ground of a great Calumnie , to make many say , Christians did usurpe the Sword of the Magistrate , and that they were not subject to the Magistrate . Erastus . We give this power of miraculous killing onely to the Apostles . Ans . Yea , But the calumny standeth so long as Erastus giveth to all the people the faith of Miracles to conveene and pray that Paul might miraculously kill those that offended the Church , and its probable when the enemies objected to Christians , all they could falsely , they would not have omitted this , that the very people by their prayers meet in one Church-jury , to kill Cesars Subjects . Beza said , The Christian Magistrate should by this kill all the drunkards , fornicators , and the like with the Sword. Erastus answereth , 1. All faults deserve not killing , but some other punishment of a lower degree . 2. The Lord himselfe appointed that the Magistrate should compell men to doe their duty , why then should Beza speake against God , and call this a compelling of men to be Hipocrites ? Ans . If other sins , as drunkennesse , fornication , extortion , doe infect the Church , and be scandalous to the very Gentiles , as the Apostle saith of incest , 1 Cor. 5. 1. 6 , 7. Upon the same reason Paul should have rebuked them , because they did not from the faith of Miracles pray that Paul might inflict some miraculous judgement by the Ministery of Satan , though lesse then death for other sinnes . But I pray you , Paul had either a warrant from God to kill this man , or he had none at all : If he had a warrant , why did he not that which is the part of a miraculous Magistrate without the prayers of the Corinthians ? Did Paul chide them , because they prayed not to God that he might doe his duty ? if he had no warrant at all , Why should he chide the Corinthians , for that they prayed not that he might doe a duty , which was not his duty ? For that is not Pauls duty , for the doing whereof he hath no warrant from God ; if it was his duty onely conditionally ; 1. What warrant is there in Scripture , to say , Paul should have miraculously killed the incestuous person , upon condition that the Corinthians had by the faith of Miracles , prayed that he might worke that miraculous slaughter , which because they did not , Paul was either exonered of that as no duty , or then Paul chided them , because they prayed not to prevene Pauls sinfull neglect ? 2. How was this revealed to the Corinthians , that they should pray that God by Paul , as by his Magistrate might revenge this incest , and not revenge their fronication , coveteousnes , extortion , Idolatry , especially seeing he saith that , v. 9. He had written to them in another Epistle , not to ke●p company with such ? Whence I thinke it evident , that Paul in another Epistle , had ordained separation of Fornicators , Coveteous persons , and the like , from amongst them , and so censures for all scandalous persons : And how shal we believe he would not teach them to cast out incestuous persons , that are far more scandalous ? And if so , he must have written in another Epistle of this miracle , that they were to pray he might work : Is it not evident by this , that Erastus his way , is full of Conjectures and groundlesse uncertainties . 2. We deny not that the Magistrate may compell men to do their duty ; nor doth Beza deny that : But that the Church hath or had any influence in the blood of an incestuous person , and in working of miracles for the bodily destruction of any , is most false , and cannot be proved by this Text : Nor do we think that the Church ( the weapons of whose warfare are carnall ) can compell any man by corporall punishment , to duties by the Sword ; for so their Spirituall way , which is terminated on the Conscience , should lead men to Hypocrisie in profession of the truth , for so reasoneth Erastus ; the Magistrate with the Sword rather punisheth sins committed in Gods Service , then forceth to duties : The fifth Argument of Beza is vindicated already . Erastus . We say not that Paul was to deliver the man to Satan , that he may be saved , but that Paul was to punish this high transgression with the Sword , to the terror of others ; but only he set bounds to Satan , that he should only kill his body , but not meddle with his soul ; but because the man repented , Paul hoped well of his soul , that his soul should be saved in the day of Christ . Ans . 1. Here Erastus doth more fully reveal the vilenesse of his opinion , for he granteth the intrinsecall end of this miraculous killing , is not the Salvation of the mans soul , but the revenging of the wickednesse of the sin , for the terror of others : Which is 1. Contrary to the Text , which saith , He was to be delivered to Satan ▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that the spirit may be saved . This noteth that the intrinsecall end of this delivering to Satan , was the Salvation of the mans soul : But the Text saith nothing of Erastus his end , that others may be terrified , though that may be an end . It is a wonder to me , that since Erastus granteth the man repented , even when Paul did in this Chapter chide with the Corinthians , that they delivered him not to Satan : For Erastus saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , He that hath done this deed , not he that continueth pertinaciously in it ( saith he : ) hence it is clear , that he repented at this time : How doth Paul chide them for not delivering a repenting man to the Devil ? that his Spirit may be saved ; if he repented , his spirit was saved ; Ergo , Paul was in the fault , and chid them without reason ; if they say , though he did repent , yet for example to terrifie others he should have been killed , 2 Cor. 2. saith , He was not killed ; and Erastus saith it ; Ergo , yet Paul failed , and they also . 3. It is against the intrinsecall end of that power which Erastus saith is miraculous : For Paul saith the end of that power is for Edification , not for Destruction , 2 Cor. 10. 8. Now the intrinsecall end of bodily killing , is peace , and terror to others , that they may be afraid to do so any more ▪ But the intrinsecall end , and finis operis , is not Edification , but finis operantis onely , for acts of Magistrates are not acts of the first Table which kindly , and per se , regardeth edification , but acts of the second Table , if their soules be saved who die , for their enormous crimes by the hand of the Magistrate : It is not from the violent death , as if it were an intrinsecall mean and ordinance appointed of God for conversion : But because God giveth to those who die that way , repentance . Yea , it is no more a mean of saving of the soule , then if they should die in their beds by some disease . To the examples of Hymeneus and Alexander , that they were not killed miraculously , I answered before . Erastus addeth no new reply to Beza . CHAP. XI . Quest . 7. Of the leaven , 1 Cor. 5. Erastus his sentence in his l. 3. c. 6. and ● . c. 7. Examined . Erastus . I shall grant ( since Beza will have it so ) that Paul expoundeth the Ceremony of leaven , in the celebration of the passeover , and that he doth not only allude to it : Paul compareth the feast of unleavened bread to the pilgrimage of our life in this world , and leaven signifieth wickednesse : Hence as the Iews all the time of the feast might eat no leavened bread , so all our life are vve to leave and forsake the vvorld and journey toward our promised Canaan , we are never to live wickedly , What can hence be collected ? but as he that eat unleavened bread , was to be killed , so should every wicked man be killed ? He that eat leavened bread in these seven dayes , was not commanded to be debarred from the Passeover : And the Passeover was the beginning of this feast , as faith in Christ was the beginning of our spirituall eating of Christ crucified for us , and of our new Christian life . Ans . I hold that learned Beza hath well expounded the leaven here ; he compareth the scandals of wicked men to leaven , the holinesse of the Saints to unleavened bread , and the publick Congregation to the feast of the Passeover , and Excommunication or putting away to the removing of the leaven ; for a scandalous man corrupteth the whole Church : so the Jewes and Rabbines , as Buxtorfius saith , that the Rabbins call naturall concupiscence , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Rabbi Alexander said after his Prayer : Lord , It is known to thee that it is my will to do thy will : But what retardeth me ? the leaven in the masse or lump , and Buxtorfius citeth the same place , 1 Cor. 5. 6. and Gal. 5. 9. And least we should think that he meant nothing but naturall concupiscense ; he saith in the Targum , They take the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for wickednesse and folly ; he citeth Medraseh Koheleth , cap. 7. ver . 8. except R. Samuel , had been long suffering , The Persian that he taught , had returned to folly , or his old wickednesse . Paul saith the same , Purge out therefore the old leaven , that ye may be a new lump : He speaketh to the Church conveened . 2. The comparison runneth so , that the Corinthians were to purge out the old leaven of wickednesse , and cast out the incestuous man , that they might be a new lump ; and this if it must alwayes be done , far more when they are to celebrate that feast that came in place of the passeover : Nor is the Apostle only Teaching what they could not lawfully do , all their life , as they were single Christians , but what was their duty as Christians , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 conveened together in a Church way , for Paul doth not command one single Christian to cast him out , but he commandeth the Church , gathered together in the name of the Lord Iesus , with Pauls spirit , and the power of our Lord Iesus Christ , ver . 4. 5. To purge out , not the leaven of sin in themselves , but the man , ver . 2. That he that hath done this deed may be put out , and ver . 7. Purge out the old leaven , and that the Apostles precept is to cast out the man , he saith it in expresse termes , ver . 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Cast out that wicked man from amongst you , and ver . 12. They were to judge him , as one that is within : 2. Because without conveening together in their daily conversation , they were to purge the leaven of m●lice out of their heart , it were a ridiculous thing for Paul to command them to convene altogether , to lead a godly life : 3. There was no need that they should convene with Pauls spirit , and in the name and power of our Lord Iesus Christ to lead a godly life , and for a personall purging of every man his own soul from this leaven . 4. They were to judge this man , ver . 12. Therefore this cannot be meant of a personall judging every one of themselves , but of a Church-judging of an offender . 5. If Erastus grant that Paul expoundeth the Ceremony of leaven , and putting away leaven in the Passeover : Let him see how he can apply this to killing of every single man that liveth wickedly : We apply it to the casting out of the scandalous out of the Church , as leaven was to be put out of the houses of all who were to eat the passeover . Erastus . I care not much whither the Lord himself immediatly , or the Magistrate was to kill him , who eat leavened bread at that time : But I rather think that God killed him ; for we finde none killed for this cause : 2. Because Paul writ of those who did unworthily eat , 1 Cor. 11. Ans . There is no ground that God any way would have them to be killed , that did eat unleavened bread , and that we finde none for that cause ever killed , is much for us : for then God did not execute any such Law , which ( as Erastus saith ) was broken by many : It is like God never made any such Law : 2. Because it is said , he shall be cut off , who eateth leavened bread , it followeth not that therefore this was done immediately by God ; for it is said , Lev. 18. 29. Whosoever doth any of these abominations , even the soul that committeth them , shall be cut off from amongst the people ; if that be killing ; it is known , the Magistrate was to kill such as committed incest , & did lie with beasts : But Vatablus expoundeth it of Excommunication , thus , Id est , Deus non agnoscet illum tanquam Israelitam & circumcisum : and Vatablus understood the Hebrew Tongue better , then Erastus who professeth he understandeth nothing of it . 3. That which Erastus saith of Paul , That God himself killed these at Corinth , who did eat and drink unvvorthily ; may as well insinuate the Magistrate should kill with the sword , all that communicateth unworthily ( which is absurd ) as it can prove , that those that eat leavened bread were immediatly killed of God. Erastus . Those that eat leavened bread vvere debarred from the passeover : But leavened bread signified , scelera , vvickednesse ; Ergo , vvicked men should by us be debarred from the Sacraments . 1. It is false that those that eat leavened bread vvere debarred from the passeover by Gods command : These tvvo differ much ; he that eateth leavened bread shall be cut off , and he that eateth leaven shall be debarred from the feast of the passeover , even as these two ; the childe that clattereth in time of Sermon , shall be whipt with rods , and the childe that clattereth in time of Sermon shall be excluded from hearing Sermon ; when the Master forbiddeth to clatter in time of Sermon , under a punishment , he biddeth them not be absent from the Sermon : so when God forbiddeth to eat leaven , under a punishment , be forbiddeth not to exclude the man from the passeover , the Lord commandeth both to be done . Ans . 1. This is Erastus his Argument , not the Argument of Beza , for eating of leaven signifieth a scandalous and openly wicked man ; and if this be the Assumption , it is true , but the Syllogisme so formed , shall conclude against Erastus : 2. It is certain that God commandeth the Priests not to violate his holy things , Ezech. 22. 26 , Hag. 2. 11. 12. Ezech. 44. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11. Else how failed they in keeping the charge of the Lord , in not differencing between the clean and the vnclean ? Now to eat the passeover with leavened bread is an expresse violation of the holy things of God , Exod. 12. ver . 8. You shall eat the flesh in that night , rost with fire and vnleavened bread , ver . 11. And thus shall ye eat it — ver . 15. Seven dayes shall ye eat unleavened bread , even the first day , ye shall put away leaven out of your houses : 2. He that is unclean is forbidden to eat the passeover , Lev. 9. 13. The clean only is to keep it : And he that is clean , and not on a journey , and keepeth it not , that man shall bear his sin ; Ergo , the unclean are excepted ; and he who is sanctified according to the purification of the sanctuary only by the Law , is to eat , 2 Chro. 3● . 9. Therefore Hezechiah prayed that God would pardon them that were not so cleansed , ver . 18. To crave pardon presupposeth a sinne , Num. 9. 3 , 4 , 5 , 6. But so it is , That he that eateth unleavened bread in any of these seven dayes , was unclean , and to be cut off for his uncleannesse , and transgressed this Ceremoniall Law , Exod. 12. 8. 15. Levit. 9 ▪ 13. Ergo , he was not to be admitted to the holy things of God , except the Priests and those who had the charge of the Passeover ▪ should know him to be purified , Ezech. 22. 26. Hag. 2. 11 , 12. And we know it was the Priests part to pronounce any clean or unclean , & that the passeover was one of the chief of the holy things of God. 3. Erastus his conjecture , That he that did eat leavened bread , was not to absent himself from the Passeover ; but to come tali modo , according to the Law : As the childe that clattereth in time of Sermon , is not bidden be absent from the Sermon , may prove as well that no unclean , no heathen , or uncircumcised , are forbidden to eat the Passeover ; for no Law of God forbiddeth either to eat the Passeover , except this , that only the circumcised and the unclean were forbidden ; when the Lord in his Law putteth an expresse and a differencing , or discriminative character on those that eat , to wit , that they be circumcised and clean who shall eat ; Ergo , God , in that putteth an evident inhibition on those that are uncircumcised heathen and unclean , that they are not to eat , as when God Commandeth every Male to be circumcised ; we infer then no Female were to be circumcised . And by this means the uncircumcised Moabite , the Philistine , were not by the Priests and Porters debarred out of the Temple , or from the Passeover , so they would be circumcised and turn Jews : Even as the childe is not excluded by a command of the Master from hearing Sermon , only he is forbidden to clatter in time of Sermon : But a Iew was both forbidden uncleannesse Ceremoniall by an expresse Law , and by another Law he was forbidden to come to the Passeover ; and a heathen , as heathen , was both forbidden to eat , and the Priests forbidden to admit him . Erastus . Though we should grant , That those that eat leaven were debarred from the Passeover ; yet it shall not follow , that those that live wickedly , shall be debarred from the Lords Supper , for the Feast of unleavened bread , typified not the Supper of the Lord , but the whole time of our life : Otherwise , saith he , ( in his Thesis ) we may live wickedly all our dayes , except when we come to the holy Supper ; as the Jews might eat unleavened bread at any time , except on those dayes when the Lord forbade them . Ans . 1. We contend not , that debarring of men from any one Ordinance , was signified by putting away of the Leaven : But that by putting of leaven from their houses and Table , was typified ( as Paul here expoundeth it ) the putting of a wicked person out the midst of the Church , 1 Cor. 5. 2. compared with ver . 5 , 6 , 7. 13. If the Feast of unleavened bread , typified all our life that we should be holy ; yet it had a speciall relation to our Purification , when we did partake of the most holy Ordinances of God , such as was the Passeover then , and to us the Lords Supper : Else , Erastus might say , God hath forbidden single Christians to live at all , except they lived holily , which is a vain conceit . It is not lawfull to Erastus to put significations on types , it his will ; and therefore that that Feast pointed out holinesse all our life , is utterly denyed ; for eating of leavened bread , except in these dayes forbidden , was not a sin , nor any Ceremoniall type at all , no more then our common bread and wine are signes of Christs body and blood . 2. Paul compareth the Feast to the lump of the Visible Church ; so as the leaven was to be removed out of all houses of Israel ; because it did Ceremonially infect , corrupt , and leaven them , and so was to be purged ; so did the in●●stuons man , leaven the Visible Church of Corinth , and was to be purged out : Nor do I contend , that the Lords Supper here is meant , though I know no solemn Spirituall Feast that the visible Church now hath , but the Supper of the Lord : But rather I understand , Church-Communion in the dain●ies of the Gospel , which are set forth to us under the similitude of a Feast , Matth. 22. Luke 14. 16 , 17 , 18 , &c. Prov. 9. 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. Cant. 5. 1. Erastus . The leaven of the Passeover does not so signifie impurity of life , that Excommunication can be hence gathered : therefore the Apostle alludeth to that place , that or the like way , as the Jews did Celebrate their Passeover without leaven ; so it becometh us to Celebrate our Passeover without the leaven of malice and wickednesse : Leaven simply , may either signifie good or evil , as Matth. 13. and 16. and Potuit , it might signifie our naturall corruption . For God not only forbiddeth to eat leaven , but to have it in the house ; and leaven signifieth 〈…〉 sse so to be punished , as ye● say , even by death . Ans . The Leaven of the Passeover , signified so impurity , as we are to put out the person that leaveneth the Church , out of the Church , as they were to put leaven out of the house ; and not only simply , not to eat it ; so are we not only , not to eat and drink with a scandalous man , but he is to be reputed no member of the Church , but a leavening and contagious man ; and therefore Paul doth not here , as Erastus dreameth , show what way every one in his own personall practise and duty , as a single Christian is to do , that he may save his own soul ; and therefore every one was to celebrate a Christian Passeover in his own soul , laying aside the leaven of malice : Though I grant , That Paul , ver . 8. doth infer and draw a conclusion of a personall purging out of the leaven of malice and hypocrisie out of every mans heart : But Paul doth expresly command the Corinthians as a convened Church , to put out from amongst them another man , for the saving of that other mans soul : And what they should do in a Church society toward the man , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Who hath done this , to wit , down right they should Iudge him , Cast him out , purge him out as a leavening peece . And the world cannot give any other meaning of the words , then that , as the Iews were to put all leaven from amongst them , when they were to celebrate their Passeover : So the Corinthians were to exercise the like work , upon this incestuous man , and to put him out from amongst them , as one delivered to Satan , as a lump of sowre leaven ; and we seek no more for Excommunication . 2. Leaven signifieth Matth. 13. good , the Kingdom of God is compared to leaven : But here it is corruption of contagious scandall in this incestuous man ; and such leaven as is to be cast out , and purged away . Now , I hope , we must not purge out , and cast away the Kingdom of heaven : and Matth. 16. 6. The leaven of the corrupt and false Doctrine of Pharisees and Sadduces , that corrupteth the hearts of men , is meant , and of this leaven we are to beware : But why doth Erastus strive to bring the reader in a good opinion of leaven , which Paul would have us to detest ? I know not a reason , but because the place is so evident for the casting out of an incestuous man from amongst the Corinthians , lest he should infect the flock , and that by the Church convened together in the name and power of Christ , that his soul may be saved ; and this is the very excommunication that we assert . 3. This leaven , ( saith he ) may signifie naturall corruption : Now Erastus putteth us to ( a may be , ) but ( a may be ) will not do it : For the Text saith not , I hope , by Erastus his confession , that the poor man must be delivered to Satan , that is , miraculously killed , for naturall concupiscence . All the world thus are delivered to Satan , as being heirs of wrath for sin Originall , at least in demerit . 2. The man was not judged , purged out , and cast out , as leaven that sowred the Church , for naturall corruption . 3. Paul offendeth not with them , that they were puffed and mourned not for the mans Originall sin , but for his actuall wickednesse , because he had gone in to his fathers wife , an Abomination that the Gentiles are ashamed to name . Erastus . Then the man must be killed , as he that eat leavened bread was killed : and though the punishments of Moses Law as such , must not be brought in the Christian Church , yet if God subject men to the Magistrates Sword , men cannot free them from it , though there may be degrees of punishment . Ans . We denyed that those that eat leavened bread with the Passeover were killed , but onely excommunicated and cut off from the congregation : God never subjected any to the sword , for that cause . 2. We deny that therefore by proportion the incestuous man should be killed ; by what consequence will Erastus prove that those that gathered sticks on the Lords day , those that are stubborn to Father or Mother , those who commit fornication now in the Israel of God under the New Testament , must be stened to death by the Magistrate , or miraculously killed by the Apostles ? it must be by the same consequence , that Erastus reasoneth here . But did God kill immediatly any offenders at all for originall sin , some one more nor other ? as Erastus dreameth this man was killed . 3. What warrant hath Erastus that the Devill killeth any one of the visible Church now under the New Testament , and any of the children of God , whose spirit are saved in the day of the Lord ? proferat tabulas . Erastus saith it , neither Prophet nor Apostle in the Old or New Testament ever said it . Erastus said , an Anagogicall sense is not concludent . Ans . Where the Holy Ghost giveth the sense , it is false , saith Beza . 2. Why doth then Erastus conclude miraculous killing from the Types of the Old Testament ? Erastus . Where I pray you doth Paul say that the punishment of eating leavened bread did typifie your Excommunication ? Ans . The word Excommunication may be by the Church used as the Word , Sacrament , Trinity . But the thing is not ours , but an ordinance of Iesus Christ . 2. Paul saith in this very place , as Israel were to put away leaven in their Passeover , so is the convened Church of Corinth in the name and power of Christ to put out , judge and purge out a corrupting and leavening incestuous man , and this is all we seeke for Excommunication . Erastus . I never finde the name of the Passeover in the New Testament put for the Supper of the Lord. Ans . We are not in such need of that interpretation , as to put the name of the one for the other . But let Erastus shew where he readeth that the thing , to wit , that the one Sacrament succeeded to the other ; and Beza may thence inferre his point , if God would have no man to eat the Passeover with leavened bread , and if eating of leavened bread , and bread it selfe was to be put out of all the houses of Israel , thereby signifying that incestuous and scandalous persons are to be cast out of the Church , and so from the Sacraments ; let Erastus see what Beza hath said amisse here . Erastus . God would have the Iewes to eate the Passeover without leavened bread , that they might remember of their wonderfull deliverance out of the hard bondage of Egypt , and of the deliverance of their first borne . Ans . Reverend Beza saith thesetwo were by-past benefits remembred in that Sacrament : But we have the Holy Ghost expounding that ●he putting away of leavened bread , did typifie the purging out of the incestuous men , and other scandalous persons out of the Church , which is our point , otherwise let Erastus shew us what is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the whole Masse and lumpe , for it signifieth either one single man ; Or 2. The Masse and body of the visible Church , of which the incestuous man was a Member ; or some third thing , which Erastus and his followers must teach us . Now the whole lumpe can neither signifie the incestuous man , nor any other single member of the Church . Not the incestuous man , 1. He was not the whole lumpe in danger to be leavened , for he was the leven , then he was not the lump in danger to be leavened ; for the one is the agent infecting , the other the patient infected . The whole lumpe was the thing out of which the leaven was to be removed , the terminus à quo , the incestuous man was to be purged out , therefore the leaven cannot signifie wickednesse in abstracto , as Erastus saith , but the wicked man in concreto ; for the leaven must signifie that which is cast out , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , out of the midst of them , v. 2. Now this was not incest , but the man that had his fathers wife , and had done that deed . 2. Again , the leaven was the person to be delivered to Satan , that had a soul to be saved in the day of the Lord Iesus . But wickednesse in abstracto is not delivered to Satan , nor hath it a Spirit to be saved in the day of the Lord. 3. The leaven is such a one as is to be judged , as is within the Church , v. 12. and is called a brother , with whom we are not to eat , v. 11. now this cannot be said of wickednesse in abstracto . But neither can the whole lumpe be one single man ; 1. One single man needed not the solemn conveening of the Church in the Name and power of the Lord Jesus , for his personall purging , for his personall purging is not a Church-act , but an act of a mans daily conversation and Christian walking . 2. The purging out , and the casting out is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , v. 2 out of the midst of them , then there was a society to be purged ; Ergo , not a single man onely . Much more I said before , which cannot but mist Erastus , or any his followers , except they expound this whole lump to be the body of the visible Church of Corinth . 2. So Gal. 5. 9. he addeth v. 10. he that troubleth you , ( the lump in danger to be leavened , ) shall bear his judgement , v. 12. I would they were cut off that trouble you . Then the whole Churches of Galatia were the troubled lumpe , & so it must be here , if this truth be so convincing out of the Text , let any Erastian extricate himself , if he can deny , but here is a Church-lump , a Church of Rulers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gathered together in the Name and power of the Lord Iesus , that purgeth out of it selfe leaven , not wickednesse , in abstracto , as I have demonstrated , but a wicked man named a brother , lest he leaven the whole Church , to the end his Spirit may be saved ; Iudge reader , if this be not name , nature and thing , of that which Erastians deny , to wit , of Excommunication . I humbly provoke them to make good sense of the 1 Cor. 5. and shew me what is the wicked man. 2. The casting out of the midst of you . 3. The saving of his Spirit . 4. The convened together court , instructed with the Name , and authority , and power of Christ , and if this be not a Church power , efficacion , and authoritative , being steeled with the power of the Head of the Church . 5. What is the leaven ? 6. What is the act of leavening ? 7. What is the whole lumpe ? 8. What is the purging out , putting out , and judging of the man ? 3. We know Erastus denieth any Church Government at all , but some acts of punitive justice in the Magistrate . But the Churches praying , consenting that a scandalous person shall be delivered to Satan , or some other waies punished by the Christian Magistrate , are acts of Church government , so proper to the Church , as the Magistrate as the Magistrate , cannot exercise such Acts. Erastus . Paul-delivered Hymeneus and Alexander the same way to Satan , by miraculous killing of him ; and whereas it is said , that they may learne not to blaspheme : Judges speake so when they kill Murtherers and Theeves that he shall teach them to doe so no more by taking the head from them . Ans . That word of a judge killing a man for Murther , Sirra , I le teach you other manners then to kill , can no waies be ascribed to Paul , who doth not scoffe so at taking away mens lives . Paul who wished to be separated from Christ , for the contumacious Iewes , and would not kill any by Satan , since his rod and power was for edification , 2 Cor. 10. 8. and that the Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord , 1 Cor. 5. 5. he speaketh more gravely and lesse imperiously , and without boasting and jeering in a matter of Salvation . 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they may be instructed or disciplined not to blaspheme ; cannot be simply that they may blaspheme no more , because killed by the Devill . For 1. let Erastus in the Old or New Testament produce a parallel place for that Exposition , where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be instructed is ascribed to the dead ; but this is a common fault in all Erastus his expositions of Scripture , that they want all ground in Scripture , as let me put upon all the followers of Erastus to give a parallel to this Exposition of Mat. 18. Let him bee to thee , that is , to thee onely , when Christ speaketh of a generall Rule of all that scandalizeth . 2. Let him be as a Heathen . Give a place of Scripture for this . 1. Let him be as such Heathen onely as acknowledge Cesar , and his Deputies for lawfull Iudges . 2. A parallel for this we seek , Let him be as a Heathen , that is , convene him before an heathen Iudge . 3. What Scripture expoundeth delivering to Satan for edification , and not destruction , 1 Cor. 5. to be a Magistraticall killing by the power of the Devill , that others may feare . 4. Put out , purge out , judge those only that are within , are expounded by Erastus , pray for a miraculous destruction by the devill , as the lictor and hangman of the Apostle , that none may be killed miraculously for enormous scandals , no not such as Elimas the sorcerer , who was never within the Church ; but those that are within : And did the company of the Saints , pray with the Saints , that signes and wonders , and so miraculous killing might be wrought , not on any but on those that are within the visible Church , not on the enemies , and Iews haters of Christ , and without the Christian Churches , when the Apostles miraculously escaped out of their prisons ? Act. 4. 29 , 30. Act. 5. 19 , 20 , 21 , 22. Act. 12. 7 , 8 , 9. Act. 16. 25 , 26. 27 , 28 ? I might alledge many other such like interpretations of Erastus . 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the New Testament , signifieth to instruct and chastise the living , never any such thing is ascribed to the dead . Gal. 5. 22 , 30. Tit. 2. 20. Rev. 3. 19. Heb. 12. 10. Luk. 23. 16 , 22. 2. Cor , 6 ▪ 9. Act. 22. 3. Act. 7. 22. as they that are taught to sinne no more by being killed . 6. Robert Stephan . citeth in the margent , 1 Cor. 5. 5. to expound it of excommunicating of Hymeneus and Alexander , so doth Piscator , so Calvin , Beza , Marlorat , so Vatablus saith , Quos eje●i ex ecclesia et censui magis dignos esse ecclesia Satane quam Christi , si non resipiscant . 7. Beza De Presbyt . p. 87. learnedly observeth that it is no Grammer ; for if the effect of learning not to blaspheme be suspended upon the miraculous killing of Alexander , then he was first killed , & then learned not to blaspheme . But so Paul could have said he was killed , ut non blasphameret , that he might not blaspheme , not that he might learn not to blaspheme . CHAP. XII . Quest . 8. The eschewing of company with the scandalous , vindicated from Erastus his exceptions . BEsides other arguments from Mat. 18. and 1 Cor. 5. for excommunication , we argue thus : Those upon whom the Church is to put such a publike note of shame or a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as they are to withdraw from their company , and not to eat and drink with them , those are cast out of the Church , and so cut off from the body of Christ , and excommunicated . But the Church is to put such a note of shame , as to withdraw from the company of , and not to eat with those that are named brethren , and yet are fornicators , covetous , idolators , extortioners , railers , 1 Cor. 5. 11. and cause divisions and offences contrary to the Doctrine of the Gospel , who serve not the Lord Jesus , but their owne belly , Rom. 16. 17 , 18 ▪ who walk disorderly , are busie-bodies , idle , and obey not the Doctrine of the Apostles . 2 Thes . 3. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , Ergo. The proposition I prove , 1 Cor. 5. 11. he saith , v. 9. I wrote to you in an Epistle , not to keep company with fornicators , the same word that in the abstract is spoken of the incestuous man , v. 1. by which it is clear Paul had forbidden any company with such incestuous men . Now he had not forbidden them to keep company with dead men , if the man was to be miraculously killed , Ergo , it was his will before , that such a one should be judged , and put out , else he could not so sharply rebuke them , for not casting him out , and if now only he had first taught , and written to them to cast him out : as if excommunication had been in this same very Chapter instituted by Paul , and v. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 now I have written unto you , not to keep company with one named a brother , who is a fornicator ; this must be in the same Chapter , for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 now I have written , must be in relation to this v. 9. I wrote unto you in a Epistle before : now if here at this present he wrote to them , not to keep company with him , it must be when he commandeth to cast him out v. 13. and to judge him v. 12. so that not to keep company with such fornicators , must necessarily presuppose a casting out , and that the fornicator , with whom we are not to keep company in a familiar manner , is a man cast out of the Church , and so excommunicated . 2. Paul would never forbid brotherly familiarity with any remaining a brother , a member of the Church , and of a body with us in visible profession of the truth , as partakers of one body and blood of Christ , as all the members of the Church eating at one Lords table are , 1. Cor. 10. 16 , 17. 3. The Apostle saith such a fornicator is but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 named ▪ a brother , and so in the esteem of the Church no brother , and so not of the visible body of Christ . 4. Paul bringeth in this as a reason why they should cast out the incestucus man , v. 9. did not ( saith he ) I write to you before , and do I not now write , v. 11. even now that you are not to k●ep intimate familiarity with such titular brethren , who are brethren in name only ? Therefore put out from amongst you this man , v. 13. the Apostles argument to infer they ought to judge , and put such a man out of the Church ; because they are not to eat with him , were of no weight , if this ●schewing of familiarity with one who is a brother only in name , did not infer the Churches casting of him ou● . Erastus . it is false that Paul forbiddeth to eat with him who is cast out , for he forbiddeth not eating with a dead man. Ans . This is to beg the question , Erastus should teach us how Pauls argument cohereth ; for the text saith , he must be cast out ; why ? you must not eat with him ; then he supposeth he must be a living man , for Paul needed not fear they would eat with dead men , nor can this be Pauls consequence ; you are not to eat with the incestuous , Ergo , he must be delivered to Sathan , that he may be miraculously killed ; for that is a false consequence , for then all covetous persons , all drunkards ▪ all idolators , all extortioners , should have been killed by Paul , because with none of these we are to eat . Erastus . It is false that Paul forbiddeth as to eat meat with such ; Yea in no place he forbiddeth to eat with heathen , but elsewhere granteth it to be lawfull , and in this Chapter he permitteth private commerce with them . Ans . 1. Let the reader judge whether Erastus resuteth Paul , or Beza , Paul forbiddeth to eat with a brother ; that is a fornicator : Erastus saith , he forbiddeth no such thing . 2. Though I think Christians may eat with heathens , 1. Cor. 10. 27. and that Paul did eat with heathen ; yet it is no argument to say , it is therefore lawfull to eat with one cast out of the Church , because we may eat with heathens to gain them , and we are not bidden abstain from heathens company , that they may be ashamed of their religion , ( though Christians are to use no heathens with intimate familiarity as we do our brethren in Christ ; ) But we are to eschew intire fellowship with a scandalous and cast out brother , to gain him , that he may be ashamed , 2 Thes . 3. 14. and in this a scandalous brother is in worse case then a heathen : But in other respects he is in better condition , as being under the medicine of the Church . 3. Though we may have commerce , and buy and ●ell with heathens , and neglect no dutie● of humanity to them , as to receive them into our house , and to be hospitall to them , Heb. 13. 2. Iob 31. 32. Yet this will conclude intire fellowship with neither heathen , or scandalous brethren ; Yea , we are not to receive a false teacher into our house , 2. Ioh. ver . 10. Yet are we not forbidden to neglect duties of common humanity to false Teachers , though we be forbidden intirenesse of Brotherly fellowship with them . Erastus . There is not the same reason of holy things , and of private civill things ; for this , not eating , belongeth to private conversing with men , not to publike Communion with them in the holy things of God : One saith , It is in our liberty , Whether we converse familiarly with wicked men , or not , But it is not in our power , Whether we come to the Lords Supper , or not ; And Paul will not have us to deny any thing that belongeth to Salvation ; and therefore he saith , 2 Thess . 3. Admonish him as a Brother ; and none , I hope , can deny , but the Sacraments are helps of godlinesse and Salvation . Ans . 1. It is true , that avoiding of the company of scandalous Brethren , hath in it something civill ; but it is a censure-spirituall , and a Church-censure , two wayes : 1. Objectively , in its tendency , Respectu termini ad quem . 2. Effectively , in its rise and cause , Respectu termini à quo , it is a spirituall censure Objectively , because it tendeth to make the party ashamed , that he may repent , and become a Brother with whom we are to converse ; and therefore is destinated for no civill use , but for the good of his soul , that is a member of a Church , that he may return to what he was . 2. This censure , though one private Brother may exercise it upon another , yea , a woman on a man , who yet hath no Authority over the man , is notwithstanding in its rise and efficient cause , a Church-censure . 1. If Christ will not have one Brother to condemne another , while first he rebuke him ; and if he be not convinced , while he do the same before two or three witnesses ; and if he yet be not gained , one private Brother may not after conviction , before two or three witnesses repute him as a Heathen , or complain of him before an Heathen Iudge , as Erastus saith ; How shall we imagine any one single Brother may withdraw Brotherly fellowship from another Brother , by his own private Authority , while he first be sentenced before the Church ? And the Church shall convince him to walk disorderly , to cause divisions and offences , to be a Fornicator , a Covetous person , and so to be unworthy of the intire Brotherly fellowship of another ? For if this order were not in the Church , every Brother might take up a prejudice at his Brother , and so break all bands of Religious Communion , and Brotherly fellowship , and dissolve and make ruptures in the Churches : Now certain it is , These Texts , Rom. 16. 17 , 18. 2 Thes . 3. 11 , 12 , &c ▪ in the letter , intimate no such order as is Matth. 18. But it is presupposed , as clear by other Scriptures , we are not to withdraw from an offending Brother , but after such an order : Now the places in the letter , except we expound them by other Scriptures , do not bear that we are to rebuke our Brother , before we withdraw from him , contrary to Levit. 19. 17. 2. If I am to withdraw from a Brother , all Brotherly fellowship by these places ; then I am to esteem him as a Heathen , and as a Brother in name , not in reality , 1 Cor. 5. 11. Whereas once I esteemed him a Brother , and did keep Brotherly fellowship with him ; now this is materially Excommunication ▪ I do no more in this kinde to one who is formally Excommunicated ; yea , I am not so strange to a Heathen ; Ergo , This I must have done upon some foregoing sentence of the Church , otherwise , I might un-Church and un-Brother the man whom the Church neither hath , nor can , un-Church and un-Brother . 3. Eschewing of Brotherly fellowship to any , is an act of Government distinct from the Preaching of the Word , tending to make a Brother that walketh disorderly ashamed , that he may repent , and of a Brother in name only , may become a Brother in reallity , 2 Thes . 3. 14. But this act of Government belongeth not to the Christian Magistrate ; for every Brother ( saith Erastus ) may exercise it toward his Brother ; Ergo , here is Church-Government that the Magistrate hath no hand in , contrary to the way of Erastus , and not in the hands of Pastors , for it is distinct from Preaching ; nor is it in a Colledge of Pastors , Doctors , and Elders , for Erastus denyeth any such Colledge ; Ergo , here every one must govern another , the man the woman , and the woman the man ; the son the father , if he walk unorderly , and the Father the Son ; this can be nothing , but the greatest Confusion on Earth . 4. To put any to shame , especially publikely , by way of punishment for publike sins , must come from some Iudges , or others armed with Authority , Iudg. 18. 7. 1 Cor. 4. 14. 1 Cor. 6. 5. 1 Cor. 25. 34. Then the Apostles sense cannot be , that every one hath power of himselfe without the Church , or any authority there from to put his brother to shame ; for when a brother is not to eat with a scandalous brother , he must be convinced by the Church to be scandalous , and so cast our , 1 Cor. 5. 11 , 12 , 13. as we have proved before , and every man here should be his owne judge , and party in his owne cause , except he put his brother to some shame by an higher authority then his owne . The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is to put a publike note or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the offender . So Stephanus . So Piscator , Nota ignominiosâ excommunicationis . Pomponius laetus de Magistr . Rom. ● . 21. Censores quinto● quoque anno creari solebant , hic prorsus cives sic notabantur , ut qui Senator esset ejece●etur Senatu , qui eques Romanus equum publicum perderet , &c. Mathaeus Harnish & Gec . Gabellus , who adde to Zanchius his Commentary in 2 Thes . say , Est not ● quâdam insignire , et in aliquem animadvertere ; ut censores apud Romanos notare aliquem solebant , they expound it the publike note of Excommunication . Beza saith it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie and declare , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notate , & veluti inustâ not â compungite . So Calvin , Marlorat . And I wonder that Erastus can say with any , that it is in our power to converse , or not to converse with wicked men ; are we not discharged by Gods Spirit to converse with them ? As we are commanded to eat and drinke at the Lords Table , and is it in our power morally to obey , or disobey any Commandement of God ? Except Erastus will say with Papists , that God doth here give counsels , not commands , Rom. 16. 17. 2 Thes . 3. 14. 1 Cor. 5. 9 , 11. And whereas Erastus saith , Paul will have us 2 Thes . 3. 15. to admonish this man as a brother ; Ergo , In holy things , and in the Sacraments ▪ that are helpes of piety and Salvation , we are not to ●ast him off : It is true , the cast out man is not to be reputed as an enemy , but a brother . Yet a sicke and diseased brother , under the roughest Medicine of the Church , to wit , the rod of Excommunication , that the Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. But withdrawing of brotherly fellowship , is not a meere civill unbrothering of him , for if the brotherly fellowship of Christians must be spirituall , religious , and for the edifying of one anothers soules , for exhorting one another , to prevent hardning of heart , for provoking one another to love , and to good works , to teach one another , to comfort and support one another , as we are expresly commanded by the Holy Ghost , Heb. 3. 13. Heb. 10. 24. Col. 3. 16. 1 Thess . 5. 11 , 14. Mal. 3. 16. Jer. 50. 5. Zach. 8. 22. Psal . 42. 4. I wonder where Erastus learned this Divinity , to say , the denying of this edifying Communion to a scandalous brother , while he be ashamed and repent , Is to deny nothing that belongeth to his salvation : Admonition is but one of twenty comfortable acts of Communion , which we deny not to him , least the man should despaire , and we should cast off all care , hope , or intention to save his soul , whereas the genuine and intrinsecall intention of avoiding him , and casting him out of the Church , is , that he may be saved : Lastly , we deny not admonition , and preaching of the word to the man , thus cast out , because they be converting Ordinances , simply necessary to work the mans humiliation and repentance ; but the Lords Supper is a confirming Ordinance , and denied to the excommunicated while he is in that condition upon that very reason , that it is denied to Pagans and Heathens ; and though it be an help of piety , it is no help either to a Pagan , or an excommunicate man , but damnation : But it may be , the excommunicate man hath faith . I answer , To us in the Court of the Church , in which the Seals are dispensed , he hath no more then a Heathen hath ; and therefore , in confirming Ordinances , he is looked on by the Church as an Heathen ; and if the reason of Erastus be good , The Church is to deny no helps of godlinesse and salvation to him , though we deny private food to his body , because the Sacraments are necessary helps . Then 1. I much doubt , if the Church be to deny the necessary helps of godlinesse and salvation to a Pagan living amongst us ; Ergo , shall we not deny the Sacraments to a Pagan ? 2. We are not to avoid his company , and deny the edifying acts of Communion , which I named before , for these are necessary helps of salvation . 3. It is not the mans sin by this reason , That he eateth and drinketh unworthily ; for if it be not the Churches sin to give him the seals , because the Seals are adminiclees and helps of piety , and saving of the soul ; by the same reason , it is not the mans sin to receive the Lords Supper , for it must be equally an help of godlinesse and salvation to the Communicant receiving , as to the Church giving : Now Paul saith , 1 Cor. 11. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily , eateth and drinketh to himself judgement . So Erastus teacheth us , that it may be a sin to Swine publikely known to be such , to receive pearles , when it is no sin , but the Churches duty to give these pearls to such known Swine , which is most absurd and impious . Erastus . I said before , that God doth not exclude sinners from the Sacraments , but gather them in to them , that they may be more and more invited to repentance , and more easily raised up again ; for Sacraments , and so many Ceremonies also , were for this end ordained , that they might draw men to the love and care of true piety and holynesse , as Moses saith , Deut. 14. Ans . Erastus acknowledgeth this to be no new Argument ; therefore we may passe it , it is the chief pillar of his opinion : But I put it in forme thus , to Erastus . Those whom God inviteth to repentance , those he will not exclude from the Sacraments : But now under the Gospel , he inviteth all , even many Pagans and Heathen to repentance , 1 Tim. 2. 4. God will have all , even Heathen Magistrates , to be saved , and to come to the knowledge of the truth , so Act. 17. 30. God now commandeth all men , every where , even the Idolators , and blinde Philosophers at Athens , who erected an Altar to the unknown God , ver . 23. and who jeered at the Doctrine of the Resurrection , ver . 32. even those God inviteth to repentance ; Ergo , God excludeth not Pagans from the Sacraments ; but the conclusion is absurd and blasphemous ; therefore so must one of the premises be , but the Assumption is Scripture ; Ergo , The Major Proposition of Erastus must be blasphemous . God inviteth scorners to repentance , and rebukes are means of repentance ; Ergo , we may rebuke scorners ; Gods spirit saith , Rebuke not a scorner , Prov. 9. 7 , 8. His Proposition then must be , Those whom God inviteth to repentance , those God excludeth not from any mean of piety and sanctity : It is most false , God inviteth Dogs and Swine to repentance , and commandeth them to be holy , and the pearls of the Gospel are means of repentance , and holinesse : Must we therefore , Cast pearls to dogs and swine ? The contrary our Saviour injoyneth , Matth. 7. 6. 2. Moses , Deut. 14. 1. forbiddeth diverse Ceremonies and Sacraments of the Heathen by this Argument : Ye are the children of the Lord your God ; and he saith expresly , that the stranger may eat some unclean thing , but the Lord saith to them , You shall not do so , for thou art an holy people to the Lord thy God : Whence it is evident Moses saith poynt blank contrary to Erastus ; for Moses saith , that Ceremonies and Sacraments are for this end , to draw only the holy and sanctified people of God , to a further love and study of true piety and sanctity ; was not the eating of the Passeover a mean of Repentance , as well as the eating of the Lords Supper ? no question , but God invited the uncircumcised to repentance , but forbiddeth them to eat the Passeover . Beza said , Sinners vvere indeed called to the sacrifices , but such as professed repentance . Erastus saith , Then ●●e agree , for vve dispute only of those vvho acknovvledgeth their sins , and promise amendment . Ans . We are not willing to hold up a needlesse controversie with Erastus ; but Erastus saith , and his Arguments conclude in the Old Testament , None for Morall uncleannesse , and impenitency vvere debarred from the holy things of God ; Ergo , We are to debarre none in the Nevv Testament ; yea , 2. Paul did never command to debar any , nor did Christ debar Judas , nor the Pharisees debar the ●ewdest Publicans , nor the Apostles Simon Magus from the Sacraments ; Ergo , saith he , we are to debar none at all : now here Erastus clearly contradicteth himself , and saith , We dispute only of such as acknowledge their ●ins and promise amendment : But let Erastus say , Did Iudas acknowledge his ●in and promise amendment : Did all the morally unclean in Corinth , such as repented not of their uncleannesse , and fornication , and lasciviousnesse which they committed , 2 Cor. 12. 21. acknowledge their sin , and promise amendment ? and did those that were partakers of the Table of Devils acknowledge their sin and promise amendment ? And yet I brought the very words of Erastus , in which he saith right down in a Catholick assertion , without exception , not any of those are to be debarred from the Sacraments : Why ? The Sacraments ( saith he ) are Adminicula pi●tatis , et resipiscentiae , are helps to godlinesse and repentance : And I aske of Erastus , doth the Lord invite none to repentance , but those that do acknowledge their sin and promise amendment ? And will Erastus have helps of repentance denied to all those who acknowledge not their sins ? then let him give us Arguments in the Old or New Testament , by which he can demonstrate , that those who acknowledge not their sins , and promise not amendment , are debarred in the Old Testament , from all the holy things of God , and in the New , from the Sacraments : Let Erastus extricate himself if he can . It is worthy consideration , whether Erastus will have all those only that acknowledged their sins and repent , admitted to the holy things of God in the Old Testament ; if not , he must shew a difference , why pearls might be cast to Swine , and scorners rebuked , and holy things prophaned by the uncircumcised & prophane in the old Testament , not in the New : this he shall not shew , if they were debarred who repented not , how saith he in all his book , that none were debarred from the holy things of God in the Old Testament for Morall uncleannesse ? Erastus . But we impugne this which you say , that God hath ordained Presbyters or Elders to be judges and examinators of that businesse : But we say , that God neither commanded in the Old , or New Testament , that Priests or any other , should examine those who brought oblations for sin , whether they did truly repent , or dissemble only ; and ye say there be chosen Elders who should try this in the New Testament . Ans . 1. Elsewhere I have proved from Scripture , that the Priests did try judicially , those for whom they offered Sacrifice : If the Leaper had not bidden so many dayes as the Law required , if the Priests should offer for him , he should be partiall in the Law , and if the disease be not removed , he cannot offer for him , Matth. 8. 4. Lev. 14. 3 , 4 9 ▪ 10 , 11 , 12 ▪ 2. Observe good Reader , How craftily Erastus passeth from one question to another : All his Arguments hitherto , both in his Thesis and in his Book , conclude that no man , in either Old , or New Testament , ever was , or ought to be debarred from the holy things of God : Because there is neither precept , nor promise , nor practise in Moses , in the Prophets , or Apostles for it : 2. Because , The Sacraments are helps of repentance . 3. Because all are invited and commanded to come . Now here Erastus flyeth to another Question : Whether the unworthy should be debarred by Priests in the Old , and by certain select and chosen Elders in the New Testament ? This is a far other Question : for let him answer our Arguments , by which we prove that pearls and the holy things of God , ought to be denied to all Dogs , Swine , and prophane men , whereas Erastus saith , all those are invited to come ; and then we shall yoak with Erastus , or any other , by whom , or by whose authority these pearls ought to be denied : whether by the Church , that is , by the Elders of the Church , and people consenting , or by the civill Magistrate . Now this latter question to Erastus , is no question at all ▪ for if none ought to be debarred from the Sacraments at all ; but all must come promiscuously , as their owne good or evill spirit inclineth them , it is a vaine thing for Erastus to make any question at all , by whom they ought to be debarred ; for it is all one , as to aske the question , by whom should those who are to be gradued Doctors of Physick , be tryed and examined , whether by the faculty , and Colledge of of Physitians of the place , or by none at all : If you lay downe this ground , that there neither is , nor ought to be any graduated Doctors at all in the world , the other of those , who are to try those who are graduated is vaine , if all be invited to a free banquet , poor , and rich , leaper , and clean : it is a vain question , whether be there some Masters of the house who should try who are worthy , and to be admitted to the feast , and who unworthy , and to be debarred . Erastus . It is madnesse to say , that Paul by forbidding private ●ating , doth understand nothing but a debarring from the Sacraments , for 1 ▪ Cor. 11. he debarreth none from the Sacrament . Ans . Neither Beza , nor any of ours say , that they are both one punishment ; but that where we are forbidden to eat with a scandalous brother , it is presumed the Church doth cast him out of her society : nor doth Paul 1 Cor. 11. invite all to come to the supper . Beza said , he to whom lesse is denied , as that we eat not with him , in our private houses , to him more is denied , to wit , that he should not be admitted to the Lords supper . Erastus saith , that to whom lesse is denied , to him more is denied , is true in gifts , but not in punishments , and in things of the same kind , but not in things divers , and in things free , not in things of which one is commanded by God , and another thing not commanded ; it holdeth not in punishments , he to whom the city is denied , and who is banished , his life is not denied to him , he who is punished in his purse , is not killed ; for that a father denieth to his son an unworthy thing , yet he denieth not rayment to him . Ans . Erastus in this granteth he wrongeth Beza , as if he had said , to deny a private table , and the Lords table , were one and the same punishment . Beza saith , the one is a lesse , the other a greater punishment . 2. If it be true in gifts , that he to whom lesse is given , more is given , then it holdeth here in our case ; because private fellowship with the Saints is a gift of God , and if the Lords body given for us , and to us in the Lords supper , be not a greater gift , it is nothing : so then if a lesse gift be denied , the Lords supper a greater gift is denied . 2. It must hold in the private punishments , inflicted for an higher punishments cause , private communion with the Saints is denied , because the man is cast out of the Church ; Ergo , farre more are the highest priviledges of the Church denied : as liberty is denied to a man , because he is condemned to dye ; Ergo , farre more is life denied to him ; a mans house is denied to him , because he is banished ; Ergo , farre more is his city and countrey denied to him : But a man is not punished in his purse , because he is condemned to dye , it followeth no● ; Ergo , he should rather dye , because the one punishment is not relative to the other . 3 Because not eating with a scandalous man is a spirituall punishment , as I have proved : therefore it is of that same kind with excommunication , and therefore it holdeth here . 4. Abstinence from the private fellowship of a scandalous brother is not free , but commanded of God , and so is debarring from the Lords supper , not free , but commanded . Erastus . when he forbiddeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , no not to eat , he forbiddeth , 1. Neer communion of familiarity . 2. Not to eat with them , which is to forbid all signes of neer communion . Ans . It is clear he proveth they should cast him out , because I wrote to you that you should not keep company with such , v. 9. no more to eat with such ; Ergo , farre lesse ( would he say ) should he be a leavening member in the lumpe and masse of Christs body . Erastus . I wrote unto you , that ye should not keep company with such ; then Paul speaketh here of a thing , concerning which he had spoken before , though they understood him not : it is like they sought Pauls judgement of their conversing with men : But of delivering the man to Satan , he had not spoken before , as is clear in the Text. Ans . This is a strong argument for us , if Paul had never spoken , nor written to them of the delivering of the man to Satan , that is , of the miraculous killing of him , how could he in reason and conscience chide them , because they prayed not that he might be miraculo●sly killed ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ? it is not possible they could mourn for not joyning in a businesse , that Paul had never revealed to them to be Gods will. Yea it is a strong argument to me , that delivering to Satan was excommunication , of which he had taught them before , ( else their mourning had been unreasonble ) and which he pointed at to them as a limbe of excommunication , to wit , their not familier conversing with the scandalous . Erastus . And when he has show●n how they ought to flee the company of the scandalous , he returneth to his former purpose , commanding the wicked man to be killed : This then he saith , I commanded you to eschew the company of wicked brethren , not of the heathen , whom the Lord shall judge . Ans . 1. The Text can bear no such exposition , for the reasons I have given before . 2. The coherence is clear ; I wrote before that you should not keep company with wicked brethren : therefore put out that wicked man from amongst you . But by Erastus his glosse , there is neither sense , nor coherence in the words . Erastus . The end of refusing familiar conversing with the scandalous , is , that he may be ashamed ; and you say , that same is the end of debarring from the supper ; then it must follow , as private conversing can do the contrary , to wit , it can soment and nourish sinnes , both in the brother we converse with , and in us , so the frequent use of the Lords supper should nourish vices in us , vvhich vvere vvickednesse to think . Ans . This presumeth , that to avoyd a scandalous brother , and to debarre him from the Sacraments , must be formally one , which we teach not . 2. Hence it followeth , since they be divers formally , they cannot have the same formall and intrinsecall ends . 3. The frequent eating at the Lords table , in a scandalous man , doth dispose him more and more to sinne , as frequently sinning inclineth more to sinne ; but this is by the frequent abusing of Gods ordinance , and not from the nature of the Sacrament . Erastus . Paul forbiddeth not ill men of the company of good men , but he admonisheth good men , to flee ill men , that they may be ashamed . But vvhen you deuy the Sacraments to any , you command not the Godly not to come to the supper with the wicked , but you forbid the scandalous to come to the supper . Ans . There is no solidity in this conjecture , it leaneth upon the perpetuall m●stake of Erastus in all this dispute , as if we held , That to be debabred from familiar fellowship with the Saints , and from the Sacrament , were one and the same thing : Else , I see no conclusion that Erastus doth , or can infer against us . 2. It is false , that wicked men are not discharged the company of Saints ; for in so far as fellowship with the Saints , is a spirituall mean of the gaining of their souls by Teaching , Exhorting , Edifying , Comforting the wicked and scandalous , being Dogs and Swine are forbidden to touch such a Pearl ; Yea , God layeth a charge on wicked men , while they remain in that case , not to meddle with Confirming Ordinances ( with some Converting Ordinances they may , ) as Psal . 50. 16. But to the wicked God said , What hast thou to do to declare my Statutes : or that thou takest my Convenant in thy mouth ? 17. Seeing thou hatest Instruction , and castest my Word behinde thee . Here the wicked are forbidden to Teach or speak , to the instructing of others , which is a speciall act of Christian fellowship between Brother and Brother , Col. 3. 16. Heb. 3. 13. Heb. 10. 24. 1 Thes . 5. 11. 14. Because they hate to be Instructed of others : And you know how Christ speaketh to the unworthy intruder of himself on the secrets and spirituall marrow and comforts of the Gospel , Matth. 22. ver , 12. Friend , How camest thou here , not having thy Wedding garment ? Ezra 4. 3. But Zerubbabel and Joshua , and the rest of the chief of the Fathers came and said unto the Adversaries of Iudah and Benjamin , You have nothing to do with us , to build an house unto our God ; But we our selves together will build unto the Lord God of Israel : Doth not God expresly forbid David to build an house to his name ? 1 Chron. 22. 8. 2 Chron. 6. 9. And we know it is a typicall discharge layed upon men of blood , not to touch the holiest things of God ; but that men of Peace must meddle with them , Isa . 1. 13. Bring no more vain Oblations , &c. All which holdeth forth , that not only those who have the charge of the house of the Lord , to see that no Swine and Dogs prophane the holy things of God ; but they are forbidden all private Ordinances and publike , in so far as they can make no other use of them , but to defile them . Erastus saith , They be wickedly forbidden to come to the Lords Supper , who desire to Celebrate the memoriall of his death . Beza Replieth well , 1. What if he know not what he desireth who cometh ? 2. What if there be just suspition or clear evidence that he playeth the Hypocrite ? 3. What if it concern the whole Church that his desire be suspended ? Erastus . The first cause is not to purpose , because we speak of those that are well instructed . 2. The second is bred in the brain of Beza ; I am compelled to think that he that publikely professeth he is grieved for his sins , and that he purposeth to live a holy life in time to come , that he thinketh as he speaketh , if he remain not in that purpose : I also remain not alwayes in my good purpose ; his desire is an Argument of Piety , which should not be smothered and oppressed , but excited and nourished : And this opinion of Beza dependeth on the Iudgement of men ; neither hath the Lord committed the Examination of some to Elders : And it is folly to say , It concerns the Church to delay , to do that which the Lord hath Commanded me to do . Ans . 1. Erastus professeth he standeth for their admission to the Lords Supper , who are Recte instituti , & profitentur dolere se propter peccata sua , who are instructed in the grounds of Christian Religion , and repenteth of their sins , or professeth it : And he said before , as I observed it , If any shall be found who shall trample on the Sacraments , Ego hunc minime admittendum censeo : I judge such a man should not be admitted to the Sacraments : Whence it is clear , That Erastus professeth that the ignorant and the scandalous should be debarred from the Lords Supper : But , good Reader , Observe that Erastus contradicteth himself in all his Arguments ; for he proveth , that not any one Christian in the Visible Church , ignorant , or not ignorant ; who professe their Repentance , or not professe it , can be excluded from the Sacraments ; but that all are commanded by Christ to come . But Erastus saith , Scriptura illos , de quibus nos loquimur , nec à sacrificiis arcet , nec à sacramentis aliis ullis : Imò sub penâ capitis mandat , ut universi mares , &c. The Scripture excludeth none from Sacrifices , or any other Sacraments : But commandeth that all the Male Children , Jews and strangers , who are not legally unclean , and from home , should compear at Ierusalem thrice a year before the Lord : And pag. 104. In sacris literis non tantum non inveniri aliquos à sacramentis propter solam vitae turpitudinem , ab actos esse , sed contrarium potius probari : And Iohn Baptist ( saith he ) Baptized all that came to him , Pharisees and Sadduces , whom he affirmeth to be a Generation of Vipers , Ex quo intelligimus : Whence we understand , that Ministers are not to deny the Sacraments to those who seek them , and the Iudgement is to be left to God , Whether he who professeth Repentance , dissemble , or deal truly and sincerely : Yea , when Erastus saith , That it is not in all the Scripture to be found , Aliquos a Sacramentis propter solam vitae turpitudinem abactos esse : That any were debarred from the Sacraments for only wickednesse of life ; but rather the contrary may be proved , either ignorance of God , opposed to due instruction , and professed impenitency , is no wickednesse of life , which is most absurd ; or then in Scripture , some must be debarred from the Sacraments for wickednesse of life only : But Erastus saith plainly , None in Scripture are debarred from the Sacraments , for only wickednesse of life : And so they are not debarred , because they professe not Repentance . And Erastus saith , Christ said , Drink ye all of this and Iudas was not excepted : Christ went into the Temple with most wicked men : the Pharisees and Sadduces were Baptized with the same Baptisme of Iohn vvith them : Then Erastus will exclude none at all , no not those whom Christ pronounced to sin against the Holy Ghost , and the convincing light of their own minde , Matth. 12. 31 , 32. Ioh. 9. 39 , 40 , 41. and 15. 24. and 7. 28. Yea , pag. 117. He will have none excluded in Corinth , not those that are impenitent , and those that vvere partakers of the Table of Devils . Pag. 116. When Christ commandeth all to eat and all to drink , he excludeth none that professeth themselves to be Disciples : But many professe no Repentance , Who professe themselves Disciples : See pag. 117 , 118. and the following pages . 2. Erastus saith , He is compelled to think , That he that publikely professeth sorrovv for sin , doth think as he speaketh : But to whom shall he professe it ? To the Church ? Then hath the Church power to accept the confession of scandalous men , ere they be admitted to the Lords Supper : Erastus will stand at this , for it is Government in the hands of the Church ; if he must confesse to the Civill Magistrate , who made him a Steward of the Seals , and Mysteries of the Gospel ? Nor is the Church to think , as Erastus is compelled to think , manifest Hypocrites , and those that trample the Sacraments under their feet , will make profession of sorrow for sin : and Erastus thinketh such are not to be admitted : Erastus saith , they may change their purpose of Repentance , and so may he doe himselfe . Valeat totum , granting all , that is , nothing to us , for any Divinity we have proofe of in Erastus his booke ▪ I should humbly conceive when he speaketh so ignorantly of the worke of Repentance , and preparations for the Lords Supper : he hath been a man non rectè institutus , not well instructed , and so without the lists of the disputation by his owne word , and so not to have beene himselfe to be admitted to the Sacraments . 2. Nor is it in Beza his head onely , that those who desire the Sacrament have true piety , for Christ saith , Wicked men are known by their works ; otherwise if tramplers of the Sacrament , and the ignorant desire the Sacrament , as ignorance is neighbour to arrogance and presumption : let Erastus give us a rule in the Word by which they are to be debarred , all his arguments will prove that they are to be admitted : and if Erastus deny that the judgement of men either of Church or Magistrate is to be interposed in the excluding of those who are , non rectè instituti , not rightly instructed , and doe not professe sorrovv for their sin , he must speake against sense , if he grant some must judge , who are ignorant , and openly impenitent ; then I say to Erastus what hee saith to Beza , your opinion dependeth on the opinion and judgement of men . 3. If God have not commanded either Elders , or any other ( as Erastus saith , ) to examine and judge , who are fit for the Lords Supper , who not : Then seeing Erastus saith the prophane , the ignorant , the impenitently scandalous , knowne to be such , are to be debarred . I aske of Erastus , to whom Christ hath commanded the tryall of this , who are ignorant , and non rectè instituti ? Men cannot debarre themselves from the Sacraments in a judiciall way , most of men conceiting well of themselves , rush upon the ordinances of God , not knowing that they doe evill : Workers of iniquity , who cry , Lord , Lord , Adulterers , Theeves , Idolaters , who dare come to the Temple of the Lord and cry , The temple of the Lord , The temple of the Lord are these , Ier. 7. 9 , 10 , 11. will also fast and professe Repentance , Esa . 57. 3 , 4 , 5. even when their wickednes testifieth to their face against them in the eies of all , Ier. 2. 1 , &c. Ier. 2. 34. Esa . 1. 9. and they will desire ●o partake of the Lords Supper , as is evident , Esa . 57. 2. Now there are none on earth , neither Elders , or any any others to debarre them ; Erastus saith , Taceo jam , quod Deus non praecepit vel Presbyteris , vel aliis tale examen . Let Erastus answer us in this , and by what charity is Erastus obliged to beleeve , all that seeketh the Lords supper , do it in truth ? God has given to us mens works , not their words , of which hypocrites are liberall , and shall we foment hypocrisie , and mens eating their owne damnation , under Erastus his pretence of incouraging , and not suffocating seeming godly desires ? Lastly , Erastus saith , it doth not concern the Church , that the man deferre to do that which Christ commands him to do , this is to beg the question . Doth Christ command a man to eat his owne damnation ? CHAP. XIII . Quest . 9. Other Arguments for Excommunication vindicated . Erastus . The Apostle writeth , if any man love not the Lord Jesus , let him be accursed : Ergo , Paul will have the Elders to sit and judge who truely repent , who not , that they may admit the one to the supper , not the other ; if this be excommunication , excommunication is grounded on a thousand places : to love Christ is to k●ep his commandements , Ioh. 13. and 15. then who ever saith those that keep not the commandements of Christ , are cursed of God , he shall this way excommunicate : then Moses did often excommunicate . But because the false Apostles did strive to make Paul contemptible , therefore Paul saith , God be judge which of us loveth Christ , and let God destroy him who loves him not , this is the true meaning . Ans . Erastus perverteth the sense of Beza his words , for Beza has no such conclusion as to prove a formall excommunication by the Elders , or Church judicature ; this is Erastus sained conclusion . Beza inferreth from these words , that there is here gravissimae excommunicationis species , a kind of heavy excommunication , materially , to be eternally separated from Christ , called the great excommunication . And it was to be accursed while the Lord come , and therefore this may prove there is a kind of lesser excommunication , in the Church , and Moses his cursing by way of preaching , may well inserre , that because there be Church censures , therefore there is a Church cursing heavy , and lesse heavy . But Beza intendeth not to prove excommunication by the Church from this , but only that Christs enemies are cursed , though they be other wayes in the Church ; and this kinde of excommunication , of shutting impenitent sinners out of heaven , is in a thousand places of scripture , and nothing can hence be concluded against Beza ; and the like excommunication is Gal. 1. And when Ioh. 2. Ep. forbiddeth to receive a fa●●e teacher into your house , if he be a member of the Church , he is to be farre lesse kept in Christs greater house the Church ; but is to be cast out . Erastus . When Paul saith , Gal. 5. I would they were cut off who trouble you ; he saith not , conveene the Elders , and cast such men out of the Church , or deliver them to Satan , but he wisheth that they were cut off by God. Ans . 1. The place , Gal. 5. 12. I wish they were cut off that trouble you , is expounded by Piscator of cutting off from the visible Church ; Yea he saith , conveene the Church , when he saith , v. 9. a little leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe , that is , a little false Doctrine infecteth the whole Church , and v. 10. I am confident of you , that ye will be no otherwise minded ; but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgement , who ever he be : then he hopeth well of the Galathians that they will be of one mind to judge , and cast out the false teacher , this is parallel to 1 Cor. 5. though Paul do not so right downe chide them for neglect of Church censures , as he doth 1 Cor. 5. But saith Erastus , if Paul wished them to be cut off that troubled them , why did he not cut off those false teachers , and deliver them to Satan ? Erastus answereth , it was not Gods will so to do , and the Apostles could not in every place , and at every time kill miraculously ; but when it was profitable , and necessary . Ans . Then Paul , 1 Cor. 5. farre lesse could rebuke the Corinthians ; because they prayed not that the incestuous Corinthian might be miraculously killed by Paul : for Paul had not power to kill him ; because it was not necessary , nor profitable : the man repented , and was never killed . 2. Iudge if it be probable that Paul would wish to work a miracle in killing false teachers , when it was neither profitable , necessary , nor sa●e for the Church to have them killed . 3. Paul was confident the man who troubled them should beare his judgement . Erastus saith , it was not Gods will he should be miraculously killed ; Ergo , it was not miraculous killing , but some Church censure ; or then Erastus must find out another kind of judgement . And why ( may some say ) doth not Paul write to Excommunicate him , as he did the incestuous Corinthian ? Beza Answereth , Paul would not 1 Cor. 5. take that Authority to himself , but would do it by the suffrages of the Church : So here he sheweth what he desireth , but happily it was not expedient that they should be presently cut off : So Beza : Yea , the words do well bear , that Paul thought fit , That they should bear their Iudgement who had troubled them , and that that leaven should be purged out . 2. Yea , if this cutting off be miraculous , it is clear , Paul could not Communicate it to others , for it was Pauls will that the incestuous Corinthian should be delivered to Satan by the suffrages of the Corinthians : Nor do we read that the Apostles wished to cut off men miraculously , but were not able to do it . Erastus . It is false , That Paul willed the man to be delivered to Satan by the suffrages of the Corinthians : For he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , I have already Concluded , Ordained , Decreed , to deliver him to Satan , though I be absent in body : what then would he have done ? he would all the Church being gathered together ( not some Presbyters only ) by his own spirit , and the power of the Lord Iesus granted to him , deliver the man to Satan , that he might strike fear and terror on others , and that the man might bear the just punishment of his wickednesse . Ans . Paul chideth them , that they were puffed up , and mourned not , that the man might be put out of the midst of them : Then , whereas it might be said , we want the presence of the Apostle Paul , and his privity to the businesse : To this Paul saith , ver . 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , For me ( saith he ) I have , as if I were present in body when you are Convened together , &c. Iudged to deliver such a one to Satan : Now that this Decree was the judiciall Decree and sentence of Paul as a miraculous Magistrate giving sentence judicially , when Paul himself was absent , and had not convinced the man , nor spoken with him , I do not believe ; 1. Because , though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signifie such a sentence of a man when the guilty is before him , yet the word doth not necessitate us to this Exposition , Luk. 19. 22. Out of thy own mouth will I judge thee ; for it doth as often signifie a simple act of the minde , and the opinion of any not sitting in judgement , as Act. 13. 46. Ye judge your selves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unworthy of life Eternall , 1 Cor. 2. 2. I determined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to know nothing but Christ , Luk. 7. 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith Christ to Simon the Pharisee who was not on the bench , Thou hast judged rightly , Tit. 3. 12. I have determined there to winter , 1 Cor. 10. 15. Iudge ye what I say , Act. 27. 1. When it was determined to sail into Italy . 2. We do not read that Apostle , Prophet or Iudge , gave out a sentence of death against any , the person condemned not being present nor heard : the Lord himself did it not to Adam , nor to Sodom ; he came down to see , he examined Adam : Moses did not so condemn the man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath day : Joshua convinced Achan , the Prophet convinced Gehazi , ere he smote him with Leprosie , Peter convinced A●anias and Saphira to their faces , ere he killed them , so did Paul convince Elimas the sorcerer in his face , so did Christ in his miraculous purging of the Temple , convince them that His Fathers house should be a house of Prayer . Now Paul here giveth a judiciall sentence of death on a man , he never spake of being at Philippi whence he wrote , and the delinquent at Corinth , if we beleeve Erastus . 3. Erastus judgeth that Paul knew this man to be penitent , and how knew Paul this ? It must be a miraculous knowledge , by which Paul at Philippi looked upon the mans heart at Corinth , one of the greatest miracles that ever Paul wrought for Paul had the knowledge of the mans sinne only by report , v. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is reported ; between Pauls writing the first verse of that Chapter , and his writing the third verse there must interveene a miraculous discovery of the incestuous mans heart , Paul being at Philippi , and the man at Corinth ; and Paul knowing the man to be penitent , and because of his penitency ( as Erastus saith ) Paul did not kill him : Yet Paul so farre absent , must have given out a miraculous sentence , as a miraculous Magistrate . I ( saith he ) by revelation as having the sword of God now in my hand , have judged , and given out sentence , that this man shall be miraculously killed by Satan , before your eyes , that all may feare , and do so no more , and yet I know him to be penitent , and that he shall not be killed by Satan ; a monstrous and irrationall sentence , if it be said , that by report Paul had knowledge of his sinne , and by report also he had knowledge of his repentence , and that his spirit would be saved in the day of the Lord , and that this knowledge came not to Paul by any immediate revelation . I answer , Yet the sentence must stand by Erastus his mind touching 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . I have judged and condemned him as a miraculous Magistrate to dye upon a report , though I never heard him , and I know he shall not dye for this sault : for can it be said , that Paul retracted a sentence which he gave out as the deputy of God , and he even then , when he wrote the sentence , kn●w there was so much repentance in the man , as he would for it be moved not to kill him . 4. There is no ground in the Text , why Paul should be said to seek the naked presence of the whole people , to do such a miracle before them , he being himselfe absent ; for there is more then a naked presence of the Corinthians , as only witnesses that they might be affraid & do so no more : for they were present as instructed with the spirit of Paul , and the power of the Lord Jesus Christ ▪ to deliver such a one to Satan : as the words bear , v. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . For to be conveened in the name of Christ , being spoken , Mat. 18. v. 20. of a Church meeting , or in reference thereunto in the same phrase , and to be conveened with the power and spirit of Paul , and of the Lord Iesus , cannot agree to Paul ; nor can it be said , I Paul absent in body , and present in spirit , in the name of the Lord Jesus , and with my spirit , and the power of the Lord Jesus , have decreed to deliver such a one to Satan . For , 1. the Grammer of the words cannot beare that , for ( being conveened in the name of the Lord , with my spirit ) are constructed together in the Text. 2. It is no sence , nor any Scripture phrase . I present in spirit , and with my spirit have decreed to deliver such a one to Satan . 3. It is evident that Paul would , as it were absent , recompence his bodily absence , with the presence of the spirit , and road of Church censure , which the Lord had communicated to them . 5. Erastus needeth not object , that there was a conveening of the Church , not of some Elders , for as there is no word of the word Elders in the Text , so is there no word of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Text , and so the debate will be , what is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether Elders , or people , or both ; but though every one in their owne place were understood , yet the words beare a juridicall convention , being conveened in the name of the Lord Jesus , and with my spirit , and the power of the Lord Jesus . Erastus ▪ The questions why Paul did not command to excommunicate the false Apostles in Galathia ? Or why he did not miraculousty kill them ? are both urgent ; But the latter is most urgent , for the power of miraculous afflicting men , was given to few men , and to Apostles : But it is a wonder , if excommunication was ever , and every where to be observed in all Churches . Yet Paul neither practiseth it here , nor else where , nor commandeth others to practise it ; now here he desireth they may be cut off , but not excommunicated . Ans . We say the last is no question , you never read in the New-Testament , or in the Old , that Prophets or Apostles consulted , or advised with the people , whether they should work miracles or not : 2. Though Excommunication was an ordinary power , as the power of binding and loosing given to the Church , Matth. 16. 19. and 18. 18. Ioh. 20. 22 , 23. Yet the actuall exercise of Excommunication , being the highest and weightiest censure , and the most severe of any other on earth , it is no wonder that Paul be as sparing and rare in the exercise of it , as the Apostles were in killing mens bodies . 3. It is a begging of the question , to say , Paul neither practised himself , nor commanded others to excommunicate , for he did both . Erastus . That which is , Rom. 16. spoken for eschewing of those who cause offences , is that every one single person beware of false Teachers ; it is not spoken to the Church to Excommunicate those false Teachers , and therefore there is no such need of such a Presbytery as you dream of , but only of good and diligent Ministers , who may rightly instruct , and prudently teach their hearers , what Teachers they ought to eschew . Ans . 1. The eschewing of false Teachers is a generall , and a duty no question given to all and every one of the Church : But the place doth no more say in expresse terms that a single Pastor should give warning particularly by name , that this man , Iohn , Hymeneus , Alexander , are those false Teachers to be eschewed , then it saith , that the Presbytery , which we assert , doth in expresse termes , shew what false Teachers they be , who by name are to be Excommunicated and eschewed ; but you see , that Erastus is overcome by truth , so far , as he must say one single Minister may declare that such a false Teacher , by name , is to be eschewed as a Heathen and a Publican , and so in effect excommunicated , and put out of the Church ; but he denieth that the Church may declare him a Heathen , as Matth. 18. and that many Elders , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gathered together in the name of Christ , as it is , 1 Cor. 5. may put out a false Teacher , or a wolf out of the flock . 2. We grant that it is spoken to every one , that he should eschew false teachers , yea , and 2 Thes . 3. All that walketh unordinately , all fornicators , extortioners , drunkards , 1 Co● . 5. But that every man should eschew those , whom he in his private judgement conceiveth to be such , before he rebuke them , and labour to gain them , and in case of obst●n●cy , Tell the Church , as Christ commande●h , Matth. 18. is not commanded , bu● forbidden , Matth. 18. Lev. 1917. Col. 3. 15. For if this should be , that I might immediatly , upon my own private grudge , unbrother and cast out of my heart and intire fellowship , every one whom I conceive offendeth me , and walketh unordinately , without observing Christs order , or previous rebuking of him , I make a pathway to perpetuall Schismes : 2. A violation of all Laws of fraternity , and Christian Communion . 3. A diss●lving and breaking of all Church Communion , and i● were strange , if Erastus will have Christs order kept , Matth. 18. in private offences done by one brother to another , and not in publick offences , when a brother offendeth twenty , and a whole Church , as if I were obliged to seek to gain my brothers soul in private and l●sse injuries , and not in publick , and more hainous offences . Hence it is clear to me , If we are to reject an Heretick , after once , or twice admonition , and not to receive in our houses false Teachers , and 1 Tim. 6. 3. If any teach otherwise , and consent not unto the wholesome word , even the words of our Lord Iesus Christ , being given to perverse disputing , as men of corrupt minds , and destitute of the truth , 1 Tim. 6. 3 , 4 , 5. We are to withdraw our selves from such , and to save , with severity and plucking out of the fi●e , those that cannot be cured ; then certainly the Church of Christ must also turn away from such men , and acknowledge them as no members of the body , whereof Christ is the head ; if we say not this , if one hath leave in a constituted Church , to j●dge and condemne his brother , and then we shall not take the course of the Apostles in the like case , as Act. 15. which is not Apostolick , for when false Teachers troubled the Brethren , they would not peremptorily , though great Apostles , as Paul and Barnabas , determine against either the false doctrine , or the persons of the Teachers , while the Apostles , Elders , and Brethren did meet in a Synod , and determine against the Error , and against the men , as such as troubled the Brethren with words , and perverted their souls , Act. 15. Now Erastus is willing to acknowledge a sort of Divine Excommunication , not a humane , as he is pleased to call that Ordinance of separating of wicked men from the Church and holy things of God , which yet was in the Church of the Jews , instituted by Christ and his Apostles , and which no Church wanted , as learned Beza saith , even in the time of persecution : had Erastus explained to us his divine Excommunication , as he calleth it , it were easie to bring most of his owne Arguments with greater strength of reason against it then against ours , which is the truely divine Excommunication . CHAP. XIV . Quest . 10. Whether Erastus doth strongly prove that there is no Presbytery , nor two distinct judicatures , one of the Church , another of the State ? Erastus . I deny not , First , such a Presbytery , as the Evangelists mention , which is called a Presbytery , a Synedry , a Synagogue ; this was the civill Magistrate who had amongst the Jews the power of the sword . 2. I deny not a Presbytery , 1 Cor. 6. when the Church wanteth a civill Magistrate . 3. I deny not a Presbytery of learned men , who being asked , may give their judgement of doubts : of which Ambrose , there was nothing of old done sine seniorum consilio , without the Counsels of the Elders . But I deny a Senate , collected out of the body of the Church , to judge who repenteth , and are to be excommunicated , and debarred from the Sacraments , and who not ; or I deny any Ecclesiasticall judicature , touching the manners and conversation of men , different from the judgement or court of the civill Magistrate , or that there be two supream Courts touching manners in one Common wealth . Ans . One simple head in a moment , may deny more then many wise men can prove in a whole day , it proveth they are more cumbersome in their disputes , then strong ; that there was a Iewish Presbytery , ●hat is , a civill judicature , is con●uted by Lev. 10. 10. where there is a Court of Aarons sonnes , whose it was to judge of Church matters only , and to put difference betweene holy , and unholy , betweene cleane , and uncleane . 2. A Presbytery of arbitrators in matters civill , to keep Christians from going to law one with another , before heathen judges : Is not a Presbytery , 1 Cor. 6. one wise man might do that , and he is no Presbytery . 2. There is no judicatures of Officers there ; they were but gifted men arbitrarily chosen for a certaine businesse , and were not judges , habitu . 3. A Presbytery for Doctrine only is further to seek in the word , I hope , then our Presbytery ; Erastus should teach us where it is . 4. He denieth a Presbytery for manners , then all scandals must come before the civill Magistrate . Who made him a Church officer to judge of the affairs of the Church ? Who is to be admitted to the seals , who not ? For two supream Courts , I shall speak God-willing . Erastus . There is no Colledge of Presbyters at Corinth , but every man was to judge himselfe . Ans . There is a company gathered together in the name of our Lord Jesus with the spirit of Paul , and the power of our Lord Iesus , 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. who did judge those that are within , and put out from amongst them an incestuous man , v. 12 , 13. least he should leaven the whole Church , v. 6. this is a Colledge of judges . 2. There is a number of builders and labourers with God , 1 Cor. 3. 9 , 10 , 11 , 12. Ministers of God , dispensers of the misteries of Word and Sacraments of God , 1 Cor. 4. 1. such as Paul , Apollos , Cephas , and others , 1 Cor. 1. 12 , 13. 1 Cor. 4. 6. A number that had power to punish , to forgive , 2 Cor. 1. 2 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10. 3. A number of Prophets who judged of the Doctrine of the Prophets , 1 Cor. 14. 30 , 31 , 32. these be very like a Colledge of Presbyters . O but Paul writeth not to those , but to those who were puffed up , and mourned not , 1 Cor. 5. 2. These were the people and Church . Ans . Yea these were the eyes , eares , and principall parts of the Church , 1 Cor. 12. 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18. now he writeth to the Church , 1 Cor. 1. 1 ▪ 2. Erastus . Before this time , Paul must have instituted this Presbytery , who seeth not that this is false ? for so he would have accused the Presbytery , not the whole Church ; but he accuseth not the Elders , because they admitted the man to the Lords supper , and there is no word of excommunication here . There is no mention of one judgement , of one election , of one office , but he chideth the whole Church ; because they mourned not : it was not the Elders office to remove this ; they dream , who say there is a Presbytery instituted here , and there was none instituted before this Epistle was written ; he biddeth them not ask suffrages , whether he should be excommunicated or no. Ans . All that Erastus saith against a Presbytery , is to improve excommunication : But there may be excommunication by the people , as many hold , where there be no Elders at all . 2. Let Erastus point out the time , when a number of preaching Prophets were instituted at Corinth , whether in this Chapter ( which to me is a dream ) or before . 3. He had cause to rebuke all ; All were secure , the Elders who cast him not out , the people who said not to their Elders , as the Colossians are bidden say , Col. 4. 17. to Archippus ; and will Erastus say that preaching Elders , who by office , are the eyes of the Church , 1 Cor. 12. 17 , 28. were not to be chiefe in mourning to God , and praying that the man might be miraculously killed ? and yet he reproveth all equally . 4. He reproveth them all that the man was not cast out of the Church , and this includeth a reproofe , that he injoyed all the Church priviledges , especially the Sacraments . 5. It is false that there is no mention of judgement , v. 12. Do not ye judge those that are within ? for election , there is none in the Chapter , nor any Presbytery instituted in this Chapter ; it was before : Erastus hath the like reason to say , that there was no instituted Church at Corinth , because in the 1. or 2. Epistle to the Corinthians : we reade not where he instituted any such Church ; if we finde the thing instituted , we know it had an institution , and let Erastus shew us when Paul received the institution of the Lords supper , from the Lord : shall we deny he received any such thing contrary to 1 Cor. 11. 23. because we finde not where and how he received from the Lord ? 6. There is no asking of suffrages mentioned Act. 1. at the choosing of Mathias , nor Act. 6. at the choosing of the Deacons that we reade of ; Ergo , there were no suffrages there ; it followeth not . 7. And ought not farre rather suffrages to have been asked before the people should take on their heads the mans blood , by consenting thereunto , and praying for it , as Erastus saith ? Erastus . If these words , v. 3. I verily as absent in body , but present in spirit , have decreed , &c. signifie , choose out of your company , Presbyters , who are to censure the manners of the people , who shall debarre the unworthy from the Sacraments , I am willing to suffer any thing . Ans . I know no man but Erastus that dreameth of any such sense , there is no institution of a Presbytery in this Chapter , no calling of Ministers ; but it presupposeth a ministery before s●●led . But if th●se words . I have decreed , &c. have the Erastian sense , I have given s●●●e●c● as a Magistrate , that the man be killed by the ministery of the Devill ; and that you shall be my Heralds to proclaime this sentence : it is a wonder the Text give not any hint of such a sense . Erastus . v. 12. he speaketh not of the judgement of Presbyters , but of all the people . Ans . 1. This Erastus on his word asserteth , without probation : We deny it , it is but par●llel with Gods judging . 2. It is an act of the keys . 3. It is relative to casting out by those that are conveened in the name of the Lord Iesus , with the spirit of Paul , and the power of our Lord Iesus : Was every Girle , and beleeving servant capable of this spirit ▪ and power ? Erastus . I grant before any come to age , be baptized , he is to be examined , whether he understand the Doctrine of saith , and assent to it with his heart : I grant it is profitable that young ones be examined , before they be admitted to the supper , but I deny God hath for either of those instituted a Presbytery . But there is no ground that a Presbytery must try wicked men , ere they be admitted to the Lords supper . Ans . 1. We owe Erastus thanks for granting this ; but what if the aged be sound grosly ignorant , and uncapable of the seals ? and some wicked men will trample the seals as swine , and yet they desire the seals . Erastus said before , such should not be admitted ; who should debarre them ; either the Church of beleevers , or those that are over them in the Lord , or the Magistrate must debarre them : if the first and second be said , Erastus cometh to finde some use for a Presbytery ; if the Magistrate be an heathen , he cannot examine or debarre any from the seals . Let Erastus answer , if he be a Christian , how can it be denied ; but if the Magistrate by his office is to steward the bread to one of the children , not to another , but he is a steward to cut and divide the word , and seals both aright ; and how could Paul make it one of the properties of the Pastor , 2. Tim. 2. to cut the word , and by the same reason to distribute the seals aright , if it depend upon another officer by his office to command him to divide it to this man , whom he hath examined , and findeth in his mind qualified , and not to this man ? We judge the Elders of the New Testament do agree in this common and perpetuall morality , that both are to put difference between clean , and unclean , holy , and unholy , though many things were unclean to the Iews , that are not unclean to us , and that the Church hath yet a power to bind and loose , Mat. 16. 9. Erastus . There was never a wiser common wealth in the world , then that of the Iews , Deut. 4 But in the Common vvealth of the Ievves , there vvere never tvvo distinct judicatures concerning manners : Ergo , There should not be these tvvo different jurisdictions in the Christian common vvealth . But all should be given to the civill Magistrate . Ans . Erastus is seldome happy in his Logick , his Sy●logismes are thin sowne , all Gods laws are most wise , but if this be a good Argument , was not their Church , their Religion , their Ceremonies , their judiciall Laws , all wise and righteous ? Then the Christian Church should be conform yet to the Iewish , we should have those same bloody sacrifices , judiciall lawes , Ceremonies that they had . The Iudicatures and officers are positive things , flowing from the positive will of God , who doth appoint one jurisdiction for them , most wise , and another to Christians different from them , and in its kinde , most wise . 2. We give two judicatures in the Church of the Iews , concerning manners , one civil , acknowledged by Erastus ; another spirituall & Ecclesiastick , ordaining Ecclesiastick and Spirituall punishments upon the unclean , Lev. 10. 10. As to be removed out of the campe , and such like , and Deut. 17. Thou shalt come to the priests , the Levites , and the Iudge , that shall be in those daies , according to the sentence vvhich they of that place ( vvhich the Lord shall chuse ) shall shevv thee , and thou shalt observe to doe according to all that they informe thee , ver . 12. And the man that vvill do● presumptuously , and vvill not hearken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Priest , ( that standeth there to minister before the Lord thy God ) or unto the judge , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 even that man shall die , and thou shalt put avvdy evill from Israel . There is here an evident disjunction that clearly holdeth forth , that both the Priests and the civill judge judged in matters of manners , and that he that presumptuously despised the sentence of either was to die : a judicature of the Priests is evidently here , and a judicature of the civill judge , Erastus cannot deny , and that the Priest judged in subordination to the civill judge , is refuted by the words , which saith the Priest was immediatly subordinate to God , not to the Magstistrate : He that will not heare the Priest ( that standeth to minister before the Lord thy God ) shall die : Ergo , He is the Minister of the Lord ; and God called and separated Aaron and his sonnes , to stand before the Lord , and to minister , and he did call the Levites , the Magistrate called them not to office . Erastus . Beza saith , that Moses , Ioshua , David , Salomon , did not execute the office of the Priests , and therefore the charge of the Priests , and of the civill Magistrates were different offices , and charges ; but I said , before the Lord chose Aaron and his sonnes to be Priests , they were not so distinct charges , but they did agree to one and the same person ; for , Moses to omit the rest , did execute the office of Aaron , Levit. 8. But after that it was not lawfull for any to doe the office both of King and Priest ; and therefore Saul and Vzziah were justly corrected of God for it . But what is this ? It proveth not that the Priests had publike judicatures to punish wickednes of manners . Ans . Certainly , if Erastus deny the charge of the Priest and the King to be different offices , because once Moses did offer Sacrifice , ( and so was Melchisedeck both a King and a Priest , Heb. 7. ) he must say that Moses offered Sacrifices , Levit. 8. not as a Priest . ( Sure I am , Moses was a Prophet , and a Prince and Ruler , but no Priest . ) But Moses by Erastus his way , must as a civill Magistrate have offered Sacrifices , and not as a Priest or priviledged person by a speciall and an extraordinary commandement of God ; for to deny the two offices of Priest and King to be different offices , because one man discharged some Acts proper to both Offices , as Moses both did beare the Sword of God , as a Prince , and did also discharge some Acts proper to the Priest , as Erastus saith he did , Leviticus 8. is a poore and naughty Argument : undeniable it is that Melchisedeck was both King and Priest , but even then to be a King and to be a Priest , were two distinct offices , in nature and essence , because Melchisedech did not take away the life of a Murtherer , as a Priest , but as King of Salem , Heb. 7. 1. Nor did Abraham pay tithes to Melchisedech as to a King , but as to a Priest . Tithes in Moses Law as tithes , were never due to any but to the Priests : and therefore even in Melchisedeck , the Kingly and Priestly office , were formally distinct Ordinances of God , just as David as a King and judge took away the head of the man who brought Sauls head to him , and not as a Prophet he did this ; so as a Prophet he penned the Psalmes , not as a King : If one and the same man be both a Musitian and a painter , he doth paint excellently as a painter , not at a Musitian , and he singeth excellently not as a Painter , but as a Musitian ; and though one and the same man doe acts proper to both , that may prove that Musick and the art of painting are one subjectively onely , that they may both agree to one and the same man , but not that they are not two faculties and gifts of God different in spece and nature . 2. Though Erastus confesse that it was unlawfull that Vzzias and Saul should sacrifice , yet he will have the Kings office , and the Ministers office under the New Testament not so different ; for he said expresly , Who knoweth not now when Aarons Priesthood is removed , but we are all equally Priests ? Saul and Vzziah sinned when they were bold to sacrifice and burne incense , but the Magistrate doth not therefore sin , who exerciseth the charge of the Ministery , if he might for his businesse performe both , doth Paul make exceptions of Magistrates and Potentates , when he saith , 1 Cor. 14. You may all prophecie ? Hence he must grant that the civill Magistrate now may both preach , baptize , and administer the Supper of the Lord , and therfore not only hath the Church no Senate , nor Ecclesiasticall court to punish faults , and scandals with Ecclesiastick censures ; but there is no Presbytery of Elders to give their judgement in matters of doctrine , for the Magistrates and all Christians may as well prophecy by ● Cor. 14. as Ministers , saith he , yea the faculty of preaching is no more proper to the Ministers of the Church , then to the Magistrates of the city . Now by this nothing is proper to the Magistrate , as the Magistrate , but to the Magistrate as a Christian , and to all Christians . But Erastus contendeth that the government of the Church , and punishing of Scandals , which we say belongeth to those that are over the people of God in the Lord , and to Church Rulers , doth belong to the Magistrate as the Magistrate , and virtute officii , by vertue of his office : so that if any Iew or Turke , or any ignorant or extreamely scandalous should attempt to intrude himselfe upon the Seals , the Magistrate as the Magistrate and virtute officii , is to examine and judge if he be unworthy , & to debar him , or as he findeth him worthy , admit him to the Seals . Now any seeth that it is but a deceiving of the Reader , to say that one man may discharge both the place of the Magistrate , and the Minister of God , as Moses did , and Ioshua , & David : For let Erastus and his followers shew us roundly and down-right , whether or no prophecying , debarring the unworthy from the Seals , and all acts of Church government , not proper to the Magistrate as the Magistrate , and virtute officii ; And if so , ( as indeed Erastus teacheth ) it is bu● a poore shift to say , that one and the same man may both exercise the part of a Magistrate , and of a Minister . Erastus . Beza for ever shall not prove that there was a Church judicature , that had power to punish scandalous men . Iehoshaphat 2 Chron. 19. ordained judges in all the fenced cities , and admonished them of their duty . 2. And did the same at Ierusalem . 3. And ordained judges of Levites and Priests , and heads of families , for the judgement of the Lord , and for every cause ; and Amaziah the High Priest was chiefe in the causes of the Lord , and Zebadiah in the Kings causes . This Synedrie at Ierusalem was the politick Magistrate , they judged of stroaks , servitude , deaths . But your Synedrie judgeth not between blood and blood , it judgeth not of every cause , as Deut. 17. Those that are not well versed in Scripture , are to note two things : 1. That the cause of the Lord , where mention is made of judicatures , is not onely a cause of Religion , but any cause proposed in judgement , especially the causes of the widdow , the Orphan , & oppressed , which the Lord saith he will avenge . 2. The Levites & Priests were no lesse civil judges then others it is known that onely the Levits were Magistrats in the cities of refuge , there was need of men exercised in the Law of God , that the judges might judge righteously . Ans . If you take punishing for inflicting Church-censure , ( as we here take it ) then all the places that sayes the Priests pronounced the Leper clean or unclean , to put out of the campe , or take in , to judge of the adulterous woman , of the restitution made by those for whom they offered Sacrifices , to judge between the clean and unclean ; to hold out of the Sanctuary the unclean , the uncircumcised in heart and flesh , Levit. 13. 3 , 4 , &c. and 20 , 22. and 21. 26 , and 30. 44. and 31. 50. Ezek. 22. 26. and 44. 8 , 9 , 10. Num. 3. 6 , and 5. 18 , 19. Deut , 17. 12. say the Priests had power to punish for transgressing of Gods Lawes , and where the Prophets complaine of the Priests mis-government and unjustice , it is presupposed they were to govern justly according to the Law , Ier. 5. 31. 2 King. 12. 4. Ier. 26. 7 , 8 , 11. Hag. 2. 11 , 12. Ezek. 44. 8 , 9 , 10. 2. For the place 2 Chron. 19. it is evident that Iehoshaphat doth reforme both Church and State , and brought the corrupted Iudicatures to that which they should be by Law ; and v. 5 , 6 , 7. He set judges in the fenced cities of Iudah : Here is the civill judicature . And v. 8. Moreover in Ierusalem did Iehoshaphat set of the Levits , and of the Priests , and of the chiefo of the fathers of Israel , for the judgement of the Lord , and for controversies , when they returned to Ierusalem . Now that this second is a Church judicature , I am confirmed , 1. Because Iehoshaphat appointed civill judges in all the fenced cities of Iudah ; Ergo , Also in Ierusalem the prime fenced city : Now this civill judicature was not tyed to a place , but was in every city , even all the fenced cities ; but the Synedrie of Priests , Levites and Elders was onely at Ierusalem , in the place that the Lord should chuse , Deut. 17. 8. Hence a judicature tyed to no city , but which is in every fenced city , 2 Chron. 19. 5. Deut. 17. 8. and a judicature tyed to Ierusalem , the place that the Lord did choose , Deut. 17. 8. 2 Chron. 19. 8. must be two distinct judicatures , but such were these . 2. There is a ( moreover ) put to the Iudicature at Ierusalem , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and also in Ierusalem did Iehoshaphat set of the Levites , &c. This could not have been said , if this had not been a judicature different from the former , for if Iehoshaphat appointed Iudges in all the fenced cities ; Ergo , He appointed them first at Ierusalem , the Mother city and fountaine of justice ; now then he should say the same thing needlesly , and with a moreover , if this judicature at Ierusalem were not a judicature Ecclesiasticke and different from the judicature civill , that he appointed at Ierusalem as one of the prime fenced cities , which was common with the civill judicatures in other fenced cities . 3. The persons in the judicatures are different , for v. 5. the members of the court , 2 Chro. 19. 5 , 6 , 7 ▪ are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 judges ; these could not be Churchmen , for of these he speaketh v. 8. & they are expresly distinguished from the Levites , Priests and Elders , v. 8. who are all Church-men , for the fathers of the people were no other thing then our governing Elders , and these were members of the other court , v. 8. 4. The objects of these judicatures are very different . The Spirit of God saith of the one ver . 5. That they judge for the Lord , ver . 13. for ▪ all the Kings matters , this must be all civill causes , in which the King , and inferiour judges under the King doe judge ; but the object of the other is higher . The Priests and Levites are appointed by Iehoshaphat for the judgement of the Lord , ver . 8. And in every matter of the Lord , v. 13. Now whereas Erastus putteth a note of ignorance on all that hath been versed in the Old Testament before him , whereas he confesseth he understandeth not the Originall Language , let the Reader judge what arrogance is here , where ever there is mention ( saith he ) of judgement , there is signified not religious causes , but also other causes , especially the cause of the widow and Orphane : It bewrayeth great ignorance . For , 1. The matters of the Lord , and the matters of the King , are so evidently distinguished , and opposed the one to the other , by two divers presidents in the different judicatures , the one Ecclesiasticall , Amaziah the chiefe Priest , in every word or matter of the Lord ▪ and the other Zebadiah , the sonne of Ishmael the ruler of the house of Iudah , for all the Kings matters , that the very words of the Text , say that of Erastus which he saith of others , that he is not versed in the Scripture : for then the causes of the Lord , and the causes of the King in the Text , by Erastus should be the same causes , whereas the Spirit of God doth distinguish them most evidently . 2. If the cause of the King , were all one with the judgement of the Lord , and the cause of the Lord , yea , if it were all one with all causes whatsoever either civill or Ecclesiasticall , what reason was there they should be distinguished in the Text ? and that Amaziah should not be over the people in the Kings matters , though he were the chiefe Priest , and Zebadiah though a civill Iudge over all the matters of the Lord , and causes Ecclesiasticall ? 3. The Kings matters are the causes of the widow , and orphan , and oppressed , as is evident , Ier. 22. 2. O King of Iudah , v. 3. execute yee judgement and righteousnesse , and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor , and doe no wrong , doe no violence to the stranger , the fatherlesse , nor the widdow , so Esa . 1. 10. 17. Prov. 31. 4 , 5. Iob 29. 12 , 13 , &c. Then the ▪ Text must beare that every matter of the King is the Iudgement of the Lord , and the matter of the Lord ; and every matter and judgement of the Lord , is also the matter of the King , and to be judged by the King , then must the King as well as the Priest , judge between the clean and the unclean , and give sentence who shall be put out of the Campe , and not enter into the Congregation of the Lord , no lesse then the Priests . Let Erastus and all his see to this , and then must the Priests also releeve the fatherlesse and widdow , and put to death the oppressour . 2. The different presidents in the judicatures maketh them different judicatures . 3. It is denied , that all causes whatsoever came before the Ecclesiasticall Synedry at Jerusalem , Erastus doth say this , but not prove it ; for the place 2 Chron. 19. doth clearly expound the place , Deut. 17. for the causes of the brethren that dwell in the Cities , between Blood and Blood , between Law and Commandement , Statutes and judgements are judged in the Ecclesiasticall Synedrim at Ierusalem not in a civill coactive way by the power of the sword . 1. Because all causes are by a coactive power judged , as the matters of the King , the supream sword bearer , 2 Chron. 19. 5. v. 13. Rom. 13 ▪ 4. to eschew oppression , and maintain justice , Ier. 22. 2 , 3. But the causes here judged in this Synedrim , are judged in another reduplication , as the matters of the Lord differenced from the matters of the King , 2 Chron. 19. 13. now if the Priests and Levites judged in the same judicature , these same civill causes , and the same way by the power of the sword , as Magistrates , ( as Erastus saith ) why is there in the Text , 1. Two judicatures ; one , v. 5. in all the fenced cities ; another at Ierusalem , v. 8 ? 2. What meaneth this , that the Kings matters are judged in the civill judicature , not by the Priests and Levites ? ( as Erastus saith ) for the Ruler of the house of Iudah was president in these , and the matters of the Lord were judged by the Priests and Levites ? and Amariah the chiefe Priest was over them ? for then Amariah was as well over the Kings matters , as the Ruler of the house of Iudah , and the Ruler of the house of Iudah over the Lords matters , as over the Kings ; for if Priests and Levites judged as the Deputies subordinate to the King , and by the power of the sword , the Kings matters are the Lords matters , and the Lords matters the Kings matters , and Amariah judgeth not as chiefe Priests , as he doth burne incense , but as an other judge , this truly is to turne the Text upside downe . 2. The causes judged in the Synedrim at Ierusalem , are said to be judged as controversies , when they returned to Ierusalem , 2 Chr. 19. 8. and matters too hard , between plea and plea , between blood , and blood , between stroke and stroke , Deut. 17. 8. and so doubts of Law , and cases of conscience . Now Mal. 2. 7. The Priests lips should preserve knowledge , and they should seek the Law at his mouth ; for he is the messenger of the Lord of hostes , and this way only the Priests and Levites judged , not that they inflicted death on any ; but they resolved in an Ecclesiasticall way , the consciences of the judges of the fenced Cities , what was a breach of the Law of God Morall or Judiciall , what not ; what deserved Church censures , what not , who were clean , who unclean ; and all these are called the judgement of the Lord , the matters of the Lord ; because they had so near relation to the soul and conscience , as the conscience is under a divine Law. 3. Erastus saith , it is knowen that the Levites only were Magistrates in the Cities of refuge , but I deny it ; Erastus should have made it knowen to us from some Scripture : I finde no ground for it in Scripture . Erastus . It is true , that Beza saith , that the Magistrate hath a supream power to cause every man do his duty . But how hath he that supream power , if he be also subject to the Presbyters ? for your Presbyters do subject the Magistrate to them , and compell him to obey them and punish them , if they disobey . Ans . The Magistrate even King David leaveth not off to be supream , because Nathan commandeth him in the Lord ; nor the King of Niniveh and his Nobles leave not off to command as Magistrates , though Jonah by the word of the Lord bring them to lie in sackcloth , and to Fast ; all the Kings are subject to the rebukes and threatnings of the Prophets , Isa . 1. 10. Jer. 22. 2 , 3. Ier. 1. 18. 2 Kin. 12. 8 , 9. 10 , 11 , 12. 1 Kin. 21. 21 , 22 , 23. Isa . 30. 33. Hos . 5. 1 , 2. and to their commandments in the Lord : If Presbyters do command as Ministers of Christ , the highest powers on earth if they have souls , must submit their consciences to the Lords rebukings , threatnings and Commandment in their mouth : Court Sycophants say the contrary , but we care not . 2. But they punish the Christian Magistrate ( saith he ) if there be any Church Censure , as we suppose there is , this Objection should not have been made against us ; because of the Magistrates supremacy ; it doth conclude with equall strength , that Pastors should use it against no man : Now there be some swine that trample the Sacraments , some not well instructed in the grounds of Christian Religion ▪ and Erastus said , pag. 207. Such should not be admitted to the Lords Supper ▪ Now the Magistrate the King is such ; Let Erastians say , the Pearles of the Seals of the Covenant are to be given to no swine , except the swine be Magistrates , and that which the Church bindeth on earth is bound in heaven , except it be the Magistrate ; Erastus saith , he may go to Hell by priviledge of his place ; and that whose sins the Elders of the Church retaineth are retained , except it be the Kings sins , and that we are to put shame upon scandalous persons , and to refuse to eat with them , Romanes 16. 17. 2 ▪ Thess . 3. 14 , 15. 1 Cor. 5. 11. 2 Ioh. 10. Except they be Magistrates ; Sure God is no accepter of persons . Erastus . Whereas you say , it is not lawfull for the Magistrate to preach and administer the Sacraments ▪ ( if he might because of his businesse be able to discharge both Offices ) it is not true : God hath not forbidden it ; it was lawfull in the Old Testament , for one man to discharge both , why is it not lawfull now also ? the history of Eli and Samuel is known ; it is nothing that you say , that the tribunall of Moses , was distinguished from the tribunall of Aaron : for God gave to Aaron no tribunall at all , different from the tribunall of Moses , he never did forbid the Priests to sit in the Civill judicature after the captivity , the Priests judged the people Ezech. 44. Ans . That it is lawfull for the Magistrate to preach and Administer the Sacraments , 1. Destroyeth the Ordinance of Pastors , and a sent and called Ministry under the New Testament , against the Scriptures , Heb ▪ 5. 4 ▪ No man taketh on him this honour to himself ▪ except he that is called of God , as was Aaron : So also Christ glorified not himself , to be made an high Priest , &c. ● 2. God often maketh an honour of a calling to the Ministery , that he hath separated them to it , Numb . 16 ▪ 9. Moses saith to Korah ; hear now ●e sons of Levi , Seemeth it a small thing unto you , that the God of Israel hath separated you from the congregation of Israel to bring you neer to himself to do the service of the tabernacle of the Lord , Deut. 10. 8. At that time the Lord separated the tribe of Levi to bear the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord , to stand before the Lord to minister unto him , Numb . 8 ▪ 6. 7. 8. 9. But that same honour is put upon the Preachers of the Gospel , Rom ▪ ● . 1. Paul the servant of Iesus Christ , called to be an Apostle , separated unto the Gospell of God , Act. 13. 2. The holy Ghost said , Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them : If it be an honour , and no man , though gifted as Christ was , can take honour to himself : No Magistrate can take on him to discharge the office of a Minister . Object . But when he is called to be a Magistrate , he is called to be a Minister , and so being called to the one , he is called by the same calling to the other . Ans . If being called to be Magistrate , he be also called to be a Minister , then being called to be a Minister , he is called to be a Magistrate , and Hoc ipso that he is a Minister , be may usurpe the sword , and usurpe the Throne and the Bench ▪ But Christ being sent to be a Prophet , and to preach the Gospel , Esa . 61. 1. Luk. 4. 20. 21. ve● . 43. refused to divide the inheritance , and to be a a Iudge , Luk. 12. 13 , 14. He would not take on him to be a judge , except God had made him , and called him to be a judge ; If any say the Magistrate , being the supream place , containeth eminently all inferior offices ▪ as to be a Minister , a Lawyer , a Physitian , &c. but the inferior does not containe the superior , I Ans . Then the Magistrate being called to be a Magistrate and King , he is called to be a Priest to burn incense , which the Lord condemned in his word ▪ in Vzzah ; then when Saul is called to be a King , he is called to be an Astronomer , Lawyer , Physitian , Sayler , Tayler : Now God giveth a spirit to be a King , but no gifts to those offices ; Ergo , No calling thereunto , for no gifts argue no calling of God. 2. If a man called to be a judge , be also by that same calling , by which he is made a judge , made a Minister , then it is all one to be called to be a judge , and to be a Minister ; and so a Magistrate as a Magistrate doth preach and administrate the Sacraments , then 1. All Magistrates should preach and administrate the Sacraments , and Nero , and heathen Magistrates are gifts , actu primo , given by Christ ascending on high , for the edifying the body of the Church , Ephe. 4. 11 , 12. Obj. It is not sinne to him to preach and administrate the Sacraments ; but then he cannot have time for both . Ans . If God lawfully call the Magistrate to preach the Gospel , woe be to him , if he preach not , he should lay aside all other imployments and preach , God never gave a talent and calling to any to preach , but he ought to lay aside other things , and imploy that talent to the honour of God , otherwise he sinneth in digging his Lords talent in the earth , whereas he is obliged to make five talent ten . 2. If he preach as a Pastor not as a Magistrate , then he hath another calling of God to be a Pastor , and another to be a Magistrate , and ●●rtaine it is , as a Magistrate he doth not preach ; because there be farre other qualifications required in a Magistrate , as Deut. 1. 12. that he be wise , and understanding , and knowen , and a man of truth , hating coveteousnesse , Exo. 18. 21. But there is farre other qualities required in a Bishop , 1 Tim. 3. 1 , 2 , 3. Ergo , it is one thing to be called to be a Minister , and another to be called to be a Magistrate . 3. In all the word , Christ never commanded the Magistrate to preach and baptise ▪ this negative Argument Erastus useth often against us , to prove that none ought to be excluded from the Sacraments , because Priests , Prophets , Christ , Apostles never excluded any : But Christ commanded the Ministers to preach and baptise , and gave them the Holy Ghost for that effect , and sent them as the father sent him , as having received all power from the father , Math. 28. 18 , 19 , 20. Mark. 16. 15 , 16. Ioh. 20. 20 , 21 , 22. and least we should think this charge was given to Apostles as Apostles , he teacheth that it is given to all faithfull Pastors to the end of the world , Math. 28. v. 20. Lo I am with you , even unto the end of the world , Amen . Not to say , that if it be peculiar to Apostles to preach and baptise , neither Pastors , farre lesse Magistrates can do it , or then Pastors and Magistrates are Apostles sent to preach to all the world , and can work miracles , which is absurd . 4. Christ ascending to heaven , left Apostles , Evangelists , Pastors and Teachers , for the perfecting of the Saints , and work of the Ministery ; not Kings and Magistrates . 5. How shall they preach , except they be sent ? Magistrates as Magistrates bear the sword , and have carnall weapons , and are not sent ; the weapons of Ministers are not carnall , 2 Cor. 10. 4 , 5. For Erastus his Argument , God has not forbidden Magistrates to preach ; Ergo , it is lawfull for them to preach , it followeth not ▪ for such positive ordinances as preaching Ministers , must be appointed by a positive command , for where hath God forbidden women to baptise ? Ergo , they may baptise ; is not the Lords commanding the Apostles to go teach and baptise all Nations , and his not giving any such commandement to others , as good as a forbidding of them ? But I hope this is examined already suffi●ientl● . 2. For Samuel his being both Iudge and Prophet , I grant it ; but as an extraordinary dispensation of God , which Christ would not take on him to do , Luk. 12. nor is it left to us as a rule . 3. That Aarons sons had no tribunall of their owne different from the tribunall of Moses , is proved to be false from 2 Chr. 19 , 8. 4. That the Priests were Magistrates having the power of the sword , cannot be proved by any word of God , the pl●●e Ez● . 44. is every way for us , all the power given in that Cha ▪ is Ecclesiasticall , none Civill , as to k●ep the charge of the Lords holy things , to exclude the uncircumcised in heart and flesh , out of the sanctuary , to come near to the table of the Lord and Minister , v. 16 , to enter into the gates of the inner courts , clothed in linnen , &c. and many the like , did no more agree to a Magistrate then to burn incense , which to do , Erastus granteth was unlawfull in King Vzziah ; yet he would prove that it is lawfull under the New Testament to exercise both , so the Magistrate were able to do both ; because Samuel exercised both . But might not King Vzziah exercise both without impeachment of his businesse ? and where was he forbidden ? but in this God made choise of the tribe of Levi , and of no others , which also he has done under the New Testament ▪ as is proved . Erastus . Nor is that true , that whose part it is to preach and dispense the Sacraments , it is his part to judge of those that prophaneth the word , and seals , so as he has power to punish any that desires the Sacraments , with the want of the Sacraments ; and though it were true , it should prove that Pastors , not a Presbytery of Pastors and Ruling Elders have any power to debarre from the seals . Ans . 1. Well , then Erastus granteth that the Ministers are to preach the Word and dispense the Sacraments : But not to judge of those that prophane the holy things of God , nor to debarre from the Sacraments any who desire them ; if Erastus did mean a bodily debarring by the power of the sword , if any openly prophane shall violently intrude himself , we should yeeld that to the Magistrate as the keeper of both Tables . But Erastus is of that minde , that as the Magistrate may preach and dispense the Sacraments , he may by that power also Ecclesiastically cognosce , and judge of the scandals , for which the openly prophane are to be debarred , and accordingly debarre . Now Erastus saith he may preach as a Christian , because that all Christians now under the New Testament may preach and prophecy , all are Priests and Prophets , so saith he , page 175. So the Magistrate by this as a Christian , and so all Christians women and children , may try and examine all that are openly prophane , and unworthy of the Seals : this can be nothing but popular Anarchy ; yet that the Magistrate , as a Magistrate , and not as a Christian , is to examine and try who are unworthy communicants , I conceive is the minde of Erastus , as I have proved before : Which though it be a plaine contradiction , yet it is the pillar of all the Erastian doctrine , that the Magistrate as the Magistrate hath the supream power of all Church governement . Therefore ( saith he , page 171. ) they doe wickedly who take from the Magistrate that part of the visible jurisdiction in governement of the Church which God hath given to him , and subject the Magistrate to some other jurisdiction , — Magistrates are Gods. Ans . If to preach , dispense the Sacraments , and to judge who are unworthy of the Seals , and debarre them , be taken from the Magistrate as he is a Christian , this power of visible jurisdiction over the Church is no more taken by us from the Magistrate , then it is taken from all Christians as Christians , and in regard of any such power Magistrates are no more Gods and Nursefathers in the Church , then all Christians are Gods and Nursefathers of the Church : for by the reason of Erastus , p. 175. that all Christians now are Priests and Prophets , and so may examine who are worthy of the seals , who not , then the Civill Magistrate can be , by us , spoyled of nothing that God has given him , as a Magistrate , except Erastus say that he doth all these as a Magistrate & virtute officij ; which when he or any of his Disciples shall assert , beside that it is contradictorious to his way , we are ready to demonstrate that it is blasphemous & contrary to the word of God. But that Erastus does take from the Elders of the Church , and give to the Magistrate a power to judge in an Ecclesiasticall way , who are to be debarred from the seals , I argue on the contrary thus ; those who are to cut the word , and distribute it aright , are also to distribute the seals a right , to the worthy , not to dogs and swine , not to heathens and publicans , for it is evident that the right stewarding and distributing of ordinances doth essentially include the stewarding of them , with judgement and discerning , to those that are worthy , not to those that are unworthy . But Elders , not Civill Magistrates are to do the former , Ergo the latter also . 2. Those to whom Christ committed the power of the keys to open and shut , to bind and loose , to those he hath given the use and exercise of the keys . But Christ gave the power of the keys to the Apostle Peter , as representing the Rulers of the Church , Mat. 16. 19. & to the Church , Mat. 18. 18. and not to the Magistrate as to the Magistrate ; Ergo , The proposi●ion I prove from the Texts , Mat. 18. 18. What ye sh●ll bind on earth , shall be bound in heaven , &c. and Cha. 16. 19. the same is repeated : now actuall binding is the use and exercise of the keys given to Peter and the Church . But it is presumed the power is given , when Christ saith , v. 19. I will give unto thee , the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven . 2. We read not that God giveth a power , a gift , a talent , or an office , but he judgeth it a sinne in those to whom he giveth it , not to put forth in acts and in exercise that gift , talent , and office , either by themselves , or his deputies ; which latter I speak for the King , who in his own person , and in the person of inferiour judges sent by him , do put forth in acts of justice , the Royall power that God has given him . The assumption is Scripture . Erastus has no answer to this , but the keys were given to Peter as representing all the faithfull , not the Elders , and that all private Christians do bind and loose . Ans . Besides , this is answered fully above , and is a meer anarchicall Democracy ; it , 2. concludeth well that Christ gave not to the Magistrate as the Magistrate , the keys , but to the Magistrate as he is a Christian , making that same Christian confession of faith with Peter , Mat. 16. and as he is an offended brother , who may bind and loose in earth and heaven , so Erastus Thes . 54. p. 42. and so by this the Magistrate hath no more power to debarre from the seals , then all other Christians have . 3. If Christ give the key of knowledge to the Elders , then he cannot give the power of studying Sermons , and preaching the word to another ; so if Christ give the power of breaking the bread of life to the children of the house , then he cannot give the power of judging , who are the children of the house , who not , to another . Ob. But the Magistrate is only to examine the fact , & to punish adultery , incest and the like , that deserve to be punished by the sword , but not whether it be a scandall that deserve exclusion from the Sacrament , or not ; Ministers are to take the probation of the scandalous fact by witnes from the Magistrate , & so to exclude from the Lords supper , and to deal with the mans conscience to bring him to repentance , so do some argue . Ans . If the Church be to try the penitency , or impenitency of the fact , and not to cognosce and try whether he hath done the fact , upon the same ground the Magistrate is to try and punish the disturbance of the peace of the Common-wealth , that adhereth to the fact , and not to try the fact . 2. It is not possible that the Church can know whether the man be penitent , or no , except by witnesses they know the fact , for they shall run a preposterous way , to work the man to a godly sorrow , for that sinne which possibly he never committed ; now that of which the Church is to convince the man , and from which they are to gain his soul , that they are to find out . 2. This is against the way of Erastus , who will have the Magistrate to exclude from the Sacraments , and none other . 3. The word knowes no such thing , as that Ministers should be led in the acts of their Ministeriall duties , to whom they should dispense the mysteries of the Gospel , and to whom they should deny them ; by the Magistrate ? by a good warrant the Magistrate is to lay a tye on the consciences of Elders , what they should dispence , as to whom they should dispense ; sure if the Magistrate as the Magistrate must prescribe to Ministers , to what sort of persons they must dispence word and Sacraments , he must upon the same ground as a Magistrate prescribe what Doctrine they should preach to this man , not to this , whether Law or Gospel ; and so the Magistrate as the Magistrate must be a Pastor to cut the word aright , 2 Tim. 2. 15. Eze. 3. 18 , 19 , 20. Eze. 13. 19. to command to preach life to this man , death to this man. 4. If the Church must cast him out , and judge him who has done this wickednesse , 1 Cor. 5. 2 , 12. and 4. 5 , 6. 7. then must they judge of his scandall ; that according to the quality of the scandall , they may proportion the measure of the punishment ; Ergo , a pari they must judge whom they debarre from the seals . 5. The debarring any from the seals , must be proportioned to the end of all spirituall censures , that the man be gained , and his sinne loosed in heaven , Mat. 18. 15. 18. that his soul may be saved in the day of the Lord , 1 Cor. 5. 4. That he may be ashamed , and so humbled , 2 Thes . 3. 14 , 15. 2 Cor. 2. 6 , 7. that he may learn not to blaspheme , 1 Tim. 1. 20. But the Magistrates excluding of any from the Sacraments is no mean congruous to such an end , for he can command nothing , but the disobedience of which he can and ought to punish with the sword ; now a carnall weapon cannot be congruous and proportionable to a spirituall end . 6. If the Magistrate as a Magistrate must so farre have the keys of Discipline , then as a Magistrate he must catechise , examine , and try the knowledge of the Communicants , and so watch for their souls , as those that must give an accompt to God. 7. The Magistrate must have a Negative voyce in all the acts of the Church , and the man must be bound in heaven , but not except the Magistrate will , and loosed in heaven , but not except the Magistrate will , for all must depend upon the consent of him to whom Iesus Christ has committed the supream ▪ and highest and only power of governing the Church ; now this is the Magistrate as the Magistrate to Erastus . 8. The Magistrate as the Magistrate must forgive sinners and relaxe them from excommunication , 2 Cor. 2. 7. and restore those that are overtaken in offences , with the spirit of meeknesse , Gal. 6. 1. and rebuke publikely those that sin publikely , 1 Tim. 5. 20. and so be a spirituall man , and a Pastor . Neither doth it follow that the Pastors as Pastors only , should debarre from the Communion , though virtute potestatis ordinis as Pastors , they are to keep themselves pure , and not to give pearls to swine , nor to communicate with other mens sins ; yet because the Sacraments are Church ordinances , they are to be dispensed by the Church , that is , by the Elders with consent of the people : it is one thing to dispense ordinances to those that receive them , and another thing to dispense them ce●●o ordine after a Church way , the former is from power of order , the latter from power of jurisdiction , and from the Church only . CHAP. XV. Quest . 11. Whether Erastus do validly confute a Presbytery . Erastus . What consequence is this ? Lev. 10. God commandeth Aaron and his sonnes to put a difference between the holy and prophane , the cleane and the unclean , this difference they were to teach the people out of the Law ; Ergo , God hath ordained a Colledge of Ecclesiasticall Senators to exercise the power of the Civill Magistrate ? it is like this ; God commanded the Pastors to teach the people , and dispense the Sacraments ; Ergo , he instituted a Presbytery in place of the Magistrate . Ans . This consequence is so strong ( though the consequent be not ours ) to prove a Synedrie , that Erastus shall never be able to refute it ; for that the Priests might teach the people , they were to judge and governe the people , and w●re to judge between the holy and prophane , not onely that the Priests might informe the p●oples minds , but that the Priests and Levites might , 2 Chron. 9. 8 ▪ 9 10. Deut. 17. 8 , 9 give judgement between blood and blood , between plea and plea , between stroake and stroake , being matters of controversie , and hard to be judged by the inferiour judges ; these concerned not the instruction of the people as matters of opinion , as Erastus imagineth ; but they concerned the governing of the people in justice , that v. 12. the man that will doe presumptuously , or will not hearken unto the Priest or the judge , shall die the death ? Was not this to governe the people and to judge them ? Certainly Erastus in the same Chapter saith so , to wit , that there was one common Synedrim of civill judges , Priests and Levites at Jerusalem , that the Priests and Levites were Iudges in capitall matters , and gave out the sentence of death , de capite & sanguine , and he proveth page 270. 271. that the Priests were civill judges , and did give s●●tences of blood , of life and d●ath : Ergo , the Priests did not discerne between the clean and the unclean , between blood and blood onely , that they might teach the people , but that they might regulate their owne practise in judgement , and govern the people ; yea that the Priests might pronounce some unclean , and to be put out of the Campe so many dayes , that they might debar out of the Sanctuary the uncl●an , the uncircumcised , the strangers , and Lev. 10. the end of judging and governing is expresly set down , v. 10. and so a judicature , and the other end , v. 11. that they may teach the children of Israel all the Statutes which the Lord hath spoken by the hand of Moses . 2. From the Elders preaching the Word and dispensing the Sacraments , simply we inferre no judicature at all , farre lesse a politick judicature , which we doe not ascribe to the Priests , for Iohn Baptist both preached the Word and baptized , and yet was no judge , nor did he erect any Church judicature , but from the power of the keyes given to the Church , and exercised by the Church , Mat. 16. 19. Mat. 18. 15 , 16 , &c. 1 Cor. 5. 1 , 2 , 3. &c. Revel . 2. 1 , 2 , 3 , &c. we inferre a Church judicature , we never placed a Presbytery in place of the Magistrate ; for it is no more the Magistrates place , then to sacrifice is the place of the Magistrate . Erastus . J wonder that you seeke your Presbytery in Moses Law , all yours , say the Synedrie , Christ speaketh of did rise after the captivity , at least when the sword was taken from the Iewes . They say David and Solomon did punish vices , they approve August . 39. quest . in Deut. that Excommunication doth now what putting to death did of Old , and deny any Excommunication to have beene in the Church of the New Testament . Ans . Erastus declares himselfe to be a childe , not versed in Protestant Divines , for we except Musculus , Gualther , Bullinger , some except Aretius , all our Protestant Divines goe the way Beza goeth . 2. Let him produce any of ours , who say that the Synedry that Christ speaketh of , was Iewish , and ours say that Christ alludeth to the Iewish Synedrie : But all ( few excepted ) that Christ Mat. 18. speaketh of the Christian Church to be erected . 3. The Kings of Israel punished scandals , but that is not enough , did they governe the Church , pronounce who were clean or unclean ? or middle with the charge of Ecclesiastick Government committed to Aaron and his sonnes ? 4. We say with Augustine , that some that were killed of old , are to be Excommunicated now , Augustine speaketh not of all , and what is that against us ? Erastus . Not any but your self ( Beza ) say that Moses speaketh of th●se same persons , things , and office , Levit. 10. and Deut. 17. in Levit. 10. he speaketh onely of the Priesthood , and Deut. 17. of the Iudges or Magistrats . Ans . Beza expoundeth the one place by the other , but he saith not these persons , things and office are in both places . 2. Erastus onely contradicteth Beza , and saith Moses speaketh of the Magistrates , Deut. 17. But he is refuted by the Spirit of God , 2 Chron. 19. 8 , 9. who repeating the very words of Deut. 17. saith the Iudges here were Priests , Levites , and heads of Families , whom all men deny to be Magistrates . Erastus . You say Deut. 17. mention is made of blood , of the cause of Pleas , not because the Synedrie judged of the fact , but because they answered the true sense of the Law ; I say , whether they answered of the fact , or of the Law , they sentenced judicially of life and death , so that there was no provocation from them to the civill judicature , for he was put to death , who would not stand to their sentence , but you deny that any politick causes or matters of blood or death , belongs to your Presbytery . Ans . 1. Beza said well the fact , and the putting of the man to death , which is the assumption and conclusion belonged to the civill judge , not to the Priests ; But the questio juris , the question of Law belonged to the Ecclesiasticall judicature of Priests , Levites and Elders ; and it is evident , that it was a case of conscience , concerning a matter , or an admirable cause that cannot be determined by the judges in the city , they not being so well versed in the Law as the Priests , whose lips should preserve knowledge , Mal. 2. 7. Therefore it is not a fact , that may be cleared by Witnesses , there is not such difficulty in facts , except in adultery , or secret Murthers , the word commeth from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to admire , or to be separated from sense and reason , Lament . 1. 9. Gen. 18. 14. Is there any thing hard to , or ●id from Jehovah ? 2. They are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 causes or matters of contention , Vatablus causa insolita & difficilior : Our translation hath it , matters of controversie . 3. It is said , thou shalt come and inquire or diligently search out . 4. The Priests and Levites shall shew thee the sentence of judgement , so it is evident that the Priests and Levites did not so much judge , as declare and resolve the law-part of which the inferiour judges did doubt , for the difficulty of the question , as Saul came to Samuel the Seer , to aske concerning his fathers asses , and it is true bloods and stroakes came under the cognizance of the Priests , but as bloods comes before Lawyers , and those that are expert in the civill Law , in the Parliament of England and Scotland , the Lawyers as Iudges put no man to death , the King could say , fall upon such an evill doer , and kill him , and the judges and Princes might put to death . But you never read that the Priests , yea or the High Priest said , fall upon such an ill doer and kill him , nor was this any Law of God , that the Ecclesiastick Sanedrim , should put to death and politically condemne any man to die , or command any mans blood to be shed , they but declared and resolved a case of conscience to the judges , and a plea , and said , This is a matter of blood , and deserveth death by the Law of God , and he that hath done such a fact in point of Law , ought to die . But there were two things left to the civil● Iudges . 1. Whether this man hath done such a fact . 2. A sitting in the Tribunall , and saying , I or we command and decree such a man who hath shed such blood , hath inflicted such a stroake on this woman who is with childe of living birth , to be stoned to death , to be hanged . Erastus hath not proved , nor never shall prove that the High Priests , Priests or Levites , by Gods Law did thus judge any : That Ananias commanded Paul to be beaten , and the lictors of the High Priest smote Christ on the face at the command of the Priests , was against Law , they had no power so to doe by Law , yea , and our Presbyteries that judge of sorceries , witchcrafts , incests , adulteries , and other capitall crimes , and of bloods in point of Gods Law , what is witchcraft , what is incest , that the husband that striketh his wife being with quick ▪ child , and killeth the birth is a Murtherer ; but that they judicially say , such a woman is a Witch , and so ordain her to be hanged and burnt , and such a husband is a Murtherer , and decerne him to die , is utterly unlawfull , therefore this is an ignorant speech of Erastus : This synedrie of Priests and Levites , whether in point of Law , or in point of ●act , did give out sentences of death , therefore they were politick judges , it followeth not ; and that the Priests said , this man deserveth to die , and therefore they gave out , as civill judges , sentences of death , ( for the civill judge draweth not the sword with his owne hand , ) is a foul consequence ; for lawyers do say such a man is worthy to die , but it followeth not that Lawyers are civill judges to condemne a man to die ; for the Priests said , this man deserveth to die in point of Law , not absolutely , as this man , but upon supposition that he hath committed the fact , deserveth to die , and their meaning is , any man whosoever he be , though they never hear , nor see the man who hath committed such a fact , ought to die . Now Gods Law never appointed any judge to condemn a man to die , whom the judge never did accuse , heare , or see , this were extreame unjustice : Now this supposition is , and was to be proved and judged by the civill Iudge ; and whereas Erastus saith , the judge draweth the sword with his owne hand against no man ; 1. It is not to purpose , for the hangman is in Law the hand and instrument of the judge , but he is neither hand nor instrument of the Lawyer , of the Priests and Levites , who in matters criminall of life and death , judge of the Maior proposition , and of the Law , except Erastus would have a Major proposition to prove an Assumption , which were to shame all Logick : For the Priest never commanded this or this man , because he had done this fault , to be stoned by such & such executioners . 2. It is doubtful whether the judge did never with his owne hand , cast a stone at any stoned to death . Lastly , there was no provocation from the great Sanedrim at Ierusalem , true , in matter of Law , what then ? Ergo , they were politick judges ? it followeth as the like consequences of Erastus doth follow . Yea , for the fact and the judiciall condemning of the man , they were neither the highest judicature , nor any judicature at all , the civill Iudges of the high Sanedrim did that onely . It is true , he was to die who would not stand to the sentence of the judge or Priest in the matter of Law , the man being judged to be guilty of the fact by the civill judge , but this shall never prove that the Priests were civill judges . Erastus . The late Iewes referre to this Sanedrim at Ierusalem questions of making warre , or consecrating the Priest , of tributes , of charges of the Temple , of judging of Tribes , of the censuring of false Prophets , and of Soothsayers , &c. How then is it not a politick judicature in which all causes belonging to worship , Ceremonies , civill policy , bloods , and capitall punishments were handled ? for when Moses had spoken of the punishing of Idolaters , he presently addeth Deut. 17. If any thing be hard for thee , &c Ans . It is like enough , the Iewes referred such as these to the Sanedrim , but we contend for two Sanedrims , one civill , and another of Priests , Levites and Elders , who judged of matters onely of Ecclesiasticall cognizance , and of bloods , and punishing Idolaters and false Prophets with death , onely in a spirituall way , in point of Law ; and I judge the holy Ghost Deut. 17. hath so framed the words that it is evident , as I have proved that capitall crimes belonged to them in point of Law ; for he saith not , he that refuseth to die when the Priests and Levites condemne him to die , hee shall surely die , and have the benefit of appeal to no higher judicature , Now this he should have said by Erastus his way ; but he that will not stand to the sentence of the Priest or judge shall die . Hence it is clear , he speaketh of things in matters of Law , in which the guilty might dis-assent , and alledge the Priests had not judged according to Law. But how was it the minde of the holy Ghost that any could refuse the Sentence of death given out by the Priests ? for the meaning must be by Erastus his way , he that refuseth to die , when the Priest condemneth him to die , he shall surely die . 2. He saith not that the Priests and Levites shall give out sentences of death and blood against any man , but they shall shew and teach thee when thou shalt inquire , the sentences of judgement , even of Idolaters , blasphemers , of Murthers , and blood , according to the Law of God , the knowledge of which the Priests lips should preserve . Erastus . Moses instituted no other publike judicatures for punishing of wickednes , but those he maketh mention of Exod. 18. Numb . 11. Deut. 1. 16 , 17. But all th●se were onely civill , not Ecclesiasticall Iudges . The seventy that were indued with the spirit of prophecy were given to helpe Moses and ●ase him , not to be assistants to helpe Aaron , and it cannot be doubted but Moses his government was civill . Ans . Both the Major & the Minor is false , the Major is from some particular places , negativè , he should argue from all the Old Testament , and he argueth from some places onely , he leaveth out Levit. 10. and all the places where the Priests were onely to judge the Leper , the uncleane , which are spirituall judicatures , not civill . 2. The Assumption is false ; Deut. 17 , saith the contrary . 3. Though we could not shew a place for the formall institution of an Ordinance , yet if we show the thing instituted , it is sufficient . 4. Erastus much doubteth himselfe , if Moses his government was altogether civill , especially before the Lord separated Aaron his sons and the Tribe of Levi to teach and governe the people in an Ecclesiasticall way , for Erastus said before that Moses prescribed Lawes to Aaron , sacrificed and did that which was proper to the Priests , though after that God forbad the Kings to usurpe the Priests office , and punished Saul and Vzziah for so doing , ( though I never read that Saul usurped the Priests office , you may take it upon the word of Erastus ) and we all know that Moses was a Prophet of God , Deut. 18. 18. I will raise them up a Prophet from amongst their brethren like unto thee , Deut. 34. 10. And there arose not a Prophet in Israel since , like unto Moses , whom the Lord knew face to face , Heb. 3. 5. Moses verily was faithfull in all his house as a servant : Now those that will say Moses his government of the Church was all civill and politicall , as a civill judge and King , and that he acted not in the governement of the Church , as in writing and delivering Laws , and in doing many things , yea in commanding the will of God , as a Prophet to Aaron , to his sons , and the whole tribe of Levi , to me speakes non-sense . Erastus . That judicature to the which the inferiours appealed , as to the supreame , is politick . Ans . It is denied , they appealed to it , as the supreme Ecclesiastick in point of Law and Conscience : Ergo , It was not politique , all the rest are answered before , yea , Iehoshaphat 2 Chron. 19. putteth this as a thing peculiar to the Priests , v. 12. What cause soever shall come before you of your brethren , — between blood and blood , between Law and Commandement , Statutes and Judgements , ye shall even warne them that they trespasse not against the Lord ; that is , as Erastus yeeldeth , ye shall teach them what is just and agreeable to , and what is unjust and repugnant to the Law of God. Civill judges lips were not to preserve knowledge , as the lips of the Priests , Mal. 2. 7. and Deut. 17. 11. According to the sentence of the Law that they shall teach thee , and according to the judgement that they shall tell , thou shalt doe . Hence it is clear that this judicature in civill things was a teaching , a telling , a declaring and resolving judicature , and that in blood they resolved of causes of blood , of stroakes , but judged not persons , nor bloody men , nor violent persons . Erastus . Moses and Iehoshaphat speake of one and the same judicature . Moses doth not give teaching and commanding divisibly to some , but joyntly to all the Synedrie . Though the Priests were more skilled in the Law , for Moses commandeth to teach the sense of the Law by judgeing , as he saith himselfe , Exod. 18. 16. I judge between one and another , and I doe make them know the statutes of God and his lawes ; Moses putteth them all joyntly together , they shall tell thee , thou shalt doe what they shevv thee , according to the Lavv that they shall teach thee shalt thou doe , not declining to the right-hand , or to the left-hand . Ans . 1. That Iehoshaphat speaketh of the same judicature that Moses speaketh of , is clear , 2 Chron. 19. 8 , 9. 10. The very words of Moses Deut. 17. 8. are the same , both the same judges , and the same causes , compared with v. 5 , 6 , 7. But Iehoshaphat maketh two judicatures , as I have proved , and Iehoshaphat reformed according to Moses his Lavv , as Erastus granteth . 2. I cannot be induced to beleeve that the judges here teached by judging , it is spoken contrary to Theology : The end of teaching is to informe the conscience , and Teachers as Teachers watch for the soule ; and the end of civill and politick judging , is a quiet and peaceable life , 1 Tim. 2. 2. the vveapons of teachers are not carnall , but spirituall , 2 Cor. 10. 4 , 5. the weapons of civill Iudges are carnall , for the civill Iudge beareth not the svvord in vaine , Rom. 13. 4. then these same civill judges did not both teach and judge at once , they taught not as civill judges , but as Priests ; they judged not as Priests , but as civill Iudges ; and therefore there is no ground to say that Moses ascribeth these same acts to civill judges , and Priests and Levites , as if they made one Synedry ; for in both Texts not one word of teaching , which is proper to the Priests , Mal. 2. 7. Ier. 2. 8. Hos . 4. 6. is ascribed to the civill Iudge ; and not one word of judging and condemning to death , which is proper to the civill Iudge , Num. 35. 24. Deut. 22. 18 , 19 , Deut. 17. 2. 3 , 4 , &c. and 21. 19 , 20. 1 King. 21. 11. 2 Sam. 14. 15. 1 Kings 2. 28 , &c. Rom. 13. 4. Luke 12. 13. 14. &c. is ascribed to the Priests and Levites ; but the Priest or the judge are set downe by way of disjunction , Deut. 17. 12. which could not be if they made one and the same judicature , and therefore Iehoshaphat 2 Chron. 19. clearely distinguisheth them in two judicatures , one v. 5 , 6 , 7. Another v. 8 , 9 , 10. having two sundry presidents , and two sundry objects to treat about , to wit , the matters of Iehovah , and the matters of the King. 3. The place cited Exod. 18. 16. confirmeth much our opinion , for Moses as a Iudge saith , vvhen they have a matter , they come unto me , and I judge between one & another . This he spake as a civill Iudge ; and when he saith , And I make them knovv the statutes of God and his lavves : This he spake as a prophet , for Moses was both a Iudge and a Prophet . Now if all civill Iudges be such mixt persons , as to teach the Stautes and Laws of God , they doe this either as civill judges , or as Prophets , then there was reason why Malachie should have said , the civill judges lips should preserve knowledge , and they should seeke the Law at his mouth ; for if a civill judge , as a Iudge teach the people , and watch for their souls , what marvell then he beare the sword to preserve their bodies , as a Prophet , and not as a Iudge ; and if he beare the sword as a Prophet and Teacher , all Teachers must beare the sword : which is against reason and Scripture , and what reason is there , if Moses teach as a civill judge , but he may as properly be obliged in conscience to teach , and so he should sin if he imploy not his talent that way , as he is obliged to exercise the sword as a judge ? and by the contrary , a Prophet as a Prophet should be obliged in conscience , as kindly and per se , to exercise the Sword as to preach the Gospel , for nothing agreeth more kindly to the subiect , then that which agreeth to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under that reduplication , as it is such ; Now this is against sense and reason , and confoundeth all callings on earth : but if Erastus grant that Moses judgeth as a civill judge , and teacheth the people the Law of God as a prophet , then to make this Sanedrim a mixt company both to judge civilly , and to teach as spirituall men by office , must all the Priests and Levites in this Sanedrim be both Priests and Levites , and also civill Iudges ? And all the civill Iudges must be both civill judges , and also Priests and Levites , which is expresly against the Text , that speakes Deut. 17. of the Priest , or the Iudge , as two distinct offices , and so God must have chosen the Iudge no lesse , then the Priest to minister before him . So , it is false , that teaching and judging are copulatively ascribed to these same persons , and to the same judicature , as Erastus saith . Erastus . He saith Deut. 17. he shall die who standeth not to the sentence of the Priest or judge , by way of disjunction , in regard of divers times , for the Princes or Iudges were not alwayes the same , for often onely the Priests governed , and for the same reason he saith not , Deut. 17. ascend to Ierusalem , but to the place which the Lord thy God shall chuse , for the Arke was not alwayes in one place , or city ; So Deut. 19. when he speaketh of the false witnesse , he saith , and they shall stand before the Lord , that is , before the Priests and Iudges that shall be at that time . Who vvould thinke that there are here distinct and divers Iudicatures ? Ans . It is a conjecture of Erastus , that Moses speaketh Deut. 17. of the Priest or the Iudge by way of disjunction , because of divers times , not of divers and distinct Tribunals , for all Moses his time , and Ioshua's time , and for the most part , there were both Iudges and Priests , and we had rather beleeve the Spirit of God then Erastus , for 2 Chron. 19. under Iehoshaphat at one and the same time , there were both civill Iudges , and Priests and Levites , and these two Judicatures had two different sorts of causes , and two different Presidents ; if then at one and the same time the man was to be put to death , who did not stand to the sentence of the Priest , though he should stand to the sentence of the civill judge ; and so if hee was to be put to death , who should stand to the sentence of the Priests , and give an outside of obedience to the Ceremoniall Law , if he should not stand to the sentence of the civill Judge , then were there at the same time these two sentences in these two judicatures : but the former is true by the expresse Law of God ; Ergo , so is the latter : when God saith , Goe up to the place that the Lord shall chuse , he meaneth Ierusalem , and one determinate place at once , and if Moses had said , Goe up to the place that the Lord shall chuse ; or to some other place that the Lord shall not chuse , then could I inferre well , that at one and the same time , they might have gone to either places , or to both places , having two sorts of causes , as there be ever two sorts of causes in the Church , some Civill , some Ecclesiasticall . 3. Erastus should have shewen a time when onely the Priest as the Priest did governe , and there neither was a civill Iudge , nor was that Priest who governed the civill judge : If Erastus shew not this , he sheweth nothing for his owne cause , which is to make one confused Judicature of civill and Ecclesiasticall Iudges and causes , which the Scripture doth carefully distinguish . 4. In the place Deut. 19. nothing is said against us , but that onely the civill Iudge put to death the false Witnesse ; which is much for us , that though the false witnesse was to stand before the Priests , and incurre an Ecclesiastick censure , yet the Priest as Priest had no hand in putting him to death . Erastus . Sometime the Priest vvas president in this Sanedrim , as Eli and Samuel , vvithout a judge ; therefore vvhen it is said , the chiefe Priest vvas ●ver them in all the matters of the Lord , and Zebadiah in the Kings matters , they made not tvvo different Iudicatures ; and the high Priest and Zebadiah vvere both over the same Iudicature . Iosephus excellently versed in the Ievvish lavvs , saith , antiq . lib. 9. c. 1. they vvere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fellovves or companions ; then they vvere not in divers Senats . The Levites vvere equally servants to both , though it may be the Priests were more diligently to goe about the canses of God , and the Iudges the causes of the King. Ans . Were Eli and Samuel presidents in the Sanedrim without a Iudge ? that is as much as to say , Eli and Samuel , who undoubtedly by the Testimony of the Spirit of God were civill Iudges of Israel , 1 Sam. 4 18. and 7. 15. and 8. 1. 7. were Judges without Iudges : I conceive Eli was both a Priest and a Judge ; and Samuel both a Prophet and a Iudge ; whether Samuel was a Priest or not , let Erastus determine . Samuel was of the Tribe of Ephraim , not a Priest , though he sacrificed by an extraordinary Priviledge ; nor was Moses a Priest . 2. I see no reason to say , Eli was a Priest without a Iudge , more then to say he was a Iudge without a Priest , for he was both . But this may shew the Reader , that Erastus alwayes confoundeth the office of the Priest , and the Civill judge , so as he maketh them not only subjectively one , which God himself did in the person of Eli , but also one formally ; for as I shew before Erastus must say , Eli sacrificed as a Iudge , and he condemned ill doers to die & exercised the sword as a Priest ; & Samuel prophesied as a Magistrate , & Samuel did judge Israel as a Prophet ; for the Magistrate as the Magistrate to Erastus , doth both the part of a Iudge , of a Priest and Prophet of old , and now of a Pastor and Teacher . 3. It is enough to us that Amariah and Zebadiah were over diverse causes , in divers Courts , and differenced , 2 Chro. 19. in that the one was , for the kings matters , the other for Gods matters . Erast . saith right down , they were both for these same matters . But the one was to care more for the Kings matters , the other more for Gods matters : so Erastus is forced to make a difference : But he maketh it in the comparative degree , and the spirit of God maketh the difference in the positive degree : But 1. Erastus saith without the Text , Amariah was to care for the matters of the King , but more for the matters of God : The Text saith no such thing , but the contrary : he saith , Zebadiah the Civill Magistrate was to care for the matters of God , but more for the matters of the King : 4. This is against Erastus his his way ; which is that the Magistrate hath a supreame principall and only care of Church-Government , and the Priests and Levites , and Pastors and Teachers only , as the servants of the Magistrates , A & sub Magistratibus , as Vtenbogard speaketh , from and under the Magistrate , as the Vicars , Deputies , and Ambassadors of the Magistrate ; yea , that Magistrates teach the people by the Pastors , as by their Vicars , then Zebadiah should more diligently care for the matters of God , then Amariah as the Lord and Master should more care his own businesse , then his servant should do : 3. More or lesse doth not vary the nature of things ; then must the Magistrate Sacrifice , Teach , judge between the clean and the unclean , minister before the Lord as the sons of Aaron , and the sons of Levi , but lesse diligently . But what calling hath he to any of these Acts at all ? Hath the Lord chosen the Tribe of Iudah , or the Tribe of Levi to minister before him ? And by the same reason , the Priests , Levites should do these same things , but more diligently . And again Amariah is to use the sword , and to condemne ill doers to death : But lesse diligently , these be pleasant dreams . 5. The Priest and Judges are companions , as Moses and Aaron : Ergo , the one is not Master and the other servant and Deputy , ●● Erastus dreameth , and they are the rather of that in divers Senats . 6. But how proveth Erastus , That the Levites were common Servants both to Priests and Judges ? For though it were so , this will never subject the Priests to the Civill Iudge , nor confound these two Iudicatures : David 1 Chron. 26. divided the Levites , and set them in their courses for service ; Ergo , They were King Davids servants as King , it followeth not , except Erastus prove David did not this as a Prophet , and that the Lord did not choose the Tribe of Levi. But David did it as a King , and so all Magistrates may appoint offices in the House of God , and call men to the Ministry , by vertue of the Magistrates place : But David , 1 Chro. 24. distributed the Priests as well as the Levites ; Ergo , the Priests are servants to the King , as well as the Levites . But the Levites are expresly , 1. Chron. 26. given by office , to wait on the sons of Aaron , for the service of the house of the Lord , for the purifying the holy things , for the shew bread , for the fine flour for meat offerings , and for the unleavened Cakes , and that which is baked in the pan , and for that which is fryed , and for all manner of measures and size , to praise the Lord at morning and night ; to offer all burnt sacrifices to the Lord , &c. In all which no man can say , they were servants to the King : For then the King sacrificed by them , as by his servants ; no Divinity is more contrary to Scripture . It is true , 1 Chron. 26. 30. some of the Hebronites were Officers in all the businesse of the Lord , and the service of the King. But that is because , ver . 26. they had the oversight of the spoile , that the King dedicated to the house of the Lord , for the building of the Temple , and that is called the Kings businesse . Erastus . Jehoshaphat , 2 Chron. 19. did not depart from Moses his Law : But we read not , that there were two distinct Iurisdictions commanded and instituted by God. Ans . If this be a good Argument ; all that David and Solomon did for , and in the building of the Temple in the structure , forme , length , breadth , Cedars , gold , Altars , &c. of the Temple shall be without Warrant ; Solomon and David departed not from Moses : But Moses spake nothing of the Temple , and a thousand things of Divine institution in the Temple . But this is our Argument , Jehoshaphat did erect no new Iudicatures , but restore those that had their Warrant from Moses his Law. But so it is that Iehoshaphat reinstituteth two distinct Iudicatures ; Ergo , The Lord by Moses at the beginning did institute these two distinct Iudicatures . Erastus . We are not anxiously to inquire what be the matters of God ; it is all one with what he said before ; ye judge not for men , but for the Lord. The Rabbines , the judgement of Capitall causes is the judgement of souls , the scripture nameth all judgements most frequently , the judgements of the Lord , Deut. 1. Ye shall not fear men ; for the judgement is the Lords , Exod. 18. The people come to me to inquire of God , that is , to seek judgement : Therefore are the Judges , Exod. 22. Psal . 82. called Gods , The matter of God , is any cause expressed in the Law of God , and proposed to the Judges to be judged ; and the Kings matter , is that which properly belongeth to the King. Ans . Erastus his anxiety to inquire is little , because he cannot Answer : 1. The matter of the Lord cannot be all one with this , Ye judge not for men , but for the Lord : For the matter of the King , or a point of Treason to be judged , is to be judged not for men , but for the Lord. But the Text differenceth between the matters of Lord , and the matters of the King. 2. In the former , 2 Chron. 19. 5. he speaketh of civill businesse ; but the matters of the Lord are such as concern the Law of God , and the true sense and meaning thereof to be proposed to the conscience ; and 3. That is a common thing to all causes , that in the manner of Iudging , Iudges are to look that they do as men in the place of God , so then as God , if he were judging , would do no iniquity , nor respect persons , nor take gifts , as he saith , ver . 7. So neither should men do iniquity , or respect persons in judgement ; and so is it taken , Deut. 1. 17. Now this clearly is the manner of righteous judgement , and Modus judicandi , but the matter of Iehovah is Res judicata ; the thing to be judged , which may be unjustly Iudged : and this matter of Iehovah is not common to all causes , but is contradistinguished in the Text , from the matters of the King , which in the manner of judging is no lesse to be judged according to the judgement of the Lord , then the matters of Jehovah . 4. The Chalde Paraphrast , Vt inquir at instructionem , Vatab. Vt consulat deum . This is a false interpretation , That to inquire of God , is to seek judgement from God : For it is to ask the Lords minde in doubtsome cases ; and this they asked from Moses , as he was a Prophet , not as he was a civill Iudge : except Erastus will have the Magistrate of old to give responses , and to have been Oracles by vertue of their Office : which is a clear untruth , Saul , David , Solomon , Joshua , though Kings , did not give responsals , and answers when they did go to War , or were in doubtsome perplexities . But did ask Counsell at the Priest and Oracle of God and the Ark , 1 Sam. 15. 37. Iosh . 9. 14. Iudg. 20. 27. 1 Sam. 30. 8. and 23. 2. 4. And by this the Magistrate as the Magistrate should resolve all doubts of conscience now to perplexed consciences , under the New-Testament . 5. The Iudges are called Gods , because they are under-Deputies in the room and place of the great God , not because every judgement of theirs is the judgement , and very sentence of God , and according to that the cause they judge is nothing but the cause of God , for they are to judge the Kings matters , no lesse then Gods matters . 6. For what end Erastus speaketh of the Rabbines here I know not , I think he knoweth not himself ; the man was ignorant of them , and innocent of their language . Erastus . I am not against , that the things of God be things belonging to the Worship of God , and the matters of the Kings Civill businesse . The Priest must especially take care , that there be no error in Faith and Ceremonies : and this belongeth also to the King , as is clear , Deut. 17. So Zebadiah is not excluded from Gods matters : Nor Amariah from the Kings businesse . Ans . This interpretation is fully refuted : Zebadiah is in the Text , excluded from judging Ecclesiastically , in the matters of God , as a Priest , Levite or Elder . For if he must judge so , he must either judge as a Priest or Levite , which he was not , or as a Civill Iudge ; if as a Civill Iudge , then is he no lesse over the people in the matters of God , then in the Kings matters : Now the Text could not exclude him from these things which belongeth to his office , and put him in another Sphere , in the businesse of the King , and put such a wide difference between the object of the two men , as the Kings matters , and the matters of the King of Kings . The like I say of Amariah . 2. The King Deut. 17. as King , is to Iudge according to the Book of the Law , that he may be a godly King , and fear God , and keep the words of the Law ; Ergo , he is to teach the people no lesse then the Priest , and to judge between the clean and unclean , and that as King : This no way followeth . Erastus . If you please by the matters of God , to understand the causes of appeals , and by the Kings matters , other judgements , I contend not : And because the Priest was better accustomed with the Law of God , then others , therefore the High Priest was set over these , yet so , as Zebadiah was over the Kings businesse : But I think the two first , especially the first , the best Exposition : But 1 Chron. 26. These same persons are set over both the Kings and the Lords matters . Ans . Consider how dubious Erastus is in his three Expositions to elude the force of the place . If it was the Magistrates place , virtute officii , by vertue of his office to command the Priests , and to direct them ( as Erastus and Vtenbogard say ) in the internall and specifick acts of Sacrificing , Iudging between the clean and the unclean , teaching the people : then the King and the Civill Iudge were by office , to be more skilled in the Causes of God , then the Priests , because the Commander and the directer , who may by his office exercise those same acts that he commandeth his servants ; yea , and is by office , to command him to do thus , in these internall Acts , and not thus , he ought , by his office , to be more skilled in these then the servant . I grant , the King Commandeth the Painter , all the morall equity requisite in Painting , that he endamage not the Common-wealth by prosuse lavishing of Gold ; and in this , it is presumed , there is more Iustice and morall equity by office in the King Commanding , then in the Painter Commanded : But if the King should take on him to Command , virtute officii , that the Painter regulateth his actions of art , thus and thus , and direct and Command by his Royall office , as King , that the Painter draw the face of the Image with more pale and white , and lesse red and incarnate colour ; in such a proportion according to art , and not in such a proportion : Then by office the King as King , might paint Pourtraict● himself ; and behoved by office to be more skilled in Painting then the Painter . Now Erastus presupposeth , Whatever the Priests do as Priests , in an Ecclesiasticall way , ( he excepteth Sacrificing and burning incense , but for a time ) that the King as King may do the same also ; so the King as King may teach , give responses in matters of God , and now under the new Testament , Preach and dispense the Sacraments , and judge as King , whether Priests and Pastors do right or no ; and that not only in order to Civill , but also to Ecclesiasticall punishments , as deprivation from their offices , and debarring from the Sacraments ; Hence it must follow , that Zebediah should , by office , be better skilled in the matters of God then Amariah , or any Priest ; and by office he should rather be over the matters of God , then any Priest in the world . 2. Now its clear that these same things , to be over men in the matter of God , and in the matters of the King , 1 Chron. 26. proveth nothing , except they be over these same matters , by one and the same power of the Sword , as Erastus saith ; Amariah the High Priest , and Zebediah the Civill Iudge , promiscuously were both of them , without exclusion of either , over the people in the matters of the Lord , and in the matters of the King ; and in the same judicature , & by the same coactive power of the sword , as Erastus saith , Priests and Civill Iudges were in the same judicature , by the same Civill power , Iudges to give out joyntly , in a judiciall way , the sentence of a bloody death , and to inflict a bloody death by the same power . 3. It is Erastus his ignorance of the Originall Text , to say these same words that are 2 Chron. 19. 11. are also , 1 Chron , 26. ver . 30 , 32. for 2 Chron. 19. 11. it is said , Amariah is over you in all the matters of the Lord : Hence the matters of the Lord , were the formall object of his judging : But 1 Chron. 26. 30. the Hebronites were officers in the businesse of the Lord , or , to the businesse of the Lord , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the service of the King. Levites might have been imployed in both Ecclesiasticall and Civill businesse in the Temple , and in the overseeing of those spoiles , that David in Wars had taken from the Enemies , and Dedicated for building the House of the Lord , which are called the Kings businesse ; and the construction , ver . 32. is varied , where it is said , The Hebronites mighty men of valour , and so fit for war , were made by King David , Rulers over the Reu●eni●es , Gadites , and the half Tribe of Manasseh for every matter ; not in every matter pertaining to God : The affixum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here , and the affaires of the King. These Levites seem to be imployed in the war , and are called valiant men , which must be some extraordinary case : But otherwise , when God commanded to number the Children of Israel for War , Numb . 1. 3. 45. The Levites were not numbred , God did forbid Moses to number them , because they were appointed for another service , ver . 48 , 49 , 50. Yet it seemeth in Davids time , when there were ex●raordinary warres , that they were not exempted from the warres , for 1 Chron. 21. David commanded to number all Israel from Dan to Beersheb● , and v. 6. Levi and Benjamin Ioab counted not , for the Kings word was abominable to Ioab ; Whence to me it would seem , that in some cases they were counted for warre , so 2 Chron , 23. 7. The Levites shall compasse the King , every man with his weapons in his hands , and Iehoiada the High Priest was their leader , to establish Ioash in his Throne ; but the case was not ordinary . Otherwise the Levites were separated from warre and civill judicatures to the service of the Sanctuary , Numb . 1. 47 , 50. and 2. 33. and 3. 9. 12. and 3. 41 , 45. and 8. 6. and 9. 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 18 , 19. and 18. 23. Deut. 31. 25. Iosh . 14 ▪ 3. 4. and 18. 7. 1 Chron. 15. 15. 2 Chron. 8. 14. and 20 19. and 29. 5 , 16 , 25 , 26. Ezra 3. 9 , 10. c. 6. 18. c. 8. 29. Ne● . 8. 7 , 9. and 9. 4. Ezek. 44. 10. All which places must be answered by Erastus . CHAP. XVI . Quest . 12. Whether Erastus proveth validly the power of the Civill Magistrate in matters Ecclesiastick ? BEfore I proceed further , it is needfull to examine Erastus his doctrine of the civill Magistrate . Erastus . As there is a twofold governing , so of necessity there must be two supreame Governours . God is the governour of the inward man , the Magistrate of the outward man , it is absurd there should be two supream Governours of the same Government , so as the one neither be a part of the other , nor Administer all in the name of the other . Ans . 1. Because a man consisteth of a spirituall part , a conscience and soul , and of an externall visible part ; in which he exerciseth visible and externall acts of worship ; yet spirituall , another , as he is a civill Agent , therefore there is a necessity there be no supream externall Governours under the one supream Lord of Heaven and earth ; one that teacheth and informeth the minde , and ruleth by the sword whole man , as he is a part of a civill society , in all his civil actions , and this is the Magistrate ; another that governeth him , as he is a member of a spirituall and supernaturall society , and exerciseth externall spirituall actions , in reference to God & in the subjection of his conscience to him , and this is either a Priest , Levite or Prophet in the Old Testament , or Pastor , Teacher or Elder in the New Testament : and it is absurd , that there should not be two Governors ; one over man in relation to his conscience and walking with God , and his brethren as Members of a spirituall society , called a Pastor or Teacher ; another in relation to his civill actions of Peace and justice to his brother , as he is a Member of a civill society , called a Magistrate . 2. It is an absurd thing , for Erastus to fancie God , and the Magistrate , two supream Governors , when the Magistrate is not supream , but a meer Minister and vassall subordinate to God , the only most high . 3. It is as absurd to imagine God hath given no Rulers , Teachers , and guides to govern a man as he is a spirituall Agent obliged to worship God , and to be edified in the faith , but only the civill Magistrate ; then hath Christ left no shepherd to his redeemed flock but the Civill Magistrate , and ascending on high he hath left no gifts , no Pastors and Teachers , for the gathering of the Saints to the end of the world , when we shall meet all in the unity of the Faith ; but only the Magistrate contrary to Christs end , in ascending to heaven , Eph. 4. 11. Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 1 , 2. and contrary to Christs compassion to souls , who is moved , that his sheep want shepherds ; for there souls , rather then Magistrates , Matth. 9. 36 , 37 , 38. therefore the opinion of Erastus is like the Divinity of Epicures or unchristian Moralists , who appoint Magistrates to Governe the externall man , but no Teachers to take care of their souls , or to lead them to heaven . Erastus . As there is one measure by which we measure things of divers natures , as cloath of linnen , of silke , of silver , of gold , and there is one weight by which we measure things weighable , though of most divers natures ; so is there one visible dispensation and governing of all visible things , though there be some Lawes for the City , some for the Countrey , some for the Schooles , as there be no necessity of divers rulers , and Law-givers , to the City , to the Countrey , to the Schooles ; so is there no necessity that there should be any other then the Magistrate , who should guide things civill and prophane , things of Schooles , and things sacred . Ans . This man speaketh rather like a Morall , or a naturall Physitian , then a Divine ; the argument were good , if men had no souls , for then they should not need any to watch for their souls , as the spirit of God saith they do , Heb. 13. 17. and he with one stroak , taketh away Pastors and Teachers , and maketh the King the onely Pastor and Teacher in all his Kingdomes . 2. We know similitudes , especially not warranted with Scripture , proveth nothing , and this may well conclude there should be no ruler at all , nor any Lawgiver on earth , but God only , and let every man do what seemes good in his owne eyes , for Gods will is the only measure and rule of all things . And 3. If all men were to be ruled the same way , it might have colour . But it is knowen , that all Churches , as members of a Common-wealth , are ruled one way , in giving to every man his own , & in not doing violence one to another ; But in keeping peace and policy , as all men do in all societies on earth , and so they have need of Magistrates . 2. Another way they are considered as Members of a society , called from the state of sinne , to Grace and Glory , and so they have no lesse need of teachers for the guiding of their souls , Mat. 9. 36 , 37 , 38. Eph. 4. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16. Act. 8. 31. Heb. 13. 17. 1 Thes . 5. 12 , 13. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Act. 20. 28 , 29. Math. 28. 19 , 20. Phil. 1. 1. and by name of the Elders of the Church , Act. 4. 5. 23. and 11. 3. and 14. 23. and 15. 2 , 4 , 6 , 22 , 23. and 16. 4. and 20. 28. and 21. 18. and 22. 5. Tit. 1. 5. and that the Magistrate should rule the house of God , is against the word . Erastus . One Common-wealth can have but one supream Magistrate , a body with two heads is monstrous , therefore Papists almost by this argument , doe appoint one Pope head of the Church . There cannot be two powers of two swords , both supream and of equall power : But the Church power must be subject to the more excellent , the power of the Magistrate . But because he cannot do all by himselfe , he Governeth the Schooles by Doctors , the Cities by inferiour judges , the Church by Pastors , and all according to right and justice , and the word of God , and that where the Magistrate and subjects are Christians ; but where the Magistrate is of a false Religion , two different Governments are tollerable . Ans . 1. This argument destro●eth all Aristocracy , Parliaments , and Senates , where many good men have equall power , and so the Common-wealth may not have 70. Heads and Rulers of equall power , which is against the Scripture , which commandeth subjection to every Civill ordinance of man , as lawfull , Rom. 13. 1 , 2 , 3. Tit. 3. 1 , 2 , 3. 1 Pet. 2. 13 , 14. Deut. 1. 16. It maketh no Government lawfull , but Popedome and Monarchy in both Church and state . 2. It is to beg the question , that there cannot be two supream powers , both supream in their owne kinde , for they are both supream in their owne sphere : as Pastors dispense Sacraments and Word , without subjection to the Magistrate as they are Pastors , and Magistrates use the Sword without dependence on Pastors , and yet is there mutuall and reciprocall subjection of each to other in divers considerations : Pastors as subjects in a Civill relation , are subject to the Magistrate , as every soul on earth is , and Magistrates as they have souls and stand in need to be led to heaven , are under Pastors and Elders . For if they hear not the Church , and if they commit incest , they are to be cast out of the Church , Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. Rom. 16. 17. 1 Thes . 3. 14. 15. If they walk inordinately , we are to eschew their company , if they despise the Ministers of Christ , they despise him who sent them , Math. 10. 40. Luk. 10. 16. God respecteth not the persons of Kings , and we finding them not excepted , if the preachers of the Gospel be to all beleevers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over them in the Lord , 1 Thess . 5. 12. 1 Tim. 5. 17. call it authority , or no Authority , they have some oversight over the Christian Magistrate ; and here be two supreams , two highest powers , one Ecclesiasticall , another Civill ; nor should any deny Moses to be above Aaron , as the supream judge ; Aaron not having the power of the sword , as Moses had , and Aaron must be above Moses , in sacrificing , in burning incens● ▪ , in judging between the clean and the unclean , which Moses could not do . 2. The excellency of the Civill power in regard of earthly honour and eminency in the fifth Commandment , above the servants of God in the Ministry of Christs spirituall Kingdom , which is not of this world , we heartily acknowledge . 3. That the King Preacheth and dispenseth the Sacraments by Pastors , as by his servants , is wilde Divinty : Pastors then must have Magistraticall Authority and power of the sword committed to them , as the Deputies and inferior judges of the Lords of the Gentiles , which Christ forbade his Disciples , Luk. 22. 25 , 26 , 27. For the servant must have some power committed to him from the principall cause in that wherein he is a servant . 4. What reason is there , that where the Magistrate is a Heathen , two Governments , and so two heads in one body should be ? for then there is and must be a Church-Government , where the Magistrate is a Heathen , and that in the hands of the Church : if then the Magistrate turn Christian , must he spoile the Church of what was her due before ? Erastus . The Lord Jesus changed nothing in the New Testament of that most wise Government in the Iewish Church , now there all Government was in the hands of Moses : I say not , that the Magistrate might sacrifice , or do what was proper to the Priests , but he did dispose and order what was to be done by the Priests . Ans . Yea , but Erastus saith , the Magistrate may dispense word and Sacraments in the New Testament , if he had leisure : Why might he not sacrifice in the Old Testament also ? 2. Pastors do by their Doctrine and Discipline , order and regulate all callings in their Moralls of right and wrong , of just and unjust ; yet is not the Pastor the only Governour in all externals . 3. If Christ changed nothing of the Iewish Government , we have all their exclusion of men out of the Campe , their separating of the unclean , and their politick and Ceremoniall Lawes , which is unsound Divinity . Erastus . Moses Ruled all before there was a Priesthood instituted . God , Exod. 4. Numb . 12. calleth Aaron to his office and maugurateth him by Moses ; nor doth he command him to exercise a peculiar judgement , when he declareth his office to him , and when Aaron dieth , Moses substituteth Eleazar in his place . Ioshua c. 3 , 4 teacheth the Priests what they should doe , and commanded them to circumcise Israel : so did Samuel , David , Solomon , and in the time of the Maccabees it was so . Ans . Moses was once a Prophet and Iudge both ; Ergo , so it may be now , it followeth not , except Moses as a Magistrate did reveale what was the Priesthood : What Aaron and Eleazer his sonnes might doe , by as good reason Moses , David , Solomon , Ioshua , as Magistrates wrote Canonick Scripture and prophecied . Then may Magistrates as Magistrates build new Temples typicall to God , give new Laws , write Canonick Scripture , as these men did by the Spirit of prophecy no doubt , not as Magistrates ; for why , but they might sacrifice as Magistrates , and why should Moses rather have committed the Priesthood , and the service of the Tabernacle due to him as a Magistrate , so to Aaron and his sonnes , as it should be unlawfull to him as a King , and unlawfull to Vzziah to burn incense , and to sacrifice , and to doe the office of the Priest ? If the Magistrate as the Magistrate doe all that the Priests are to doe as Priests , and that by a supream principle , and radicall power in him , he ought not to cast off that which is proper to him as a Magistrate , to take that which is lesse proper , he casteth the care and ruling of souls on the Priests , and reserveth the lesser part to himself , to rule the bodies of men with the Sword , all these are sufficiently answered before . Erastus . The King of Persia , Ezra 7. appointed Iudges to judge the people and teach them , but there is no word of Excommunication , or any Ecclesiastick punishment , but of death , imprisonment , fines ; nor did Nehemiah punish the false Prophets with any other punishment . Iosephus speaketh nothing of it , nor Antiochus . Ans . I shew before that there is for●eiting , and separation from the Congregation , Ezra 10. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he shall be separated from the Church . 2. If the King of Persia appointed men to judge and teach the people , why should he deny any judicature at all ? 3. Where ever Iosephus speaketh of the judging of the Priests , as he doth antiq . l. 11. c. 7. ant . l. 11. c. 8. l. 12. c. 9. he hinteth at this . Erastus . Christ dischargeth his Disciples to exercise dominion . Christ would not condemne the adulterous woman , nor judge between the brethren , Luke 12. Paul calleth Ministers dispensators , stewards , Peter forbiddeth a dominion . Ans . Let Erastus be mindfull of this himselfe , who yet saith , that the Magistrate may both judge , also ( if he have time ) dispence the Word and Sacraments ; if then the Magistrate by his office may preach and dispense the Sacraments , who made him a judge and a Ruler ? Will this sati●fie mens conscience ; The Magistrate as the Magistrate may play the Minister ; but the Minister may not play the Magistrate : Now as Erastus saith , the Minister in holy things , is his servant called by him ; may not the Minister be called by him to the Bench also ? Erastus ; Eli and Samuel , were both Priests and Iudges , and so to Erastus they are not inconsistent . 2. Ministers ought not to usurpe the civill sword ; Ergo , they have no power of governing by the sword of the Spirit , it followeth not , the contrary is evident , 1 Thes . 5. 12. 1. Tim. 5. 17. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Rom. 12. 7 , 8. Erastus . Peter Martyr saith , Com. 1 Sam. 8. Those that live wickedly , may be corrected by the Magistrate . But Papists give one civill Ecclesiastick power to the Pope , and another to the Magistrate , whereas the civill Magistrate is sufficient enough . Ans . Pet. Martyr 1 Cor. 5. expresly asserteth Excommunication , and acknowledgeth a Presbyterie of Pastors and Seniors , or Elders , Peter Martyr condemneth the use of both swords in the Pope , and saith it is sufficient that the Magistrate have the Sword. Erastus . Christ saith , my Kingdom is not of this world , that is , it is not pollitick , externall , visible , for Christ reigneth in the world , but his Government is invisible , and spirituall in the Word , and the Spirit . Ans . Christ denieth only that his Kingdome is of this World , in regard it is not holden up by the civill sword of men , or Magistrates , as Erastus doth dreame , who maketh the Magistrate with his club to be the onely Catholick and principall Ruler in all Christs courts ; which Christ refuteth , when he saith , If my Kingdome were of this world , mine owne would fight for me . Now Erastus will have no weapon , but the Magistrates sword to hold out , and cast out all offenders out of Christs Kingdom ; but it is false , that Christs Kingdom is not politicall , externall and visible ; this is to deny that Christ hath a visible Church : Sure exhorting , rebuking , censuring , withdrawing from the scandalous , excommunication , are visible externally , and in a politick spirituall way exercised by Christ in his Ambassadors : for externall and spirituall are not opposed , nor are politicall and spirituall opposed , as Erastus dreameth , and therefore this is a non sequitur of Erastus : His Kingdom is not of this world ; Ergo , it is not externall . Erastus . When Pompeius invaded and possessed Iudea , and Gabinius having overcome Alexander , had changed the state of Iudea , the Pharisees did reigne wholly at Ierusalem . The Kingly power was removed and Aristocracy set up , Ioseph . bel . Iud. l. 1. c. 6. Ioseph . antiq . l. 14. c. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : The Synedrie for the most part , had its owne authority vnder Hyrcanus , and under Archilaus it was more fully restored , as is cleer by the Evangelists and Iosephus . Claudius in the tenth year after Christs death , setteth forth an Edict , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Ioseph . Ant. lib. 19. Titus Vespasianus promised the same thing to them . Ans . Will then Erastus have Christ , Mat. 18. to restore the power of the Sanedrim , in gaining a lost brother ; that is to cite him before the Roman Iudges : But 1. the Romans made high Priests from yeere to yeere , did Christ acknowledge the Sanedrim to be a restored Iudicature in this ? 2. Say that the Sanedrim in sacris , in in the holy things of God , had its full power , the Romans not impeding them ; hath any man a face to deny , but Pharisees corrupted both Law , Gospell , Sanedrim and all , and doth Christ establish their most corrupt government ; especially when they set themselves against the Messiah ? Cesar or Pompeius could give the Sanedrim no more then it had before they were subdued ; but before they were subdued , the Sanedrim was changed and corrupted . 3. This is to beg the question , to say they kept the power of the Sword : For 1. We utterly deny that by Gods Law they ever had any such power , and forsooth , because the High-Priests servant smote our Saviour on the face , and they scourged and imprisoned the Apostles ; What then ? therefore the Sanedrim had the Law of God for it , and Aaron and his sonnes might beat , scourge , imprison , and kill , as they killed Steven , without Law or warrant , ( except the Law that they had from the Roman Emperours , for which cause I judge their Sanedrim was then a mixed Judicature , ) surely this is a vaine consequence . 4. It is like enough Claudius and Tiberius both , gave them liberty of their own Religion , Ceremonies and customes at their pleasure , and that is much for us , the adversary so do reason from a corrupt , unjust and wicked practice to infer a Law. Erastus . I have solidly proved , there were not two distinct jurisdictions ; but that the Magistrate Governed all . I deny not that the Magistrate took counsell at those that were skilled in the Law. And I have proved that the Sanedrim in Christs time , when he spake these words , had the power of the sword , in things pertaining to Religion . Ans . Let another man praise thee , solidity of the probation to most of Protestant Divines , is plain emptinesse . 2. That the Magistrate took advice of Divines and learned men skilled in the Law , is not like the first pattern of Moses , David , Solomon , who as Magistrates ( saith Erastus ) did rule all in the Church , gave the Law to Aaron his sons , directed and commanded the Prophets from the Lord , as nearest to him , what they should do , what Laws they should teach the people : Shew us one precept , practise , or promise in the word , where Moses , David , Solomon asked Counsell at Aaron , the Priests , Gad , Nathan , or the Prophets ; saying , O sons of Aaron , O Prophets advise us Magistrates , what Laws we should command you , touching your office , your holy garments , your washing , your beasts clean and unclean , your l●per , your putting men out of the Camp , touching the forme , dimensions , structure , materials of the Arke , Tabernacle , Temple , &c. that we may know what to command you from the Lord ; for we are nearer to the Lord , and have a more eminent place , as Church-Officers , then you who are but our Vicars , Deputies , and servants to be directed by us . Now 1. Moses received all Laws immediatly from God , and never consulted with any man , either Aaron , Priest , or Prophet ; David and Solomon had the forme of the Temple , given to them by the Lord in writing , and advised with none at all ; & therefore received from God , and delivered to the Church , what they received of the Lord. 2. What warrant the Magistrates should advise with Ministers ; what they should command-Ministers , to preach and do in their Ministery , if by vertue of their Office they command Ministers . 3. So like as Christ referreth men to the Civill sword on their bodies to gain their souls , which is the scope of Christ , Matth. 18. CHAP. XVII . Quest . 13. Whether Erastus can make good that the Synedry was the Civill Magistrate ? Erastus . When the Priest accused Jeremiah , Chap. 26. of blasphemy , he sate not amongst the Judges , but stood as an accuser before the Magistrate : So Beza . Erastus replieth , Your Synedry had no Civill jurisdiction , because it is a dream : 2. Should Pashut the Priest be both accuser and judge ? 3. In Ieremiahs time , there was a Monarch , in whose hand was all power ; in Christs time there was an Aristocracy , the Government being in the hands of some chosen men . Ans . Certainly , Ier. 26. 10. the Princes sate down in judgement , but that the Priests sate with them , we have not one word , only the Priests accused him as worthy to die in the question of Law , and so the people , ver . 8. Now the people undeniably cannot have been Iudges . 2. Nor do we say , the Priests were both judges Civill to condemn Ieremiah to die , and accusers : that doth not hinder , but they in an Ecclesiasticall way were Iudges , touching the question of Law , whether he had spoken blasphemy or not , and also Accusers before the Civill Iudges . 3. It is to beg the question to say , that all power even of Church-censuring was in the hand of the King. 1. The King might exclude none of the Lepers out of the Camp , the Priests only could by the Law of God do this , and excluded Vzziah the King , as a Leper out of the Congregation : The King could not judge who were clean , who unclean . 2. That all power was in the hand of the Kings , as if the Kings of I●dah were by Gods Law absolute , can never be proved , but the contrary is evident , Deut. 17. And that inferiour Iudges were essentially Iudges , and the Lords immediate Deputies , is clear by Scripture , Deut. 1. 16. 2 Chron. 19. 5 , 6 , 7. Exod. 18. 21 , &c. Numb . 11. ●6 , 17 , 18. Psal . 82. 6 , 7. Rom. 13. 1 , 2. Erastus . You ask how Caiaphas , and the Pri●sts had power against Iesus : I ansvver : 1. From God : 2. From the Kings of Persia . 3. From the permission of the Romans : They apprehended him , and bound him , which was a part of Civill power , nor was this some of the confusion under the Maccabees : Hovv can this be proved ? Christ never rebuked it , nor his Apostles ; the contrary is clear in Iosephus . Ans . A permissive power from God , can prove no Law-power . 2. Persians and Romans could not give to Priests and Levites the power of the sword , to do what the Law of God had exempted them from doing , they were not so much as numbred for the war , but set apart for the service of Gods house , Num. 1. 3. 45 , &c. they might in some extraordinary cases judge in civill businesse with the Civill Iudges in the same Iudicature , but this was no standing Law , 2. Erastus seeketh we would prove that the practise of bloody Pharisees was not against Law : He knoweth , it is his own Argument , Affirmanti incumbit Probatio . 3. Christ and the Apostles rebuked not particularly many other sins . Pilate might have accused them for binding one of Cesars Subjects , of whom he had said , he found no fault in him . 4. That Ioseph was a Priest , or a Levite , I reade not , he was an Honourable Councellor , some think of Pilates Councell . 5. That they had any Law of God to apprehend Iesus , or that Ioseph had any hand in either condemning , or doing any thing in the Sanedrim , but shewing his judgement , as a Iudge in the question of Law , what was blasphemy , we must deny , let Erastus prove it , if so be Erastus make him either Priest or Levite ? Ioh. 18. 31. The Iews expresly deny the power that Erastus giveth them : Pilate therefore said unto them , take him and judge him according to your Law , which was a salt mocking of them . I knovv , if you had povver , you should not have brought him to me ; therefore if ye have povver , use it : The Ievvs therefore said unto him , It is not lavvfull for us to put any man to death , and the Evangelist addeth , ver . 32. That the saying of Iesus might be fulfilled , which he spake , signifying what death he should die , that is , God had taken power of life and death from the Iews , in his admirable providence , that Iesus might die a Roman death , due for treason , that is , that he might be crucified ; Ergo , the Iews had no power to put him to death . It is weak and empty that Erastus saith , They had not povver to put him to death , for saying he vvas King , because that was a civill crime : But they had power to put him to death , and to stone him for blasphemy ; for the Iews say universally without distinction of causes , with two negations , which in the Greek Language is a strong and universall negation , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , We have not power to kill any man , Ergo , the place will never prove that the Church men might not kill him , because the Iews might kill no man : you will say , Hovv had they povver vvith svvords and staves to take the Kings free subject and binde him , which yet they did ? I answer , it was an usurped power , for by Erastus his doctrine , they had no more power to take him and binde him for Treason , which was a civill crime , then they had to kill him for Treason , both was alike unlawfull by the Roman Lavv , and Pilate being a man willing to please the people , as the event of the businesse sheweth , did not in a legall way challenge them for binding him ; but he durst not be answerable to his Prince Cesar , if he had past by such a high point , as their putting Christ to death : But we desire any Law of God ( for practises especially of wicked men are no binding rule ) that Priests or Levites , in the Old-Testament , might either binde a Iew or put him to death , and when Pilate did stand so much to put Christ to death , they would have used their own power , malice so necessitating them , if they had had any , and might well have said to Pilate , It is lavvfull for us to put him to death for blasphemy , but vve vvill not use our povver , vve so love to be loyall to Caesar ; but they say the contrary , We have no povver to put any man to death . They say indeed , that by their law he ought to die . But that they had no power to put him to death , for the Common people said , that , as may appear , if we compare , Ioh. 19. ver . 5. with ver . 12. with Matth. 27. 25. and with Act. 2. 36. Act. 3. 12. &c. and yet Erastus will not say that the common people were Members of the Sanedrim , or had power of life and death , as the Civill Magistrate had . Erastus . Steven was stoned by the Sanedrim , not by tumult , for there vvere vvitnesses , as the lavv required , Act. 7. The vvitnesses ( vvho by the lavv vvere to cast the first stone at the man condemned ) vvere here , therefore there vvas Lavv-povver to stone him , though they did it unjustly . Ans . Beza meant , that Steven was stoned by tumult , that is , without any Law-power , except usurped , when the Iews were now riper for destruction , and had taken on them the blood of the Lord of glory , and so growing more daring and insolent against the Roman povver , to their own just desolation , that came on them under Vespasian . That they used witnesses , will not prove they had Law to stone Steven , for Timothy had no power of life and death over Elders , one brother hath no power of life and death over another , as Erastus will grant , yet with both there is use of witnesses , 1 Tim. 5. 19. Matth. 18. 16. This I hope concludeth but weakly , any lawfull civill power , so all this is from a naked practise of those that alvvayes resisted the holy Ghost : And the like I say of Paul , who saith Act. 26. 10. of himself , Many of the Saints did I shut up in prison , having received authority from the high Priests , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; suppose it were true that Saul had Law and Authority from the high Priests to imprison the Saints , and to murther the Saints , no high Priest can make over a Law-power to another , which he hath not himself ; now certain this Law-power of the Pharisees and High Priests by Gods Law , is the question . Let us see Law or institution , where the High Priests ( for of these only the Text speaketh ) did imprison and put to death , either blasphemer or false Prophet , or , if by Moses his Law , which must be a rule to all the High Priests in the time of persecuting Saul , it was either Law or practise , that the High Priest had power to imprison , or scourge , or put to death any man , and this was most proper to the King , and the Civill judge , and the Elders and Iudges in every City , 2 Sam. 1. 14. 15 , 16. 1 Kin. 2. 9. & 2. 6 , 7. Isa . 1. 23. Ier. 22. 1 , &c. Ier. 22. 27. Numb . 35. 12. 24. Deut. 22. 18. & 7. 5. & 19. 12. 13. ver . 18 , 19 , 20 , 21. & 21. 19. 1 Kin. 21. 11. Hos . 6. 8. Zeph. 3. 1 , 2 , 3. Rom. 13. 4. We know undoubtedly the King , the Civill Iudge , had power of all bodily punishments , as of scourging , death , stoning , strangling , crucifying , hanging ; But shew meany Vestigium , or the least consequence where the Priests or High Priests had such power , or did execute such power in any one man : it is true , Deut. 17. the Priests might determine in Law what was blasphemy , and so what deserved the punishment of blasphemy , which is death : But so the written Law of God , the very letter of it could in many cases clearly resolve the Civill judge , even though there had been no controversie about the fact , whether it was condemned in the Law of God , or not : we know Samuel not being judge , but Saul being King & supream Magistrate , & not executing judgement on the Amalekites , he killed Agag , certainly , all Divines , even Popish not excepted , say , Saul the Civil Magistrate ought to have killed Agag , & that Samuel not by vertue of his place , as a prophet , or as a Priest or a Member of the Sanedrim ( as Erastus would say ) but excited by an extraordinary motion of Gods spirit , killed him , as Phineas the son of Aaron slew , Num. 25. Zimri and Cosbi , 7 , 8. And Elijah slew Baals Priests , 1 Kin. 18. 40. 2 Kin. 1. 10. If Phineas by office , and Elias by office killed those ill doers , as Erastus would dream , The Prophets and Priests by their office were Civill Iudges , and had power to put to death evil doers . Now Erastus denyeth , and with good reason , that the Lords disciples should bear civill dominion over men , as the Lords of the Gentiles , Luk. 22. 24 , 25 , 26. and that Christ though both a Prophet and a Priest could not take on him , to be a Iudge and a Ruler , Luk. 12. yet here Erastus will have the High Priest , by a Law-power , to imprison and put to death . 2. Erastus may with as good reason say , that the high Priests had a Law-power by Gods institution to punish and to compell Christians to blaspheme God , and to persecute them to strange Cities , and to murther the Saints that believed in the Lord Iesus ; for he went to Damascus for this effect , Act. 26. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , with povver and Commission from the chief Priests , This was not a Law-power in generall , to punish such as the Law of Moses discerned to be blasphemers , but a limited particular Commission to murther the Saints , who should hear and obey the Prophet , like unto Moses , whom the Lord should raise up , Deut. 18. What Law had the High Priests for this ? Had they not a Law on the contrary ? Deut. 18. Erastus . Paul confesseth ingenuously , before the Roman Judges , that he persecuted the Saints , and that he had authority and power from the Priests and Elders so to do , Act. 22. & 26. and we read not that the Priests or Paul were censured for these things , as having done any thing against the Laws or will of the Romans , Act. 5. They send their Officer , the Captain of the Temple , they imprison the Apostles , they convene a Councell , give out a sentence , and agitate the killing of the Apostles amongst them , while Gamaliel impede them . Ans . It is true , the Romans heard that the Sanedrim exercised Civill jurisdiction , and inflicted bodily punishment . But for false Doctrine , the Romans I conceive took as little care as Gallio did of any of Gods matters , and whether the Sanedrim kept the rule of the Lords first institution , Deut. 17. yea , they looked not much whether the Priests might put to death false Prophets , or if the Civill judges only might do it ; and Erastus said before , that the Romans gave the Iews liberty of all their own laws and customes in matters of Religion . 2. What care would the Romans take , whether the Iews killed and oppressed Iews , for questions of their owne Religion , so they remained loyall and true to Cesar ? 3. We know Herod , Felix , Festus , Agrippa , being willing to pleasure the Iews , did oversee many breaches of Law in them , especially in matters of the Gospel , Act. 12. 3. and 24. 27. and 16. 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 40. Ioh. 19. 15 16 , 17. 4. How doth he prove that the Romans did not take this for a breach of their Lawes ? Because they accuse not the Sanedrim for this ? surely it followeth not : We read not that the Romans challenged them for a manifest breach of Law , when they scourged and cast in prison Paul and Silas , who were Romans and had not condemned them , Act. 16. 38 , 39. 5. We deny not a lawfull judicature of the Sanedrim , Act. 5. But that they had any Law of God , to scourge , and imprison , and put to death the Apostles , is the question ; we say , they neither had Gods law , nor durst be answerable to the Romans Laws , for that fact , and so this is a fact brought to prove a Law. Erastus . If this was insolencie in the Jevvs which rose from the confusion of the two jurisdictions ; hovv say some of yours , none can be excommunicated without the consent of the Magistrate ? Where did Christ divide the externall Government of the Church in Civill Government and Ecclesiasticall , as you distinguish them ? Ans . 1. That it is expedient , that the Christian Magistrate should be acquainted with the Excommunication of any under his jurisdiction , that he may satisfie his own Conscience in punishing him civilly , it is like some of our Divines do teach : But that the Magistrate have a negative voice in Excommunication , none of ours teach . 2. We make no such division as that of the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall Government of the Church . Erastus may dream of such a distinction : We know , all Government of the Church , as the Church , to us is Ecclesiasticall : There is a Government of men of the Church that is Civill ; but we dreamed never of a Civill Government of the Church : All the Government of the Church , as the Church , though externall , is Spirituall , Heavenly , and subordinate to Jesus Christ as Lord and King of his own house , as the Government of a house , a Kingdom , an Army , a City is subordinate to the Lord of the house , to the King , Generall Commander , and Lord Mayor , and it is no more a Civill Government subordinate to the Magistrate and his Sword , then Christs Kingdom visible and externall , or invisible and internall is of this world . When therefore Erastus denyeth that there is any Church-Government , he meaneth there is no Spirituall Church Government in the hands of Presbyters ; but because we know no Government of the Church as the Church , but it is Spirituall , and the Government of the Church by the Christian Magistrate , is a Civill Government of men as men , and that by the power of the Sword , and so it is no Church-Government at all ; and therefore we justly say , that Erastus denyeth all Church-Government . Erastus . When Paul saith , Act. 23. Thou sittest to judge me according to the Law , Doth he not acknowledge the High Priest to be his Judge ? Paul denieth that he had done any thing contrary to the Law : And Tertullus saith , We would have judged him according to our Law , if Lysias had not without Law violently taken him from us . Ans . Ananias was to judge him only in an Ecclesiasticall way ; and when Paul saw that they went beyond their line , to take his life , he appealed from their inferior judicature to Caesar , who only had power of his life . 2. Lysias had Law to vindicate an innocent man accused on his life , before a most uncompetent judicature . Tertullus knew the Iews had favour and connivence in many Lawlesse Facts . CHAP. XVIII . Quest . 14. Whether Erastus do strongly confute the Presbytery of the New Testament . BEza saith , there vvas need of same select men in the Apostles time to lay hands on Ministers , to appoint Deacons , for there vvas no Jevvish Synedrie , no Magistrate to do it ; and vvhen Paul forbiddeth Christians for things of this life to implead other before the heathen Magistrate , would he send them in spirituall businesse to such ? or must that , Tell the Church , have no use for a hundreth years after Christ ? So Beza ; yea if the Lord ascending to heaven left Officers for the building and Governing his Church , Eph. 4. 11. and some to be over the people in the Lord , 1 Thes . 5. 12. 13. some to watch for their souls , whom they were to obey , some to feed the flock , and to drive away the wolves , Act. 20. 28 , 29 , 30. some to Govern the house of God , no lesse then their owne house , 1 Tim. 3. 4. a Presbytery in generall Erastus cannot deny , only he denieth such a Presbytery , and saith , that it is like this , such a one is a living creature ; Ergo , such an one is a dog . But if I can demonstrate , there is a Presbytery and they were not all Bishops , as is clear , Rom. 12. 89. 1 Cor. 12. 28 , 29. 1 Tim. 5. 17. and if , Tell the Church , by no Grammer , can be , Tell the Bishop , except you make the Queen the Bride , and the servant or friend of the Bridegroome all one ; It must follow there is both a Presbytery , and such a Presbytery in the Church , nor do we argue from a generall to specials . Erastus . The Church may not kill men , but she may pray that God would destroy them , or convert her enemies . Ans . To pray that God would destroy him , whom we are to admonish as a brother , is a strange discipline ; Erastus will never make good from Scripture , that God hath appointed praying for the destruction of men to be a saving ordinance , appointed of Christ for gaining of souls , ( such as we take rebuking , admonishing , excommunication , eschewing the company of scandalous brethren , which have for their intrinsecall end , the repentance of a brother under these censures ) and therefore this of Erastus his killing of men , is a new forged censure . Erastus . Whereever the Scripture speaketh in the New Testament of a Presbytery , there is no other understood , but that of preachers ; therefore it is false , that the Apostles have commanded any other Elders beside those that labour in the word . Ans . The antecedent is false ; 1 Tim. 5. 17. as I have demonstrate in another place , I repeat it not here , let any disciple of Erastus answer if he can . 2. The consequence is vaine , for if in every place of the New Testament , where mention is made of an Elder , the Holy Ghost mean only a Preaching Elder , it followeth only that any other officers , as Deacons , and those that labour not in the Word , & yet Govern well , are not called with the name of Presbyters : And so the Argument is against the name , not against the office and thing . What if the Presbytery be named from the most principall part , as is ordinary in Scripture , doth it follow that there be none members of the Presbytery , but only Preachers of the Word ? In no sort . Paul saith of the visible Church of Corinth , Ye are bought with a price , ye are justified , ye are sanctified ; Ergo , none were members of the visible Church , but those that are redeemed , justified , and sanctified , it is like the consequence of Erastus . 3. I retort this vaine argument thus ; none in Scripture have the name of Apostles , But the Eleven , and Mathias , none are called the witnesses of the Lord but they , 1 Ioh. 1. 1 , 2. Ergo , there be no preaching Ministers , neither Timothy , Titus , Epaphroditus that are to be called witnesses of the Lord , but the twelve Apostles ; so where doth Erastus finde that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a deaconrie or office of labour in the Ministery is given to any , but to those that labour in the word ? Rom. 11. 13. Ergo , must there be no deaconry , but labouring in the word , the plaine contrary is Act. 6. Erastus . Beside Levites and Priests , there belonged to the Synedry of the Iews other heads of families ; Ergo , beside Ministers there must be Prophets and Doctors in the Presbytery , it followeth not . Ans . Erastus fancies a conclusion of an Argument that Beza saith not ; for he saith ; Ergo , beside Ministers there must be some chiefe men , which we call ruling Elders , to represent the people , that there may be ( as all our Divines and Scripture teach ) a threefold government in the Church : A Monarchy , in regard of Iesus Christ the onely head and King of the Church , as the Iewish Church had their High Priest a Type of him ; and Aristocracy , in Pastors and Teachers , as the Iewes had their Priests and Levites ; and a Democracy in the ruling Elders , as the Iewes had their Zekenim , and their Heads of families and Elders in the Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim , and we in the Presbytery to represent the people : and of these three the Iewish Ecclesiastick Sanedrim is made up 2 Chron. 19. 8. of the Levites and the priests 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the heads of Fathers , or Masters of families . Now Erastus yeeldeth that good Iehoshaphat departed not from Gods institution in his reformation , all this Erastus passeth over in silence , being ignorant of the Iewish Church government , and not able to answer , and he addeth something of Doctors not to a purpose , and saith there be no Doctors but Pastors onely in the Word ; contrary to Rom. 12 , 7 , 8. Ephes . 4. 11. where they are clearly distinguished . Erastus . Some chosen men must be in the Presbytery to represent the people ; Ergo , these must be Doctors and Prophets , but there is no need of that , for Bishops of old represented the whole Church . Ans . Beza hath not any such argument , he contendeth for Ruling Elders , not for Prophets and Doctors to represent the people . 2. Where doth the Scripture speake of such an office as a Bishop having Majority of power above Presbyters ? ( for since Erastus denieth all Ecclesiasticall Government in Teachers , he must deny all Majority of Ecclesiasticall Governement also , he that denieth the positive , denieth also the comparative degree ) now this is a Bishop that neither Scripture , nay nor popish Antiquity dreamed of . 3. In what is a Bishop the representative Church ? The like is Erastus his third Argument . Erastus . 1 Cor. 12. How is Government a Presbytery ? how are Overseers & governments , Doctors & Prophets ? There be many kinds of Governours . I wonder that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Miracles , you understand not the power of Excommunication , that hath terrified all the World ; how are Doctors & Prophets added to Pastors , are they not teachers as well as Pastors , but that they administer not the Sacraments ? & how doe you prove that ? how prove you Overseers to be ●ther then Ministers ? Ans . Governements to us are but a part of the Presbyterie . 2. There be many kinds of Governours , but he durst not venture to shew what is signified by governments , lest he should say , his Magistrate must be the onely Church Governour , but he knoweth that a Magistrate as a Magistrate is no member nor part of the Church , but as he is a Christian ; for then Cesar , Herod , Pontius Pilate , as Magistrates must be set in the body of Christ , as Apostles , and Teachers and Prophets , which all the World will cry shame on . 3. Beza said never that Teachers and prophets are cast to Ministers to make a Presbyterie , for by Teachers he meaneth Pastors . 4. Because Paul setteth downe Governments different from Apostles , Prophets , and Teachers , they must be some Officers different from them , we can finde none else , but such as rule well , and yet labour not in the Word , 1 Tim. 5. 17. let Erastus shew us what they are , he dares not open his minde : for he meaneth a Justice of Peace , or a King , or a heathen judge must be in the wombe of this , 1 Cor. 12. 28. let himselfe be mid-wife . Erastus answering to 1 Tim. 5. 17. saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to labour is to labour diligently , the meaning is like this ; I wish well to all Pastors , but especially to those who with great industrie , fidelity and paines feed the flocke committed to them , as I love all inclined to studie , but especially such as watch night and day upon studies , for some are more diligent in teaching then others , here 's no Tautologie to say , I love all that sincerely and soundly teach the Word , especially those that diligently teach it . Ans . I cannot particularly discusse this place , I have done it else where fully 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with two Articles noteth two species of Elders , as Tit. 1. 11. 1 Tim. 5. 8. Gal. 6. 10. Phil. 4. 22. 2. This is a Tautologie , I love all well governing and faithfull Elders , especially those that labour in the word ; they may be well and painful feeding Pastors , who are not painfull in preaching the Word , and this is Tautologie ; I love all that are studious , and studie excellently , and especially those that studie night and day , as Erastus must say if he make the phrase agree to the purpose , to feed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 well in a feeding Pastor includeth labouring in the Word , since Erastus expoundeth the place , 1 Tim. 5. 17. of Church officers , he cannot deny but the place holdeth forth a Government , and a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church Officers , for beside labouring in the Word and doctrine , which is preaching , here is well governing , it is a shame then to Erastus to expound this place so , and yet deny all Church Government , except in the hands of the Magistrate . Erastus . Ancient and moderne Doctors deny two sorts of Elders . Ans . I have made the contrary appear in the place cited ; I will not weary the Reader with reasons set downe at full in another place . Erastus . Shew where the Church hath a judicature , to punish sins different from the Magistrates judicature , as the Lord made a power of burning incense to the Lord , to be different from the Kings royall power . Ans . Mat. 18. Mat. 16. Ioh. 20. Mat. 28. 19 , 20. Eph. 20. 28. 1 Cor. 5. 1 , 2 ▪ &c. Rev. 2. 1 , 2. and 20. 21. Ministers are no lesse separated under the New Testament to all ministeriall acts of feeding , by the word and rod of Discipline , then Priests were of Old. Erastus . Nathan did not Excommunicate David . Ans . Nathan had assurance from God that his sin was pardoned ; 2. That the Sanedrim did not cast David out is a fact , and proveth not they had no power ; for 80. Priests cast Vzziah out of the house of God for a lesse fault , that carried in its face lesse scandall . Erastus . The Prophets never accuse the Priests , that they admitted the unclean to the sacrifices and holy things of God. Ans . The contrary is evident , Ier. 5. 31. Ezek. 22. 25 , 26. and 44. 8 , 9 , 10. contrary to their Office , Deut. 17. 11 , 12. Levit. 10. 10. Erastus . David Psal . 51. sheweth he would have given Sacrifices , but God craved a broken heart ; Ergo , he had power to sacrifice . Ans . Not except withall he had offered a contrite heart to God. Paul ( saith Erastus ) speaketh of coming to them with the rod , of delivering to Satan , of his comming with the authority God had given him , of his coming to them mourning . Ans . Where saith Paul that he his alone did use the rod ? doth he not ascribe judging and casting out to the Corinthians ? 1 Cor. 5. 12. &c , and forgiving of the incestuous man 2 Cor. 2. to them Beza saith , this power is necessary to purge the Church , lest it be infected ; even to the end of the world , and therefore must be left with the Church . Erastus . To be gathered in the Name of the Lord is not referred to the congregations meeting together , but to Pauls act of delivering to Satan , the Corinthians and Pauls Spirit instructed thus with the power of Christ , might have delivered others to Satan as they did this man , if the Apostle had not pardoned them , but they had not Pauls spirit with them in their convention afterward , because in no place he biddeth them be gathered together with his Spirit , as he doth here . Ans . Paul doth construe the words v. 4. in the Name of Christ with the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye being conveened , and the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , are separated from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( I have judged ) by the interposition of these words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Erastus his grammar will be a little confused . 2. What needed the Corinthians be gathered together with the Spirit of Paul , and the power of the Lord Jesus to pray that the man might be miraculously killed ? for when they were not gathered together in a Church meeting , but were all separatim in their own houses and closets , they had power to judge the man , that is , to pray that he might be miraculously killed , else Erastus cannot make Paul , in any reasonable manner to rebuke them because they prayed not that he might be killed , for Erastus must suppose the power of praying ; for this , in faith , was tyed to this publike convention of the Church , and Erastus saith , in no place he biddeth them be gathered together as here . This Spirit of Paul and power of the Lord Jesus that was in them , was not given to elevate them to any higher or more supernaturall acts of miraculous co-operating with Paul , then their naked act of consenting that the man should be cut off , and this act of consenting , they could not want , in their private praying at home , that the man be miraculously killed , and so this spirit of Paul , and the power of the Lord Iesus shall be brought so low , as I know not what to make of it . Erastus . If they had prayed that God would punish this enormous sinne , whether God had heard them or not , they had discharged their dutie . Ans . But it is evident he rebuketh them not onely , for not mourning for the mans fall , and not praying that he might be punished ; but for that they conveened not , and did not judge , and put away the man ; Ergo , they had alwayes an ordinary power to judge and cast out scandalous persons , and Paul rebuketh them for not improving this power ; then it was not any miraculous power not ordinarily in their hand , as powers of that kinde are supposed to be . Erastus saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be construed with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; as the meaning may be ; note such a one in an Epistle , and write to me , that I may censure him . Ans . This is throwne Grammar , which the Greek doth not bear without violence , for Paul saith , If he obey not our doctrine , written by Epistle , marke such a one , and he commandeth them to inflict a censure on him , by eschewing his company . CHAP. XIX . Quest . 15. Of the use of Excommunication toward the Magistrate especially . Erastus . How many thousands of men have been killed by occasion of Excommunication in Germany ? it hath subjected Kings and Scriptures , and all to the Pope . Ans . All this may be said of the Gospell and of Christ , that hee is appointed for the fall and ruine of many , and that he came not to give Peace , but the Sword , 1 Pet. 2. 8. Luke 2. 34. Mat. 10. 34 , 35. But the cause is not in the Gospell , or in Christ , but in mens corrupt nature : Excommunication is the Rod of the King out of Zion , and we know how impatient men are of the yoke of Christ ; Excommunication abused by the Pope doth all this . Erastus . Excommunication cureth not wounded consciences , but begetteth Hypocrites . Ans . So publike rebuking of those that sin publikely , 1 Tim. 5. 20. being abused doth beget Hypocrites , Esa . 57. 1 , 2 , 3. Ezek. 31 , 32 , 33. 1 King. 21. 27. 28 , 29. so doth the Rod , the Word , the giving of almes , praying , being abused to wicked ends , make hypocrites , Mat. 23. 14 , 25. Mat. 6. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. Psal . 78. v. 34 , 35 , 36. Hos . 7. 14. Excommunication is innocent of all these . Erastus . I thinke it not amisse that the Magistrate chuse godly and prudent men , and joyne to them godly Ministers , who in place of the Magistrate may inquire in the life and manners of men , and convene before them loose livers , and rebuke them , and if need be , deferre them to the Magistrate ; But this is unjust , that such a Senate be chosen by the Church , which hath no power to chuse them . 2. That they are not chosen in the Name of the Magistrate , but against his will. 3. That they subject the Magistrate to them . Ans . Erastus is willing there be a Presbytery : 1. Of mixed men , prudent men , and godly Pastors . 2. Chosen by the Magistrate . 3. That they judge and rebuke Murtherers , Extortioners , Oppressors , Thieves , &c. But 1. he should give us Scripture for this his new Presbytery . He condemneth ours , because it wanteth ( as he saith ) the Authority ; and the like of his Presbytery in the Old or New Testament you finde not . 2. That Ministers should judge of bloods , thefts , treasons , paricides ( for all these are loose livers ) and of goods and inheritances , and give an account to the Civill Magistrate , is all one as if the Ministers of the Gospel should be Iudges as the Lords of the Gentiles , such as Pilate , Foelix and the rest , so they do it at the Command of the Supream Magistrate ; then the King may warrant Ministers to go against the Command and practise of Christ , Luk. 22. 24 , 25 , 26. and 12 , 13 , &c. 2 Tim. 2. 4. For this is a Civill Judicature . 3. Then the Ministers rebuking in the name of the Civill Magistrate , may make him to Preach & exhort in the name of the Civil Magistrate . So Ministers , are they to hear the word at the Magistrates mouth ? I thought Ministers had been the Ambassadors of an higher King , Ezech. 2. 7 , 8. and 3. 3. Speak with my words to them , Rom. 1. 1. 2 Cor. 5. 20. 4. If the Ministers rebuke as Ambassadors of Christ : Those to whom they Preach the word of reconciliation , those they are to rebuke with Authority , and all hearers are subject to them : Magistrates or others , high or low : This is clear by 2 Cor. 5. 19. 20 , &c. 2 Tim. 4. 1 , 2. For rebuking in way of Preaching , or in way of censure , is a part of the Gospel . But Pastors are to Preach the Gospel to all , to great and small who stand in need of Reconciliation , 2 Cor. 5. 20 , Act. 9. 15. He is a chosen vessel to me , to bear my name before Gentiles and Kings , and the Children of Israel . Erastus . It is false that the Sword of the Magistrate is not sufficient to coerce sins , Psal . 101. Kings have put to death those that seek not God : It is nothing that you say , the Priest judged those same sins in a spirituall manner , that the Magistrate judged politically ; for it is false , that the Priests judged in a Judicature separated from the Civill Judges , as your Presbytery sitteth . See Levit. cap. 4. 5. 6. God seemeth to have given no Laws of punishing offenders by themselves , as with us , least we should imagine two distinct Judicatures . Ans . We deny not , but the Sword is sufficient to punish offenders , in its own kinde , in order to the peace of the Common-wealth . to remove evil ; to cause others fear , to pacifie Gods wrath , as the Scriptures speak : so David and good Kings purged the city of God , but Erastus cannot deny but God ordained spirituall means of rebukings , putting out of the Camp , eschewing the company of offenders , that they may be ashamed , and those spirituall means have a spirituall influence on the soul to remove offences , to gain the offenders , Matth. 18. 15. Psal . 110 ▪ 2. Isa , 11. 4. Psal . 141. 5. 2 Thess . 3. 14 , 15. 2. The word maketh the Priests separated from Civill Iudges , Zach. 3. 7. The Angel of the Lord protested unto Ioshua the high Priest , if thou wilt walk in my wayes , and keep my charge , then thou shalt also judge my house , and thou shalt keep my courts . The Civill Magistrate judged not the house of God , the way that the High Priest did . The Divines that noteth on the place , say , The chief part in Ecclesiasticall affairs was upon the High Priest , Deu● . 17. 12. 2 Chron. 19. 11. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is given to the Priest is to judge , to give out sentence in judgement , the very word that is given to King Iosiah ; He judged the cause of the poor and needy , and Ier. 5. 28. They judge not the cause , the cause of the fatherlesse , and Ier. 21. 12. O house of David execute judgement in the morning , and the sons of Aaron the Priests , 1 Chron. 24. 5. are made some of them Governors of the sanctuary , and Governors of the house of God : It is the word that signifies Princes , 2 Kin. 9. 5. A word to thee O Prince 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 1 Sam. 22. 2. 1 Chro. 11. 6. Ier. 17. 25 , Num. 23. 3. 10. All the princes of Moab , Isa . 30. 4. Isa . 10. 8. Are not my princes Kings ? and Lev. 4. 5 , 6. chapters , judiciall acts are given to the Priest that are proper to him as Priest , which none do but he , nor have the Civill ludges any part in it , more then they can offer sacrifices which none do but the priests , for he was to judge of the quality of the sins , and might not offer any sacrifice for every sin , nor dip his finger in the blood of the bullock seven times , for every sin , this spirituall judicature was the Priests . And neither Moses the Prince nor any Civill Iudge on earth could share with the Priests in judging this : all the world will say the judge may use the sword against the Murtherer , and Elders or Pastors have not to do with the sword at all : and the Pastors are to convince , rebuke and work upon the conscience of the Murtherer to gain him to repentance , and no civill judge as a civill judge hath to share with him in this : here be distinct punishments , one corporall and civill , another spirituall , why then must they not flow from two distinct Iurisdictions ? or if it displease any man , that we call Church-censures with the name of punishment , we can forbear the name , for rebukes , suspension from the Sacraments , Excommunication , because they are intrinsecally , and of their own nature such as tend not to the hurt , but to the gaining and saving of the souls of the persons censured ; they are unproperly punishments , as the power and court they come from is unproperly a rod a Iudicature , a Court , and those that inflict the censures improperly Iudges , yet can it not be denied to be spirituall Government , and that there is a spirituall sword , the word of God , and a spirituall coaction , flowing from Heralds , or servants in the name of the King of Kings and Head of the Church , who reigneth in his own Ordinances , and Ministers . Erastus . The priests bade Uzziah not burn incense , because it was their part only to sacrifice : But vvhere is it vvritten that the King vvas condemned by the sentence of the Priests ? Ans . The Priests were a Colledge of Elders , who not only judicially condemned the Kings fact as against the Lavv of God , but 2 Chron. 26. Azariah and eighty priests vvith him vvithstood him , and resisted him , yea , they gave out sentence against him , ver . 18. It pertaineth not unto thee , Vzziah , to burn incense to the Lord , but to the Priests the sons of Aaron , that are consecrated to burn incense ; go out of the sanctuary , for thou hast trespassed , they give out the sentence of the Law of God , Numb . 16. 40 , Nor might any come in to the Holy place , but the Priests and Levites , Num. 18. 6 , 7. here is a sentence judiciall by the voyces of 80. Priests in an externall court , given out against the supream Magistrate : for they gave not out this sentence as private men , but as Priests , judging according to the Law , and in this the King was subject to Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction . Erastus . It is a vaine thing to say , they Excommunicate not the Magistrate as the Magistrate , none but Kata-baptists and such as deny Magistracy to be an Ordinance of God , can say that : Every man might excuse rebellion so , and say , I persecute not the Magistrate as he is a Magistrate , but as he is a tyrant : But I say you may not reproach the Magistrate , Exod. 22. farre lesse may you punish him . How can I obey him , whose whole life and actions , I may by Power , and coaction limit ? The Magistrate so is but a servant to the Presbytery . Ans . Erastus scorneth this distinction , to say , the Magistrate not as a Magistrate , but as a scandalous man is Excommunicated : Yet we can make him receive the distinction whether he will or not : For Erastus saith , that Pastors may rebuke , convince , and threaten the Magistrate ? Good man , may Pastors threaten and rebuke the Magistrate as the Magistrate ? or may they only threaten , and rebuke him as an offending man ? Erastus dare not say the first , for so he were a grosse Kata-baptist , for then Pastors were to rebuke the very office , and to condemne it ; if he say the latter , as he doth in expresse words , then he acknowledgeth that Pastors may bind the sinnes of wicked Magistrates in heaven , is this , good Thoma , no Ecclesiasticall coaction , no jurisdiction ? and this is to receive the distinction whether you will or not . 2. The rejecting of this distinction is a tenet of Royalists , for certainly we use no defensive armes against the King as King , but as he is a misled man ; and I think the King will say , he useth not offensive armes against the Parliament as the Parliament , but under another very undeserved notion , as Rebels . 3. It is lesse that we may not rail on rulers , which is a sinne , ( for to rail upon any cursing-wise is unlawfull ) then that we cannot punish the ruler , which is more ? To punish the ruler as a sinfull and wicked man , is a work of justice , and so lesse unlawfull then sin . Erastus taketh for confessed ( as his custome is ) that which we deny , that to punish rulers with an Ecclesiastick censure is a sin , as to rail on them , and curse them is a greater sin . But to binde the rulers sinnes in heaven , is a punishment , and this the Elders may lawfully do , and to eschew the company of a ruler , if he be a fornicator , an extortioner , and idolater , is either to punish him , or put shame upon him , 2 Thes . 3. 14. But one private Christian , farre more a Church may do that , Rom. 16. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 9 , 10. 2 Thes . 3. 14. except Erastus except the Magistrate from being under a Divine and Apostolick command ; this he must say , and so we have the Apostles meaning ; withdraw from those that cause divisions , and walk unordinately , and are fornicators , coveteous , extortioners , least they infect you , and that they may be ashamed , and repent , except they be Magistrates , though in the lowest rank ; if they be Magistrates , they are gods , and you their subjects , and you may in no sort shame them . I should think God both accepted persons , and would not have us to indeavour the repentance and gaining of the souls of Magistrates , because they are above Gospel-rules by this way of Erastus ; and because the Presbytery may not rail on Magistrates , for that is sinne , it followeth not , the Presbytery may inflict no Ecclesiasticall censure on them ; Yea , let me retort this , The Magistrate may not rail on , or curse and revile the Priests ; So Paul expoundeth it , Act. 23. 5. against reviling of Priests , nor may the Magistrate revile or curse any subject , for I conceive reviling to be sinne , Mat. 5. 11. and 27. 39. Joh. 9. 28. 1 Cor. 4. 12. 1 Pet. 2. 23. 1 Cor. 6. 10. Isai . 51. 7. Zepha . 2. 8. 1 Pet. 3. 9. Jude 9. and the Magistrate is under the Moral Law. Hence I inferre by Erastus his reasoning , that the Magistrate may not punish , Priests , Prophets , Pastors , or any subject , though they most hainously trespasse against all Lawes , which is absurd . 3. That the Magistrate is made a servant , not a Magistrate , if the Elders may use the rod of Christ against him is a vaine consequence ; Paul preached himself a servant , in a spirituall Ministery , to all the Christians in Corinth , 2 Cor. 4. 5. and all Elders are thus servants to Magistrates and flock ; Yet Erastus knoweth that Paul had a rod of miraculous killing the disobedient , as Erastus expoundeth , 1 Cor. 5. & 1 Cor. 4. 21. What will ye ? shall I come unto you with a rod , or in love ? Suppose there had been a Christian Magistrate at Corinth that should fall in incest , as one did , 1 Cor. 5. 1. Paul could not come to him with the rod ; or suppose the Roman Emperour had been a Christian and within the Church , and should have his Fathers wife ; Paul could use no rod against him , and should he not have in readinesse revenge against all disobedience ? 2 Cor. 10 ▪ 6. and authority , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , given him by the Lord for edification , v. 8. against all offenders within the Christian Church ? in regard that Christ is head and King of the Church ; but he should have neither rod nor revenge in readinesse against the disobedience of the Emperour ? why , is not the rod of Paul the rod of Christ ? 2 Cor. 10. 8. yea certainly , is not then the Christian Emperour the subject of Christs Kingdome ? and subject to the King Christ , and his rod ? No but ( saith Erastus ) Paul , Is the Emperour subject to thee ? and if Paul should have a rod to punish the Emperour , then the Apostle could not be the Emperours subject , nor obey him as a God on earth : for ( saith Erastus , ) no subject may punish the Magistrate . This is downe right to make God an accepter of persons , nor can Erastus deny but sharp rebuking was a punishment , Tit. 1. Rebuke them sharply that they may be sound in the ●aith ; And this the Apostle urgeth all Ministers and watchmen to do , not being afraid of the faces of Kings , Iere. 1. 17 , 18. Joh. 2. 1 , 2 , 3 ▪ 4. 2 Tim. 4. 1 , 2 , 3. Erastus teacheth Magistrates to break Christs bounds , and to say , we will not have this man to reigne over us , he needed not employ a wicked pen for this , they need no teacher , vitia discuntur sine Magistro . Erastus . Some of yours say , there is need of the Magistrates consent to Excommunication , but certainly he will never consent to be Excommunicated himself , Theodosius was not willing , nor will good Magistrates consent , when they see the danger on themselves , you would not bring in again the Church-penances of the ancients . Ans . 1. We all think the Cumulative consent of the godly Magistrate , is necessary to Excommunication : Because he is obliged to joyne his sanction and authority to all Christs Ordinances , but we think not the privative , or negative consent is required ; so as no mans sinnes should be bound in heaven , except the Magistrate say Amen . 2. Put Erastus his Arguments in forme , and you shall see their weaknesse as thus : He whose consent is required to Excommunication , cannot be punished with Excommunication himselfe , because no man will consent , not Theodosius , nor the godliest man , that he be punished himselfe : But the Magistrates consent ( say the Presbyterians ) is to be had to Excommunication ; Ergo , the Magistrate cannot be punished with Excommunication himselfe . Ans . I retort it , he whose consent is required for threatning wrath ●o , and rebuking of offenders and scandalous men , he is not to be threatned with wrath , and rebuked for his own offences and scandals ; because no man , no Theodosius , no godly Magistrate , when he seeth the present danger , will consent , that he be threatned with the wrath of God and rebuked himselfe ; We know Nathan was afraid to rebuke a Magistrate according to Gods heart , but in the third Person . But Erastians teach that the Magistrate , when he scandalously offends , should be threatned and rebuked ; Ergo , the Magistrates consent is not requisite to threatnings and rebukings of Pastors . But the conclusion is against Erastus , for the Pastors preach , and rebuke , and threaten as the deputies and servants of the Magistrate , and as sent by him ; and the Magistrate preacheth , rebuketh , threatneth all offenders , and himselfe also in and through Pastors as his servants , as Erastus teacheth ; then he must consent , that they threaten and rebuke himselfe . 2. The proposition is false , it is presumed , all the subjects do consent to lawfull penall Lawes against sorcery , murther , incest in the generall , and virtually , that they shall be put in execution against themselves : yet the Sorcerer will never formally consent , that he himselfe be put to death , though he once , as a subject , consented to the Law , that all Sorcerers be put to death : For when the penall Law against sorcery was enacted , he consented to this . 3. He whose consent accumulative is requisite , that scandalous offenders in generall be Excommunicated , but not that this or this man , possibly the Magistrate himselfe , he is not to be Excommunicated , is most false ; he whose consent negative , is requisite for Excommunication , he is not to be Excommunicated himself , the proposition is true ; But I assume , the Magistrates consent negative , is requisite to Excommunication , there is nothing more false : For shall that which the Church bindeth on earth , not be bound in heaven , except the King , the Iustice , or Master Constable say Amen to it on earth ? We say not that the Magistrates consent as a Magistrate , is requisite , for the Excommunicating of himselfe . For though as a Magistrate he ought to give his consent to Excommucate all offenders , and adde his civill sanction , as one of the seven wise men of Greece said , Patere legem , quam ipse tuleris . Yet he is not Excommunicated as a Magistrate ( except with Kata-baptists , you condemne the Office of Magistracie as an unlawfull Ordinance ) but as a scandalous man. 3. The old penances , as they do us that service to make good that Excommunication was in the ancient Church , and that Erastus wanteth the authority of the Fathers , and upon his ingenuity should have been ashamed to cite them for his way , so we condemne them as introductory to Popery ; but let Erastus forme an Argument from this , and logick shall his●e at it . That which bringeth in old satisfactions and penance , is not to be holden . But Excommunication , or the Excommunicating of Magistrates doth this ; Ergo , The assumption must be proved . Erastus . It hath no more truth which you say , that the Magistrate , while he punisheth , cureth not the conscience , for God calleth many by tribulations to himselfe , and farre more then by your Excommunication . Ans . I would Erastus had drawen up an Argument , which seldome he doth , for this it must be : That which is a saving mean to gaine scandalous offenders to Iesus Christ , and better then Excommunication , is an Ordinance of God , and the other no Ordinance ; But the Magistrates punishing with the sword the scandalous offenders , is a saving meane to gaine scandalous offenders , and better then Excommunication ; Ergo , Ans . Neither Major nor Minor proposition hath any truth at all . 1. Though the Magistrates sword were a better meane to gain souls , it followeth not that Excommunication is no mean. The Law is lesse powerfull for gaining souls , The Gospel more powerfull . But the Law is not for that no Ordinance of God. 2. Erastus his reason to prove , that the Magistrates punishing cureth the conscience , as a saving Ordinance , no lesse then Excommunication , must be this ; That , by which God calleth , and draweth many to himselfe , is a saving mean , to cure the conscience ; but by the Magistrates punishing of scandalous men , God doth this as by other tribulations . The proposition must be , a propositio per se ; That by the Magistrates heading , and hanging , scourging , and imprisoning of themselves , as kindly and intrinsecally saving means , such as rebukes , promises , commands , excommunication are , the Lord calleth men , and converteth them , that is false , God no more useth the Sword of the Magistrate , as a kindly mean of gaining souls , then the sword of an oppressing Tyrant ; so Nebuchadnezzars oppressing of the Church of God , and the Assyrians unjust wasting of the people of Israel , shall be kindly means of gaining of souls ; because God blessed the rod to many to humble their uncircumcised heart ; but this is accidentall to , and beside the nature of the rod : but it is not accidentall to rebuking , threatning , promises to the preaching of the Gospel , nor to Excommunication to save souls and gaine them to Christ . The Gospel , and all the parts of it , are kindly , and of themselves the power of God to salvation : The Magistrates sword to Erastus must be the power of God to salvation , and Christ , Matth. 18. in his order of gaining an offending brothers soul , by this reason must descend , not ascend , contrary to the order of Christ , for Christ maketh the rebuking between brother and brother , to be the first step of gaining an offender to Christ . 2. The rebuking before two or three . 3. Before the Church . 4. Excommunication : Now all these are spirituall means and more efficacious , the second then the first , the third then the second , the fourth then any of them . But Erastus maketh Christ in the fourth step , to descend from three spirituall steps of gaining the mans soul , to a fourth , which is carnall , to wit , let him be as a heathen , &c. this is Caesars sword , which certainly is a carnall weapon , proper to the Kingdomes of this world , Ioh. 18. 36. whereas rebuking , exhorting , promises , and Excommunication , are the spirituall weapons of the warfare of the Ministers of Christ , 2 Cor. 10. 4 , 8 , 9. Rev. 1. 16. Esai 11. 4. Psal . 45. 4. Rom. 1. 16. The exercise of the sword is a mean of edifying consequenter by removing false teachers , that hindreth edification ; but no man can say it is a mean of it self , and kindly in regard of the man against whom the sword is used ; Farther , that which is a common mean of conserving peace in all societies and corporations , even without the Church , where the Gospel was never heard , cannot be a kindly mean of gaining mens souls that are within the visible Church . Erastus . Ambrose following the example of Azariah , cannot be defended in debarring Theodosius from the Sacraments ; Yea , it was tyranicall and damnable to debarre a man desirous to hear the word , who otherwayes repented and acknowledged his fault , from the means of salvation . It was like the Popes proud fact in trampling ●on the Emperours neck ▪ he had no cause of wrath against Theodosius , but as Nicephorus saith , the Emperour hated Ambrose . Ans . 1. If Erastus had come to Logick , he refuteth here but a Law by a fact of Ambrose . 2. What if Ambrose debarred Theodosius from hearing the word ; Ergo , there is no Excommunication , it followeth not . 3. That he debarred Theodosius from the Sacrament , after he gave evidences of his repentance to the Church , is an untruth . 4. That after such a cruell fact of murthering so many innocent persons of Thessalonica , Theodosius should have been admitted to the Sacrament , or remained a Member of the Church , to eat and drink his owne damnation , and not be cast out , as 1 Cor. 5. no man but Erastus could say : so it is cleare , that Ambrose did no more then a faithfull Pastor , and Amariah and the 80. valiant Priests did , in not suffering the holy things of God to be polluted ; Lipsius , no religious man , saith , l. 2. c. 24. de Constantia , quo facto nihil magis impium omnis ve●us impietas habuit . Beza , Bucer , P. Martyr , Melancton , Calvin , Anto. Waleus , Gomaras , commend Ambrose . And truly to kill seven thousand Citizens of Thessalonica , of which the most part were innocent , deserved more then Excommunication , if more could be inflicted by the Church . See Ambrose , Epist . 5. 28 , 29. Erastus had no reason to compare so laudable a fact to the proud fact of an abominable Pope trampling on the Emperours neck , and abusing the word of God , Psal . 91. to defend his devilish pride . CHAP. XX. Quest . 16. A vindication of other Arguments for Excommunication , as from sacrificing , offering of gifts , &c. with bloody hands . Erastus . Esay 1. c. 52. c. 66. Ier. 6. 7. Ezech. 23. and 33. Psa . 50. are alledged for Excommunication , to which I answer , 1. The Lord doth not condemne sacrificing , for he commanded it , but the abuse thereof , as he that commendeth modesty to one that eateth undecently , doeth condemne unmannerly eating ; but commandeth not abstinence from eating ; so Christ Mat. 6. removeth not fasting and praying , but the abuse of them . When the Hebrews propound two just and right things , of which they approve the one , and deny the other , there is only a comparison understood , as Hos . 6. I will have mercy , and not sacrifice , that is , rather mercy then sacrifice , Prov. 8. Receive my instruction , and not silver , that is ▪ receive rather my instruction then silver : so this is no good consequence . God hateth the sacrifice of the wicked ; Ergo , Presbyters are to be chosen , who should hinder wicked men to sacrifice : it followeth not , for then this should be as good a consequence ; God hateth the prayers of the wicked ; Ergo , Presbyters are to be chosen , who should hinder men to call upon God , to praise God , to rest on the Sabbath , to give almes , except these Presbyters judge them worthy . Ans . In the following books , Erastus refuteth some Treatises of Authors without names , the books I cannot have , and if he doe them right in repeating their minde faithfully , I know not ; but I know in many things , and in this very argument Erastus fancied arguments on Beza , which he would reject as none of his . 1. Sacrificing seemeth to be a confirming ordinance , as eating the Passeover , and the Communion of the Lords bodie and blood ; and as there was some examination of the persons for whom sacrifices were offered required in the Priests , as I said before , from Mat. 8. 4. Levit. 14. 3 , 4. 9 , 10 , 11 , 12. So there is Morall cleannesse required in all that are to partake of the Sacraments , that presupposeth conversion ; and I grant the first and native consequence of these is , that it was the sin and hypocrisie of the persons themselves who sacrificed first and principally . But that it was not the sins of the Priests who admitted those that were no better then Sodom and Gomorrah Esa . 1. 10. and had hands full of blood , ver . 15. is now the question ; I conceive that it is a taxing of the Priests and Church Rulers , that is , Esa . 1. 10. no lesse then of civill judges and the people , yea , that he rather taxeth the Priests called Rulers , v. 10. and that that is not as Socinians say , a new commandement of Christ , but an old , Mat. 5. 23. Therefore if thou bring thy gift unto the Altar , and there remembrest that thy brother hath ought against thee ? What if the Priest should know that he had killed an innocent man , and beside the guilt of innocent blood , that the sad hearted widow , and the weeping Orphanes had any blood to charge him withall , was the Priest either to offer or sacrifice for him , while he were reconciled to the widdow and fatherlesse ? Christ addeth v. 24. Leave there thy gift before the Altar , and goe thy way , first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be reconciled to thy Brother , and then come and offer thy gift : I offer it to the consideration of the Reader , if as the offerer of the gift was to leave his offering , knowing himself to be under blood , and to have offended his brother , he was to leave his offering at the Altar , so if the Priest who offered the same should also know that the same day he had offered his childe to Molech or the Devill ; if the Priest in this case should offer for him , and if the Priest should not eat this mans sin , and communicate with the bloody impenitent man in offering with him , and for him the sacrifice of fools ; if he should not leave offering for him till he went and was reconciled with his brother , for the Priest by office was to forbid such a bloodie man to offer ; Ergo , he could not by office , also offer for him . Here an order prescribed that is morall , perpetuall , and common both to the ordinances of the Old and New Testament , for Christ doth here expound the Law , which was corrupted by the Pharisees . 2. He doth not set down a rule concerning the Ceremoniall Law , which was shortly to be abrogated , but sure he hath an eye to the worship of the New Testament . What if he that is come to the Table to eat and drinke with Christ , and both his owne conscience and the Elders remember the widdow & orphane have a just accusation against this man of late , yesterday , he killed their husband and father , should either this man eat and drinke at this time with Iesus Christ ? or should the Elders give these holy things to him ? I thinke no● . And to come to the argument , it is true , Isa . 1. sacrificing is not condemned , but sacrificing by such Princes of Sodom and tali modo , by men of bloodie hands ; Ergo , they were not to abstaine from sacrificing , but at that time and in that condition ; nor doe we forbid either coming to , or debarring from the Lords Table by the Elders , but onely haec vice , and onely while 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first he be reconciled to his brethren , and testifie that he repenteth , we never heighten Excommunication to such an extremity , as it doth totally unchurch the man , and exclude him from the Seals simpliciter and absolutely , but according to Christs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and his order , and therefore the Elders are to exclude for a time just as this , God will have mercy and not sacrifice , that is , rather mercy , first mercy , and first faith and repentance ; then sacrifice , that is , then afterward externall worship , afterward receiving of the Passeover , the Lords Supper , and offering of gifts at the Altar : And secondarily even in the second place , in regard of time , he will have all these externalls , whence the man is to debarre himselfe , and by the same reason the Elders as the 80. Priests did to a King , 2 Chron. 26. are to debarre the man while he repent : And 2. This also ; I will have mercy , and not Sacrifice , or , I will have mercy rather then Sacrifice , doth imply that both mercy and Sacrifice are lawfull , and acceptable to God in their owne order and way . But where saith God , I will have sacrificing rather then sacrificing with bloody hands , so as both sacrificing , and sacrificing with bloody hands , shall be lawfull and acceptable to God in their owne order ? for Sacrificing with bloodie hands was never lawfull , never acceptable to God in any order . Nor said God ever he would chuse the coming of those to his Sanctuary , who the same day they came in had slaughtered their sonnes to Molech : God alwaies hated it , and never chose it , if at the same time both mercy and sacrifice cannot be , as David starving cannot both abstaine from eating shew-bread , as the Law in its letter required , and shew mercie to his life ; and the life of his followers , and eate , yea , he is to eate , and the Priests knowing his case , doe give him the Shewbread to eat , & forbid abstinence , as they would forbid selfe-murthering , and selfstarving , so here , where at one time eating at the Lords Table , and reconciliation with the widow and fatherlesse , cannot be co-existent together at one time and place , an exigence of divine providence forbidding both , the bloodie man is to debarre himselfe from the Lords Supper , it being as sacrificing and lesse necessary if we speake comparatively ; and the Elders are not to give those holy things to the bloodie man , while 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , first he be reconciled to the widow and Orphane , which now comparing the one with the other is mercy , whereas eating and drinking at the Lords Supper is but Sacrifice , but it should be as sacrificing with bloodie hands , which God condemneth and forbiddeth , and the Priests and Elders knowing it to be such a sinne , ought to forbid and to hinder it : Hence as this , I will have mercy and not sacrifice , hath this sense , I will have you to omit Sacrifice , when it cannot be done without neglect of mercie , vvhich is more acceptable to me then all Sacrifices ; so I vvill have reconciliation to the offended widdow and Orphanes , and not coming to the Lords Supper vvithout the former ; for the former is more acceptable to me , and should be to you and the Elders in your practice , then the latter ; and therefore the comparison of eating , and eating undecently halteth ; for eating undecently before another , which would procure deadly sicknesse to your brother , ought to be forbidden by the Ruler , it being known to be so , and ought to be abstained from hic & nunc , as a sinne , and a hurting of your brothers health , and yet the Ruler cannot forbid totall abstinence from meat to him that eateth undecently , as the Elders cannot command totall abstinence from the Sacraments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwayes and in all cases . 2. We draw no conclusion of erecting a Presbytery from those places , but those two we draw ; Ergo , 1. It is a sin to the people themselves to sacrifice with bloodie hands , because God condemneth such a manner of sacrificing . 2. Ergo , they are to be debarred by some who hath the charge of the holy things of God , but from the Antecedent , we neither inferre ; Ergo , Presbyters , nor , Ergo , the people , nor , Ergo , the Prince should debarre them . 3. Calling on God is not to be forbidden , nor giving of almes , because they are abused , but the manner of the abusing those ordinances are forbidden by God , and may be hindred by the Church , and forbidden under the pain of Excommunication . The Church cannot forbid men of totall abstinence from the Lords Supper , but they can command him that is not reconciled to his brother , and visibly under the guilt of blood , to leave the Table , as Christ Mat. 5. 23. commandeth the unreconciled man to leave his gift at the Altar , and goe first be reconciled with his brother , and then at the next occasion , come to the Lords Supper ; so the Church of the Iewes could not forbid the Pharisees to pray , but they could passe such an act , as is , Act. 15. 22. We forbid Pharisees or any other to bring their private prayers to the Markets and streets , and when they are to give almes , we forbid them with sound of Trumpet to make proclamation to all men that they are the onely holy and charitable men in the earth . Nor doe we thinke that the Church can debarre men from the Sacraments for inward and and invisible unworthinesse ; but onely for visible and professed uncleannesse ; and Levit. 9. 13. it is clear , the man that is uncleane is forbidden to keepe the Passeover . Will Erastus say , O he is not forbidden to eate the Passeover , but onely he is forbidden to eat it tali modo being unclean ? and therefore it is not the Priests sinne if he should give the Passeover to the uncleane man , and forbid him to eate tali modo , in his uncleannesse ? see Erastus himselfe against this , lib. 1. c. 3. page 103. 104. where he confesseth that the unclean are debarred , and yet uncleannes in the eaters of the Passeover , was an abuse onely , and made not eating of the Passeover unlawfull in it self . So the Lord complaineth , Ezek. 23. 38. Moreover this they have done unto me , they have defiled my Sanctuary in the same day , and have prophaned my Sabbaths . 39. For when they had slaine their children to their Idols , then they came 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same very day into my Sanctuary to prophane it ; and loe this they have done in the midst of my house . Will Erastus now say , It was Ceremoniall uncleannes , not Morall , to kill their seed to Molech ; and that Morall uncleannesse and bloodie murthering of their seed in the same day when a person is to come to the Lords supper , known to be such a Murtherer to the Elders who have power to judge the scandalous and to cast him out , 1 Cor. 5. did not sinne , if they should be instrumentall to lead Murtherers into the Temple ? and say to them , Take yee , eate yee , this is the body of the Lord that is broken for you ? Erastus answereth , The Prophet Ezek. 23. accuseth not the Priests or Elders , that they debarred not those Murtherers from the Temple and Sacraments , if there had been any precept for this , some footstep should have appeared in Gods rebuking of them . Ans . The Lord doth not particularly reprove the Priests by name in every place , in which he reproveth the people : But expresly for this same very sinne , the Lord reproveth the Priests , Ezek. 44. 7. Let it suffice you , that ye have brought into my sanctuary strangers uncircumcised in heart , and uncircumcised in flesh , to be in my sanctuary to pollute it - 8 ▪ And ye have not kept the charge of my holy things ; but ye have set keepers of my charge , in my sanctuary , for your selves . 24. And in controversie they shall stand in judgement ( he had spoken of their teaching the people to discerne between the clean and the unclean , v. 23. ) and they shall judge it according to my judgements , and they shall keep my Laws and my Statutes in all mine assemblies , and hallow my Sabbaths , so 2 Chron. 23. 19. And Iehojada set the porters at the Gates of the house of the Lord , that none which was uncleane in any thing should enter in . And shall we concelve that porters , that is , Levites , would hold out those that were only ceremonially unclean , and receive in murtherers who had killed there Children to Molech that same day ? there was not to enter in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the unclean in any matter ; the text is generall , excludes idolaters and murthers , and such as should refuse to enter in Covenant with the Lord , of which the Text speaketh . As for Erastus his consequence , which he unjustly imputeth to us , to wit , Israel sinned in coming to the Lords temple to prophane it , in the very day that they slew their Children to Molech ; Ergo , there ought to have been Priests , and now there must be Presbyters and selected overseers in a Church judicature to debarre murtherers , and the like scandalous persons from the Sacraments . 1. This is not our consequence . But this we say , if the Priests knew that same day , that they came to the Temple , they slew their Children to Molech , the Priests should have debarred them from coming to the Temple , and from eating the Passeover , as their office and duty was by the Law of God , Num. 9. v. 6 , 7. Num. 19. 11 , 12. Lev. 22. 6. The soul that hath touched any such ( unclean ) shal be unclean till even , and shall not eat of the holy things , unlesse he wash his flesh with water , 7. and when the Sun is downe , he shal be clean , and shall afterward eat of the holy things , because it is his food : Now it was the Priests office , Lev. 10. 10. that he put a difference between holy and unholy , and between clean and unclean ; so if Eli knew that his sonnes made themselves vile before the people , and committed furnication with the women at the doore of the Tabernacle of the Congregation ; Ergo , Eli should as a judge have restrained them , 1 Sam. 3. 13. But from this antecedent , we draw not this consequence , Elies sonnes do publikely make themselves vile ; Ergo , there ought to be such an Ordinance as a judge , with Civill power to punish them , and Ergo , there ought to have been no King to punish them , but a judge like unto Eli and Samuel ; this consequence followeth not from this antecedent , but only hoc posito , that Eli hath the sword , and be the Civill judge ; Ergo , he ought to punish , from scandals in the Church , and prophaning the holy things of God , we inferre not ; Ergo , there must be such a judicature erected , as if the antecedent were the cause of the consequent . But this only followeth ; Ergo , supposing there be a Church and Presbytery invested with this power , they ought not to admit murtherers , or any unclean persons to come and partake of the Sacraments , and so defile the holy things of God : as for the place Ezek. 33. I undertake not from thence to conclude debarring of any from the holy things of God by the Priests , what may follow by consequent is another thing . Erastus . Whereas it is said , Deut. 23. the Lord would not have the price of a whore offered to him ; Ergo , far lesse would he have a whore admitted to the sacrifice : it followeth not , but a penitent , or a whore , professing repentance , may be admitted to the sacrifices . 2. He forbiddeth only the price of a whore to be offered to him as a vow , or a thing vowed , it may be that agree not to all sacrifices : For God forbiddeth a living creature , that is unperfect , in a vow ; But Lev. 22. he forbiddeth not such imperfect living creatures to be offered to him , in a free will sacrifice , so God forbiddeth honey to be offered in an offering by fire , but not in all other oblations . But will not the Lord have a whore to offer to God that which is lawfully purchased , or which is her patrimony ? or may not a whore offer her first borne to the Lord , or circumcise him ? We find not that forbidden . From things to persons we cannot argue ; we may not offer a lame beast to God ; Ergo , doth the Lord so abhor a lame man , that he may not come to the Temple ? God alloweth not tares amongst the wheat , yet he will not have the externall Ministers to pluck up the tares while harvest . Ans . If the hire received for a whores selling of her body to uncleannesse , must not be applyed to the service of God , farre more cannot a whore as a whore be admitted to partake of the holy things of God , for the price or money is called abomination to God , Deut. 23. for the whore , not the whore for the money ; and so we may well argue from the things to the persons . 2. It is false that God forbiddeth the price of a whore onely in vows , and not in sacrifices ; he forbiddeth it because as Moses saith , Deut. 23. 18. it is an abomination to the Lord , and as Erastus saith , it is money unjustly purchased ; Yea , Davids practise teacheth , that what we bestow on sacrifices , as well as in vows , it must be our own proper goods , and not so much as gifted to us , 2 Sam. 24. 24. Neither will I offer burnt offerings unto the Lord my God of that which cost me nothing ; farre lesse would he offer the price of a whore in sacrifices ; and the Divines of England say on the place , hereby is forbidden that any gaine of evill things should be applied to the service of God , Mich. 7. 1. Vatablus saith the like . 2. For the Lords forbidding to offer in a vow , Bullock or Lambe , or any thing that is superfluous , or lacking in his parts , and permitting it in a free-will offering , by a free will offering , is meant that which is given to the Priest for food , of a free gift ; but otherwise , what is offered to the Lord in a vow , or a free will offering must be perfect : for the blind , broken , maimed , having a wenne , scurvy , or scab , can in no sort be offered to the Lord , Lev. 22. 20 , 21 , 22 , 23. There is no word of the Lord in the free will gift that Erastus speaketh of , but only the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is liberall , free , from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give freely to God or man. 3. A whore repenting or professing repentance , was not debarred from sacrifices ; but that is without the bounds of the question , an heathen could say , Quem penitet facti is pene innocens est . Senec. in Traged , We debarre none that professe repentance from the seals of the Covenant . 4. When a whore as a whore did offer her first borne being a bastard in the Temple , I conceive neither she nor her childe were accepted , Deut. 23. 2. Abastard shall not enter into the Congregation of the Lord : if the childe was born of Married Parents , the woman repenting , the question now must be far altered . 5. For a lame man to be a Priest , we can say something , but that all the lame in Israel were debarred from the Temple , and the holy things of God , we dare not say ; and a difference of things and men we acknowledge , but that is nothing to weaken the argument . 6. How proveth Erastus the tares are not to be plucked up by men ? Mat. 13. will bear no such thing : ill men are to be cast out of the Church before the day of judgement , both by the Magistrate and miraculously by the Apostles , and by Excommunication say we , Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. Erastus . He that possesseth the price of the whore , is not to be debarred out of the Temple , though the money could not be offered to God. The Pharisees would not have the price of blood cast in the treasure of the Temple ; yet they cast not Judas out of the Temple , which these patrons of Ceremonies would have done , if there had been any Law for it . Ans . This is to beg the question , the whore who sold her body for a price was unclean , and more unclean then the innocent money , and so in that case excluded from the holy things of God. 2. They admitted doves , oxen , and money changers into the Temple and prophaned it , and why should they cast Judas out of the Temple ? will their practises prove any thing , they used all divine ceremonies and Lawes of God to their owne carnall ends . Erastus . Heathens vvere not admitted into the Temple , But a scandalous man is a heathen , Ezech. 16. Your Father was an Ammorite ; also , if thou be a transgressour of the Law , thy circumcision is become uncircumcision , Rom. 2. he is vvorse then an Infidell , 1 Tim. 5. Erastus ansvvereth , but if vve look to Gods estimation , vvicked brethren are vvorse then pagans . But if vve consider the externall face of the Church , there be many things in vvicked men that agreeth not to heathen , vvicked circumcised men might go in to the Temple . Gentiles might not ; so the assumption is most false . 2. A circumcised man and a Baptisedman , can never turn non-circumcised , or non baptised . Ans . I say nothing to the cursing and blessing Deut. 27. Nor do I owne that Argument ; it is not ours . 2. Those which are ( so our argument runneth ) as Heathens and Publicans , as Pagans , Ammorites , whereas they were sometimes Brethren and Members of the Church , are not to be admitted to the Sacraments , nor to be acknowledged as members of the Church more then Heathen , Ammorites , Pagans are to be be admitted to the Sacraments and Members of the Church . But wicked men amongst the Iewes , and amongst us Christians , who will not hear the Church and are fornicators , idolaters , railers , drunkards , and extortioners , and walke inordinately , and cause divisions contrary to the Gospell of our Lord Iesus , are to be esteemed as Heathens , Pagans , Amorites , and worse then Infidels ; therefore such amongst the Iewes were not admitted to the Temple and holy things of God , and amongst us not to be admitted to the Sacraments , nor to be acknowledged as members of the Church . Erastus answereth not to this Argument , either Major or Assumption , but propoundeth an Argument of a namelesse Author , as he knoweth best to answer and remove himself . 2. Many things ( saith he ) agree to Pagans and Turks which agree not to scandalous Christians . True , scandalous Christians are not Amorites and Pagans simpliciter , they differ in profession , the one being baptized , not the other ; and once being baptized , they can never be unbaptized ; but that is not our Argument , but they agree in this , that they are no more really Christians , being fornicators , railers , drunkards , extortioners , &c. then Pagans , but have the onely name and title of such , and are to be esteemed so by us , and are to us quoad hoc , in regard of Church priviledges , as heathens and publicans , and so the Lord of old termed his Apostate people Sodom and Gomorrah , Esa . 1. 10. and as the children of the Ethiopians and Philistines , Amos 9. 7. and as uncleane and uncapable in a Church way of the Passeover , and now of the Lords Supper to us , as Ethiopians , Sodomites of old , and this day Turks and Pagans are to us . 3. That the wicked that were circumcised might go into the Temple amongst the Iews , de facto , they might , but de jure , by Law , they might not , Ier. 7. 9. Ezek. 23. 39. Esa . 66. 3. no more then by Law they might prophane the holy Name of God , or kill a man , or sacrifice a dog to God , or offer swines blood , or blesse an Idoll , The argument from sanctifying the Sabbath I passe , it hath no sense nor reason as Erastus propoundeth it . Erastus . Christ Mat. 5. commandeth him who is to offer a gift , to leave his gift at the Altar , and first to be reconciled to his brother ; Ergo , he will have us not to use the Sacraments while we be first reconciled to our Brother . But so ( saith Erastus ) we should not pray to God , nor seeke forgivenesse of sinnes , while we first forgive those that have wronged us ; Christ doth not here speake of the externall governing of his Church , but of the perfection of a Christian man , else wee could doe nothing that is good and just , and we were all to be Excommunicated , he saith not , if the Presbyters shall command ; leave thy gift , but if thou shalt call to minde thy selfe ; he speaketh not of a prohibition of others discharging an instituted vvorship , but of that which a mans owne minde doth enjoyne him , you may as easily prove the Papists Masse from this , as Excommunication . Ans . Surely this is to me convincing , if I be discharged by the Holy Ghost to meddle with the holy things of God , or offering a gift , to God at his Altar , while I first be reconciled to my brother ; then those who have by office power to steward those holy things , in wisedome , and fidelity , putting a difference betweene the precious and the vile , knowing that I am at wrath wi●h my brother , and having convinced me before two or three Witnesses that I have highly trespassed against my brother , are to deny to Steward or dispense any such holy thing to me , while I be first reconciled to my brother ; and the like I say of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper . 2. To Erastus his Argument , I answer , it is not alike here as in praying , for praying is so absolutely necessary , that it obligeth by a command of God , even a Simon Magus to pray , while he is in the gall of bitternesse , that the thoughts of his heart may be forgive● , Act. 8. 22. But Erastus , as if he had set himselfe to contradict Christ , would insinuate as much , as Christ were not to be obeyed , for his Exposition holdeth forth this sense , When thou bringest thy gift unto the Altar , and remembrest that thy brother hath ought against thee , leave not thy gift , depart not , goe not about to be reconciled to thy Brother , but first offer thy gift ; But Simon Magus , though he should remember that he was in the gall of bitternesse , should not delay to pray till he were first delivered from the gall of bitternesse , and then pray : Sure if Peter had said to Simon Magus , First labour to be freed of the gall of bitternesse , and to have thy thoughts pardoned , and then pray that the thoughts of thy heart may be pardoned , as Christ saith , First bee reconciled to thy brother , and then offer ; and ( as Paul saith ) First , Let a man try and examine himselfe , and so let him eate and drinke , the reply of Erastus should have nerves . 2. It is true , Christ speaketh not of the externall government of the Church ; but it is as false that he speaketh of the internall acts of the minde ; but he speaketh of the right ordering of the externall acts of divine worship , which are regulable , though not quatenus , as regulable by the Church , and draweth an argument from the words by necessary consequence , which consequence Erastus cannot elude . 3. But how doth Erastus prove this consequence , if our Exposition stand , and if we were to doe nothing in offering gifts at the Altar , except we bee first reconciled to our brother , and if God approve nothing which we doe , which deviates from this perfection , we should doe nothing that is good and right , and so all must be excommunicated . 1. Is Christ here injoyning a work of perfection , and of supererogation ? Is Erastus popish in this ? 2. As it is impossible not to offer gifts aright , so is it not to eate and drinke worthily , while first we be reconciled to our brother : Erastus was so surfetred with charity , as we heard before , that if any but desire the Sacrament and professe repentance , he thinketh he is obliged to beleeve he is fit for the Lords Supper ; and here , if Christ require , but that the partie be reconciled to his brother , ere he offer his gift and come to the Sacrament , this is too great strictnesse , it should excommunicate us all , and we shall so never doe any thing that is right and good . 4. It is false that Christ speaketh here of internall acts onely , and of that which our minde injoyneth , for the Lord speaketh of three externall visible acts ; 1. Of offering a gift at the Altar . 2. Of delaying and suspending of the offering . 3. Of a previous visible reconciliation to an offended brother . 5. He saith not , if the Presbyters bid you , ( saith he ) leave your offering ; true , he saith not that in words ; but supposing this , that the Presbyters know that the same very day that he bringeth his offering , he had beene killing his owne sonne to Molech , as Ezek. 23. 38. 39. Whether were the Presbyters to forbid him to come and offer , while he should testifie his repentance ; and finding him impenitent ; whether should they not judge him both to be debarred from the holy things of God , and to be cast out of the Church , as 1 Cor. 5. Certaine this is Christs order , Be first reconciled to thy Brother , and then offer ; try thy selfe first , and then eate ; and if the Church see this order neglected , whether are they to suffer clean and unclean to come and eat , and holy things to be prophaned ? Erastus . He shall expede himselfe out of this doubt easily , who can distinguish the internall governing of the Church , which is proper to God onely who knoweth the thoughts and can judge them without error , from the externall governing of the Church , in qua falli infinitè omnes possumus in the which we may all infinitely erre , and in which we can doe nothing , nisi quod mandatum expessè nobis legimus , except what vve read to be expresly commanded , for here he vvho is not against us is vvith us , Marke 9. and no man ought to forbid those which God hath commanded , so they bee externally done , all externall actions quoad nos , to us are good vvhich are done according to the prescript of Gods Word , though to God vvho judgeth the heart they be not good every vvay ; many to day , the Pharisees of old ; many in Pauls time preach for gaine , many are ambitious , and some out of envy preach ; Christ never for bad them to teach , nor Paul but rejoyced , Phil. 1. that Christ was preached ; hovvever since no man can understand the internall actions or thoughts , and without error judge them ▪ there is no punishment by mans Law for them ; onely God , vvithout error , judgeth and punisheth them . Ans . There be many untruths here , 1. If this distinction of internall and externall governing of the Church , remove most of the doubts here , he that eates and drinkes unworthily , which is an act of externall worship , which may be regulated and ordered by the Church , ( for the Church may not administer the Sacraments to Pagans without the Church ) is no sinne to the unworthy eater , because God commanded that externall act expresly , as Erastus saith , and so it is a good action , quoad nos , even to the unworthy eater , for he knoweth not his owne thoughts , nor can he judge them without error , especially being unregenerated . 2. If Erastus himselfe acknowledge this his owne dis●inction , he must acknowledge an externall Church-government , and who then are the Governours , especially in the Apostolick-Church , where heathen Magistrates are ? Pastors and Teachers no doubt , what meaneth this then ? my Brother trespasseth against me and will not be gained ? I tell the Church ; ( Erastus saith ) I tell the Christian Magistrate , but there is no Christian Magistrate , then there was no externall Government in the Church the first hundreth , nay , nor three hundred yeers in the Church , or then it must follow , that the Apostles and Pastors were the deputies of heathen Magistrates : Ergo , the heathen Magistrates should with imposition of hands have been ordained the officers , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in every Church . And that they were not ; it was their owne fault ; for the principall officer must be more principally called to office by Christ , and given by him as a gift , when he ascended on high , to edifie the body of the Church , Eph. 4. 11. 3. Erastus will have men debarred from judging the inward actions , because God only can judge them , sine errore , without error : But so God only should judge all things internall and externall , and there should be no Magistrates , because men may erre in judging the externall actions of men , and will not this gratifie the Papists , who say in this ; Tell the Church , that is , the Pope who cannot erre . Then the Synod cannot erre , Protestants deny the consequence ; Synods may judge , as Act. 15. and yet Synods may erre . 4. Erastus will have us lyable to infinite errors in externall actions : therefore ( saith he ) we should do nothing in externalls , but what is expresly commanded ; but first may we not infinite falli , infinitely erre in internall actions and thought , and acts of beleeving ? are we more infallible in internall , then in externall actions ? New Theologie : and are we not as well tyed to what is expresly commanded in internall , as in externall actions ? I think the word is as strict a rule , and the Law of the Lord as perfect in the one as in the other . 5. The great error is here , that Erastus being sleeping when he wrote , thinketh that to eat and drinke unworthily , to offer a gift at the Altar , the offerer being unreconciled to his brother , is an action internall and known to God ; and that can no more be known to man , then the thoughts of the heart : A palpable untruth ! is not worshipping of Baalim , murthering , stealing , whoring , killing the Children to Mol●ch , and coming to stand in the Temple of the Lord , which are called a prophaning of Gods holy name , Ier. 7. 9 , 10 , 11. Ezek. 23. 38 , 39. are not these actions visible , externall , and as feazable to be judged by man , as murther may be judged by a Magistrate ? Yea , by this , let a Pagan come to the table of the Lord , we are not to hinder him , why ? it is an internall action knowne , citra errorem , to God only , and we cannot then judge whither he have examined himself or not ; if he be not against us here , he is with us saith Erastus , Quod deus facere jussit , ab eo revocari aut retrahi nullus ab hominibus debet : si modo externe sic fiat , ut precepit deus ; Yea , so the Magistrate cannot hinder either Pagan or the open enemy , and persecutor , who will trample upon the Sacrament , from the Sacraments ; the contrary whereof Erastus said , pag. 207. hunc ego minime admittendum censeo , and let Erastus give us Scripture , either expresse , or by consequence , where a Pagan or a persecutor may be impeded by Church or Magistrate from externall receiving of the seals , except that we are not to give pearls to swine ? But was it not as hard to judge whether Saul persecuting the Church out of blind zeal , was a swine , or a dogge , as to judge whether he that killeth his sonne to Molech out of blind devotion , and cometh the same day to the Temple of the Lord , doth prophane the Name of the Lord ? 6. If we must do nothing in externalls without the expresse commandement of God , nor may we without Gods command , either expresse , or a necessary consequence , admit dogs and swine to the Lords table . 7. Paul indeed rejoyced that Christ was preached , though out of envy , Phil. 1. but by men called and gifted of God to preach , and therefore ought not to be forbidden to preach , while the Church , for their scandalous life do cast them out ; say they are called Ministers once , the Church is not to cast them out , for this or that particular sinne , if they be not contumatious , and Paul , saith he , Rejoyceth that Christ was preached ; but he saith not , he rejoyced that they preached Christ , tali modo , out of contention , thinking to add affliction to his bonds . Yet God forbiddeth the externall act of preaching in those that hateth to be reformed , Psal . 50. 16 , 17. and forbiddeth the Church to lay hands on , or to call to the Ministery , wicked men that hateth to be reformed , or to keep them in the Ministery ; and this hindreth not , but Paul might rejoyce at the consequent of their Ministery , to wit , at the preaching of the Gospel , so long as they remained in the Ministery : as we may rejoyce in that Christ was crucified for sinners , and not allow that Herod and Pilate did with wicked hands crucifie the Lord of Glory , nor yet are we to rejoyce in their sinne . But all this hindreth not , but he that is at wrath with his brother , and knowne to be so by the Priests , should be hindred to offer his gift while he be reconciled to him . 8. We are not to hinder acts of externall worship , as praying , praising , preaching ; nor can the Church forbid them , except where God by his Commandement require that we do them wi●h a speciall visible qualification and order : As first , be reconciled to your brother , first examine your selfe , and then of●er your gift , and come and eat and drinke at the Lords table : and in Negatives , Come to my Temple , but come not that very day you killed your sonnes to Molech , while ye repent and be humbled for that sinne . Erastus . The godly Kings compelled the people to observe the rites ordained of God , at least externally , and 2 Chron. 15. killed those that sought not the Lord , then they sinne who punish sinnes by debarring men from the Sacrament : for beside that , they forbid a thing commanded of God , and as it falleth under mens judgement , that is , as it is externall and good , so they cast their sickle in another mans field , because the correcting of sinnes in so farre as they are externall belongeth to the Magistrate , and in so farre as they come from a depraved will , they belong to God onely . Ans . Here is one palpable error , that all externall scandals are punished , either by the Magistrate as the Magistrate , so he must be understood , else he saith nothing , or by God onely , contrary to 1 Cor. 5. 11. Rom. 16. 17. 2 Thes . 3. 14 , 15. For we give a third , they are punished by the Church , but only in a Ministeriall way . It is false that the godly Kings could compell the unclean Jewes , though circumcised to come to the Temple , or the murtherers of their Children that same day , to come with bloody hands to the Temple : Yet the very locall and personall presence of a Iew in the Temple , and the very posture of his body in looking with his face toward the Temple while he prayed , was an externall lawfull Ordinance of God : They could not then lawfully compell the Iews to these rites , except with such and such previous qualifications ; they could not compell the Priests unwashed , and having drunk wine to go to the Sanctuary , 2 Chro. 15. It is not said , they were to be put to death that should omit any Ceremony , ( though every Religious observance be a seeking of God ) but they that would not seek God by entring in Covenant to renounce idols , and serve the Lord , or should prove apostates from the sworne Covenant , were to be put to death . 3. If that be a punishment ( we contend for things , not for names ) which is a privation of good inflicted for a sinne : then let Erastus s●e , if the Priests punish not , who debarred men from the holy things of God ( by Erastus his grant ) for Ceremoniall omissions against a Law of God , And if the Priests should not suffer an unreconciled man to offer gifts , and if the Church should deny pearls to apostates , if this be not punishment ? and if the Magistrate be to cast out , or inflict Ecclesiasticall censures , shall he not punish in so doing ? Erastus . To be cast out of the Synogogue is not to be Excommunicated : For the Synagogue signified sometime all Iudea , sometime a particular Congregation , or the place of meeting , or the sermon . By no Law could a circumcised Iew be cast out of all Iudea , and sent to the Gentitles , or be compelled to say they were not Iews ; Yea , they were killed who denyed Iudaisme . 2 Maccabees so the cast out of the Synagogue , were not debarred from the Temple . The Church of the Iews was tyed to one certaine place , but every particular Church hath alike power : To be cast out of the Synagogue then with the Iews , must be another thing , then to be Excommunicated now , for he that is cast out of one particular Church , is cast out of the whole Catholick Church . But it was not so in Iudea , for Sacrifices and Sacraments ( except circumcision and expiation ) were only at Ierusalem , not in Synagogues : how then could they deny Sacraments , which they wanted themselves ? they could not deny what was not in their power to give : Moses was read in their Synagogues every Sabbath , No man could be forbidden to heare the word read , this had been against a manifest precept : It is like they admitted heathens to the Synagogue , Act. 13. 14. c. 12. c. 18. But it was not lawfull for heathen to enter into the Temple : And when Moses commanded all the clean to go to Ierusalem , no Synagogue could forbid them to go . Ans . That the Synod might have divers significations , I deny not , but that to be cast out of the Synagogue had divers significations , we deny ; Yea , it signified no other thing but to be cast out of the Church , and the Lord Iesus speaketh of it , and the Evangelists as of a standing censure in the Jewish Church , which the spirit of God condemneth no where , except when it was abused , Ioh. 9. 22. Ioh. 12. 42. Ioh. 16. 2. Luk. 6. 22. Ioh. 9. 35. so is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nadah , to Excommunicate as an unclean thing , Esay 66. 5. Your Brethren that cast you out . Pagnin and Mercer expound it of casting out of the Synagogue , and they cite Ioh. 9. and 12. and 16. to make it signifie Excommunication . 2. That a circumcised Iew could by no Law be cast out of Iudea , seemeth to say , that banishment was not a lawfull punishment : Surely David against all Law then did banish Absolon , 2 Sam. 14. 13. and when the King of Persia , Ezra . 7. 25 , 26. commandeth Ezra to restore judicatures , as at the beginning ; It would seem that banishment was an ancient punishment amongst the Iews : Therefore Erastus craftily saith , that no born Iews were so cast out of Iudea , that they were compelled to say they were not Iews . Surely we never dreamed of such an Excommunication , that the excommunicated should be compelled to lie , and say that though they were Iews and Christians , yet they should say they were not Iews or Christians . 2. When the people was in Egypt , 2 Mac. they were killed who denyed themselves to be Iews , and deservedly , for they denied their Religion and their God. What is this against Excommunication ? We plead not for such an Excommunication , as was a locall extrusion of a person out of the land of Iudea , nor for such a one wherey they denyed their Nation , that was a sinfull lying . But such , whereby Church priviledges were denyed to some for scandals . 3. Nor do we expound casting out of the Synagogue literally , as Erastus doth , to be a casting out of the Synagogue or from the Ordinances there , and from hearing the word or the Law of Moses : for the Synagogue is the Church , and it was to be debarred from the Temple , Passeover , and other Holy things , though these should be tyed to one certaine place , to wit , to the Temple ; and I doubt , if the excommunicated be to be debarred from hearing the word ; 1. Because the excommunicated is to be admonished as a brother , 2 Thes . 3. 15. and the word preached is a mean simply necessary for the mans gaining . 2. Because heathens were not excluded from hearing the word , 1 Chron. 14 23. Act. 17. 16. 17 , 18 , 19 , 20. &c. Act. 14. v. 15 , 16 , 17. But from the Temple and Sacraments they were excluded : We have often answered , that all the Morally unclean , though they were ceremonially clean , are not only not commanded to go up to Ierusalem , that is , to the Temple and holy things , that they are rebuked , and accused , because they stood in the Lords Temple with their bloods and idolatries , and other abominations in their skirts , Ieremiah 7. verse 9. 10. Ezekiel 23. 38 , 39. Esay 1. verse 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16. Erastus . They call Christ a Samaritan , Ioh. 8. Those of Nazareth not onely cast him out of the Synagogue , but out of the town , and strove to throw him over the brow of a mountain : Who d●ubts then but they cast Christ out of the Synagogue , when they made a Law , that if any should confesse him , he should be cast out of the Synagogue : Yet never man objected to Christ , ( It is not lawfull to thee to go into the Temple , for thou art cast out of the Synagogue . ) Ergo , to be cast out of the Synagogue was not to be excommunicated . Ans . All these are poor conjectures , for Erastus granteth there was such a censure as casting out of the Synagogue , But he sheweth not what it is . But I retort this argument ; if Christ had been cast out of the Synagogue , those that called him a Samaritane , and cast out of their Synagogues , such as confessed him , would have sometime said , ( it is not lawfull to thee to go into the Synagogues and teach , for thou art cast out of the Synagogue . ) But by the contrary , Christ till the day of his death , openly taught in the Synagogues , Ioh. 18. 20. I spake openly to the world , I ever taught in the Synagogue and in the Temple , whither the Iews alwayes resort , Luke 4. 15. he taught in their Synagogues , Luke 4. 16. as his custome was , he went into the Synagogues ▪ Mat. 4. 23. Mark 1. 39. Mark 3. 1. Luk. 6. 6. Mat. 9. 35. Luke 13. 10. and therefore it is a demonstration to me , that they never cast Christ out of the Synagogue ; what hindred them , saith Erastus ? I answer . Let him shew me what hindred them to stone him , Ioh. 10. and not to put him to death till his houre came . Erastus speaketh not like a divine , who scoffeth at the secret Counsell of God : For God had the sufferings of his owne sonne Christ , in a speciall manner , determined and weighed , in number , weight , and measure . And therefore though they made a Law , that all that confesseth Christ should be cast out of the Synagogue , and though those that sinned against the Holy Ghost , Matt. 12. called him a Samaritane , and out of a sudden passion , those that wondred at the gracious words that proceeded out of his mouth , would cast him over the brow of a Mountaine ; Yet I hold , they never made any Law , no● did execute any Law , nor did cast out of their Sgnagogue , or excommunicate the Lord Iesus . I leave Erastus to his conjectures . Erastus . Act. 4. and 5. The Apostles were scourged and cast out by the high Synagogue summa Synagoga , yet presently they teach in the Temple , and use the Sacramen●s , Act. 21. When Paul Act. 21. was to go to the Temple to sacrifice , the Apostles who counselled him so to do , do not object , that he was excommunicated , and so could not by Law do so ; His adversaries accuse him that he taught against the Law , and that he profaned the Temple , by bringing in the Gentiles , he openly saith , he had done nothing against the Law. Then to be cast out of the Synagogue is not to be excommunicated , for one cast out of the Synagogue , could not but do against the Law , if he should go to the Temple and sacrifice . Ans . If Erastus would argue logically ( as to me in my humble apprehension , he is still weak in all his book in this ) we should find frothy grounds : as thus , If those who were scourged and cast out of the Synagogue ( to wit , unjustly and against all Law of God for preaching Christ Iesus ) were never accused for going into the Temple and using the Sacraments , and say , truly they did nothing against the Law , then the cast out of the Synagogue might lawfully go to the Temple and partake of the Sacraments ; the proposition is the greatest untruth that can be . 1. Erastus must prove that the Iews accused the Apostles of all and every thing , which they conceived to be against the Law. I conceive this is a conjecture , and false . 2. The other part of the proposition is as false as to say , light is darknesse ; if Paul cast out of the Synagogue , and excommunicated against all Law of God and Moses , yet go to the Temple and sacrifice , and partake of Sacraments , say he doth nothing against the Law ; then casting out of the Synagogue and Excommunication doth not exclude any from the Temple , sacrifices and Sacraments : this is as much as Paul should say , unjust Excommunication against all Law of God and of Moses for righteousnesse sake , doth exclude no man from the Temple and the sacrifices and Sacraments ; Ergo , casting out of the Synagogue and Excommunication rightly administred , doth exclude none from the Temple , sacrifices and Sacraments : Surely 〈◊〉 is abominable to ascribe as much to unjustly administred ordinances , as to the j●st ordinances of Christ . Erastus must lay downe the Popish ground of Navar and Gregory , that Excommunication sive de justa , sive de i●justa causa , either for a just or an unjust cause is to be feared , and hath force . Might not Paul though he had been unjustly excommunicated , go to the Temple and Sacraments , and yet say he had done nothing against the Law ? might not the man whom Iesus found after he was unjustly cast out of Temple and Synagogue , Ioh. 9. 39. say , I have done nothing against the Law , nor do against it , though I go to the Temple ? 3. How will Erastus prove that the Apostles , Act. 4. and 5. or Paul were c●st out of the Synagogue or excommunicated ? I never could read it : They commanded them neither to preach in Temple or Synagogue any more in the name of Iesus ; But that they cast them out of the Synagogue , or cast Paul out of the Synagogue , where is it to be read ? let Erastus teach us . Erastus . It is hard to say , what it is to be cast out of the Synagogue , it was not Excommunication , it seemeth to be some note of infamy , Ioh. 12. or a particular banishing them out of a towne , and Iesus seemeth , Luk. 4. to be banished by the Nazarites , and it seemeth to be a denying of right of the City ; so as the cast out of the Synagogue shal be no more esteemed for a true Iew , but as a prosylite ; Prosylites dwelt amongst the Iews , and had right to those same holy things with them , yet were they distinguished from the Iews : so it seemeth to be that which is Ezra 10. to be separated from the Crongregation of those that had been carried away captive . It agreeth with that Deuteronomy 23. where the Children of Edom were admitted ●● enter into the Congregation of the Lord in their third generation . It s absurd to think● that God who is no accepter of Persons , will not have one cut off , a Bastard , an Ammonite , a Moabite received into his Kingdome : So the Lord refused not that they should be circumcised and admitted to the Sacraments ; but he would not have them counted for true Iews ; He would have Egyptians and Edomites received in their third generation : so their Father , Grand-father , and great Grandfather had been circumcised , otherwise to the thousand generation they were ●ot received , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to cast out , or to be cast out of the Synagogue are meeker words then to condemne , cast out , excommunicate ; and though the Pharisees should debarre from the Sacraments those that are cast out of the Synagogue , we are not to imitate the examples of ill men . Ans . 1. If it be hard to determine what it is to be cast out of the Synagogue , it is hard to deny it to be Excommunication ; for to be a Member of the Synagogue , as an Elder or a Ruler of the Synagogue , was to be a Member of the Church , and a Church priviledge ; Ergo , to be cast out of the Synagogue must be to be unchurched , and made no Member of the Church , and this is very like Excommunication : however , Erastus cannot deny it to bee some Church censure like to Excommunication as any thing can be . 2. That it was a civill banishing out of a Towne , or that Christ was banished by the Nazarites out of Nazareth leaneth upon Erastus his ita videtur , so it seemeth ; To which I crave leave to say , non ita videtur , it appeareth to be no such thing , Christ came againe to Nazareth , and till his death was never banished from Synagogue or Temple , Iohn 18. 20. They should rather have been said to cast Christ out of the Temple and banish him from Ierusalem , for Ioh. 10. 22 , 23 , 31. They took up stones to stone him , v. 39. then to banish him out of Nazareth , or cast him out of the Synagogue . 3. Prosylites had all the right that Iews had by Gods Law , what men denyed them , is not the question . Erastus spake nothing from Scripture or Gods Law , that was one and the same to the born Iew , and the stranger that came in and was circumcised , and gave his name to the Israel of God. 4. To be deprived of the priviledge of a city is a civill punishment ; Ergo , to be cast out of the Congregation or Synagogue , which was a spirituall and Church punishment was no such thing . 5. The separating from the Congregation , Ezra 10. 8. was Excommunication ; the Annotation of the English Divines say it was Excommunication , such as casting out of the Synagogue , Ioh. 9. 22. 6. If it agree with Deut. 23. 8. To enter in the Congregation of the Lord , is to be a Member of the Church of God , and therefore the Hebrew readeth it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the Church of God. The Chalde Paraphrast 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erint mundi ut ingrediantur Ecclesiam Domini , They shall be cleane that they may enter into the Church of God. Sure this was not Physicall or civill cleannesse , but cleannesse spirituall according to the Law of God : so the seventy translate it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hieronym . intrabunt in Ecclesiam Domini . Vatablus in Not. erint de consortio populi Sancti . The English Annotators cite for this Nehe. 13. 1 , 2. the Law is , that the Moabite and the Ammonite should not enter into the Congregation of the Lord for ever , It is said v. 3. They separated from Israel all the mixed multitude , so that cleare it is , to enter into the Congregation is to become a Member of the Church ; then to be separated from the Congregation , must be to be cast out of the Church , and deprived of the holy things of God , as heathens and strangers were , according to that Levit. 22. 10. There shall no stranger eate of the holy thing : What is this but Excommunication ? call it with another name ▪ we care not , it is really to be separated from the Church . 7. It is admirable to me to heare Erastus say , It cannot be that God who is no accepter of of persons , will not receive into his Kingdome a Bastard , an Ammonite , a Moabite ? Is not this to reason against the Law of God , and the wisedome of God ? Deut. 23. 1. 2 , 3. who saith , that he will not receive such into his Church , which is his Kingdome , and a company of Kings and Priests unto God , which he hath freely loved , Exod. 19. 5 , 6. Psal . 149. 1. Deut. 7. 7. Deut. 26. 16 , 17 , 18. as ●o● the rejecting of men from his heavenly Kingdome according to Gods decree of eternall Reprobation , I deny Excommunication to be any such rejection of men ; it being onely a casting them out from the visible Church , and the speciall Church priviledges , that their Spirits may be saved in the day of the Lord ; and what can be more contrary to the Word , then that Erastus should say God declared not , that it was his will that Moabites , Ammonites should not be circumcised , an● admitted to the Sacraments . Why then did hee not chuse Moabites and Ammonites for his people , and make a covenant with them , and give Circumcision a Seale of the Covenant , as he dealt with the Iewes ? if he mean God will not exclude Moabites and Ammonites from the Sacraments , so they repent and turne to him : but now Erastus fights with his owneshaddow . Who denieth but Iewes and Gentiles , so they call on him , are welcome to all the holy things of God , and not to be cast out of either Church or Synagogue . 8. To say , to cast out of the Synagogue , is a meeker word then to Excommunicate , is but to beg the question . Yea , but saith Erastus it is lesse and a milder thing then to destroy , and pro deplorato habere , to esteeme a person lost , we say Excommunication is not to destroy or to give for lost , but though it be the most violent , yet it is a saving remedy that the man may be ashamed , humbled , and his Spirit saved . 9. We reason not from the fact of Pharisees , if they cast any out of the Synagogue for a just cause , they ought also by Gods Law to debarre them from Temple and Sacraments , and therefore if they did not debarre , it was their sinne , not our Rule . CHAP. XXI . Quest . 17. Divers other Arguments vindicated , as from Communion with the Church , subjection of Magistrates and Ministers : The Ceremonially unclean from Matth. 18. Tell the Church . Erastus . Christ hath given a power to his Church to loose , Ergo , also to binde : The Church admitteth Believers into Communion ; Ergo , they cast out the impenitent . Erastus Answereth , Such a power as they have to Ioose and to admit ; such and no other have they to binde and to cast out ; but it follovveth not , Ergo , it is a povver to debar from the Sacraments , and to Excommunicate : it is à Genere , and Speciem affirmativè . Ans . Erastus is mistaken , and formeth the Argument as he pleaseth . The Church pardoneth as a Church , and receiveth into her body believers to participate of Church-priviledges and Sacraments in a Church Communion ; Ergo , the Church hath power to binde and cast out from this same Church-Communion , those that leaveneth the whole lump ; as a City may admit a stranger to all the City priviledges ; Ergo , the same City may for offences against the City , cast out and deprive of City priviledges offenders : is this a Genere ad speciem affirmativè ? If the Church have a power to cast out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from amongst them a Member , we shall not contend for the name of Excommunication . Erastus . The Ministers have none , by whom in their office they can be corrected : But saith Erastus , If every soul be subject to the higher powers , how are Ministers excepted ? if Ministers correct Ministers , they play to others hands , spare thou the nails , and I shall spare the teeth . Ans . The Author doth not except Ministers from civill subjection to Magistrates : But only he saith , In Ecclesiasticall censures , the Magistrate is not to judge the Ministers ; because a Ministery being an Ecclesiasticall office , as such , it is not liable to the civill power , only the Ministers as they erre and sin in their persons , are liable to civill punishment , but not to Ecclesiasticall , to be inflicted by the Magistrate . 2. Through the corruption of mens nature , every one may wink at anothers faults : It is true , But consider if this slow from the nature of Gods Ordinance , to wit , that the Citizen obey the Laws of the City whereof he is a member . This is an Argument against any Senate , Parliament , Counsell of State , or War , or Aristocracy on earth : if of an hundreth Lords of the States Generall , one or ten play the Traytor to the State , who shall take order with them ? Their Collegues and fellow-Senators . Partiall judging falls out here through mens corruption : spare thou the nails , and I le spare the teeth : and from Erastus his way , ( if you Argue from mens corruption ) the same will follow : May not the Magistrate say to the Minister , Honour me before the people , and Preach not against the sins of King and Court , and I will oversee and wink at thy Pluralities , non-residencies , soul-murthers ? And may not the Minister say to the Magistrate , Let me be above all Civill Laws , and be Lord Prelat , and sit on the necks of my Brethren , and defraud , oppresse , and I shall be silent and preach nothing against the idolatry , oppressions , Sodomy , uncleannesse of Magistrate and court . Erastus . The Ceremonially unclean were excluded from the Sacraments ; Ergo , far more the Morally unclean ; But how ( saith he ) doth this follow ? You Excommunicate none but the obstinate ; for those that were Ceremonially unclean against their will , were excluded from the holy things ; Ergo , far more he that is Morally unclean is to be debarred , though he be not obstinate : How could Paul Excommunicate the incestuous man , 1 Cor. 5. he was never admonished ; or Peter Excommunicate Annanias , as you say ? Ans . All Types or comparisons hold only in that for which the spirit of God doth bring them : Now the Ceremonially unclean were debarred from holy things , to signifie how much God detests filthinesse . 2. Filthinesse , polluting and leavening others : Now the lesse will in any sin , the lesse sin , and so the lesse contagion to others , and therefore , where there is much infirmity , lesse will , and no contumacy , it rather followeth , Ergo , there should be no casting out , no Excommunication . Erastus . The Ceremonially unclean were not counted as condemned and lost , as your Excommunicated persons were ; they were admitted to Sacraments and the yearly expiation . Ans . This is Answered fully : The Excommunicated , because Excommunicated , are to us in a way to be saved under Medicine , and not given for lost , no more then those to whom the Pastors do threaten eternall wrath , or those with whom we will not eat , because of their inordinate walking are given for lost , though conditionally they are in danger of damnation if they repent no● . 2. It is denyed that the Ceremonially unclean were admitted to the Sacraments . Philo Judaeus , no lesse well versed in Jewish Antiquities then Josephus , Tract . de sacerdotum honoribus , saith , Nulli homicidae licebat introire Templum : and Josephus , l. 19. c. 7. saith , Herod Agrippa who beheaded James the brother of Christ ▪ accused one Simon , who being a wicked man , went into the Temple , Q●ia Templum non nisi puris & dignis pateret : he witnesseth the same , De Bel. Jadaic . l. 4. c. 13. Erastus . The comparison holdeth not between two sins , which have both of them their own appointed punishment , but when both is punished vvith one punishment : for it is like this , He that killed any imprudently , vvas compelled to flee to the City of Refuge , vvhich vvas a lesse sin ; Ergo , he that vvittingly and vvilfully ▪ killeth , should rather flye to that City ; or ▪ a drunken man is to pay a fine ; Ergo , a bloody Robber is far rather to pay a fine . Ans . When the comparison is made between a Ceremoniall breach , which is punished with a punishment Ceremonially , or mystically significant ; the comparison to a morall sin punished with punishment reall , signified by that Ceremoniall punishment , is inconsequent : But when both sins have the same punishment in the generall , in genere , it followeth not , that both should have the same , in spe●i● , in nature , as a drunkard ought to be punished with stripes ; Ergo , parricide ought rather to be punished with death ; but not Ergo , a parricide ought rather to be punished with stripes only : And so the consequence is nought , the leper was punished with being put out of the Camp seven dayes . It followeth not , Ergo , he that is defiled with the soul-leprosie of murther , sorcery , should far rather be punished only with being put out of the camp seven dayes : Because there is a higher punishment ordained for morall , then for a Ceremoniall transgression , Ceteris paribus . Erastus . If Peter Excommunicated Ananias , as you say for a private , far more should Christ have Excommunicated Iudas for a more haincus private sin . Ans . We say not that Peter Excommunicated Ananias , but that his killing of him pointed at the punishment of wicked men in the bosome of the Church . 2. Gods punishing of sinners both in the time when , and in the manner , with what kinde of punishment , is no rule to the Churches or Magistrates punishing . If God spare Joab all Davids time , it followeth not , Ergo , David the Magistrate ought also to spare him . If God command to kill the man that gathereth sticks on the Sabbath : it followeth not , Ergo , the Church or Magistrate may do the like now , if any should gather sticks on the Sabbath . Erastus . Let every man try himself , he speaketh of the secrets of Conscience . Erastus . That is ( saith he ) false , he speaketh of open sins of Schismaticks , of those that came drunk to the Table , and eat things Sacrificed to Idols . Ans . Erastus mistaketh close the Authors meaning , which is to speak of the private and personall self-examination that every Communicant is to enter in before he eat , not of the publike trying , 1 Cor. 5. men are to make a secret tryall even of publike sins ; so though the sins were publike , yet was the tryall secret and personall , but did not exclude a publike examination by the Church , if need were . Erastus . Though those that come to the Supper professe Repentance , yet many hypocrites come : So Isa . 1. those Hypocrites might have said , We testifie by our sacrificing , that we have hands full of blood ; If we deal Hypocritically or sincerely , God who knoweth the hearts only must judge , men must judge the best . Erastus saith to the place , Isa . 1. we have Answered before : But ( saith he ) if they had said , It is true , our hands are full of blood , but we repent and are sorry , O Prophets , pray to God to have mercy on us , and we shall pray ? They could not be debarred . Ans . The man that was unreconciled to his brother might say all that at the Altar to the Priest . Yet Christ seeketh some more of him , he will not have him admitted to offer his gift , but he must leave it there , and give more then words to both God and the Priest ; he must go and humble himself to his offended Brother , and be reconciled to him : And so the Prophet , Isa . 1. seeketh more of them , ere he will have them to Sacrifice : Wash you , make you clean , put away the evil of your doings , cease to do evil , learn to do well : All this is not done in a moment at the Altar . Erastus . Tell the Church , that is , Tell the Magistrate , if he be not a defender of a wicked Religion : For I suppose , 1. That Christ speaketh of the Church in Iudea , which the Disciples understood where to finde it : Now the Disciples understood so well the Church , that they put no Question to Christ of the matter . 2. Peter only saith , How oft shall my Brother offend and I forgive him ? Now Peter and the Disciples knew nothing of the spirituall Fraternity of the Gentiles before his Resurrection : For they knew only Jews were their Brethren , and they were forbidden to preach to the Gentiles or Samaritans now . 3. Let him be to thee as an heathen and a Publican ; that is , Let him be as a man most opposite to the Jews : Heathens and Publicans did grievously oppresse them , and made the Roman yoak very burdensome to them . Ans . 1. Erastus doth suppose , ( which is most false , as I have Answered before ) that Christ speaketh to Paul from heaven and Ananias also , of bearing the Name of Christ to the Gentiles : and Paul neither knew Name nor thing , Act. 26. 15 , 16 , &c. and 9. 15 , 16 , &c. He speaketh to his Disciples of the promise of the Father , and of the Testimony of the Gospel they were to Preach , Luk. 24. 46 , 47. &c. which they knew not till afterwards . And what was the use of the holy Ghost to be powred on them ? Was not this one of the chief ? Joh. 14 , 26. He shall teach you all things , and bring all things to your remembrance , whatsoever I have said unto you : Then Christ spake many things to them that they bothforgot , & knew not till the holy Ghost came upon them . And their not asking Question , will not prove they understood all he spake , sometimes they were afraid to ask him . 2. The Jewish and Christian Church have not such essentiall differences , but they knew by the ordinary notion of the word Church , a Convention that professed the Doctrine of the Prophets , and of the Law and Gospel . And what such great difference is there between a brother , and a brother Iew and a Brother Gentile , as they behoved to understand the one , and be utterly ignorant of the other ? And what necessity to restrict it to Iews only ? Christ had often spoken to them of the incoming of the Gentiles , as Matth. 8. 11. Joh. 10. 16. Matth. 10. 18. Did the Disciples know the Kings , Councels , Indicatures of the Gentiles , that Christ said they should be convented before ? Matth. 10. 17 , 18 , 19 And because Erastus is so confident that the word Church here is the Civill Magistrate : Let any Erastian teach me , what is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Church , Matth. 16. 19. Is it the Civill Magistrate ? Is the Civill Magistrate built on a Rock ? Shall the Ports of Hell never prevail against the Civill Magistrate ? Can no Magistrate make defection from the truth ? And doth Erastus or his believe in their conscience , that the Disciples understood Christ , Matth. 16. ( for he spake of both to the Disciples ) to speak of the stability and strength , and perseverance of the Christian Magistrate : And that the Ports of Hell should never prevail against the Iewish Sanedrim and Church , which crucified the Lord of glory , and persecuted his Apostles , and all professing the Name of Iesus to the death ? 3. Heathen and Publican in generall , were names as opposite to Christian Brethren as to Iewish Brethren , as I have proved before . Erastus . The vvord Church to the Hebrevvs , signifieth either a multitude , or the Senate , or Magistrate , as Num. 35. Church is four times , Josh . 20. Tvv●ce , Psal . 82. Once : and it signifies the Magistrate . So vve say , the Empire hath done vvhat the Emperour vvith the States of the Empire hath done . So the Church or Convention think so , because the chief amongst them think so , the Common Wealth hath done this , because the Senate hath done this . Ans . The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Num. 35. 12. But in all that Chapter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : Now how this signifieth one Magistrate , which ever signifieth a collection or multitude of rulers , I leave to the learned : so Erast . faileth yet in his probation . 2. Suppose the word Church signifie the heads of the people , how shall Erastus prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth the senate of Civill Magistrates , for in this Congregation were the Priests and Levites , especially , that judge between blood and blood , voluntary or involuntary homicide , Deut. 17. ●2 , 13 , 14. 2 Chr. 19. 8 , 9. It is true also that the man that killed another unwittingly , was to be protected in the City of refuge , while he should stand before the faces 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Congregation , But let Erastus , and all who will have the Bishop or the Pope the representative Church , know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Congregation , ever , and alwayes be a collective word , as populus the people , signifieth a multitude , & never by Grammer , one single man , hoc nomen ( saith Pagnine ) certum conventum ▪ sive cetum significat , certum Collegium , it alwayes signifieth a soc●e●ie : as the Princes of the Congregation Num. 16. 2. all the Princes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Congregation , Exo. 34. 31. here is a number and a societie , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Aristotle can be atributed to no fewer then to three at least . Speak to all the Congregation of Israel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Exodus 12. 3. and the Congregations of peoples 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall compasse thee about , Psal . 7. 8. Nor shall sinners stand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Congregation of the just , Psal . 1. 5. Thou hast made desolate all my Congregation , Iob. 16 , 7. 2. The word is from a root that signifieth to conveene and gather together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore Iud. 14. 8. a swarme or a Congregation of Bees , is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Congregation . And that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Church since the world began , never signified one single man , either King , Magistrate , Pope , or Prelate , But alwayes a multitude either of rulers or people , I appeal to Demosthenes , Homer , Pho●illides , Hesiod , Lucian , Pluto , Aristotle , to Suid●● , Stephanus , Scapula ; or for the word , Cetus , Cong●egatio , to all Latine Authors , to the seventy interpreters in the Old Testament , to Hy●ronimus , all the Greek Fathers , and to the Evangelists and Apostles in the New Testament , to Act. 19. 32. Eph. 5. 23. Act. 8. 13. Rom. 16. 5. 1 Cor. 1. 2. 2 Cor. 1. 1. Gal. 1. 2. 1 Thes . 1. 1. 2 Thess . 1. 1. Act. 15. 3 , 4 , 22. Act. 16. 5. Act. 14. 23. Rev. 1. 20. Rev. 2. 1. and for Psal . 82. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is a Congregation of Gods or Magistrates , and v. 6. All of you are Children of the most high , he speaketh evidently of a multitude of Iudges . 3. Suppose the Empire be said to do what the Senate , Parliament , or great Councell of the Empire or Kingdome doth : This will not prove that the word Church in either of the Originall Tongues Hebrew or Greek , doth signifie one man , so as Tell the Church , must be all one with , Tell one single Magistrate , or , Tell one Prelate or one Pope , and he that will not hear the Magistrate , that is , the King , or one single Magistrate alone , without any fellow Magistrates , he being a Christian , is to be dealt with as an heathen , and a publican , and not as a Christian brother : For what the King doth alone without his Senate , is never called the deed of the Senate , farre lesse the act or deed of the whole Ecclesia , of the Kingdome , produce any shaddow of Grammer for this : Now to Erastus , Tell the Church , is all one with , Tell the single Christian Magistrate alone separated from Fellow-judges , or Councell , Senate , Parliament , Ecclesiasticall Assemblies , and if he hear not and obey not this one single Christian Magistrate , let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican : For Erastus will have the Civill Magistrate , though the whole Church and Pastors should judge the contrary , to have power by vertue of his office to determine against Pastors and Elders : Yea , by his office he is to command them to preach , and synodically to determine this and this , and what they determine they do , à et sub Magistratu , under , and from this one single Magistrate as his servants , instruments , Vicars and deputies , and therefore the Magistrate cannot sentence in the name of Pastors , Elders , when they are but his servants : And , 2. When he may by his office , do contrary to what they judge in conscience ought to be done : So Tell the Church , to Erastus is , Tell the one individuall single Magistrate , who by office may judge without , and contrary to the advice of all the Church Pastors , Doctors , Elders , yea , people and all : Now though we grant , that what the Emperour doth as Emperour , and the Magistrate as Magistrate hath done , that the Empire , City , and Incorporation doth , ( which yet is never true in the Church , which hath no King as a Church , save onely the head and King Iesus Christ ) yet Erastus hath not proved , what the Emperour doth without , and contrary to the advice of all the Empire , that the Empire hath done that . Erastus . Christ either understandeth by the Church the whole multitude of Ierusalem , or then the Magistrates : But he understandeth not the multitude , 1. Because Christ would not change the Government of heathens , farre lesse of that which his Father had appointed in Iudea , in which the people did never Governe : Yea , the Apostles to their death did nothing against Moses his Law , and how they take Christ to speak of a Church to be founded of new after his resurrection who beleeved not he should die and rise againe ; and after his resurrection knew not what a kingdome , whether worldly , or spirituall , he was to ●ave , cannot be conceived . Ans . 1. Many will deny the Major , for he understood the rulers of the Christian Church , not excluding the consent of the Christian Church of beleevers in the matter of Excommunication . 2. I deny that Christ doth here re-establish a Synedry , and bid them Tell the Scribes and Pharisees , and those that were to crucifie himselfe , and to persecute the Apostles to the death . Christ knew those to be miserable healers of scandals betweene brother and brother . 2. He knew this Sanedrim to be the Disciples of Christs capitall enemies , he warned the Disciples to beware of the leaven of their corrupt Doctrine , he prophecied this Sanedrim should be destroyed as a degenerated plant , that his heavenly father had not planted , and was it like Christ would direct them a perishing and degenerate remedie against scandals , that he would have removed by his Church , even till the end of the world ? 2. It is most false , that the Apostles did keep to death the institutions and ordinances of Moses , Act. 15. They abrogated all the ceremoniall Law , except that of blood and things strangled , and Paul said , he that would amongst the Galathians be circumcised , was fal●e from Christ , see Col. 2. Gal. 4. Heb. 13. and elsewhere the contrary . The Government was now to expire with Christs death and ascension , in so farre as it was pedagogicall . 3. Christ spake often of his Kingdome to them , and they understood nothing but an earthly and temporall Kingdome ; and that they understood perfectly : All this time the Church of Pastors , Teachers , Elders , Deacons , beleevers in Christ , is denied ; Let Erastus answer , when Christ said Mat. 16. He would build his Church on a rock unpregnable and insuperable to hell : If the Apostles understood a Church to be founded after the resurrection , and when Christ said , Loe I am with you to the end of the world , if Christ meant not he would give his presence to the Christian Church , not then founded , for even after his resurrection they dreamed of an earthly Kingdome , Act. 1. and that our divines do rightly expound that place , I am with you , All the faithfull Pastors , Doctors , Church-officers and beleevers to the Lords second appearance , is clear . Erastus . Christ bade , Tell that Church which hath power to conveene the offender before it , examine Witnesses judicially , cognosce and give sentence , but in Christs time the multitude could not doe this . Ans . Ergo , the Church hath a spirituall judicature : This is for u● . 2. Nor had the Sanedrim the power in all offences , as Erastus would make the world beleeve , for it was but a shadow at this time void of power , and used what power they had against Christ and the Gospel . Nor needeth Erastus to prove that by the Church the multitude cannot be understood ; though he cannot exclude them from their owne part in Church Government , both in consenting , and in withdrawing from the Excommunicated . Erastus . But , Tell the Church is all one vvith this , Appoint some who in the name of the Church may mannage the businesse ; but how prove they this ? Then Christ bade , Tell the Elders that then were , else he did not accommodate himselfe to their understanding to whom he spake ; when he was to teach hovv our sacrifices pleaseth God , be biddeth us first be reconciled to our brother , and then sacrifice , yet he knevv that sacrifices vvere to be abolished , but by Analogie he vvould teach us , vvhat he requireth vvhen he saith , he vvill have mercy , and not sacrifice ; Ergo , by your ovvn confession to tell the Church is to tell the Sanedrim , for there vvas then no Church but the multitude . Ans . 1. ( Tell the Church ) cannot in any sense , have such a meaning , as Appoint Elders and tell them ; for then ( Tell the Sanedrim ) must have this meaning , set up a sound Sanedrim , according as Moses appointed , and tell the Sanedrim . The Sanedrim in its right constitution and due power as the Law of Moses required it , was not to be had at this time : Herod had killed the Sanedrim , the Romans made High Priests from yeere to yeere against the institution , the power of life and death in the civill Sanedrim was now none at all . The Scepter was departed from Iudah , those that sate in Moses Chaire corrupted all , so the right Sanedrim was no more now to be had , then a Christian Church not yet erected . Again , Tell the Church , presupposeth a constituted Church , and therefore cannot include a command to erect a new mould ▪ 2. Tell the Elders of the Christian Church , may as well be meant in these words , Tell the Church , as the Iewish Church can be understood . 3. The word Church , and to conveene offenders , hear Witnesses , give out sentence , were all plaine Language to the disciples , though they knew not the frame of the Gospell Church , as yet , Christ being now teaching an ordinance of a Church , and the censure of Excommunication that was not to fall under practise , while Christ should ascend to heaven ; and therefore though this Church was not , yet it followeth not , that the Lord Iesus speaketh of the Sanedrim . 4. Say that he meane the Sanedrim ; Ergo , say we , he speaketh nothing of the Christian Magistrate . 1. Because there was no Magistrate now , but Iewish Magistrates as Erastus cannot deny . 2. Because this Sanedrim that gained soules of offending brethren , was Ecclesiasticall , not civill . 3. By proportion , and Analogie Christ must understand the Church of Christians , though the Sanedrim was to be removed shortly . Erastus . It is a great controversie , vvho are to be chosen out of the bodie of the Church to excommunicate judicially . Ans . The controversie was moved partly by Erastus , partly by Morellius , not in the reformed Churches . Erastus . Some say the Magistrate should chuse the Elders at least at the first , even though the Church doe not consent . But how can they sit in place of the Church and judge , who were against the will and minde of the Church chosen to be Judges ? for though the Magistrate be a chiefe Member of the Church , yet to Tell the Church , is not to Tell the Magistrate ( as you say ) but to Tell the whole Church , and it is no ●xcuse that the Magistrate doth but once chuse the Elders , for if hee have no right nor Law from God to doe it , he can never doe it , and if he have Law from God to doe it , he ought alwayes to doe it . Ans . Here Erastus reasoneth against some Au●hor that inclineth to the way of Morellius . If there bee no formed Church endued with knowledge and discretion to chuse their owne Elders , if there be godly men fit to be chosen , they are to convene and chuse from amongst them Elders , the godly Magistrate is to joyne his Vote and Power , because there is a Church not yet constitute , it is now Perturbatus aut corruptus Ecclesiae status , and I ever judged it a golden saying of that great Divine Fran. Iunius , that when the Magistrate will not concurre , the Church in that extraordinary case may doe somewhat , which ordinarily they cannot doe ; and againe when the Church doth not their duty , the Magistrate in that case may doe something more then ordinary , to cause the Church doe their dutie ; for its a common La● , to ills out of order , remedies out of the road way may be applyed . So if the Priests and Levites be corrupt , Iehoshapaht and Hezekiah and Iosiah may reforme : And therefore though the godly Magistrate , jure communi , by the common Law of Nature , imploy his power to appoint Elders , all Errors and confusions in the Church are in some measure out of order ; yet it followeth , that jure proprio , and ordinarily he should alwayes doe this . 2. Elders are not properly Representators of the Church to me , while I be better informed , for power of feeding and ruling is immediately given by Iesus Christ to the Elders , and not by the interveening mediation of the Church , but onely by their designation to the office ; th●s power is given by the people . 3. The Magistrate as the Magistrate , and by vertue of his place , is neither a Member , farre lesse a chiefe Member of the Church , for then all Magistrates should be Members of the Church , even Heathen Kings and Rulers , which no man can say . The Christian Magistrate as a Christian is a Member of the Church . But that is nothing to helpe Erastus . Erastus . Because the multitude can doe nothing in order , therefore ( say they ) they have power to choose Elders to whom belongeth the power of Excommunication . But how prove they this ? Though a company vvanting a Magistrate have this power , shall it follovv , that a company to vvhom God hath given a godly Magistrate should have this povver ? But because confusion vvould follovv , therefore Elders are to be chosen ; Ergo , Such Elders as make up your Presbyterie , à genere ad speciem affirmativè nulla est consequutio . Ans . 1. Not only from necessity of eschewing confusion , but from the positive Ordinance of God , we infer Presbyters ; we do not own any such consequence : Prela●es and Papists argue for a Monarchy in the Church , from order : we know no creatures of the like frame : Erastus is for a Bishop , he may so argue , not we : We finde Christ hath placed such organs in his body , as Eph. 4. 11. 12. 1 Cor. 12. 28. 1 Tim. 5. 17. 1 Tim. 3. 1 , 2 , &c Act. 6. 1 , 2 , &c. and 14. 23. Ergo , they ought to be , for we think the Church cannot govern it self . 2. If the Church wanting a Magistrate as the Apostolick Church did , have power to chuse Presbyters , and by a Divine Law : how dare Erastus say , That it followeth not , when the Church hath a godly Magistrate , she should keep the same power ? Can the godly Magistrate when he cometh into the Church , take any Divine power from the Church ? Is the Magistrate given to the Church as a Nurse-father to preserve that power that Christ hath given to his Spouse ? or is he given as a spoiler at noon ▪ day , to take to himself the power , and make the Ambassadors of Christ , his Ambassadors and Servants to preach in his Name ; whereas before when they had no Magistrate , Pastors did preach only in the Name of Iesus Christ ? Erastus . Sure the Lord hath concredited to the Magistrate , the Command and all power of externall Government , so as he hath subjected not only Civill , but also Sacred things to his power , that he may manage the one according to the Word of God , the other according to Iustice and equity , which since it is Commanded in the Old Testament , and practised by all holy Iudges and Kings , and we finde it not changed in the New Testament ; We justly say that the Church that hath a godly Magistrate , cannot by Gods will chuse a new Senate or Presbytery , to exercise publikely Iudgement ; for God hath not armed ▪ subjects against their Magistrates : Nor hath he Commanded them to take any part of their power from them and give it to others , and to subject them to externall Dominion . Ans . Sure the Lord concredited to the Priest , not to King Vzziah to burn incense , and to the Priests to rebuke Vzziah and command him to desist ; and this is no lesse externall Governing of the house of God , quoad hoc , in this particular then Excommunication : for to Excommunication on the Churches part , as Excommunication , is no more required , but that the scandalous and murthering Magistrate should not come to the Table of the Lord , or remain in the society and Church-fellowship of the Saints as a Member of the Church . Now if the Magistrate obey not , the Church as the Church can use no bodily coaction or restraint to hinder the Magistrate to obtrude himself upon the holy things of God : though other , either fellow-Magistrates , or the inferior Magistrates , ( if the party ●xcommunicated be the supream Magistrate ) or , the Parliament may and ought to use their power as Magistrates , by the sword to hinder the holy things of God to be prophaned ; for I think it easie to prove , if this were a fit place , that inferior Magistrates are essentially Mag●strates , and immediatly subject to the King of Kings for the due use of the sword , as the supream Magistrate or King : And therefore there is no more externall dominion used in Excommunicating a bloody and scandalous Magistrate , then in rebuking and threatning him : Now Erastus granteth , That Pastors may rebuke and threaten according to the Word of the Lord , even Magistrates and Kings . 2. If because Iudges in the Old Testament , as Eli and Samuel Sacrificed , and we finde this not changed in the New , and nothing extraordinary in this , Ministers in the New Test●ment may do the same : Then the Iustice of Peace , and Mayors of Cities , and every constable , may by vertue of their office Preach the Word and dispense the Sacraments , which is against the word , Heb. 5. 7. Mat. 9. 38. & 10. 5. & 28. 19 , 20. Joh. 21. 20 , 21. Rom. 10. 14 , 15. 3. Where doth Erastus reade in the New Testament , that Kings may not write Canonick Scripture , as King David did , and build a Typicall Temple to the Lord as Solomon did , and give out Laws of Divine institution as Moses did ? Kings in the Old Testament did these , and he can finde the contrary no where written . 4. If the Church as the Church cannot chuse a Senate of Elders to Govern themselves without wronging the Magistrate ; how did the Apostolick Church without so much as asking advice of the Civill Magistrate , set up a new Gospel , new Sacraments , new officers , a new Government : Did the Lord Iesus and the Gospel teach them to spoil Cesar ? Christ had said the contrary , Give unto Cesar those things that are Cesars . 5. To subject Magistrates to Excommunication , is no more to subject them to externall dominion , then to subject them ( as Erastus doth ) to rebukes , warnings and threatnings ; for the former hath no more of coaction , of dominion , or of coercive power , then the latter : yea , if to subject Kings to the rebukes of the Ministers of Christ , be nothing but to subject them to internall and spirituall dominion ; no more is suspension from the Sacraments and Excommunication , any thing but internall and spirituall dominion . In this sense , that neither of these two are bodily dominions , no more then rebuking of Kings . 2. Yet both these work upon the conscience in a spirituall way , for the humiliation of the King , and putting him to shame and fear , 2 Thes . 3. 14 , 15. that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord , as rebukes do work , 1 Tim. 5. 20. Gal. 2. 11. 1 Cor. 5. 6. Iude ver . 23. Yea , to say to a King , He shall be buried with the buriall of an Asse , as Ieremiah did , cap. 22. And to call the Rulers , Princes of Sodome , Isa . 1. 10. And King Herod a Fox , and Rulers and Princes Dogs , Psal . 22. ver . 16. and Bulls and Lyons , ver . 12. 13. and Wolves ravening for the prey , Ezek. 22. 27. putteth no lesse shame upon Magistrates before men , and so externall dominion on them and over them , then Excommunication and debarring from the Seals of the Covenant doth . Now Erastus subjecteth Magistrates to rebukings , threatnings and reprehensions no lesse then we do . Well , Erastus will have one single Minister to exercise externall dominion over the Magistrates , because this is manifest out of the Word : but because he would flatter Princes as much as he can , he denies that a Colledge of Elders may rebuke the Magistrate , or convene him before them , though he were the most flagitious Prince that lived ; and yet one man may summon him before the Tribunall of Christ , and charge him to come to hear a Sermon , and rebuke him in the face of the Congregation , and denounce the Iudgements of God against him openly . Is not this the Lord arming one single man against the Magistrate , to put shame and confusion on him for his sins ? And if many Pastors convened should do this , This were to arm the subjects against the Magistrate , and to take the power from him that God hath given to him , as Erastus talketh . CHAP. XXII . Quest . 18. Of exclusion from the Sacrament , of profession of repententance , the judiciall Law bindeth not Christians . The sword not a mean , of conversion , Of Idolaters and Apostates in the judgement of Erastus . IN this Chapter Erastus disputeth against a Treatise written in the German Tongue , in which he acknowledgeth , there is more learning and truth then in the other writtings . All the opinions that Erastus ascribeth to this Author , ( justly or unjustly , I know not , but Erastus his faith may be justly suspected ) I cannot defend . Erastus . Touching those to be admitted to the Sacrament , we speak alwayes , de illis solis , &c. of those only who rightly understand the Doctrine of the Gospel , and do approve and imbrace the same , and who desire with others to use the Sacraments aright , in regard of the externals , of which only the Church can judge , for the heart is rightly knowne to God only ; so the Author and we agree . Ans . The agreement is but poore by your owne relation : But 1. Let Erastus answer , what if the Christian Magistrate as Achab be a dog , and sell himselfe to do wickedly : What if he understand not the Doctrine of the Gospel ? Magistrates as Magistrates by vertue of the throne , or place , are not priviledged to be Orthodox and holy . Let one Iulian once a Christian , yet turning a sow , an enemy to the Gospel be witnesse , if we descend to the Iustices , and to Master Constables ; it may be we finde even of those dogs and swine in their conversation , though their place be a power , lawfull , and ordained of God ; We thinke ( saith Erastus ) the custome of the Church should be observed : What ? by the custome of the Church onely , by no precept or command of Christ should the holy things of God , the pearls of the Gospel be denied to dogs and swine contrary to Christs command , Mat. 7 ? 2. Erastus must exclude the Magistrate out of the lists of his disputation in six books , and say , If the Christian Magistrate be ignorant and scandalous , and yet desire to use the Sacraments right , and professe he will learne to know God , and to beleeve soundly , and walke holily , Yet the Sacraments are not to be denied to him . Tell Erastus , in sincerity who should debarre the Magistrate ? For in all your six books , you by these words , de illis solis , &c. professe that you plead not that he should be admitted to the Sacraments ; who shall exclude him ? not he himselfe ; for his credites sake he shall desire to come to the Sacraments , as many for gaine and loaves follow Christ , Ioh. 6. will they not follow him also to be seen of men , as the Pharisees prayed in the streets ? 2. Let Erastus say , when our Saviour said , Give not holy things to dogs ? Did he mean to accept the persons of Kings and Iudges , and professe , though Kings and Iudges be dogs and swine ▪ yet deny not holy things to them ? 3. Hath Christ appointed no way in the New Testament , as he did in the Old , to debarre unclean men from our Passeover ? Or shall there be no Government , no charge in the Ministers of the New Testament to keep the holy things of God from pollution ? If Master Iustice be an incestnous man , a drunkard , a dog , shall he not be cast out of the midst of the Church ? Vzziah though a King , yet for bodily leprosie was separated from the people of God , and men of high places , though doggs and swine shall be admitted to all the holy things of God under the New Testament ? 2. Erastus will have all admitted who desire to use the Sacraments right ; As touching all externalls , of which onely the Church doth judge : But , 1. Where did we assert that the Church judgeth of internalls ? and that they may debarre men from the Sacraments , for only heart-unbeleefe knowne to God only ? This must lye on Erastus , as a calumnie , while he make it good from our writings and Doctrine , that we thus teach , exclude those that are visibly scandalous and prophane , and we are satisfied . 2. He that brings his offering to the Altar , and hath done a knowne offence to his brother , ( for it is a sinfull and visible scandall , which scandalizeth one brother ) He useth not the holy things of God right , even as touching externals ; He that comes to the Lords supper desiring , and asking the ordinance of righteousnesse ( as Isaiah speaketh ) and promiseth amendment ; and yet is openly ignorant and not sound in the faith , he useth not aright the Sacraments even in externals , of which only the Church judgeth rightly : as he that in the same day commeth to the temple to worship ( now the very personall presence of a Iew in the Temple which was a Type of Iesus Christ , was a worship and a holy thing of God , whereas our presence in the place of meeting for worship is no such thing ) when he hath killed his sonne to Moloch , prophaned the Temple , and the name of God , even in externals ; for the Priests of old who were to put differences between the clean and the unclean , no more were to judge the inward thoughts and heart-dispositions of men knowne to God only , then we can now judge them in the New Testament , 1 Chro. 29. 17. 1 King. 8. 39. 1 Chro. 28. 9. Prov. 15. 11. Hence , that is an ignorant speach of Erastus , Quistatuit malus esse , non prodibit in ecclesiae faciem , ut se poenuere prioris vite testetur , ac meliorem promittat . That man shall never come before the face of the Church , to testifie that he repenteth of his former wicked life , and promise amendment , who purposeth to be wicked : Will not men purpose not to be reconciled to their brethren , and suffer many suns to go downe in their wrath and malice , who come and bring their offring to the Altar ; why did then Christ forbid offring at the Altar , without being reconciled to an offended brother ? Mat. 5. might not the offending brother offer his gift ? and were not the Priests to except his offring ? He could say all that Erastus requireth : I acknowledge I have offended my brother , I promise to crave him pardon , and I desire to offer according to the Law. Then the Priest was obliged to beleeve he dealt sincerely , and lay his gift upon the Altar , though he should not obey the command of Christ , and go and leave his gift at the Altar , and not offer while he were first reconciled to his brother ; and the like I say of one that hath killed his brother , and cometh with hot blood to the Table of the Lord , and goeth not to the Widdow and Orphanes , whose Husband and Father he had killed ▪ to be reconciled : Surely the man that should thus offer , should not come to offer , nor to eat at the Lords table rightly ; even in regard of externals , which the Church may judge : for he should omit this externall , Be first reconciled to the Widdow , and then offer , and eat as Christ commanded . 3. It is against Scripture and experience , that a man that hath a purpose to kill his Father , and in the highest point of treason to invade King Davids throne , as Absolon did , to say he will not professe to pay his vows at Hebron . And might not Judas by his very eating the Passeover , professe he beleeved in the Lambe of God that taketh away the sins of the world , and that he would serve Christ , and yet purpose in his heart to sell his Master Christ for 30 ▪ peeces of silver ; They seeme to be little acquainted with the mysterie of the hypocrisie naturally in men , who put in print such a position : The Author against whom Erastus writeth saith , We have reason to rejoyce , if we finde any such , who will not professe faith and repentance , though they be Hypocrites ; and therefore there is need of Excommunication , and his meaning is , that there is need of Excommunication alwayes , and therefore there will be many who professe Repentance in words , whose life and conversation belie their Repentance ; and Erastus cannot deny this , if he know what it is ●o have a forme of godlinesse , and deny the power , which forme many have who are to be debarred from the Sacraments , and to be Excommunicated , in regard they are lovers of their owne selves , covetous , boasters , proud , blasphemers , disobedient to parents , unthankefull , without naturall affection , truce breakers , false accusers , incontinent , fierce , despisers of those that are good , traitors , headie , high minded , &c. 2 Tim. 3. 1 , 2 , &c. and such they are in the eies of men , otherwise Paul would not forbid to withdraw from such . Erastus . The Author I thinke would yeeld that the Sacraments should not be denyed to those who seeke them , and desire to use them aright , and are not excommunicated , for the writeth that the deniall of the Sacraments , is onely a Testimony of excommunication ; So when we give not a Testimony of a thing for example of learning , to any to whom the thing it selfe , to wit , learning doth not agree , we cannot deny the Sacraments to those who are not Excommunicated , for hee should not be blotted with a Testimony of a banished man , who is not declared to be banished . Ans . 1. The Author I thinke would never yeeld , but the Sacraments ought to be denied to those who aske for them , and desire to use them aright , if they be otherwise Truce-breakers , false accusers , incontinent , traitors , for those have , and may have a forme of godlines , and aske the Sacraments and desire to use them aright ; I meane they may say they desire to use them aright , for of their inward desire , God onely can judge , who knoweth the heart ; yet the Author cannot , he will not say , that such are to be admitted to the Lords Supper , all tha● Erastus goeth on i● , That the Church is obliged to beleeve that those doe repent , and use the Sacraments aright , who say in word of mouth , they doe so , and therefore are to be admitted to the Sacraments , though they come but an houre before out of the Bordell house , and have hands and sword hot and smoking with innocent blood . Now Dogs , and Swine , C●in ; Iudas , known to be scandalous , may give faire words , and cry , Lord , Lord , and professe all this , as is cleare , Isa . 58. 2. Mat. 7. 21 , 22. Rom. 16. 18 : Mat. 23. 13 ▪ 14 , 23 , &c. 2. Exclusion from the Sacraments is a Testimony of Excommunication , but not testimonium proprium quarto modo , for some that are not excommunicated , are to be debarred from the Sacraments as the thing it selfe will force us to acknowledge ; should any come with his sword hot in blood , from killing his father and Pastor to the Lords Table , I hope the Church knowing this would not admit him to the Sacrament , and yet he is not yet excommunicated , and I hope they would not presently in the same moment that they debarred him from the Lords Supper , excommunicate him . There must be some time required to pray for him , to rebuke , convince , and lay open his sinne before he be excommunicated , which moved me to thinke that there was necessity of expresse Scripture to prove Excommunication ; but that abstention ( as Divines calleth it ) or suspension from the Lords Supper , may well be sufficiently proved by Analogie , by consequent and by the nature of the holy things of God , and Pearles that are not to be given to the prophane . 3. A visible scandall is a sufficient ground of the lesser excommunication , or debarring from the Lords Supper , and so we put a Testimony of one banished from the holy things of God on him who hath committed a scandalous offence , which is a sufficient ground thereof , though the offender be not formally excommunicated . This Author saith , without the consent of the Church , no man , though contumacious , should be excommunicated ; What this is against us , or for Erastus , I see not , we say the same . He saith , The Magistrate may chuse some of the congregation to Excommunicate ; which if he say , I consent not to him , and see no warrant for it in Scripture : But I rather believe his sense to be , That the godly Magistrate may command the Church to Excommunicate and punish them , if they be negligent in this . But hence it followeth not , that the Magistrate may Excommunicate them , as Erastus inferreth , no more then of old ; it followeth , King Vzziah might command the Priests to burn incense to the Lord , and punish them ; if in this they should neglect their duty : Ergo , King Vzziah might lawfully in his own person burn incense to the Lord : Erastus himself will deny this consequence . Erastus saith , It is evident this Author meaneth , That God commanded not a Presbytery to be , but that it is necessary for orders cause . But I had rather that he had proved it from the Authors words : And so I deny it , while Erastus bring his own words to prove it : I believe he fancies many things of this worthy Author , as that he subjects not the Magistrate to the Presbytery : And why ? Because he saith , None ought to be Excommunicated without the consent of the Magistrate . Truly it is a weak reason ; for if the Magistrate be a godly man , and a Member of the Church , it is necessary that his positive consent be had , that he may in light and faith use the sword against him , as against other evil doers . But I give him no negative voyce , nor any authoritative or Ecclesiastically judiciall voyce in Excommunication , which can be due to him as a Magistrate : So the Author doth not at all disagree from us ; Erastus is mistasten . Erastus . God hath Excommunicated Drunkards , Hypocrites from the Sacraments except they repent : But where hath God commanded such , being Circumcised and Baptized to be excluded from the Sacraments ? especially if they professe that they repent of their former wayes : for it is one thing to be excluded of God , another thing to be cast out of the visible society of the godly . Ans . God hath Excommunicated Drunkards and Hypocrites , who are not known openly to be such to the Church , and therefore the Church cannot debar such from the Sacraments , and so we grant all , That it is one thing to be Excommunicated of the Church , and another to be Excommunicated of God. 2. He asketh , where hath God commanded to debar such from the Sacraments being circumcised and baptized ? I Answer then , If they be uncircumcised and unbaptised , God will have the Church to debar them . But let Erastus shew any Scripture for their exclusion , but such as warranteth us to exclude the openly scandalous , though circumcised and baptized . 3. What warrant hath the Church or Magistrate , if Erastus so will , to debar all the uncircumcised and ●nbaptised from the Sacraments ; Job , the Eunuch , are not Excommunicated of God ▪ Ergo , if the Lords non-Excommunication be our rule , we cannot Excommunicate all the uncircumcised and baptized as such . 4. Erastus addeth , They cannot be excluded from the Sacraments , Presertim s● p●nitentiam vitae anteactae prae se ●erant , especially if they professe repentance . But this presertim ▪ especially , seemeth to infer , though they professe no repentance , but be dogs and swine , they ought not to be debarred from the Seale ▪ Is this piety , or rather prophanity ? But only he would say , they are far lesse to be debarred if they professe repentance . But we know , to professe repentance in Erastus his way , is to say by word of mouth , they repent : Now this saying so , may consist with being openly dogs and swine . Hence we see the contradicent of Erastus his saying , to wit , that the most openly scandalous are not to be excluded from the Sacraments , especially if they say they repent , that is , especially if they lye and dissemble before the Sun , yea , though they mock God and repent no● . I should think their saying they repent , when their flagitious and impure conversation doth belye their profession , maketh them so much rather worthy to be debarred , being both dogs and Hypocrites ▪ So far I am from Erastus his presertim , especially if they professe that they repent . Erastus . I grant it ●ighteth with Gods will , that pardon should be denied to any by the Word , and yet pardon ▪ sealed to those same men in the Sacrament : But when the Word denyeth remission of sins absolutely to those , the Sacraments are not due to them ; but the Word denieth not remission to them upon condition they repent , and so neither should the Sacraments be denied to them . Ans . But the word denyeth absolutely remission of sins to dogs and swine , so long as they repent not ; and that so much the more , that they say they repent , and their life belies their words , and testifies to their face , and before the Sun , that they are pla●stered Hypocrites , Ergo , the Sacraments should be denyed to them . Erastus . But it followeth not that the Sacraments belongeth not to him who is not a member of the invisible Church , so he be a member of the visible Church ; but as he partaketh only of the externall Communion , so he receiveth but the externall elements , from an externall Minister . Ans . But if he be visibly no Member of the invisible Church , but in the eyes of the Church visibly a dog or a swine , neither ought the externall symbols , that are even externally the holy things of God to be given to him : for otherwise , this Argument shall conclude , if one be baptised , and a member of the Church , though a dog , yet the pearls of the Gospel are to be cast to such a dog , which Erastus himself denieth : And so this Argument hurteth Erastus as much as us . That this Author saith , God commanded those that transgressed his holy Law with an high hand , and presumptuously to be killed , lest they should live and prophane his holy things ; I defend not : But sure Erastus erreth , who will have all such to be killed by the Magistrate under the New Testament , because they were killed in the Old : Then are we to stone the men that gathereth sticks on the Lords day ; the childe that is stubborn to his Parents , the Virgins , daughters of Ministers that committeth fornication are to be put to death . Why , but then the whole judiciall Law of God shall oblige us Christians as Carolosladius and others teach ? I humbly concieve that the putting of some to death in the Old Testament , as it was a punishment to them , so was it a mysterious teaching of us , how God hated such and such sins , and mysteries of that kinde are gone with other shadows . But we read not ( saith Erastus ) where Christ hath changed those Laws in the New Testament . It is true , Christ hath not said in particular , I abolish the debarring of the leper seven dayes , and he that is thus and thus unclean shall be separated till the evening ; nor hath he said particularly of every carnall Ordinance and judiciall Law , it is abolished . But we conceive , the whole bulk of the judiciall Law , as judiciall , and as it concerned the Republick of the Iews only , is abolished , though the morall equity of all those be not abolished ; also some punishments were meetly Symbolicall , to teach the detestation of such a vice , as the boaring with an A●le the ear of him that loved his Master , and desired still to serve him , and the making of him his perpetuall servant . I should think the punishing with death the man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath was such ; and in all these , the punishing of a sin against the Morall Law by the Magistrate , is Morall and perpetuall ; but the punishing of every sin against the Morall Law , tali modo , so and so , with death , with spitting on the face : I much doubt if these punishments in particular , and in their positive determination to the people of the Iews , be morall and perpetuall : As he that would marry a captive woman of another Religion , is to cause her first pare her nailes , and wash her self , and give her a moneth , or lesse time to lament the death of her Parents , which was a Iudiciall , not a Ceremoniall Law ; that this should be perpetuall , because Christ in particular hath not abolished it , to me seems most unjust ; for as Paul saith , He that is Circumcised becomes debter to the whole Law , sure to all the Ceremonies of Moses his Law : So I Argue , à pari , from the like , He that will keep one judciciall Law , because judiciall and given by Moses , becometh debter to keep the whole judiciall Law , under pain of Gods eternall wrath . We do not teach that men are to be Excommunicated , for whatever scandalous sins deserve death at the hand of the Magistrate , whether they openly repent or not ; if any give evident signification of their repentance for murther , they are not to be Excommunicated , for the end of Excommunication , being once obtained , which is the visible and known repentance , and saving of the offenders soul , the mean is not to be used , which is Excommunication . But if any commit murther , whether he repent or repent not , the Lord hath made no exception of regenerate or not regenerate , of men repenting or not repenting , he should die by the sword of the Magistrate , Gen. 9. 9. It is true , some are to be Excommunicated for the very atrocity of the sin , it being parricide ; but that is , because he giveth no positive signes of repentance to the Church , which is contumacy added to his parricide . Erastus would prove , That God would not have men dedebarred from the Sacraments , because they commit haynous sins to be punished with death by the Judge : 1. Facinora saepe sunt occulta , such crimes are often unknown to the world . Ans . That which is denied , is not concluded a fault in Logick ; for only scandals as scandals to the Church , and so known to the Church are to be censured with Excommunication . Erastus . He thus would prove the same , often these crimes cannot be punished , as David durst not punish the murther of Ioab , 2 Sam. 3. Often for other causes they are neglected by the Magistrate , as David neglected to punish the incest and murther of Absolon , but shall we think such were not to come to the Temple and Sacraments ? so Psal . 14. David saith , There was not one that doth good , those were not all punished by the Magistrate ; yet were they not removed from the Sacraments . Ans . Let Erastus argue here , and we shall see his logick ; Those that commit parricides , sorceries , and do trample the holy things of God under feet , whom yet the Magistrate dare not punish , because of their power and greatnesse ▪ those are not to be debarred from the Sacraments . But there be many scandalous persons in the Church , such as Ioab , whom the Magistrate dare not punish , for their greatnesse ; Ergo , Ans . The Major is manifestly false , and a begging of the question : For Erastus saith , pag. 207. He thinketh such ought not to be admitted to the Sacraments who will trample on the Sacraments and prophane them . For though the Magistrate dare not punish them , which is his sinfull neglect , if they be dogs and swine ( as often they are ) and bloody men , such as Ioab , they ought not ; yea , they never were by any Law of God , admitted to the Temple and Sacraments , what they did , de facto , or the Priests permitted , is not the question . It was Davids sinne that he took not away the head of bloody Ioab when he killed Abner and Amasa . 2. How doth Erastus prove that David neglected to punish the incest of Absolon ( his sinfull neglect in not punishing his murther I yield ) for Absolon was never in Davids power to punish after he committed that incest ; possibly he neglected to punish his owne Concubines , that is but a conjecture . It is as like Absolon forced the Concubines to that incest as any other thing . 3. For that Psal . 14. There is none that doth good ; it is spoken of the naturall corruption of all mankind , who therefore cannot be justified by the works of the Law , as Paul expoundeth it , Rom. 3. 9 , 10 , 11 , 19 , 20 , 21. and not of scandals punishable by the Magistrates ; and where this corruption did break out , in bloods within the Church , it ought to have been punished , both by the Magistrate and Church : so it is an argument yet , a facto ad jus , and a great inconsequence . 4. I aske for what cause doth the Spirit of God rebuke killing of the Children to Molech , and coming that same day to the Temple ? Because it was a sinne and particularly a prophaning of the Sanctuary , which was one speciall holy thing to God , Ezek. 23. 38 , 39. Ier. 7. 8 ▪ 9 , 10 , 11. It was no sin to come to the Temple : Sure it was commanded of God in his Law , as Erastus yieldeth . What was the sin then ? to come with their hands full of blood , and of the unnaturall blood of their owne Children was the sinne ; and yet if they had repented , to come after they had killed their Children , was no sinne , nor any prophaning of the Sanctuary of God. Then all their sinne was , that being Morally unclean , they came to the Sanctuary ; Ergo , God forbade such bloody men to come to his Sanctuary ; because God forbiddeth all sinne in his perfect Law ; Ergo , those that deserved to dye by the hand of the Magistrate for open murther , deserved for that open murther to be debarred from the holy things of God , what ever Erastus say on the contrary . Erastus . The adversaries contend , that some are to be excommunicated who deserve not to dye ; as if any to a light injury , adde contumacy ; But they should have a warrant for this , for this is a contradiction . ( Every one who is clean according to the Law , should keep the Passeover ) and this ( some who is clean according to the Law , ( to wit , who liveth wickedly and scandalously , and yet is Ceremonially clean ) should not keep the Passeover . ) Ans . We finde no distinction made by Christ , Matth. 18 ▪ and therefore we make none ; He that offendeth his brother , ( Christ maketh no exceptions of light or small offences ) if he cannot be gained by admonitions , and be contumacious against the Church , he is reputed as a heathen and a publican ; and this is our warrant . 2. Let Erastus answer this contradiction according to his owne way . Every one who is Ceremonially clean should come to the Temple . Some who are Ceremonially clean , ( to wit , who the same day have slaine their sons to Molech ) should not come into the Temple . The affirmative is holden as a truth by Erastus . The negative is the word of the Lord , Ezech. 23. 38 , 39. 3. It is no contradiction which Erastus proposeth : For every one who is Ceremonially clean , should not keep the Passeover , except also he be Morally clean : For he that discerneth not the Lords body , should not eat ; and the Lambe was no lesse Sacramentally the Lords body , then the Bread and Wine is his body , so the former is false , in rei veritate . The latter , to wit , Every one Ceremonially cleane should not keepe the Passeover , to Erastus is false : Now of two propositions contradicent , both cannot be false , Erastus may know this is bad Logick . Erastus . The Prophets rebuked the abuse and prophaning of the Sacraments , but they interdicted none circumcised of the use of the Sacraments , they said the sacrifices of the wicked were no more welcome to God , then if they offered things forbidden ( dogs and swines blood ) to God , but they never say the Priests are to be accused for admitting such into the Sacraments . They accuse and rebuke the Priests that they transgressed , and taught not the people aright , but never that they admitted such into the holy things of God : The Prophets say alwayes those things are wicked before God , but not in the face of the Church . Ans . If the Prophets rebuked the prophaning of the Sacraments , then they also forbade prophane men to use the Sacraments , could the Prophets rebuke any thing but sin ? Ergo , they forbade the sinne which they rebuked : Ergo , they forbade the man that had murthered his sonne to Molech , to come to the Sanctuary while he repented , for they could not rebuke but what they forbad . 2. If the bloody mans comming to the Sanctuary in that case , was nothing more acceptable to God , then the offering of a dog to God ; then as the offering of a dog to God , was both forbidden to the people and to the Priest , so was the people and Priest both accused for the bloody mans comming into the Temple , the one should sin in comming , the other in admitting him to come . 3. The Priests are expresly accused for this , Ezek. 22 , 25 , 26. and 44. 23 , 24. Hag. 2. 11 , 12 , 13. 4. Those were not onely sinnes in foro Dei , before God , for so when they were secret , they were sinnes before God , but when openly knowen , as Jer. 7. 9 , 10 , &c. Ezek. 23. 38 , 39. they were the Priests sins : The bloody are forbidden to come to the Sanctuary ; what then ? were not the Porters whose calling it was to hold out the uncleane , to debar all whom the Lord forbade to come ? Certainly , they excluded to their knowledge all whom God excluded , else how had they the charge to keepe the doores of the Lords House ? and the Priests are not onely rebuked for not instructing the people , but for erring in governing , Ier. 5. 31. they are not Prophets , but Priests and Governours both Ecclesiasticall and civill , that the Prophet complaineth of , who did rule with rigour & cruelty over the people , beside that they feed not the flocke but themselves , Ezek. 34. 1 , 2 , 3 , &c. Ier. 23. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. and 10. 21. and 22. 22. and 50. 6. Micah 2. 11. Hos . 4. 18. Micah 7. 3. Erastus . Though ill doers be not killed by the Magistrate , yet it followeth not that God for any such cause ( deserving death ) would have them debarred à recto usu , from the right use of holy things by some that are not Magistrates , nor are manifest Idolaters , Apostates , and Hereticks , though they be not put to death by the Magistrate , to be debarred by these fancied or imaginary Presbyters . Ans . 1. Erastus taketh ever for confessed , without any probation , that it is rectus usus , the right use of the holy things of God , that men with bloodie hands use them , which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : a most false principle , for he that killeth his children to Molech , and that same day cometh into the Sanctuary of God , is so farre from the right using of the holy things of God , that the Lord saith expresly , his comming in in that condition to the Sanctuary is , ( saith the Lord , ) the prophaning of my Sanctuary , Ezek. 23. 39. is this rectus usus Ceremoniarum ? the right use of the holy things of God ? It is not : 1. It is a forbidden use of holy things , Isa . 1. 13. Mat. 7. 6. Mat. 5. 23. 2. It is a rebuked use of holy things , Ier. 7. 9 , 10 , 11. Isa . 66. 3. 3. It is a prophaning of holy things , Ezek. 23. 38 , 39. 4. It is such a use as bringeth damnation to the party that useth it , 1 Cor. 11. 27 , 29. and it is all these quoad externa , in externall things . 2. Erastus could yeeld they be debarred , but by the Magistrate , not by Imaginary Presbyters . But all his Arguments , ( as I shew before ) doe prove they should be debarred , à recto usu , from the right use of holy things by no man , no more then they should be debarred from giving of almes , or reading the word , this is Erastus his owne Argument ; I pray you may the Magistrate , or any on earth by any authority inhibite a Malefactor , or a Murtherer , who ought to die by the Magistrate , to read the Word , to give almes , to pray for mercy to God , because he hath killed a man ? 3. If hereticks , apostates , open idolaters are to be debarred , by whom shall they be debarred : Erastus , pag. 207. thinketh they ought not to be admitted to the Sacraments , who shall debar them ? The Magistrate , ( saith he ) But the Magistrate himselfe is the apostate , the heretick , the idolater . 2. He that may debarre from the seals , may admit to the seals ; he that may do both , Ex Officio , is the formall dispenser of the seals by office , that the Magistrate is not : He that may put out , or take in into the house by supream power , is the Lord of the house : He who by office may admit some to the Table , and debarre other some , is the Steward . But the Magistrate is neither the lord of the Church , nor the steward of the house , by office . We do not hold this consequence ; the Lord commanded ill doers to be killed ; Ergo , He ordained in that same commandement , that they be Excommunicated ? Nor do we say all those who were to be Excommunicated , were to be killed , as Erastus saith : Nor that Excommunication in the New Testament succeedeth in place of killing in the Old Testament ; we see no light of Scripture going before us in these . Erastus . It is a wonder that you say , that the godly Magistrate doth procure the externall Peace of the Common-wealth , but not the salvation of the subjects , that the Presbyters do only care for . Ans . The Sword is no intrinsecall mean of the saving of any mans soul : It is true , the godly Magistrate may procure a godly life ; but as a cause removens impedimentum , removing idolatry , heresie , wolves and false teachers from the flock , and commanding under the paine of the Sword , that Pastors do their duty . But Christ ascending on high , gave Pastors and Teachers to gather a Church ; but not Magistrates armed with the Sword. Erastus . The Magistrates Sword is a most efficacious mean to bring men to the knowledge of God , nothing more effectuall then affliction , and the crosse , when right teaching is joyned therewith ; examples teach us that in danger of death , men have seriously turned to God , who before could be moved by no exhortations . But you say all die not in the Lord , nor repent ; nor ( say I ) do they all die in the Lord , who are taken away by diseases , or are excommunicated ; yea , Excommunication maketh many hypocrites . Ans . 1. Erastus here extolleth the Sword of the Magistrate , as a more effectuall mean to salvation , then exhortations or the Gospel : But I read that Pastors are the Ministers by whom we beleeve , and that they are workers with God , and fellow-builders ; and Fathers to convert , edifie to salvation , and beget men over again to Christ , 1 Cor. 3. 5 , 9. 1 Cor. 2. 4 , 15. Ambassadors of God , 2 Cor. 5. 20. Friends of the Bridgroome , 2 Cor. 11. 2. Ioh. 3. 29. Angels , Rev. 2. 1. But I never read any such thing of the Magistrate , and that the Gospel is the power of God to salvation , Rom. 1. 16. The arme of the Lord , Esay 53. 1. Sharper then a two edged sword , lively and mighty in operation , Heb. 4. 12. You never read any such thing of the Sword of the Magistrate , the rest are before answered . Erastus . Some may be changed in a moment , as the publican , Luke 18. Z●cheus , The repenting woman ▪ Luke 7. If therefore they professe repentance , they are not to be debarred from the Lords supper . Ans . Put it in forme thus ; Those who may be changed and translated from darknesse to light in a moment , and say , that they repent , are to be admitted to the Lords supper : I assume , But doggs and swine , and doggish and furious persecutors ▪ who are to be debarred from the Sacraments : As Erastus saith , pag. 207. may be changed in a moment , and say they repent ; Ergo , those are to be admitted to the Sacraments , who are not to be admitted to the Sacraments ▪ let Erastus prove the Major proposition . 2. We finde no such sudden change in the Publican , Zacheus , or the repenting woman , as Erastus seemeth to insinuate . 3. Christ who knoweth the heart , and can change men in a moment , can at first welcome persons suddenly converted ; Ergo , Must the stewards and dispensers of the mysteries upon a ( may be ) or a ( may not be ) reach the pearls of the Gospel to doggs and swine , whom they see to be such ? It is a wide consequence , He that bringeth his gift to the Alter , may in a moment be changed ; Ergo , He should not leave his gift at the Altar , and go and first be reconciled to his brother ; He is presently without more adoe to offer his gift , his heart is straighted in a moment , if we beleeve Erastus . But the rather of this ; that the man is in a moment changed : He is to be debarred , least his scandalous approaching to use the holy things of God , make the work of conversion suspitious to others . 4. This argument presupposeth that unvisible conversion , giveth a man right in foro Ecclesi● in the Churches court , to the seals of the Covenant , and so there should be no need of externall profession at all , which is absurd . Erastus . Shall not then idolaters and apostates be debarred ? as w● ( saith he ) deny an idolater ▪ and an apostate to be a Member of th● Church of Christ ; so we thinke the man that defendeth his wickednesse , is not to be reckoned amongst the Members of the Church ; An● as we think the former are to be banished out of the society of Christians , so we think the latter are not to be suffered in that society . Ans . The Idolater that maketh defection , and the apostate were once Members of the Church ; what hath made them now no Members ? Who should judge them , and cast them out ? the Magistrate ? I answer , there is no Christian Magistrate : If the Church must do it , here truly , is all granted by Erastus , that he hath disputed against in six books , even this very Excommunication . But if there be a Christian Magistrate ; what Scripture is there to warrant that he should cast out a Member out of Christs body ? Here is an Excommunication without precept , promise , or practise in the word ; we read that the Church of Corinth congregated together , hath a command to judge , and cast out a scandalous Member , 1 Cor. 5. 4 , 5 , 11 , 12 , 13. out from amongst the midst of them : Let Erastus say as much from the New Testament , for his Magistraticall casting ou● . 2. What reason is there by Erastus his way , for casting out an idolater , and a man that defendeth his owne wickednesse ? 1. May not God convert those suddenly ; as he did the thiefe on the crosse , and Saul ? Ergo , They should not be cast out . 2. The Magistrate cannot more cut off those from being Members of Christs body ; then he can remove their faith and internall communion with Christ . Now for this cause Erastus saith , the Church cannot Excommunicate , pag. 1. 2 Thess . 3. and 4. 3. Christ and the Apostles did neither cast out Iudas , nor Scribes , Pharisees , or Publicans out of the Church , though they were worse then idolaters . 4. No helps of salvation are to be denied even to idolaters , and to men that defend their owne wickednesse , but their remaining in the Church amongst the godly , is a helpe of their salvation ; and God inviteth them to repentance , and the staying in the Church ; And the Sacraments are to Erastus means of repentance , and this casting out must be to save them : for no power is given of God to the Magistrate or Church for destruction , but for edification ▪ Now to put them out of the Church , that they may be saved , is as Erastus conceiteth , to cast a lascivious Virgin out of the company of chaste Matr●ns , to the end she may preserve her chastity : I speak here all in the language of Erastus , who useth all those against casting any out of the Church , by Presbyters ; but they stand with equall strength , against his casting out of idolaters and apostates out of the Church , and so do the rest of his Arguments : Therefore this conclusion of Erastus is a granting us the whole cause ; after in six books , he hath pleaded none should be Excommunicated , he falleth on Bellarmines Tutissimum igitur , &c. when he had written six books against justification by faith ▪ Lastly , why should idolaters , apostates , and obstinately wicked men be excluded from the dispute of Excommunication and suspension from the Sacraments : for he knoweth that Beza , and Protestant Divines do make these the speciall , though not the whole subject of the dispute : Now Erastus concluding his six books , doth hereby professe he hath never faithfully stated the question , when he excludes those from the subjectum questionis , who especially heareth not the Church , and ought to be Excommunicated . Thus have I given an account , as I could , of the wit of Erastus , against the freedome of the Kingdome of the Lord Iesus . CHAP. XXIII . Of the power of the Christian Magistrate in Ecclesiasticall Discipline . QUEST . XIX . Whether or no the Christian Magistrate be so above the Church in matters of Religion , Doctrine and Discipline , that the Church and her Guides , Pastors , and Teachers , do all they do in these , as subordinate to the Magistrate as his servants , and by his Authority ? Or is the spirituall power of the Church , immediately subject to Iesus Christ only ? VVEE know that Erastus who is Refuted by Beza , Vtenbogard , whom Ant ▪ Walens Learnedly Refuteth , Maccovius opposed by the Universities and Divines of Holland , Vedelius Answered by Gu. Apolonius and others ; and the Belgick Arminians in their Petition to the States , and Hu. Grotins against Sibrandus Lubert . Divers Episcopall Writers in England do hold , That the Guides of the Church do all in their Ministery by the Authority of the Christian Magistrate : I believe the contrary : And 1. We exclude not the Magistrate who is a keeper of both Tables of the Law , from a care of matters of Religion . 2. We deny not to him a power to examine Heresies and false Doctrine : 1. In order to bodily punishment with the sword : 2. With a judgement not Antecedent , but Subsequent to the judgement of the Church , where the Church is constituted . 3. With such a judgement as concerneth his practise , lest he should in a blinde way , and upon trust , execute his office in punishing Hereticks , whether they be sentenced by the Church according unto , or contrary to the word of God as Papists dream . 3. We deny not , but the Prince may command the Pastor to Preach , and the Synod and Presbytery to use the keys of Christs Kingdom according to the Rules of the Word : But this is but a Civill subjection , though the object be spirituall : But the Question is not ▪ 1. Whether the Christian Magistrate have a care of both Tables of the Law. 2. Whether he as a blinde servant is to execute the will of the Church , in punishing such as they discern to be Hereticks ; we pray the Lord to give him eyes and wisdom in his Administration . 3. Nor thirdly , Whether he may use his coercive power against false Teachers , that belongs to the controversie concerning Liberty of Conscience . 4. The Question is not , Whether the Magistrate have any power of jurisdiction in the Court of Conscience , they grant that belongeth to the Preaching of the Word : But the Question is , touching the power in the externall Court of Censures . 5. The Question is not , Whether the power of exercising Discipline be from the Magistrate , I mean in a free and peacable manner , with freedome from violence of men : we grant that power , and by proportion also , that exercise of Discipline is from him : But whether the intrinsecall power be not immediately from Christ given to the Church ; this we teach , as the power of saying peacably from danger of Pirats and Robbers is from the King ; but the Art of Navigation is not from the King. But the Question is , whether the Magistrate by vertue of his office , as a Magistrate , hath Supream power to Govern the Church , and immediatly as a little Monarch under Christ above Pastors , Teachers , and the Church of God , to Iudge and determine what is true Doctrine , what Heresie , to censure and remove from Church-Communion the Seals and Church-offices , all scandalous persons , and that if Pastors , or Doctors , or the Church , Teach or dispense censures , they do it not with any immediate subjection to Christ , but in the Name and Authority of the Magistrate , having power from the Magistrate as his servants and delegates ? To this we answer negatively , denying any such power to the Magistrate , and doe hold , that the Church , and Christs courts and Assemblies of Pastors , Doctors , and Elders , hath this power onely and immediately from Iesus Christ , without subordination in their office , to King , Parliament , or any Magistrate on earth by these Arguments . 1. Because in the Old Testament , the Lord distinguished two courts , Deut. 17. 8. If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgement , 10. Thou shalt come unto the Priests , the Levites , and unto the Iudge that shall be in those dayes , and inquire , and they shall shew thee the sentence of judgement . And thou shalt doe according to the sentence , which they of that place ( which the Lord shall chuse ) shall shew thee , &c. There be here two Courts clearly , one court of Priests and Levites that were Iudges ; another of the Iudge : Now the King by vertue of his Kingly office , might not usurpe the Priests office . 1. Vzziah was smitten with Leprosie for so doing . 2. It is evident in Moses his writing , that Aaron and his sonnes the Priests and Levites were separated for the service of the Tabernacle , to teach the people , to carry the Arke , to sacrifice , to judge the Leper , and to judge between the clean and the unclean , to put out of the campe , out of the congregation the unclean , and to admit the clean , Lev. 1. 7 , 9 , 12 , &c. and 5. 8. and 7. 7. and 13. 3 , 4 , &c. 23. Numb . 5. 8. &c. and 18. 4 , 5. 2 Chron. 29. 11. You hath the Lord chosen to stand before him , 1 Sam. 21. 1 , 2. Lev. 21. 1. Iosh . 3. 8. 1 Kin. 8. 3. 1 Chron. 8. 9. 2 Chron. 5. 7. and 7. 6. and 8. 14. Zeph. 3. 4. Hag. 2. 11 , 12. Mal. 2. 7 , Deut. 10 , 9. and 21. 5. Num. 1. 29. Deut. 10. 8 , 18. Numb . 1. 50. and 3. 9 , 12 , 41. and 8. 10. Psal . 122. 5. In Jerusalem there were set thrones of judgement , the thrones of the house of David , Mat. 22. 21. Christ commanded to give to Cesar the things that are Cesars : and he in his own person refused to usurpe Cesars place , Luke 12. 14. Man , who made me a Iudge ? and interdicted his Apostles thereof , Luke 22 , 24 , 25 , 26. and yet appointed for them a Judicature of another kinde , Mat. 18. 15. Mat. 16. 19. Ioh. 20. 21. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Heb. 13. 17. 1 Cor. 5. and if any should deny that the Civill Magistrate had another Court in which he judged , the Scriptures will refute him . 3. It is evident that Iehoshaphat did not institute , but restore those two courts , 2 Chron. 19. 11. And behold Amariah the chiefe Priest is over you in all matters of the Lord , and Zebadiah the son of Ishmael the ruler of the house of Iudah , for all the Kings matters ; never any Erastian could satisfie either themselves or others , to shew us what were those two courts , so distinguished by their two sundry Rulers . Amariah and Zebadiah , the one a Priest , the other a Magistrate . 2. By the different formall objects , the matters of the Lord , the matters of the King , and confounded they must be ; if the King and Ruler be a judge in the matters of God , except God make him both a civill judge and a Prophet , as were Moses and Samuel , which yet were differenced when the God of order established his Church in Canaan . The Church convenes for a Church businesse , Iosh . 18. 1. to set up the Tabernacle , but for a civill businesse , to make war , the State conveneth , Iosh . 22. 12. 15. 16. Iudg. 21. 12. and Ier. 26. 8. there is the Church judicature discerning that Ieremiah was a false Teacher , and they first judge the cause , and v. 16. The Civill Iudicature discerneth the contrary , and under Zorababel , Ezra , and Nehemiah , they indured different judicatures ; Iesus Christ was arraigned before Caiphas the High Priest for pretended blasphemie , before Pilate the civill judge for treason , but Caiphas was to determine onely by Law , in questione juris whether it was blasphemie which Christ had spoken , but he had no power by Gods Law to lead Witnesses or condemn Christ . Nor is it true , that the Priests had their government onely about Ceremonialls , for they were to judge of Morall uncleannes also , which even then debarred men from the holy things of God , as is cleare , Hag. 2. 12. Ezek. 44. 9. 10 , 23 , 24. and if any say that the Magistrate amongst the Iewes did judge of Ecclesiasticall things , and reformed Religion : We answer extraordinarily , the Magistrate might prophecie , and did prophecy , as did Samuel , David , Solomon : Why do not Erastians bring those examples to prove that Kings , Provasts , Iustices , may now preach the Word , and administer the Sacraments , which yet is unlawfull to them by grant of Adversaries , for the examples of the Kings amongst the Iewes , is as strong for preaching , as for governing ; and because Prophets did judge the people of old , yet no Protestant Divine will say , that now Pastors may also usurpe the civill Sword. Now least any should object the case is not alike in the Jewish and Christian Church , surely the King of the Church hath no lesse separated such men as Paul and Barnabas for the Ministery now , then at that time , Rom. 1. 1 , 2. Act. 2. And sent labourers to his vineyard , Luk. 10. 2. Matth. 20. 2. & 9. 37 , 38. And Ambassadors to Preach in his Name , 2 Cor. 5. 20. Ministers of Christ , and Stewarts of the mysteries of God , 1 Cor. 4. 1. Men sent of God , whose feet are pleasant for their good News , as were the Prophets of old , who were not only gifted to preach , but instructed with Divine Authority , as is clear Rom. 10. 14. 15. Isa . 52. 7. & 40. 9. Nahum 1. 15. Yea , and men that feeds the flock , not only by Preaching , but also Govern the Church , so that they must take heed , that Ravening Wolves creep not into the Church , who shall not spare the flock , Act. 20. 28. 29. Men who must be obeyed because they watch for our soules , Heb. 13. 17. And can govern the Church , as well as they are apt to teach , 1 Tim. 3. 5. 2. Men that labour amongst us , and are over us in the Lord , 1 Thes . 5. 12. And men who are to call to the work other faithfull men that are able to teach others , 2 Tim. 2. 2. Such as are separated from the affairs of this life , such as Magistrates are not , 1 Cor. 6. 3. such as Rule well , 1 Tim. 5. 17. and are not to receive accusations , but under witnesses , and are to lay hands suddenly on no man , not to call them to the holy Ministery till they be sufficiently tryed , 1 Tim. 5. 19 , 20 , 22. all which import teaching and governing . Now if all these directions be given to Timothy and other Pastors till the end of the world ; then must all these directions be principally written to the Magistrate as the Magistrate ; and these Epistles to Timothy agree principally to the Christian Magistrate , and to Pastors and Doctors at the by , as they be delegates and substitutes of the Magistrates ; and that , by office , the Emperour of Rome was to lay hands suddenly on no man , and commit the Gospel to faithfull men who could teach others , and was not to receive an accusation against an Elder ; and certainly , if the Magistrate call to office those that are over us in the Lord , and if those who watch for our soules , especially , be but the curates and delegates of the King and Parliament , then the King and Parliament behoved in a more eminent manner to watch for our souls ; for directions and commandments of God in this kinde , are more principally given to the Master , Lord , and chief Governour of the house of God , ( if the Magistrate be such ) then to the servants & delegates ▪ But where is there any such directions given to the Emperour , King , or Christian Magistrate , by any shadow of ground in the Word ? It is not much to say , The Magistrate was an heathen & an enemy at this time , and therefore those could not be written to him . For 1. No force can strain these two Epistles to Timothy , and the other to Titus , which contain a form of Church-policy to any Christian Magistrate ; for then the qualification of the King , if he be the supream Governour of the Church should far rather have been expressed , then the qualification of a Bishop and a Deacon , which is no where hinted at . 2. All these directions , notwithstanding this , do and must actu primo , agree to the Mag●strate : for his office who is chief governour , & what he should be is described in the Word . 3. When Christ ascended on high , he gave , as a fruit of his ascension , sufficient means for his intended end , The perfecting of the Saints , the gathering of his Body the Church , and the edifying thereof , even till we all meet in the Vnity of the Spirit , and the knowledge of the son of God unto a perfect man , Eph. 4. Now neither in that place , nor in any other place , did Christ give a Magistrate for the edifying his Body the Church ; but only those that are but his Delegates , Apostles , Prophets , Evangelists , Pastors , Teachers , i● the Magistrate be the only Governour of the Church , and he who sendeth into the Vineyard those who edifie the Body ; the King should have been first in this Role , as the only supream gatherer , edifier and builder of the Church : It cannot be said , The Ruling Elder then , because he is omitted here , should not be the gift of Christ , given to Edifi● the Church ; and by this it must be denied , that the King the Nurse father of the Church who is to take care that the Children be fed with the sincere milk of the Word , is given of God to edf●ie the Church , because he is not name● here . Ans . Our Divines , as Calvin , Beza , Marlorate , do strongly gather from this place , that because the Pope pretended to be the Catholick edifier of the Church , is not here in this Text , nor in any other scripture , that therefore he is not the head of the Church ; and the King , being pretended to be the only eminent gatherer of the Church , and Supream Governour in all Causes , Civill and Ecclesiasticall , he should especially have been set down here , he being a mixed person , and more then half a Church-officer in the minde of the Adversary : And there was no colour of reason , why the supream and only Head , and principall Governour of the Church , should be omitted , at least the Magistrate should be in some other Scripture as the only Church Governor ; seeing the Adversaries make Pastors , Doctors , Elders , and Deacons , only the Delegates and Servants of the Magistrate . 1. As God calleth the King to governe the people , by the free election of the people ; so if the Magistrate be called of God to teach and govern the Church , this calling of his should be in the Scripture , as his calling to the Throne or Bench is , Deut. 17. 14. 15 , &c. & 1. 15 , 16. Rom. 13. Tit. 3. 1 , 2. But in neither the Old nor the New Testament finde we any Prince or Ruler separated for the holy things of God , to be ` Priest , Apostle , Pastor , Prophet , Teacher by vertue of his office , as if he were a mixed person ( as the Adversarie say . ) No David is called to Sacrifice , no Constantine to preach and Administrate the Sacraments by vertue of the Magistrates place . 2. If any Reply , that the Christian Magistrate is a means ordained for that spirituall end , the gathering and edifying the Church , in regard the keepeth not only the second Table of the Law , and so promoteth not only the Temporall good of the State in promoting mercy and Justice only , but also in procuring spirituall good to the people in preserving the first Table of the Law. I Answer , That the Christian Magistrate doth both ; but 1. Not directly by being the intrinsecall means , in actibus elicitis , in elicite and intrinsecall acts , promoting edification in both Tables of the Law , of which the Scripture speaketh , Eph. 4 11. but a far other way : 1. In imperated and commanded acts extrinsecally , as he doth command with the sword for Peaces cause in all calling● , in sailing , trading , painting , &c. promoting it by carnall means by the sword , which belongeth not to the officers of Christs Kingdom . 2. Not necessarily , as the Pastors and Elders , without which Christ hath no externall visible Kingdom on earth , whereas he hath had , & often hath a compleat flourishing externall visible Kingdom without Magistrates : yea , where Magistrates have been open enemies to the Gospel . 3. Not directly the Magistrate doth this , but in so far as he admitteth ( as Triglandius saith ) the Church of Christ within his State , which he may , and often doth refuse to do , and yet be a compleat Magistrate ; and therefore the Magistrate may two wayes procure the spirituall good of the Church : 1. By procuring that the Nurses give good and wholesome milk to the Church , 2. Permodum removent is prohibens , which is also a cause , for he may save the flock from great temptations , when by his sword he driveth away the Wolves from the flock ▪ But not any of these bringeth the Magistrate within the lis● of the number of these intrinsecall , 2. Necessary , 3. Spirituall gifts , which Christ ascending on high , gave for the Edifying of his Body the Church . Two powers so different as spirituall and temporall : 2. As powers carnall of this world , and spirituall not of this world : And 3. Both immediatly subject , the one to God the creator , the other to Christ the Redeemer and Head of the Church , and so co-ordinate , and supream both of them in their own kinde , cannot be so subordinate , as the temporall should be the supream in the same kinde , the spirituall the inferiour and subordinate . But these two powers are so different , as spirituall and temporall , carnall of this world , spirituall not of this world , the one subject as supream immediatly to God creator , the other supream immediately subject to God the redeemer ; Ergo , Those powers of Governing are not so subordinate as the Temporall should be supream , the spirituall subordinate to it . The Major is undeniable , for it involveth a contradiction that two supreame co-ordinate powers should be two , not Supreame , but subornidate powers : The same way I prove the Assumption . 1. The Magistrates power is supreame from God , Rom. 13. 1. The Powers that are be of God , Prov. 8. By me Kings reigne , for no Ecclesiasticall power , nor any power on earth , interveenes between God the Creator , and the power of the civill Magistrates ; But God who giveth being to a society of men , hoc ipso , because they are a society of reasonable men , hath given to them a power immediately from ▪ himselfe , to designe such and such to be their Rulers : Shew us any higher power above the Magistrates , but God the creator making the civill power . Never man dreamt that the Spirituall power of the Church doth interveen as an instrumentall cause of the politick power . 2. By order of nature , a politick power is first : men are first men in naturall and politick society , ere they be in a supernaturall pollicy , or a Church ; and Christ did not make a spirituall power by the intervention of a civill power . 2. The power of the two Kingdoms are distinguished by Christ , Iohn 18. 36. Iesus answered , my Kingdome is not of this World , ( then the power thereof is not of this World , ) if my Kingdome were of this World , then would my servants fight that I should not be delivered to the Iewes . The one power is coactive by the Sword , the other free , voluntary by the Word . Erastus had no reason to infer thence that Christs Kingdome is onely internall and invisible , not externall and visible , because Christ opposeth his Kingdom to a fighting Kingdom , using the sword to defend him from the Iewes , that he should not be taken and crucified , as is clear in the words , but he opposeth not his Kingdome to an externall visible Kingdom , for his Church visible consisting of visible Officers is his Kingdom , Eph. 4. 11 , 12. 1 Cor. 12. 13 &c. The Word of the Kingdom is audible , and it is visibly professed , and Ministers are visibly and externally called to the holy Ministery , by the laying on of the hands of the Elders and voices of the People ; but he opposeth his Kingdome to a Kingdome fighting with the Sword , and using the coactive power of the sword to save him from being apprehended and crucified by the Iewes : Now this is the Magistrates Kingdome , for he beareth not the sword in vain , Rom. 13. 4. and so Christ evidently proveth in these words , that the power that beareth the sword , which is the very essence of the Magistrates office as a Magistrate , is not a part of his Kingdome , for his Kingdome is of another World , and Spirituall ; but the Magistrates power is of this World , and useth worldly weapons , as the sword . Then it is evident that the Magistrate as the Magistrate , 1. Is not subordinate to Christ as Mediator and head of the Church . 2. That when it was said , All power in heaven and earth is given to the Mediator Christ : The sense cannot be , the power of the sword was given to him as Mediator , to be a judge and a Ruler on earth , which he refused , Luke 12. 13 , 14. ( though as God he hath the power of the sword . ) 3. That the supream Magistrate as Magistrate is not the onely Deputie , Delegate , and Vicar of Christ as Mediator ; for if Christ as Mediator have a substitute and Deputie , such as the Magistrate as the Magistrate , who beareth his bloodie sword to cut off the enemies of the Church , and to fight for Christ : then 1. Christs Kingdome surely should be of this World. 2. By the same reason , since as Mediator he is Priest , and a High Priest to offer a sacrifice to God , as all Priests must doe that are proper Priests Heb. 8. 3. c. 9. 7. c. 10. 14. c. 10. 1 , 2 , 3. &c. there must be Priests under Christ properly so called , to offer some bloodie sacrifice satisfactorie for sinne , which is blasphemie to say , I meane proper Priests ; for otherwise in a figurative and borrowed sense , all beleeevers are Priests to offer themselves to God , Rom. 12. 1. Revel . 1. 5. 6. 1 Pet. 2. 9. but not the Deputies of the High Priest Iesus Christ , and by the same reason he must have Prophets under him that are Vicars and Deputies , which is unpossible for Christ as Prophet and great Prophet , is essentially Lawgiver , and the Author of Cannonick Scripture , and he who really by a supernaturall power teacheth the heart , but so he hath no Deputies , nor any Ministers or Prophets , nor any under Law-givers , or under Prophets , which by an action or any active power communicated to them , can as under Lawgivers devise any part of Law or Gospell or any other part of Cannonick Scripture , or have any active influence supernaturall to make a new heart : Hence all our Divines say , Christ as Mediator and King of the Church hath no Deputies , neither King , nor High Priest , nor Pope , nor Saint . 4. It must follow , that the Magistrate who as Magistrate beareth the Sword , is not the head officer of the Church under the Mediator ; for as Magistrate he must act with the sword , upon the Church as the Church , and the Ministers of the Gospell as they are such ; whereas when the Magistrate doth act as Magistrate on the Ministers with the sword , he doth it on them as men erring and sinning : But onely so he procureth as a Magistrate the spirituall good of the Church as the Church , indirectly and by the sword , in driving away Hereticks and wolves from the flock . That Church which is the pattern and rule to all the Churches unto the end of the world , in those things that belongeth to a Church , as a Christian Church , must be our rule and paterne in Government : But in the Apostolick Church of Jerusalem , Antioch , Ephesus , Thessalonica , Corinth , Galatia , Philippi , Colosse , the seven Churches of Asia , planted and framed up as perfect Christian Churches , by the Apostles , the Magistrate was not the only supream Governour of Churches ; nor did the Apostles , Elders and Teachers in those Churches , nor the Church , act , preach , dispence the Sacraments , rule , governe as servants , under , and through , and from the Authority of the Magistrate or King , as his Vicars , deputies , and servants ; But by immediate Authority from Iesus Christ placed in them without the interveening mediation of Magistrates ; Ergo , that Church should be the patern of our Church , though the adversaries deny the proposition , to wit , that the Apostolick Churches as Apostolick , should be our patern in all things in regard that the Magistrates were then heathens & enemies to the Church and Gospel , and so de facto , actually , and by accident could not be the supream officers and Governours of the Church ; yet now , when we have Christian Magistrates , that are nursefathers to the Church , and beleevers professing the Gospel , such as David , Solomon , Iosiah , Iehoshaphat , and Ezekiah , and other godly Princes of Israel and Iudah were , and therefore that the Church , as it is a Generall , both to the Iewish and Christian Church , should be our paterne in Government ; yet we have ( though I say , they deny this Major ) a great advantage of the adversaries in these . 1. We have the first Christian Church to be our paterne , and the New Ierusalem that came downe from Heaven , from God , Revel . 21. 10. The mother of us all , Gal. 4. 26. Which is builded upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets , Jesus Christ himselfe being the chief corner stone , Ephe. 2. 20. to be our rule and paterne , and all that was prophecied , though not compleatly in all the degrees of the Church of the Apostles , was then fulfilled , as touching the essence of a Church . 2. Yet here the Magistrate was no chief officer . 3. The adversaries must prove Moses , David , Solomon , and those godly Kings , as Kings and Magistrates , and virtute officij , were supream rulers and Church-officers , and so that Constantine , and all the godly Princes and Emperours , were , by vertue of their office , as Magistrates , all such Prophets , as were Moses , David , Solomon : for certainly , they as Prophets wrote Scripture , had the form and structure of the Temple revealed to them of God , received Laws from God for the Priests : if our Kings as Magistrates now can do the like , we shall then say something to their Headship over the Church . 4. And if they reformed Religion in the time of the defection of the Priests , when they were holy and zealous , and walked with God , and did right in the sight of the Lord like unto David , such as Jehoshaphaet , Josiah , when the Priests were corrupt : we shall grant the like to Parliaments made up of Josiahs and Ezechiahs ; when the Assembly of Divines are corrupt , Heterodox , and all the Pastors have corrupted their wayes . 5. Civill punishing of Church-men when they are Hereticall and scandalous , we heartily yield to Magistrates . But that Magistrates as such should Excommunicate and admit such to the Sacrament , and reject other such , and rebuke , or , that the Magistrate as the Magistrate , did of old judge between the clean and the unclean , cast out from the congregation and camp , and receive in , and so governe the Church , is altogether unwarranttable . Now the adversaries , as Erastus , grant that Idolaters , Apostates , and extreamly prophane men , are to be cast out of the Christian society , and not to be suffered there ; and also that Dogs , and Swine , and Apostates , & persecut●rs , are neither to be admitted to hear the Word , nor partake of the Sacraments : So also Mr. Pryn , if Magistrates must cast them out of the Church by vertue of their office , and judge as Magistrates who are prophane , and who truly feare God , and who are dogs and Apostates , who not , surely then Magistrates as Magistrates must discerne between the cleane and the uncleane , as Priest ▪ of old , and must separate the precious from the vile , as the Prophets did of old , and so were the mouth of God , and must stand before the Lord , le● . 15. 19. Then must Magistrates as Magistrates be Pastors called in the Pulpit as well as in the Throne , and the Bench , and that by vertue of their calling , which neither Erastus , nor the reverend Mr. Pryn will owne . Now if the Elders of the Church with the consent of the people , must cast such out of the Church , and from communion in the holy things of God , here is in expresse termes the very Ecclesiasticall Excommunication which Mr. Pryn denieth to be an Ordinance of God , and yet it must be commanded by Iesus Christ in these words , Mat. 7. 6. Give not holy things unto dogs , and therefore keep not in Church communion the prophane , and ( by the way ) Mr. Pryn to me yeeldeth the cause , and granteth that Excommunication and suspension from the Sacraments , doe both fall under this precept of Christ , Mat. 7. That which falleth under a command of Christ , to me is a Divine Ordinance . 2. He saith also , reasoning against are suspension from the Sacraments , Obstinate scandalous sinners make no conscience at all of receiving the Sacrament , and voluntarily suspend themselves there-from , in case they be freely admitted to other Ordinances , it being onely the totall Exclusion from the Church , and all Christian society ( not any bare suspension from the Sacrament , ) which worketh both shame and remorse in excommunicate persons , as Paul resolveth 1 Thes . 3. 14. 1 Cor. 5. 13. compared with 1 Cor. 1. to v. 10. 3. This is , in terminis , excommunication proved from divers places of Scripture , for it is a totall Exclusion from the Church , and all Christian society , working shame and remorse as Paul resolveth : We seeke no more , Pauls resolution to us is a Divine right . Those words of that Learned and Reverend man have ( give me leave by the way to say , for I hope worthier then I am , do answer fully all he hath said in this subject ) all that we crave . For 1. obstinate men will voluntarily suspend themselves from the Sacrament : Ergo , the Church should not suspend them onely , but also Excommunicate them ; I grant all , if they be obstinate , they are to be not only suspended , but also excommunicated ; Ergo , they are not solie and onely to be suspended , Pro hac vice , for this time ; it followeth no waies , all that this Reverend Lawyer saith against sole suspension from the Sacrament of an obstinate offender , is nothing against us ; if he be obstinate , he is not onely to be suspended from the Sacrament , but also if he goe on in refusing to heare the admonitions of brethren , and of the Church , he is to be excommunicated ; Ergo , he is not first , hac vice , to be suspended from a confirming Ordinance given to those onely who are supposed to have the life of faith , and can onely eat and drinke spiritually and by faith the body and blood of Christ ; It followeth not . I thinke Mr. Pryn would not have Hereticks and Apostates suddenly and at the first totally ( as he saith ) excluded from the Church , and all Christian society , sure we owe some gentlenes and patience even to them , If God peradventure may give them Repentance to scape out of the snare of the Devil , 2 Tim. 2. 24. 25 , 26. yet if an Heretick and Apostate that same day that the Lords Supper were to be celebrated should deny the Resurrection , and Iesus Christ to be God blessed for ever , and not equall with the Father , nor consubstantiall with him , and withall should that same day have offered his childe to Molech , and yet professe his desire to come to the Lords Supper , professing he had tryed and examined himselfe , and his desire to come to eate and drinke with Iesus Christ the great Prophet of his Church ; Would not Mr. Prynne thinke he should not be admitted to the Lords Supper , and yet that he should not totally be excluded from the Church , and all communion from the Church and holy things of God ? I should think if he cannot be presently excommunicated , yet he should not be admitted to the Sacrament , for sure he cannot but be in a doggish and swinish disposition in one degree or other : And my reason is , he is as Erastus saith , non rectè institutus , not rightly instructed , but heterodoxe , and so cannot try and examine himselfe , while he be better principled in the faith : so a suspension for a time from the Lords supper , and ex natura rei , without totall exclusion from the Church and all Christian society , were as necessary , ( whether the Magistrate or Church suspend , I dispute not now ) as a degree of punishment , or a preventing of eating of damnation is necessary hi● & nunc : O , but saith Master Prinne , Christ knew that Iudas was worse than an heretick , and yet he denied not to admit him to the Supper ; Ergo , though we knew such a one , the Sacrament being a converting Ordinance , it followeth not that we should debarre him from the Sacrament . Ans . Whether Iudas did eat the Supper of the Lord , or not , I think nothing of the matter ; only Master Prinne hath duram provinciam , and a very hard task to prove it from Scripture , If I were to examine his book , I should deny his consequences from the Evangelists , for not any of them can prove that Iudas did communicate at the last Supper . But , 1. Christs example in this being an act of Christ , as God , permitting the greatest hypocrisie on earth , is no rule to the Church to give the Lords Supper to Iuddasses ; First , Iudas was visibly and infallibly to Christ , a man who deserved to be totally excluded out of the Church and all Christian societie , and to Christ a knowne traitor , a Devill , an hypocrite ; Ergo , as Christ did not exclude him out of the Church ; neither should the Saints now exclude from their society ; nor should the Christian Magistrate ( as Erastus and Master Prinne thinketh ) exclude Iudasses and knowne traitors , and knowne Devills , and knowne children of the Devil out of the Church ; this is to Erastus and Master Prinne both absurd . 2. Christ did eat and drink with Iudas knowing him to be all these ; Ergo , we may eat and drink with knowne traitors also , the contrary is a truth , 1 Cor. 5. 9 , 10. 11. 2 Thess . 3 , 14 , 15 , Rom. 16. 17. evident enough . 3. Christ preached the Gospel to those that he knew sinned against the Holy Ghost , to the Pharisees who persecuted Christ to death and others , Math. 12. 31 , 32 , 33 , 34. Ioh. 15. 22 , 23 , 24 , 25. Ioh. 7. 28 , 29. Ioh. 12. 35 , 36 , 37 , 38. Ioh. 10. 31 , 32. Ioh. 11. 47 , 48. and this is by the exposition of Erastus l. 3. c. 3. pag. 307. 308. and Master Prinne his vindication , pag. 38 , 39. To give holy things to dogs : so Mr. Prinne saith , that by doggs and swine , are meant only such infidels and heathen , who refuse to imbrace and beleeve the Gospel , or harbour or entertain the preachers of it , ( of which the text is principally intended ) as well as the Sacraments , or of such open contemners , persecutors of the Gospel and Ministers , who runne upon and teare the preachers thereof , trampling the pearls of the Gospel , and the tenderers of them under their feet , as the Text resolves in terminis , Mat. 7. 6. Mat. 10 , 14 , 15. Luk. 9 ▪ 5. Act. 13. 46. or open Apostates . 2. Pet. 1. 2 , 21 , 22 , &c : hence by this we may give the pearls of the Gospel to such dogs as the Pharisees , for to them Christ tendred the pearle of the Gospel . 4. Christ might have hindred , being God equall with the Father , the Pharisees and Iews to malice him ; Ergo , he being above the Laws that he gives to us , doth not in this example warrant us to cast the pearls of the Gospel to such as we know to be Iudasses , Pharisees , and malicious haters and heart-murtherers of Christ . 2. There is not the like reason of preaching the word , and dispensing the seals , 1. Because the word is a converting ordinance out of question , and preached to heathen and to the non-converted , though they refuse to imbrace and beleeve the Gospel , and refuse to entertaine the preachers of it : as is clear , Act. 19. 22 , 23 , 24 , 25. Tit. 1. 10 , 11 , 12 , 13. 2 Tim. 3. 25 , 26 , 27. The Texts that Master Prinne alledgeth , that the Gospel should not be preached to heathen who refuse to imbrace and beleeve the Gospel , to wit , Mat. 10. 14 , 15. Luk. 9. 5. Act. 13. 46. are to no purpose , for Mat. 10. Luk. 9. is but a Temporary Commandement , given for a time , that the Disciples should depart from those houses of Iudea ( there is nothing of the heathen ; But by the contrary the Apostles are forbidden to go to Samaritanes or Gentiles at all , Mat. 10. 5 , 6. ) who would not receive the peace of God in the Gospel , which precept the Apostles in the story of the Acts , did not observe ; but preached the Gospel to many heathen who refused to imbrace and beleeve the Gospel : As Act. 16. and 17. and 19. 2. The place , Act. 13. 15. is meant of the blaspheming Iews , to whom Paul preached long after they persecuted and stoned the Prophets , and had killed the Lord of life , Act ▪ 2. and 4. and 8. and 9. Mat. 23. 37 , 38. 3. Those places , are to better colour of purpose brought by Arminians , and Socinians to prove , that the Gospel is preached to people for their good entertainment thereof , and denied to others for their unworthinesse , and because they will not welcome it ; So the Arminians in the conference at Hague , pag. 87 , 88 , 89. God sendeth the Gospel not according to his absolute will , sed ob alias causas in homine latent●s , for secret causes in man. Arminius against Perkins . p. 199. The will of God in sending the Gospell , hath causes in the will of man according to that , habenti dabitur : So Corvinus ad Wallachros , p. 44. Socinus Comment . in 1. Epist . Ioh. c. 4. p. 307. saith the same : and Mr. Pryn is pleased in the same sense to cite them , I conceive imprudently , for I beleeve that Reverend and learned man doth hate those impious Sects , the Enemies of the grace of God ; but truly if this be a rule to Pastors to spread the Gospell , that they are to offer and give the pearle of the preached Gospell to those that willingly receive it , and harbour the preachers , and presently to depart and preach no more the word of the Kingdom to those who refuse it , as the places Mat. 10. 14. & Luke 9. 5. carry that sense , because they are Heathens who refuse to embrace and beleeve the Gospell , and harbour the Preachers , as ( the worthy Divine saith , ) conceiving that to be a casting of Pearles to Dogs and Swine ; I see not how the Preachers & spreaders of the Gospel to the Heathen , are to beleeve that God out of meer grace , & the good pleasure of his will , without respect to good or bad deserving , sendeth the Gospel to some , and denieth it to others . 3. Though the Sacrament of the Supper be a converting Ordinance in this sense , that it corroborateth faith and conversion , where it was once , and so applyeth the Promises to one who before beleeved , yet it is not a converting ordinance , that is to be administred to one dead in sins and trespasses , as the word is , for then at the first Sermon that ever is preached to a Heathen , if he should say , though for base & worldly ends known to the Church that he desired to have the Sacraments , we are obliged to beleeve that he sincerely desireth these Seals , and instantly at the same sermon to baptise him , & administer the other Seal of the Lords Supper to him ; for how can we deny converting Ordinances to those who desire them ? say our adversaries . 4. An ordinance that cannot be dispensed to a Heathen , remaining a Heathen , and to an unconverted man knowne to be an unconverted man , is not an Ordinance that ought to be dispensed , as the ordinance of the Word , and as the first converting ordinance , to so many as we may safely dispense the Word unto , and if it be first a converting ordinance , as the preaching of the Word is ; then it is to be dispensed to all those to whom we are to preach the Word . But Erastus and Mr. Pryn grant , we may preach the Word to Heathen remaining Heathen , and if they deny it , ( as they yeeld it ) the Apostles did preach the Gospel to the Heathen remaining Heathen , but they never admitted , nor can we admit to the Lords Supper Heathen remaining Heathen , nor could the Iewes upon the same ground , admit to the Passeover the uncircumcised : now then the preaching of the Word to some cannot make the Church and preachers guilty of casting pearles to Swine , and of partaking of their si● , whose hearing is not mixed with faith ; and yet if the Church and Ministers should admit to the Sacraments Heathen remaiing Heathen , they should prostitute holy things to Dogs , and be guilty of an Heathen mans eating of his owne damnation ; Hence this Assertion of Mr. Prynne must be a great mistake , That Ministers may as well refuse to preach the Word to such unexcommunicated , grosse , impenitent , scandalous Christians , whom they would suspend from the Sacrament , for feare of partaking with them in their sinne , as to administer the Sacrament to them , because ( saith he , ) unprofitable hearing is as damning a sinne , as unworthie receiving of the Sacrament : 1. Because there is and may be discovered to bee in the congregation , persons as unworthy as Heathen , such as Simon Magus , yea , latent Iudasses , Parricides , who are in the visible Church while God discover their hypocrisie ; but we may lawfully preach the Word to men as uncapable of the Word as Heathen , and as unworthie ; as Christ and the Apostles did , who did not contravene that , Cast not Pearles to Swine , yet we cannot give the Sacraments to men knowne to be as scandalous , uncapable , and unworthy as Heathen ; but we must prostitute holy things to Dogs , and partake of their sinne ; for this is non causa pro causa , that Mr. Prynne bringeth , to say we may as well refuse to preach the Gospell to scandalous impenitents , as to administer the Sacrament , without partaking of the sinnes of either , because unprofitable hearing is as damning a sinne , as unworthy receiving the Supper ; This Because is no cause : it is true , they are both damnable sinnes , but how proveth he that Preachers partake equally of both ▪ I can shew him a clear difference which demonstrateth the weaknesse of this connexion . 1. Vnprofitable hearing of the Gospell in a Heathen is as damning a sin , as hypocriticall receiving of the Sacrament is a sinne , they are not equalia peccata , but sure they are ●què peccata ; but I may preach the Gospel to a Heathen , and not partake of his sinne of unprofitable hearing , for I may be commanded to preach to a Heathen remaining a Heathen , as Paul preached to Felix , to the scoffing Athenians , to the persecuting Iews , and giving obedience to the command of God , freeth me from partaking of his unprofitable hearing ; But I cannot administer the Lords Supper to an Heathen remaining a Heathen , without sharing in his sin ; and suppose a Heathen remaining a Heathen would croud in to the Lords Table , as of old many Heathen fained themselves to be Iewes , desiring to serve the time , 1 Sam. 14. 21. yet I should partake of the Heathens unworthy receiving , if knowing him to be a Heathen serving the time , and crouding in amongst the people of God , I should administer the Lords Supper , because I have no command of God to administer the Lords Supper to a Heathen man , nor could Paul administer the Sacrament to the scoffing Athenians , or to Felix , without taking part with them in their prophaning of the Lords Table . 2. The necessity of preaching the Word , it being simply necessary to the first conversion of a sinner , putteth Pastors in a case that they may , and ought to preach the Gospell to Heathen , and to thousands knowne to be unconverted without any participation of their unprofitable hearing , and the non-necessity of the Lords Supper , or the Seale of the Covenant , and the nourishing of their souls to life eternall , who visibly and to the knowledge of those who are dispensers of the Sacrament , prophane , and abominably wicked , putteth those same dispensers in a condition of being compartners with them in the prophaning of the holy things of God , if they dispence the bread to those that are knowingly dead in sinnes , so the Gospell may be taught in Catechisme to Children , Deut. 6. 6 , 7. 2 Tim. 3. 15. Exod. 12. 26 , 27. Gen. 18. 19. Prov. 22. 6. because there is a necessity they be saved by hearing , Rom. 10. 14. 1 Cor. 1. 23. but there is no necessity , but a command on the contrary , that the Lords Supper be dispensed to no children , nor to any that cannot examine themselves , and they may be saved without the Sacrament , but not ordinarily without the Word ; nor were it enough to forwarne Apostates , and persecutors , and Hypocriticall heathen , and children , that if they eate unworthily they eate their owne damnation , as Mr. Pryn saith , and yet reach the Sacrament to those , for the dispensers then should ●ast Pearls to some Dogs and Swine contrary to Mat. 5. 6. and they should be free of the guilt in polluting of holy things , if they should give them a watch-word , say they were about to prophane the holy things of God , before they committed such wickednesse . Nor doe we as Mr. Pryn saith , nor know we , or the Scriptures any such distinction , as sealing externally to the senses of any receiving the Lords Supper , lawfully divided , ( sinfully it may be divided , but there is no Law for sinne , no print , no authority of men for it , ) from the internall sealing , nor heard we ever of two sorts of conversion , one externall from Paganisme to the externall profession of the faith , wrought extraordinarily by Miracles without the Word , and ordinarily by Baptisme in Infants ▪ and another internall from formall profession , to an inward imbracing of Christ and his merits . 1. Because the Stewards and Ambassadors of Christ , may notdare to play with the Sacraments as children doe with nuts , to seal to mens senses and fancies Christ and spirituall nourishment in him , and part in his body broken and blood shed , in those who visibly have nothing of faith to their discerning , and of the life of Christ , but onely senses and fancie , such as all visibly and notoriously scandalous walking after the flesh , all Herericks , Apostates , knowne and unwashen Hypocrites have , and no more . 2. All heathen and unbaptized have senses , and are capable of externall washing , and externall and Sacramentall eating , as well as others are , but are they capable of the Seals , because they have bodies to be washed , and teeth and stomacke to eat Sacramentally ? And have Ministers warrant enough to dispense the Sacraments to all that have senses ? But they must be within the visible Church also , ere they be capable of Sacraments , Mr. Pryn will say ; but I aske by what warrant Mr. Pryn alledgeth that the Supper of the Lord is a converting ordinance as well as the Word , and that Pastors may without sinne dispense the Sacraments to those to whom they preach the Word , but they may preach the Word to Heathen remaining Heathen ; Ergo , may they dispense the Lords Supper to Heathen remaining Heathen ? What more absurd ? yet , remaining Heathen , they are as capable of Mr. Pryn his sense-sealing , and sense-converting Sacraments , as any sound beleever . 3. A sealing to the senses cannot be divided from the inward sealing by the Spirit ; neither in the intention of God , for the externall sealing without the internall is Hypocrisie , and God cannot intend Hypocrisie , nor can this division be in regard of the nature of the Sacrament , for it doth seal to us our spirituall nourishment in Christ , except we sinfully separate the one from the other , and sin is no ordinance of God. 4. What word of Christ hath Mr. Pryn for extraordinary conversion of men by Miracles without the Word ? He must conceive with Arminians and Socinians , that many are converted that never heard of that precious name of Iesus , without which there is no salvation , Act. 4. 11. or of a faith in Christ , as Moses Amyraldus dreameth , without the knowledge of Christ , and may write books de salute Ethnicorum , for this externall conversion doth lead of its owne nature to internall conversion and salvation : This may make us fancie somewhat of the salvation of Aristotle , Seneca , Cicero , Aristides , Scipio , Regulus , without the Law or Gospell , this way of extraordinarily saving men by Miracles without the Gospell , is the doctrine of Arminians and Socinians ; so say the Arminians at the Synod of Dort ▪ pag. 334 , 335. Those whom God hath deprived of the Gospell , he hath not precisely rejected them from a communion of the benefits of the Gospell . Adolphus Venator . adver . Dracenos p. 84. saith , The heathen are saved without the Gospell , if they ●●n but pray , Ens Entium miserere mei , Socinus praelec . Thelo . c. 3. telleth us of an inspired word that saveth us , called verbum interius . You may please Schoolmen thus , such as Granadus Contr. 8. de grat . tract . 6. disp . 1. numb . 43. did . Ruiz . de Predesti . se . 8. numb . 7. Alexand. Alens . 8. p. q. 69. memb . 5. art . 3. De bonis Philosophis sic credo , &c. Roa . lib. 1. De Provident . quest . 7. n. 50. Vega lib. 13. in Trident. cap. 12. Enriquez Tom. 2. De ultimo fine , c. 14. num . 6. quod lib. 8. quest . 5. Vasquez 1. par . disp . 97. and c. 5. Soto lib. 1. de nat . & grat . c. 18. ad . 2. Francis . Sonnius in demonstrat . Tract . 12. de consiliis c. 8. Camerarius lib. 1. de grat . c. 8. & lib. 7. c. 8. who doe all of them send all the good Philosophers and white Morallists to heaven by Miracles , inspirations , extraordinary workes of providence , and that without any rumour of Christ and the Gospell ; famous Papists to their owne shame , yeeld that Divine faith cannot be produced by Miracles . Andradius saith often they may be false . Maldonatus saith , That no necessary argument of faith can be drawn from Miracles . Gregorius de Valen. saith , Miracles give us no infallible certainty of Doctrine . Bellarmine saith , Miracles cannot convince the minde . Durandus giveth a sure reason why miracles cannot produce faith ; Because ( saith he ) suppose it were known of it self , that this miracle of the raising e. g. of Lazarus were true , yet it is not known by it self , that it testifieth that this is a true Doctrine which he preacheth who worketh the miracle . Mr. Prynne then hath put the salvation of those who never heard the Gospel upon extraordinary Pillars , when he bottometh them on miracles without the word , which are extraordinary rotten Pillars . 5. The Lords Supper , of which we now dispute , is not the mean of our first conversion , from formall profession , to inward embracing the Gospel : For the word must go before , and not simply the externall letter of the word ; but the word first believed and received by the efficacions working of the holy Ghost : And so the word is indeed the first converting Ordinance ; and so the Lords Supper is given to one who already believes , and the Sacrament concurreth as a mean to make good , corroborate , and increase the conversion which was before . Mr. Prynne might have spared his pains in proving , That the Lords Supper is a converting Ordinance , because it applieth Christ ●o u● : we grant it to be a converting , and quickning , and lively applicatory Ordinance : But how ? He may know that what ever Ordinance addeth a new degree of Faith of conversion , of saving application of Christ and the Promises , must be a converting Ordinance : But it is so converting , that it is a confirming Ordinance , and necessarily it presupposeth Faith and conversion already wrought by the word ; it is not a first-converting Ordinance , such as is the word ; but as nourishing or accretion is a sort of vitall generation in the body of a growing childe , so as Physicians make nutrition in children to be Aggeneration , or , Congeneration , or a vitall generation with , or in the body , and it presupposeth the first generation , by which life is given to the childe ; now nourishing doth not give life , things void of life are not capable of nourishing ; therefore nourishing is the continuing of life , and as it were prorogated and continued generation : so here , Sacramentall eating by faith , is a spirituall feeding and nourishing of the soul on the crucified Lords body broken , & his blood shed , it is not the act of our first conversion : Regeneration is sealed in Baptisme , and Christ given as sealing and confirming Regeneration ; but the Lords Supper is that which exhibiteth Christ to us as food , and sealeth our spirituall growing and coalition in Christ : I say not this , as if the Church could give the Supper of the Lord to none but such as are inwardly and really Regenerated , but to shew that the Church taketh such as are externally called , to be internally called when they dispense this Supper to them ; & that they are nearer Christ then those that hear the Gospel ( which Heathen may do ) ere they can be admitted to the Supper . And this Erast . every where , and Mr. Pryn , in terminis teach when they say , That those that are recte instituti , rightly instructed , who earnestly desire the Lords Supper , professe sincere Repentance , and promise amendment , are only to be admitted to the Sacrament , and those only excluded who are convicted to be grosse and scandalous , and obstinate offenders . Whence it is clear they professe Repentance , and to the Church they are converts , who are to be admitted to the Supper before they come to the Lords Supper : Now this must be done by the word Preached , and received by faith in profession ; Ergo , this Supper in the Church-way , cannot be dreamt to be a mean of their first conversion , far lesse in foro Dei , in Gods court , can men first receive the Lords Supper having never heard the word , and then be converted in foro Dei , really and inwardly , by receiving the Lords Supper ; then might the Sacrament , before and without the word , be given , if it be a converting Ordinance belonging to all to whom the word belongeth : For Mr. Prynne saith , It can be denyed to none within the visible Church . And what reason , if it be no lesse the first converting Ordinance , but that it may be administred to those that never heard the word , and are Members of the visible Church ? And by this Mr. Prynne cannot deny , but the Lords Supper should be dispensed to infants and children , who cannot try themselves , nor yet discern the Lords Body : Yea , those that are convicted of obstinacy in scandalous sins , are Members of the Church ; for how could they be judged , convicted and sentenced , if they be not within ? 1 Cor. 5. 12. Ergo , their being Members of the Church , is not enough to admit them to the Lords Supper , except they be to the Church otherwise qualified and fitted for it . And this doth clearly evidence , That the word of the Kingdom may , & ought to be Preached to many within the Church , that they may be converted to whom the Supper is not to be dispensed , that they may be cōverted , which is enough for our point to exclude promiscuous admission of all to the Supper ; and to prove some other qualification must be requisite , in those that come to the Supper before the Ministers , ( without violation of the holy things of God , and being guilty of not distributing aright ) can administer the Supper to them ▪ and this is another visible qualification then is requisite in those that hear the word : For Erastus and Mr. Prynne require , That all that come to the Supper be rightly instructed . 2. That they promise amendment of life : But they cannot say , none are to be admitted to hear the word , while they be qualified thus ; you exclude the ignorant from the Sacrament , do you exclude the ignorant from hearing the word ? Farther , I desire to be resolved , why Erastus and his require any qualification at all in the one , more then in the other , according to their way : For suppose persons Baptized be only negatively blamelesse , and not visibly scandalous ; yet Erastus and Mr. Prynne cannot deny the Supper to such . Suppose they know not whether they be as ignorant of God as Indians , and suppose they promise no amendment , and do positively professe no repentance at all : 1. Ministers can deny no converting Ordinances to persons , because ignorant ; for if the Supper of the Lord be a converting Ordinance , it shall convert men from their ignorance ; and an Indian ignorant of Christ , ought to be Baptized , to the end , that Baptisme may convert him from his ignorance . Now I think our Brethren cannot say this , and therefore they must yield , that Ministers dare not admit all within the Church to the Seals , except they would be guilty of their sin , in eating to themselves damnation ; and yet they dare not debar the ignorant within the Church from hearing the word , and so are no way compartners with them in the sin of unprofitable hearing . 2. Mr. Prynne may here see some ignorants debarred from the Lords Supper ; yet I hope he would not be so rigid as to Excommunicate all ignorants , because ignorant : the most rigid Novatians would condemne that : and here is sole suspension without Excommunication , which Mr. Prynne saith is not to be found in all the word of God. I wondred much when I read those words of the learned and reverend Master Prynne : That God , who bestoweth no Ordinances on men in vaine , must intend in instituting the Supper , that visible morall unregenerate Christians , may be converted thereby , as well as reall Saints be confirmed : to which I reply : 1. Neither word nor Sacraments , nor any thing on the part of the Almighty can be intended in vaine , though the end of the Ordinance be not obtained , I should have expected some such divinity from the pen of Arminians and Socinians , who make God to intend the salvation of all , and every one in both the promises of the Gospel , precepts and Sacraments , and yet he falleth from this end : so you may read , in Arminius Anti-Perkins , pag. 60. that God is disappointed in his end , in both Law and Gospel , and God shooting beside his mark misseth the salvation of many , say the Remonstrants at the Synod of Dort , pag. 216. and in their confession , c. 7. sect . 3. and because Socinus thought it hard thus to take from God wise intentions ; he did no lesse then blasphemously deprive him of his omniscience : So Socians contra puccium , c. 10. and in prelectionib . Theolog. c. 11. made all things that are contingently to come , uncertaine to God : But if you speak of intentio operis , non operantis , that the Supper , in its nature , is ordained ( this may rather be your meaning ) that morall men like Cicero , and Seneca , and Iudas , and the like , ( for all are alike in regard of the nature of the ordinances , and of that which is the genuine intention not of God , but of this Sacrament ) then you speak not of the supper as divided from the word , but as the word going before the Sacrament hath converted the man , and the Sacrament following doth adde to and confirme in grace . So , Sir , you depart from the question , for we grant that the Sermon going before in the same day of the celebration of the Supper , may , and doth convert ; and thus if an Indian heare a Sermon , to which the celebration of the Supper is annexed , if he be converted by that Sermon ( as you teach the heart in those , is only knowne to God , the Church is not to judge ) he may forthwith , ere he be baptised , come at the same time to the Lords supper , which were much precipitation , little speed , and so the word formally converteth , not the Sacrament ; But if you mean that the Sacrament formally , as the Sacrament is of its nature a mean of converting a morall Seneca , you mistake the nature of the seal , very farre , God never intended that food as food should give life to the dead , the Supper as the Supper is spirituall food , and presupposeth the eater hath life , and how gate he life but by the word of God ? 2. Doth the Sacrament as the Sacrament humble or speak one word of the Law ? doth the Sacrament say any thing here , but Christ died for thee , O Seneca , and there is a pledge of his love in dying for thee ; and the like it speaketh to Iudas , as Master Prinne thinketh , and can this convert a morall man never yet humbled for sinne ? But I have gone thus out of the way in this purpose , I returne and desire pardon for this digression , not ( I hope ) fruitlesse at this time . If the Magistrate be the chiefe Church-officer , how is it that the Church was without Christian Magistrates in the Apostles time ? then is there no exact paterne of a Christian Church , what it should be , de jure ? hath Christ in the New Testament not moulded the Church , the second temple in all the dimensions of it , as Moses , David , Solomon , did by immediate inspiration shew us the measure of the first Tabernacle , Sanctuary , and Temple ? finally should Cesar , suppose he had been a Christian , have received imposition of hands from the Elders , a● his deputies the Ministers do ? and be over the Church in the Lord as King ? and receive accusations against Elders , ordaine Elders in every Church , put out and cast out the unworthy ? only for the iniquity of the time , Ministers were forced to do these ? Erastus and his have not one word of Scripture for this , or were the keys of the Kingdome of heaven given to Cesar ? and because Cesar was without the Church , therefore Peter received them , Matth. 16. while Cesar should be converted , what Scripture have we for this ? for to rule the Church as the Magistrate doth , is an act of the Magistrate performed by power of the sword : Whether the Magistrate do rule in his owne person , or by his deputies and servants ; Ergo , the Apostles governing the Church medled with the sword , which Christ forbade , Luk. 22. 25 , 26. Rom. 13. 4. Luk. 12. 13 , 14. and all the Pastors and teachers now in the exercise of discipline do usurpe the sword ; Yea , if they be the deputies of the Magistrate in dispensing word and Sacraments , they must use the Magistrates sword as Ministers of the Gospel ; for what servants do in the name of the supream swordbearer , that the swordbearer must principally do by the servants , so Ministers by this use both swords . 5. That the Magistrate cannot be the chief officer of the Church is thus proved , he who is subject himself to heare the Church , and to submit to those that watcheth for his soul , and to be put out from amongst the midst of the Church ; if he be scandalous , is not the principall Governour and head of the Church to command all : But all Christians , and so the Christian Magistrate is such , for if God accept not the persons of men , those places , Matth. 18. If he hear not the Church , &c. Heb. 13. 17. and 1 Cor. 5. 1 , 2 , 4 , 12 , 13. must tye the Christian Magistrate , except God have excepted him ; but God hath no where excepted the Magistrate , But as David had Gad , Nathan and other See●s ; so the Magistrates now have some to watch for their souls . The proposition is proved , because if the Magistrate be supream to command Elders as Elders , both in Doctrine and discipline , and in all Ecclesiasticall censures , then the Magistrate as the Magistrate cannot be under the Elders and Ministers as such , for that involveth a contradiction ; that Pastors as Pastors should watch over the souls of Magistrates that they erre not , and oppresse not in judgement , and that the Magistrate as Magistrate should be over the souls of Pastors to watch for them in the same kind ; if any object that the Pastors as Pastors have souls , and therefore they must have some to watch for their souls ; and therefore can neither be supream , nor excepted in those places , Mat. 18. Heb. 13. 1 Cor. 5. It is answered by granting all of this or this single Pastor , but not of the whole company ; for when they erre , we know not a whole communitie over them , but those of the Catholick visible Church ; and if they erre , the Kings of the earth here may command them to do their duty under paine of bodily censure , and punish them : But none are above them to watch for their souls , that we know ; but they by office , watch both for their owne souls , and for the souls of others , even as the King governeth himselfe and the people both politically . 6. Whatever power in matters of Christs Kingdome or the Government thereof , the Magistrate hath , that must be given of Christ , who only can appoint Elders and officers over his owne house , but no where in Scripture find we any such power given to the Magistrate ; Ergo , we are to beleeve he hath not any such power . The proposition is true , because Christ being a perfect Lawgiver and King , doth give Lawes for his owne house , as particularly as Moses did for every severall pinne in the Lords Tabernacle , and David and Solomon for the Temple : the assumption I prove ; because the Government of Christs house is spirituall , as the weapons of their warfare are not carnall , 2 Cor. 8. 5. and it is in binding and loosing , forgiving and retaining sinnes , by the power of the keys of the Kingdome of God given to the Church , and to such as are sent , as the Father sent his Son Christ , Matth. 18. 18. & 16. 19. Ioh. 20. 21 , 22 , &c. But Magistrates as Magistrates do punish sinnes with the sword , Rom. 13. 4. but not forgive sins , nor binde and loose in earth or heaven , nor exercise any spirituall power , nor deal with the consciences of men , no more then they cure the diseases of the body , though indirectly and externally they take care that there be Physicians who can cure diseases . The power of governing the Church is the supream power under Christ , which can say to the Magistrates power , We must obey God , rather then men : But no such supream power agreeth to the Magistrate as Magistrate : For Ministers as Ambassadors of Christ , can and may preach , binde and loose , Rebuke , Excommunicate against the will of the Magistrate , though he command the contrary , as Prophets have rebuked Kings , Jer. 1. 18. & 22. 1 , 2. 2 Sam. 12. 7 , 8 , 9. 1 King. 21. 18 , 19. Mark 6. 17 , 18. The Magistrate as the Magistrate can do none of these : nor hath he power to command the Ministers of Christ by way of privation ; but only by way of accumulation he may command them to do their dury , and to preach the Gospel soundly , and forbid and punish the preaching of false Doctrine the same way . Whatever power Christ hath given to his Church , that the Christian Magistrate , when he becomes Christian , cannot take from the Church : But Christ gave to the Churches of Jerusalem , Antioch , Ephesus , Corinth , to the seven Churches of Asia , &c. a full power to dispense the word and Sacraments , to govern the Churches , to censure Wolves and false Teachers , who draw Disciples after them , in Synods to condemne perverters of Soules , and refute their Doctrine , to put out incestuous persons , to Excommunicate such as will not hear the Church , and a power to reject a Heretick after twice admonition , and to rule well the Church , as they should rule their own house , and to rule well , and to labour in the Word and Doctrine , &c. when they had no Magistrates at all to rule and govern them as a Church . Now if the Church be a perfect visible body , society , house , city , and Kingdom of Jesus Christ , in esse & operari , in being and all Church-operations ; then the Magistrate , when he cometh to be Christian , to help and nourish the Church , as a father he cannot take away and pull the keys out of the hands of the stewards , and throw the rod , authority , power to rule , govern , binde , loose , convene in Christs courts and Assemblies from the Church , and inthrall the Church : This evidenceth how falsely some say , That the Church as the Church is without a Magistrate , as an Army without a Commander or Leader , a Ship without a Pilot , a body without a head . When the Church in the Apostles times wanting a Magistrate , was a perfect spirituall body , gathered , edified , attaining to the unity of faith , Eph. 4. 11 , 12 , &c. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Rom. 12. 4 , 5 , &c. Builded upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles , Eph. 2. 20. Feed by their own Pastors , Act. 20. 28. Sufficiently secured by Jesus Christ from Wolves , 29. 30. Golden Candlesticks perfect and intire , Christ walking in the midst of them and praised and commended of Christ , Rev. 1. 20. & 2. 1 , 2 , 3. ver . 8 , 9 , 10. cap. 3. 8 , 9 , 10. Coming behinde in no gift , 1 Cor. 1. 7. In Covenant with God , casting out the incestuous , 1 Cor. 5. Separated from Idols , 2 Cor. 6. 16 , 17 , 18. Espoused to one husband Christ , 2 Cor. 11. 2. Established in the faith , and increasing in number daily , Act. 16. 5. Yea , the Churches had rest throughout all Judea , and Galile , and Samaria , and were edified , walking in the ●ear of the Lord , and in the comforts of the holy Ghost , and were multiplied , Act. 9. 31. Now if the Christian Magistrate be their only Head and chief Feeder , and all Elders but his servants , Edifying à & sub Magistratu , from and under the Magistrate : How were they edified , and the compleat house of God , the house wanting a head , and the Church of the living God , without the chief feeder and shepheard the Magistrate , when all this time the Lord set spirituall Pastors and watchmen over them ? It is true , it might be some defect , that they wanted a Christian Magistrate , who was their Nurse-father and keeper , and avenger of both Tables of the Law : But this defect was 1. A defect of the Church , as men who may be injured , and do violence one to another as men , if they want one who beareth the sword to be avenged on evil doers : But it is no defect of the Church as the Church . 2. There might be some defect in the Church as a Church , in this regard , that without the Magistrate his accumulative power , the edification of the Church extrinsecally might be slower , Church Laws lesse vigorous extrinsecally without the sword , and evil doers might infest the Church more ; but there should be no privation or intrinsecall defect , or want in the Church , either of an officer , or integrall part of the Church , because they wanted the Magistrate . 3. When the first three hundreth year , the Churches wanted Christian Magistrates ▪ afterward Constantinus convocated the Councell of Nice against Arrius , yet professing that he was Episcopus , without . After him the Empire being divided into three , Constantinus , Constantius , and Constans , the second adhered to Arrius & oppressed the godly . Constans and Constantinus lived not long : Though Jovianus , Theodosius , elder & yonger , Gratianus , Martianus , were favourers of the Church , yet most of the Northern Kings were persecuters . In the sixth hundreth year , they began to be obstinate favourers of Heresie . In the West Antichristianisme , in the East Mahumetisme rose ; for the most part the Church wanted godly Magistrates , and alway hath wanted . Whatever power or means of life Christ hath given to his Church or pastors for the edifying of their soules , either in Doctrine or Discipline ; by these is the holy Ghost efficacious on the hearts and conscience of the people of God , as immediatly given by Iesus Christ , without the mediation or intervention of any other means . But Christ hath given power and means of life to preach the word , to admonish , rebuke , Excommunicate to the Church and Pastors , by which the holy Ghost worketh efficaciously on the hearts of the people of God , which God hath given immediatly to the Church and Pastors , especially in the Apostolick Church , when there were no Magistrates ; and the holy Ghost is no wayes efficacious in the hearts of the children of God , by the Laws , Statutes , and sword of the Magistrate ; Ergo , God hath given to his Church and Pastors , & not to the Magistrate , power and means of life , in which the holy Ghost is effectuall , and that immediatly and not to the Magistrate . Or thus : Whoever is the supream officer and head of the Church , having under him all Church-officers as his servants , by such God is effectuall in the consciences of men : But Pastors , Teachers , Elders are such , and no wayes the Magistrate : Ergo , The Proposition is thus made good by the word of reconciliation , and the rod of the Lords power in the hands of men : The holy Ghost worketh efficaciously in men : Now the question will only be , to whom this word of reconciliation is committed , and the rod of God ; the Scripture saith to the Ministers , never to the Magistrate , 2 Cor. 5. 18. And hath committed to us the word of Reconciliation ▪ ver . 20. Now then we are Ambassadors for Christ , 2 Cor. 10. 8. Though I should boast somewhat more of our Authority which the Lord hath given us for edification , 2 Cor. 2. 13. If I come again I will not spare , 1 Cor. 4. 21. What will ye ? Shall I come unto you with a rod , or in love ? 1 Tim. 5. 17. Act. 20. 28. 29. 30. 1 Cor. 5. 12. Do not you judge them that are within ? Matth. 16. 19 , & 18. 18. Ioh. 20. 21 , 22. This word is no where committed to the Magistaate , nor is the holy Ghost efficacious by the Laws and sword of the Magistrate to convert souls ; we know not Magistrates to be Ministers by whom we believe , but Ministers only , 1 Cor. 3. ver . 5. Nor is the sword a kindely and intrinsecall mean of conversion . This Argument may be further confirmed by all the notable differences that the Scripture holdeth forth to be between the Magistrate and the Ministers and Church : As 1. The Church judgeth only those that are within the Church , 1 Cor. 5. 11 , 12. The heathen Magistrate may ●udge both those that are within and without the Church , and every soul is under his power , Rom. 13. 1 , 2 , 3. Tit. 3. 1 , 2. 1 Tim. 2. 1 , 2 , 3. 1 Pet. 2. 13 , 14 , 15. Matth. 22. 21. And by these same Scriptures , the Christian Magistrate being a lawfull Magistrate , having under him both believers ▪ and heathen , may and ought to judge both ; Ergo , the Magistrate as the Magistrate cannot judge those that are within , by the word as the Church doth , but only in some common coactive way , by the sword , to compell them to do their duty . 3. The Magistrates Kingdom is of this world , and he may fight with his sword to defend his own subjects , and his subjects may fight for him : But the Church and Kingdom of Christ , are not of this world , nor can the Church as the Church , and the Ministers thereof fight or use the sword , as is clear , Joh. 18. 36. Rom. 13. 4. The Magistrate beareth not the Sword in vain : but he beareth the sword in vain over the consciences of men , or to judge those that are within ; for the Church judgeth those that are within , with no such weapon as the bloody Sword ; There is neither sword nor dagger , nor any weapon of War required in the Church of Ephesus , their censuring of grievous Wolves or false Teachers , Act. 20. 28 , &c. Nor in the Apostles and Elders determining truth against perverters of souls , Act. 15. 21 , 22 , &c. and 16. 4. Nor in the Church of Thyatira , their not suffering Jezabell to teach , Rev. 2. 20. Nor in Pergamus , their not suffering those that held the Doctrine of Balaam , Rev. 2. 14. Erastus l. 4. c. 6. p. 285. saith , The Church can kill no man with the Sword. There was no sword ever dreamt of in rejecting an heretick after the first and second admonition , Tit. 1. 10. Let our Adversaries shew what influence the Magistrates sword hath here : yea , ( say they ) The Magistrate may banish the heretick ou● of the Church . True. Ans . Not out of the Church as the Church , but out from amongst his subjects as his subjects , whom he is to defend in peace and godlinesse . 2. It is evident Titus had no power of the sword , but was an Evangelist : Paul wrote not to Titus to banish the heretick , the rejecting here is a spirituall censure performed by previous admonitions . 3. What can the Magistrate as the Magistrate do to this ? 4. The Magistrate is a Lord , and hath by Gods appointment a Lordly dominion over those that are under him ; the Minister is only a Minister , a Servant , a Preco , or Herald , and hath dominion in the Church , Luk. 22. 24 , &c. Now those over whom the Magistrate hath a civill dominion as a Magistrate , over those he may exercise that Lordly dominion of the sword : But the Magistrate as the Magistrate , may use no Lordly dominion of the sword over the Church as the Church , to Preach , Exhort , Rebuke , Admonish , Excommunicate , to judge those that are within , as the Church may do , 1 Cor. 5. 12. Ergo , the Magistrate as the Magistrate , cannot be the supream and highest Church officer , having under him Church officers , as his servants and deputies to Preach and censure as , à & sub , under and from him , because as a Magistrate he carrieth not that which hath any power over the conscience , that is , he carrieth no● the word of the spirit , as a Magistrate , but the sword bodily to punish evil doers . 5. He who by office is chief overseer and watchman in the Church , he must by office keep his own vineyard , and not be put to keep the vineyard of others , Cant. 1. 6. He must watch for the souls of those , whom by office he keepeth as one that must give an accompt , Heb. 13. 17. He must as a speciall watchman by his office , Take heed to grievous Wolves not sparing the Flock , speaking perverse things , Act. 20. 29. And , as a watchman he must blow the Trumpet , and give early and seasonable warning to the people of the sword , Ezek. 34. 1 , &c. Yea , he must watch for the souls of ministers and teachers , and by office , rebuke , admonish , censure , and punish them , and by office judge of their Doctrine and Discipline , and is over the people in the Lord , and to admonish them , as 1 Thes . 5. And worthy of Honour for well Ruling , 1 Tim. 5. 17. But these the Magistrate as the Magistrate cannot do . 1. He keepeth another vineyard of the Civill state , he is not Pastor to the Church as the Church , over which the Holy Ghost hath set him , Act. 20. 28. 1 Peter 5. 1 , 2 , 3. he is not to give an accompt for the soul● , and for the souls of Pastors by his office , he may as a Christian be his brothers keeper , to teach , admonish , Col. 3. 15. and exhort , Heb. 3. 13. he is not by office to blow the trumpet , as Ezekiel was , Ezek. 33. 7 , 8. Ezek. 3. 17 , 18 , 19 , 20. he is not over the people in the Lord to admonish them as a Magistrate , as a Magistrate he only is either to praise and reward well doing , or take vengence on evill doing , Rom. 13. 4. nor doth Paul think Nero , 1 Tim. 5. 17. worthy of double honour , all those are proper to Church-officers , the proposition is necessary ; because if the Magistrate be the eminent and supream watchman over the Pastors , as his under deputies and servants , then must the Magistrate more eminently keepe the vineyard , and watch for the souls , both of Pastors and people , feed the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath set him , be over the people in the Lord , be worthy of double honour , as one that ruleth well , and is worthy of double honour ; and that by office : Now 1. The word never warranted him in the Old Testament , to sacrifice , to burne incense to Minister before the Lord , to carry the ark : But God separated the Priests and Levites for this only ; and was it such a sinne for Vzziah to burne incense ; and for Vzziah to touch the Ark , and for any to bear the Ark but the Levites ? and are not these things written for our instruction ? are we all now to bear the Ark ? and are we all to dispense the word and Sacraments ? When Paul will not have women to teach in the Church , and when God hath no lesse in the New Testament separated some by the laying on of hands , and appointed a Ministery in the New Testament then he did in the Old ? 2. Where hath God in Old or New Testament set downe , that all those qualifications , in an eminent manner , and as principally due to the Magistrate , as he hath described the qualification of the officers of the New Testament in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus , and the Ephesians , Ch. 4. v. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16. 1 Tim. 2. 1 Cor. 12. Rom. 12. 3. Did Christ put upon Church-officers in the New Testament , all the proper titles , priviledges and peculiar Characters of their calling , as they are the deputies of Claudius , Tiberius , and Nero ; so they had been Christian Princes ? this the adversaries must prove , and must all the Epistles of Paul to the Churches of Christ , and of Iames and Peter , Iohn and Iude , which concern Church-officers be written : First and principally to the heathen Emperours , as they be Church Magistrates , and Church-officers jure , though they be in very deed enemies of the Gospel , de facto ? It must put Erastus and all his to paines to prove , that Magistrates as Magistrates were separated in the Old Testament to sacrifice , to burne incense , to bear the Ark of the Lord , and Priests and Levites , and Prophets , were only the under servants and instruments of Kings , and the like they must do in the New Testament : But this is carefully to be observed ; that the adversaries , though they speake of Government , and some yield , as Master Prynne doth , that there is such a thing as Excommunication , especially , 1 Cor. 5. yet the truth is , they deny all Church-government : for I desire to know , why they give to Ministers of the Gospel a power to try who are hereticks , apostates , and unworthy partakers of the holy things of God ; Yea , such as may ordaine Ministers , and reject hereticks after admonitions ; if Iesus Christ hath given this power of Government beside preaching the word , I aske , quo jure , by what Scripture , if by no warrant of Christ : then it is unjustly given to them , and the Apostles and Teachers then had no right to it ; if there be a right , that by office Pastors should know what is soundnesse in the faith , and integrity of conversation ; and so who are to be called to the Ministery , who not , who are to be excluded totally from the Church , as Erastus and Master Prynne say , who not ; Then what warrant hath the Magistrate to limit the Ministers of the Gospel in this Government , such as it is , more then in dispensing the word and Sacraments ? Surely except the Magistrate put his hand to the Arke without warrant in the one , he cannot in the other . They answer , the Magistrate may limit the Pastors in preaching , no l●sse then governing , because he may command the Pastor to preach this and this , and if he preach not sound Doctrine , he may punish him ; but I answer , this is no limitting of Pastors in preaching ; Because this the Pastors may in the name and authority of God , exhort the Magistrate to execute righteous judgement , Ier. 22. and if he crush the poor and needy , and turne a tyrant , an heretick and an apostate ; the Pastors may not only denounce wrath from the Lord against them , but also judge them dogs and swine , and not dispense to them the pearls of the Gospel , yet this is not the Pastor limiting the Magistrate as the Magistrate doth limit the Pastor , as his Ambassadour and Deputie , though the Magistrate take care that Physitians , Painters , Shoomakers , Professors in Academies and Vniversities doe their dutie in their calling , and punish them , if they therein doe amisse , yet he limiteth not the painter to draw this way , not this way , nor hath he a negative voyce in acts of Art , as he pretendeth a negative voyce in Church-discipline . 2. Nor can the Pastor so command the Magistrate in the name of God , to execute justice , as if he become a tyrant , an heretick , an apostate , he will not only remove him from the Throne , and the Bench , but he will set himselfe downe in the place of the erring Magistrate , and judge righteous judgement for him , or in his place : for Erastus saith that the Magistrate may dispence word and Sacraments ( if he had time and leasure ) as lawfully as the Pastor ; and I have in another place observed , that many so make the King head of the Church ( and the like must be said of the little heads of inferior Magistrates , as of the great head ) as he is a mixed person , partly Civill , partly Ecclesiasticall and sacred , that is , by office , Ruler and Pope . 3. The Magistrate doth limit the Pastors only in positives , and in punishing and inflicting Church censures , as they command to censure scandalous persons in such and such scandals , but in no other scandals more hainous ; yet in all the challenges moved by Magistrates against Pastors , The Magistrate never made any challenge against Pastors or Synod , for their sinfull omissions and want of zeal in not censuring drunkards , adulterers , hereticks , court parasites , who injoy many benefices , and leave the flock , and I give instance , in the disputes of the Divines of England making the King the head of the Church ; court-divines accused never the Pastors that they exceeded their limits in not censuring corrupt Prelates , non-residents , pluralists , idle and unpreaching Pastors , or idol-shepherds . 4. In the contests of Holland , when the Synod of Frizland gave in a declinature to the Senate , justifying the deposition of Poppi● an unsound and scandalous Minister , in all contests with Arminians there , the controversie was ever for positives , that the Church condemned and censured hereticks , never that the Church had been slack in the matter of discipline . 5. In Scotland in Master Blackes declinature , and when the Ministers condemned to death and then banished , such as the godly and zealous servants of Christ , Master Iohn Welch , Master Iohn Forbes , and others appealed to the assemblies of the Church , for their standing for the liberties of the Church and Kingdome of Christ . King Iames did never quarrell with them , Thus you have not done in your Ministery , and Assemblies , you have not excommunicated the Marquesse of Huntly a bloody man ; but it was for positives , Thus and thus you have done against the mind and Majestie of the King and Authority . Now corrupt Pastors need as much to be limited in wicked omissions , as is clear : You are dumbe dogs and barke not , Isai . 56. 10. And the diseased ye have not strengthened , neither have ye healed that which was sick , &c. Ezech. 34. 4. as in exorbitances , in their positive zeal ; And this saith , that Magistrates intend to intrude upon Christs liberties , in this plea , rather then indeed to procure that the house of God may be builded and edified , or the liberty of the subject vindicated . And therefore the godly ought the rather to stand for the freedom of the Kingdome of the Lord Iesus , which owe not this tribute to earthly Princes ; since Christ only is King , and raigneth in his owne Church . CHAP. XXIV . Quest . 20. Of the reprocation of the subordination of the Civill and Ecclesiasticall powers to each , and their supremacie and independencie each from other . FOr the clearing of the question , I humbly offer these considerations to the Reader . 1. There is subordination of the power , and a subordination of the person indued with the power , here to be considered . 2. So is there a supremacy of power , and a supremacy of the person . 3. There is a foure fold judgement here considerable ; 1. The first is apprehensive ( apprehensivum ) and common to both Magistrate , Christian , Pastor , and all which must be given to all to whom we can ascribe conscience . 2. ( Discretivum ) the knowledge of discretion , the connaturall guide and principle of every mans beliefe and obedience . 3. ( Definiti●um ) of those that are in Authority , and do command in the Lord. 4. Peremptorium et infallibile , the supream judgement of the King of the Church , who cannot erre . The first is common to all , Rom. 15. The second proper to Christians , and is a judgement of faith , 1 Thess . 5. 2. 1 Ioh. 4. 1. and it must be builded on the first . The third is the Authoritative judgement of the Church , Act. 15. 28. Mat. 18. 17. and of judges , and it must be swayed by the second , both in the commander and the commanded . The fourth is Iesus Christs only , Rom. 14. 4. 1 Cor. 4. 5. 4. It is one thing , that the power of the Ministers be subject to the Magistrate as the Magistrate , and another thing that the persons of the Ministers should be subject : Not any office at all in their power , seems to me to be subordinate to either Magistrate or Minister ; because all Lawfull power , and Lawfull and profitable offices , and Arts , in abstracto are from God , some of them immediately ; As the the gift of prophesying , healing , speaking with tongues , working of miracles , and the offices of Apostle , Evangelist , Pastor , and Teacher , Ephe. 4. 11. those be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , gif●s and graces above Nature , that God without the interveening of human reason , hath devised for a supernaturall end , the edifying of his body the Church ; mens will and reason may interveen in the designation of persons to some of those offices , as that Iohn , Thomas , qualified as 1 Tim. 3. be Pastors , or teachers . But if we speak of the power of the Ministery , in abstracto , without connotation of the persons in concerto , then the power , or the office it selfe is not subordinate to the Ministers of the Gospel as Ministers ; far lesse to the Magistrate as the Magistrate , because it dependeth upon none on earth , Minister or Magistrate ; but the only good pleasure of him , who when he ascended to heaven , gave gifts unto men , that there is such an office as Minister , Pastor or teacher ; And the Church cannot create a new office of a Prelate ; because of its nature it tendeth to a supernaturall end , the governing of Christs body , in a way to life eternall , purchased by Christ : Now the question in this sense , whether the power of the Ministery be subordinate to the Magistrate in its constitution , it is alike in its subordination to Magistrate and Minister ; certain it is subordinate to neither . Other lawfull and profitable offices and Arts are from God , mediately , possibly by the intervening acts of rationall nature , though Magistracy be from God , Rom. 13. 1. yet it would seeme , God by the naturall reason of men , might devise and constitute the very office of Magistracy in abstracto , and the Art of sayling , painting , &c. yet is there no subjection of power to power here , by way of dominion : Hence the question must be of the subordination of the power , quoad exercitium , whether Ministers in the exercising of their Ministeriall calling be subordinate to the Magistrate as the Magistrate ? 5. Dist . A judge is one thing , and a just judge another thing , so here are we to distinguish between a Magistrate , and a Christian Magistrate . As 1. a husband is one thing , and a Christian husband another thing , a Captaine is one thing , and a Christian , and a beleeving Centurion or Captain , such as Cornelius , Acts 10. is another ; a Physitian is one thing , and a gracious Physitian is another thing ; sure a heathen Husband hath the same jus Maritale , the same Husband power in regard of Marriage union , that a Christian and beleeving Husband hath . 2. A Magistrate and a Christian Magistrate may be one and the same Magistrate , with one and the same Magistraticall power , as being first heathen Magistrate , as Sergius Paulus , Act. 13. 7 , 12. and there after converted to the faith . Paulus was no lesse a civill Deputie , when Heathen then when Christian , and not more a Deputy as touching the essence of a Magistrate , when a Christian beleever , then he was before when a Heathen ; yet to be a Magistrate , and to be a beleeving Magistrate , are two different things , even as Christianity is a noble ornament , and a gracious accident , and to be a Magistrate , is as it were the Subject , even as a man , and the accidents of the man , are two different things . 6. There be two things here considerable in the Magistrates office . 1. There is his jus and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Magistraticall power , or the authority officiall , the power of office to beare the sword . 2. There is aptitudo , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a speciall heavenly grace of well governing ; this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a gift or grace of God , to use that power for Christ . These two make one Christian husband , one Christian captain , Physitian , Master , in relation to to the wife , souldiers , sick , servants : Now the Magistrate heathen as Magistrate , even Nero , when the Church of God is in his court and dominions , hath the same jus , the same Authority and Officiall power , to be a keeper of both Tables of the Law , and to defend the Gospell , and to command the Preachers and Synods to fulfill their charge , and to see that the officers doe their dutie , and to punish dumbe dogs , Idolaters , excommunicated persons , to drive away with the sword false Teachers from the flock , he hath I say the same Magistraticall power , while he is a Heathe● , and when he is converted to the Christian faith , and he is equally head of men that professe Christ , when Heathenish as when Christian ; but in neither States , is he the Head of the body the Church , and you give not to Cesar the things that are Cesars , if you make converted Nero , because a Magistrate , now the head of the Church , and deny non-converted and heathenish Nero to be the Head of the Church ; for he is a Magistrate with compleat power of the Sword , in the one case , as in the other , that he neither doth , nor can use the sword for the Church , it is from Nero his state of infidelity that he is in as a man , and not the fault of his office , for when Paul saith , the Husband is the head of the Wife ; doth hee meane a Christian husband onely , and exclude all heathen Husbands ? No , for then the wife were not to be subject to the Husband , if a Heathen and an unbeleever , which is against Pauls mind , 1 Cor. 7. and the Law of Nature . But the converted Magistrate , who was before a heathen Magistrate , hath a new aptitude , facul●y and grace to keep both Tables of the Law , and to govern in a civill way , and indirectly the affaires of Christs Kingdome : Hence the adversaries clearly contradict themselves by confounding those two , a Magistrate and a Christian Magistrate , one while they give supream power over the Church to the Magistrate as the Magistrate , sometime to the Magistrate as Christian . So Vtenbogard in his book De officio , & authoritate supremi Magistratus Christiani in rebus Ecclesiasticis p. 7. and p. 8. hoc addo , ut intelligatur Magistratum , cum religionē Christianam amplectitur , non acquirere novam authoritatem , sed quod eam authoritatem , quam ante etiam in rebus religi●nis & ●ultus divini , habebat authoritatē , — rectè utitur : If the Magistrate when he becommeth a Christian , acquireth no new authority as a Magistrate , but onely useth well his old Authority , in matters of Religion and of Gods worship , which he had before , while he was Heathen , as he saith , then the Heathen Magistrate as a Magistrate hath a supreame power in Church matters , and yet in the same place he draweth the state of the question to a Christian Magistrate . De solo Christiano Magistratu acturus . The Arminians in their Apologie , fol. 297. ( as saith their Declaration ) speake onely of the Christian Magistrate , and yet page 298. potestati enim supremae , sive Architectonicae , qua potestas suprema est , jus hoc ut competat , ratio ordinis , sive boni Regiminis , natura sua postulat , — si Magistratui qua tali jus hoo competit , ●rgo multo magis competit Magistratui Christiano . Sure , if the Magistrate , in generall ▪ and as the Magistrate , have a supream Authority in the Government of the Church , such as the Adversaries contend for , then the Christian Magistrate farre more must be Head of the Church , and so the Magistrate as the Magistrate must be supreame Governour , and judge in all Ecclesiasticall causes , and in these same causes , he must not be Iudge as a Magistrate , but as a Christian . Nor can they make a Christian Magistrate , à medium per participationem utriusque extremi , a middle betweene a Magistrate and a Christian . 1. For where is there such an office in either Church or state ? for so a Christian Magistrate as a Christian Magistrate should be Ens per aggregationem , a thing composed of Magistracy and Christianity , as a Christian Physician , a Christian Painter ; and then the question should be , whether judgeth he as a Magistrate , or as a Christian ? as we may aske whether a Christian painter painteth as a painter or as a Christian : not as a Christian , for then all Christians should be Painters ; and a result of both should neither be a Magistrate nor a Christian , but middle between both , which fighteth with reason and sense . Some say , The power of the Magistrate in a Christian Magistrate who knoweth the doctrine of the Gospell , and hath help of the counsell and light of godly Pastors and Teachers , is perfecter then in Heathen Magistrates , and therefore this power as not Christian or heathenish , governs men as men , but as Christian , it governeth them as Christian m●n . But the learned and worthy professor Jac. Triglandius saith this is said without probation , for ( saith he ) men as Christians are members of the Church , and so are not governed but in an Ecclesiasticall way ▪ and where hath the Lord commanded the Christian Magistrate to governe the sheep of Christ , as the sheep of Christ ? Then ( say I ) 1. The magistrate must governe the Church as the Church , and so rule over the conscience of men in relation to eternall happinesse , by promising to them temporall rewards , and by compelling them by the sword , to be carried toward eternall beatitude ; for to rule the Church as the Church , is to direct and lead them by spirituall means , Word , Sacraments and Discipline , to heaven , which the magistrate as a magistrate cannot do by the sword ; and what he doth as a Christian ▪ that he must do in a spirituall way , not with a secular arm and power as magistrate ; and the two powers of a magistrate and of a Christian , cannot coalescere , grow together in one office which is made up of both , as of two parts , being in nature and spece different , no more then of a Horse and a Lyon you can make a third living creature . It is true , by Grace and Christianity , the power of the magistrate is perfected , and an excellent lustre added to it , but not one degree of Magistraticall power is added to it , by which the magistrate doth rule men as Christians , and as a Church : For as the office of a magistrate doth not promote the man one step nearer to saving Grace ; so Christianity maketh not the Heathen magistrate more a magistrate , nor giveth him a new sword over the Church as the Church , which he had not before ; nor doth it take any magistraticall power from him , no more then a heathen Husband , Master , Physician , being converted to Christ , is more a husband , more a master or Physician , then he was before : The former power is only spiritualized , and graciously facilitated in its acts , but not one whit augmented in its entitative degrees of power over the wife , the souldiers , the servants , the sick . Triglandius excellently : The Christian magistrate converted , is sanctified , but he acq●ireth no new right over the Church : So meat is sanctified by the Word and Prayer , but it is not more meat , nor doth more nourish , because sanctified . 7. Distinct . The exercise of the Ministeriall power in dispensing Word , Sacraments , Discipline , falleth under a fourfold consideration , which , because it cleareth a necessary point , I desire may be carefully observed by the Reader : 1. The simple exercise of that power is considered sine modo , without any qualification , good or evil , Orthodox , or Heterodox , as the Christian Magistrate procureth by his care , that there should be a Ministery to dispense Word , Sacraments , and Disciplin● ▪ 2. The second Consideration of this exercise , is , The exercise of power soundly and painfully , in the fear of the Lord , the Magistrate exhorting them thereunto for conscience . 3. The third Consideration is the exercise of the same , in a corrupt and wicked way and manner , either negligently or wickedly , or for evil ends . 4. The fourth Consideration is the free and peaceable exercise of this power without bodily violence . Hence I intreat the Reader to carry along in his ●ye , 1. The simple exercise of the Ministeriall power . 2. The just and godly , sound and laudable exercise . 3. The wicked and corrupt exercise , or the abuse thereof . 4. The peaceable exercise . Hence , our 1. Assertion : The Magistrate as the Magistrate is to procure that there be Preachers and Church-officers to dispense Word , Sacraments , and Discipline : For 1. his end is , That people under him may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in godlinesse and honesty , 1 Tim. 2. 2. And the Magistrate attaineth his end as a Magistrate , if there be simple exercise of Religion in the quiet and peaceable way , that may consist with the subjects indempnity , and immunity , from rapine , injuries , and violence . 2. The difference between the Magistrates and other callings , is , that the Magistrate was to take care of old , That there were Levites who bare the Ark , and , Priests who should burn incense before the Lord , and Sacrifice ; and yet it was unlawfull for the Magistrate to bear the Ark on his own shoulders , or in his own person to burn incense or sacrifice ; so the Physicians hinder that diseases rage amongst the subjects , and the Magistrates do also hinder that they should rage : But the Physians hinder them by curing diseases , and the Magistrate hinders them not by curing diseases ; for then he should as a Magistrate also be a Physician , but by procuring that there should be Physicians in the Common-wealth . The Magistrate hindreth ignorance , and losing Ships by Tempests , not by professing and teaching Sciences and Arts in Academies in his own person , nor by steering Ships , and guiding them himself to their Ports , for so a magistrate as a magistrate should be a Schoolm●ster , a professor of Arts and Sciences in the Universities , and a Pilot or Shipmaster , which were a confounding of all callings ; but by procuring that there should be Universities and Professors of Arts and Sciences , and by providing honorable stipends and wages for them , and procuring that in the Common-wealth there should be Sailers who are skilled in Shipping : and so doth the magistrate by his office take care , that the Word , Sacraments and Discipline , be dispensed . 3. But the magistrate as the magistrate doth no● command sincere , hearty , zealous , and affectionate dispensing of Word , Sacraments a●d Discipline : But only the dispensing of those without the qualification of the spirituall , or sincere exercise of the power ; Because , 1. The Magistrate cannot command that as a magistrate , which he cannot judge of , whether the thing commanded be consonant to his command , or not : But the magistrate as the magistrate cannot judge of the spirituallity , sincerity , zealousnesse , affectionatenesse of that obedience , which the Church yieldeth to his command : for if the Pastors dispense word and Sacraments , and binde and loose by the keys following the rules of the word , the magistrate cannot judge the heart or intention , whether they do those with conscience to God , and reverence and subjection of spirit to his holy Law , nor can the manner of doing be proved by witnesses to the magistrate . 2. The Magistrate as Magistrate doth not command what he doth not praise or reward , for well doing is the object of the Magistrates praising and rewarding power , Rom. 13. 3. But as a Magistrate he doth not praise and reward the qualification , or spirituality , or sincerity of Pastors dispensing of word and seals ; if they feed the flock , the Magistrate is to take care they be rewarded with wages , no● can the Magistrate as the magistrate withhold praise or wages from labourers in the vineyard , because they preach Christ out of envy , as some did Phil. 1. 15. or because they feed not the lambs out of a love to Christ , as they ought to do , Ioh. 21. 15 , 16 , 17. it is true , magistrates as godly men , may love and commend sincerity in faithfull labourers , and hate the contrary ; but this they do as Christian men , not as magistrates , not by their office , and authoritatively . 3. Magistrates command that as magistrates , the not doing of which they can a● magistrates punish with the sword , for the object of their vindicative and revenging power is ill doing , Rom. 13. 4. But if Pastors feed the flock and rule them , the magistrate cannot use the sword against the feeders , for that they want sincerity , love , cheerfulnesse in the manner of doing these things , for the sword of the magistrate doth only reach men for their externall facts , not for opinions in the mind , not for crooked intentions , not for hollow-heartednesse , hypocrisie , infidelity in the manner , or inward principles of the actions . II. Asser . when magistrates command Churchmen to do their duty , and to feed the flock , sincerely , and in the fear of the Lord , they do it not as magistrates ; but as touching the manner , they may exhort them to do their duty sincerely , cordially , and zealously as godly men ; hence that charge that King Iehoshaphat gave to the Priests and Levites , 2 Chron. 19. 9. This shall ye do in the fear of the Lord faithfully , and with a perfect heart , is a mixt command , as touching the judging of the people in all causes and controversies that should come before them ; the King as King commanded them to do this : But for the manner of the doing of it , that they should do it faithfully in the feare of the Lord , and with a perfect heart ; this he commanded them not as a King , but exhorted them to it , as a godly & religious man : for 1. any godly man might have said this , and the King might have punished the Levites and Priests , if they had not judged the causes according to the Law. But though they had not judged in the fear of the Lord , and with a perfect heart ; yet could not the King as King have punished them therefore , nor can any say , that the spirituall exhortation of Hezekiah , 2 Chron. 29. to the Priests and Levites , came from him as King , but as from a graced and religious man ; as King he might command them to Sanctifie themselves legally , for so they were to do by office ; and he might use the sword against them , if they failed in that ; and as King he may command all externall duties , not only to Church-men , but to all others ; only he cannot punish them for failings in the spirituall manner of doing externall duties ▪ 2 ▪ A spirituall and Christian exhortation ex conditione operis , and intrinsecally , hath influence on the conscience to turne the soul to God. But nothing that the magistrate can do as a magistrate , hath such an influence on the conscience , all that he doth as a magistrate and directly , is toward the outward man , by rewards and punishments ; if the magistrate remove false teachers and wolves , which would devour the flock , and if that work upon the conscience , it is indirectly and by accident , for , quoad actus imperatos , he can command that the Gospel , which hath a kindly and intrinsecall power to work upon the conscience , be preached ; if the magistrate convince the conscience of a murtherer , that he hath failed against the Law of God , he doth not that as a magistrate , but as a godly and religious man ▪ he may convince him as a magistrate , that he hath failed against the Lawes of the State , and bands of humane society , and externall peace , and scarce that , for ignorantia juris nemime●● excusat . Obj. 1. It may be objected against this : If the Elders not only omit to do their duty , but also if they erre in the nature and quality of what they do , the Magistrate is to punish ; Ergo , the Magistrate not only commandeth the Church to do the externall facts ▪ but also commands the facts with such and such qualities : the Antecedent is proved because the Magistrate not only punisheth the omission of a Church duty , as if Pastors preach not ; but also if they preach not ●al● modo , Orthodox and sound Doctrine . Ans . We never denied but the Magistrate commandeth both the exercise of Church power simply , and the man●er and such qualifications as are externall and obvious to the knowledge of the Magistrate , such as blasphemous and false Doctrine is ; But we deny that as a Magistrate he doth command those things that ar● internall and invisible , that is , the spirituallity of the actions ; he can exhort and stirre men up to the spirituallity and sincerity of doing as a godly and Christian man. Obj. 2. The Pastors and guides of the Church as such , do only command externall obedience , for they can onely in ●oro Ecclesiae , in the Court of the Church censure externall disobedience before men , the heart and sincerity thereof is no more obvious to the eye of Elders , then of Magistrates . Ans . 1. I deny the connexion of the Antecedent ; for Elders may command as Elders , more then the not doing of which they can censure , which the Magistrate cannot do ; for Elders have committed to them the word of reconciliation , as the Ambassadors of Christ . Now the word hath an immediate influence on the conscience , on the thoughts and intents of the heart , 2 Cor. 5. 18 , 19 , 20. 1 Cor. 3. 5. 1 Cor. 4. 15. Ps . 19. 7. Heb. 4. 12 , 13. And therefore their Ministery hath action on the thoughts ; yet can they not in the externall court of the Church , censure the thoughts , as not being able to see them , but the Gospel which they preach can arraigne the conscience and thoughts ▪ 2 Cor. 10. 4 , 5. But the Magistrate carrieth not such a message , and therefore his Magistraticall command can reach no farther then his temporall praise and reward , and his sword ; and that is commensurable and of equall latitude with those . Obj. 3. The Object of the Magistrates power , is well doing , and ill doing , both civill , and also supernaturall ; both for the first table , or as well for the spirituall acts of worship and Religion in the first table , as for acts of Iustice and mercy in the second table , Rom. 13. 3 , 4. Isai . 49 , 23. and you said elsewhere , that externall peace is too narrow an object for the Magistrate , for the intrinsecall end of a Magistrate is also a supernaturall good , and not only a peaceable , but also a godly life , 1 Tim. 2. 2. Ans . It is true , the Magistrate as the Magistrate doth care for the supernaturall good of subjects , and the duties of Religion , and the first table , but how ? intrinsecally and as a magistrate , that is , that men worship God according to his word : But , 1. The magistrate as such hath nothing to do with the spirit , nor can he command the sincerity of the worship ; his care is that there be a divine worship , that is , materially and externally right and consonant , externally to the rules of the word ; and for this cause learned divines make the externall man the object of the magistrates office ; but not the externall man as doing the duties of the second table only , but also as serving God in the duties of the first table : for which cause I said Augustine meant the same , when he said , that Kings serve God as men and as Kings . 2. Magistrates as magistrates are to extend their power for Christ ; that is , that not only there be Iustice and Peace amongst men , but also that there be Religion in the land , yea , that the Gospel be preached ; so all our Divines make the King to be custos ●t vindex utriusque tabule : Yea , I think he is a keeper and preserver of the Gospel also , and is to command men to serve Christ , and professe the Gospel , and to punish the blaspheming of Iesus Christ : and this is royall and magistraticall service that the King as King performeth to God , and to Iesus Christ the mediator , ex conditione operis , in regard that good which he procureth as King , materially and externally , is consonant to the supernaturall Law of the Gospel , but it is not magistraticall service to Christ ex intentione operantis . Obj. 4. When it s required that the Magistrates be men fearing God , hating coveteousnesse , &c. is not this an essentiall ingredient of an King as a King , that he read in the book of the Law , that he may feare God , Deut. 17 ? Ans . There is a twofold goodnesse here to be considered , one of the magistrate as a magistrate , another as a good and Christian magistrate . The former is an officiall goodnesse , or a magistraticall prudence , justice , and goodnesse ; this is required of all magistrates as such , to judge the people : so the acts of an heathen magistrate done according to common naturall equity , by Nebuchadnezzar , Pilate , Cesar , Felix , Festus , are to be acknowledged as acts of a Lawfull Magistrate , valide and no lesse essentially Magistraticall , then if performed by King David ; and of this goodnesse the Scriptures speak not as essentiall to a Magistrate as a Magistrate : But there is another goodnesse required of Magistrates as they are Members of the Iewish Church , and as they are Christians , and of these the Scripture speaketh ; and so Magistrates not as Magistrates , but as good and Christian , are to be such as feare God , hate covetousnesse , respect not the face and favour of men ; so it s denied that the fear of God , hating of covteousnesse , are essentiall ingredients of Kings as Kings : For Kings as Kings intend justice , peace , godlinesse , materially considered , both ex conditione operis , and operantium . But for justice and righteous judgement in a spirituall and an Evangelick way , that belongeth not to the essence of a Magistrate nec ex conditione seu ex intentione operis , nec ex conditione operantis : The Holy Ghost requireth it of judges , as they would approve themselves as truly Holy and Religious , and would be accepted of God , and in this sense Kings as Kings do not serve God , nor the mediator Christ , nor yet as men ; only they serve God and the mediator Christ as Christian Kings , or as Christian men rather . III. According to that third member of our seventh Distinction ; The unjust and evil exercise of the Ministeriall power , is obnoxious to the magistrate as the magistrate , thus , in that he beareth the sword against all evil doers , Ro. 13. 1. The magistrate as the magistrate doth only command well doing , in order to praise and a good name , or temporall reward amongst men , Rom. 13. 3. Do that which is good and thou shalt have praise of the power , 1 Tim. 5. 17. Matth. 10. 10. Nor can the magistrate as the magistrate promise , or command the Elders to feed the Flock , with the promise of the reward that Peter promiseth , 1 Pet. 5. 4. to wit , That when the chief shepheard shall appear ; they shall receive a Crown of glory that fadeth not away . The magistrate as a Preacher ( if he be one , as David and Solomon were both ) or as a godly religious Christian man , may hold forth such a promise , but not as a Magistrate , and upon the same ground the Magistrate as the Magistrate cannot forbid careles , unsound preaching , and rigorous and tyrannicall ruling or rather domineering over the Flock , under the pain of death eternall : for he can but kill the body , and hath but the carnall and temporall sword , Rom. 13. 4. and so he can inhibite ill doing only in order to temporary punishment , and though the duty of the former be spirituall , and the sinne of the latter also , yet the externall man is capable only of the Magistrates promises and threatnings , as they respect evill or good temporary ; so that it is a wonder to me , that M. Pryn or any learned man can say that magistrates can make Lawes to binde the conscience , sure it is ill divinity . 2. If there never had been sin , there should have been no government but of Fathers and Husbands , there should have been no magistraticall dominion , not any magistraticall allurement to weldoing by temporall rewards , not any terrifying from evill doing , from fear of the sword , death , stripes , or bands , and God governed the Apostolick Church , and they attained the Crowne and supernaturall end of life eternall , without the accessory hire of a a temporary reward from the magistrate , and the subsidy of his sword ; Ergo , it is evident that the magistrate is neither an essentiall , nor an integrall part of the visible Church as the visible Church , injoying all the Ordinances of God , Word , Sacraments , Discipline , Censures , Rebukes , Admonition , Excommunication , Prayers , Mutuall edification , in as great perfection , as is happily attainable in this life without , yea , against the will of the civill magistrate : Though it be a great incouragement to have the King a Nurse-father ; yet hath not Christ counted it simply necessary to his visible Church injoying all the Ordinances of God to the full . 3. If the magistrate do only command the teachers and Pastors to preach and determine synodically , in order to a temporall reward , and forbid them to abuse their ministeriall power in order to temporary punishment , by the temporary sword ; then surely the Pastors and Teachers are not subjected to them in conscience , after any Ecclesiasticall way , for the power of commanding in magistrates as magistrates must be commensurable to the power of punishing the transgressors of the command ; if the one be in order to a temporary good , the other cannot but be in order to an eternall ill ; if ministers command in the name of Christ , in order to an eternall reward , they cannot threaten the transgressors in order to a temporary punishment , but it must be in order to an eternall punishment : so that it is most clear , that the magistrate though he be in some sense a little God , and invested with the authority and Majesty of God , in that he commandeth and threatneth upon proposall of temporary reward , and temporary good , the very same duties that God injoyneth , and forbiddeth the same evills of sinne that God forbiddeth ; yet he holdeth not these out to the soul and conscience of the subjects , as the Ambassador of Iesus Christ , upon condition of eternall life , if they obey , and of eternall death , if they disobey ; but he holdeth out to the external man these that are materially divine commandements & divine inhibitions , but in another consideration ▪ but formally only they are the mandates of the Magistrates in order to temporary reward and temporary punishment . Then the Ministers as Ministers in preaching and Synods , forbid adultery , incest , murther ; but they propose them to those that are within the visible Church ; And that , 1. to their consciences , 2. Under the paine of eternall wrath . 3. As the Ambassadors of Christ craving spirituall subjection of conscience , and divine faith to those charges : But Magistrates as Magistrates hold forth in their Law-abstinence from those same sinnes of adultery , incest , murther ; But , 1. Not to the consciences of their subjects , but to the outer man as Members of the common-wealth . 2. Not under the paine of eternall wrath and condemnation , before the judge of quick and dead : Magistrates as Magistrates have neither calling , office , place nor power to threaten or inflict eternall punishment ; if Magistrates do perswade the equity of abstinence from adultery , incest , murther , in their Statutes , or Acts of Parliament , from the word of God , from the sixth and seventh command of the Decalogue , from the judgement and eternall punishment that followeth these sinnes , they so perswade not as Magistrates , but as Divines , and as godly and Christian men ; yet my sense is not that the Magistrate can Lawfully command obedience in matters of Religion not understood or knowne by the subjects , that were to exact blind obedience ; but my meaning is , that the Magistrate as the Magistrate holdeth not forth his commandements to teach and informe the conscience , as Pastors do , but he presupposeth that his mandates are knowne to be agreeable to the word of God , and proposeth them to the subjects to be obeyed . 3. Magistrates as Magistrates hold forth in their Law , abstinence from these sinnes , not as the Ambassadors of Christ , craving subjection of co●science and divine faith to those charges , but only externall obedience : for though Ministers as Ministers crave faith and subjection of conscience to all commandements and inhibitions , as in Christs stead , 2 Co. 5. 19 20. yet the Magistrate as the Magistrate doth not crave either faith or subjection of conscience , nor is he in Christs stead , to lay divine bands on the conscience , to submit the soul and conscience to beleeve and abstaine , he is the dep●●y of God as the God of Order , and as the Creator , and founder , and another of humane societies , and of Peace , to exact externall obedience , and to lay bands on your hands , not to shed innoceat blood , and on your body not to defile it with adultery , or incest , nor to violate the ch●st●●y of your brother ; hence it is evident , that the adversaries are far our ▪ who would have Ministers who do hold forth commands , that layeth hold on the conscience and craveth faith and soul-submission under the paine of eternall wrath , to do and act as the deputies and Vicars of those who have nothing to do with the conscience , and have neither office nor authority to crave soul submission , or to threaten or inflict any punishment , but such as is circum●cribed within the limits of time , and which the body of clay is capable of ; yea , when the Magistrate punisheth spirituall sinnes , heresie , idolatry , he punisheth them only with temporary punishment . Obj. 5. When a Minister speaketh that which is treason against the Prince in the Pulpit , by way of Doctrine , the Church only doth take on them to judge him , and censure him , and he will not answer the civill judge for his Doctrine , but decline him , and appeal to a Synod ; and yet if another man in private speak these same words of treason , he is judged by the civill judge , and can give no de●linature against this civill judicature , this must be unequall dealing , except the civill judge may by his office , judge whether the Minister spoke treason or not . Ans . It cannot be denied , but that which is spoken by way of Doctrine by an Ambassador , speaking the word in publick , and that which is spoken in private , although the ●ame words , are very different : for a private man in private to slander the Prince may be treason , he hath no place , nor calling to speak of the Prince , but a Pastor hath a calling as the watchman of the Lord of hosts to rebuke ▪ Herod for incest , and in a constitute Church , the Church is to try whether Iohn Baptist preached treason or not . 2. If it be a slander of the Prince and treason indeed , the Prophet who preached it , is first subject to the Prophets , who are to condemne and censure him , and then the magistrate is to inflict bodily punishment on him for it ; but the Church should labour to gaine the slanderers soule , before the civill judge take away his life . IV. Assert . The Magistrate de jure is obliged not only to permit , but also to procure the free exercise of the ministery in dispensing Word , Sacraments , and Discipline , and owe his accumulative power , to convene Synods , to adde his sanction to the lawfull and necessary constitutions and ordination of worthy , and to the Deposition of unworthy officers in the Church . 1. Because he is a Nurse-father in the Church , Isa . 49 23. 2. And by office , as a Publike father , to procure the good of the soules of the subjects in his coactive way , that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godlines and honesty , 1 Tim. 2. 2. 3. He is not onely to permit , but also positively to procure all peace , in the exercise of all lawfull and profitable trades and Arts ; Ergo , farre more that glory may dwell in the Land , and that the Peace thereof may be as a River , Isa . 48. 18. by the presence of Christ walking in the midst of the Golden Candlesticks . V. Assertion . When the Magistrate commandeth painfull and sound administration in preaching and governing , with provision of the praysing and rewarding of well doing , he doth not subordinate to himselfe the Ministery in its exercise . 1. Because this promise is accumulative , and of a temporall reward , for the Magistrate as the Magistrate cannot promise that which Peter promiseth ; that 1. 1 ▪ Pet. 5. 4. When the chiefe shepheard shall appeare , they shall receive a crowne of glory that fadeth not away , he may as a Christian promise that , but for a temporall reward for men , no man for being faithfull in the house of God , hath that unseparably annexed to his labours , by a literall promise in Scripture , and therefore it is onely accumulative . 2. Right and sound preaching and governing in Gods house , cannot from this be said to bee subjected to the Magistrate as a Magistrate , in regard that this is an accidentall hire , and an externall and accessorie good , which the Church as the Church , and the most faithfull Prophets , Apostles , and Pastors have wanted , and yet have attained the end of a Church as a Church visible , nor is this a promise made to the Church as the Church or the Ministers thereof as such , for the Apostolick church that was most poor , had neither thing , nor name , nor promise , but by the contrary , the Kings and Rulers did conspire against the Kingdome of the son of God. VI. Assertion . Though the Magistrate may both threaten to inflict , and actually inflict the ill of temporall punishment on Ministers , if they be either idle or unsound in their administration ; yet thence can onely be concluded that the male administration of the ministerie is subjected to the Magistrate as such , but not the Ministery it selfe , or the exercise thereof . 1. The male administration of any office is accidentall to the office . 2. This subjecteth the erring person , not the teaching Minister to the civill Magistrate . Nor doth this make the Ministers in the exercise of their office , properly subordinate to the Ministers , but onely so farre as the spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets . VII . Assertion . There is a twofold subordination of the exercise of Male administration of Ministers ; one civill , another Ecclesiasticall : These two differ , so as the former must be subordinate to the Magistrate who is to inflict bodily punishment , but the latter is onely subject to the Church . The Judiciall determination according to the Word of God , for the informing of the conscience and gaining to the truth the erring Ministers , is proper to the Colledge of Ministers ; and in this if the colledge of Ministers erre , they are also punishable , and the Magistrate is to command them to judge and determine , de novo , over again : The Magistrate in a constitute church is to determine civilly , and sentence , and civilly punish the Ministers that either are dumbe dogs , and will not barke , or that perverts the souls of people with false doctrine , and where the Church is constituted , it is presumed that the Priests , whose lips should preserve knowledge , have determined in an Ecclesiasticall way , the very same which the Iudge civilly is to determine , not because the Church hath so determined , but because he judgeth in his conscience it to be according to the Word of God. VIII . Assertion . The Ministers are in no sort the Ambassadors or servants of the Magistrate , but of Iesus Christ , and immediately in their ministeriall acts subordinate to the King of Kings . 1. They declare the truth in the Name of Christ , their master and Lord , not in the name of the Magistrate , as the Arminians make the steps of the subordination . 1. The Word of God. 2. The Magistrate carrying Gods sword . 3. The Preachers of the Gospell ; for then the Preachers should hear the word of the Magistrate first , and have the minde of Christ spoken and revealed to them immediately from the magistrate , but mediately onely by the mediation of the Magistrate , the minde of Christ . 2. There should be in every Christian Kingdome , where there is a King , a civill Pope , having directly both the Swords , not with the distinction of Iesuites , of dixectly and directly , and as they say , the Pope hath the temporall sword , indirectly and in ordine ad spiritualia , in order to spirituall things , and and how many inferiour Magistrates , so many civill Popes , onely they shall not be infallible . Arminians say that this collection is from envie , Because we ( say they ) deny a headship and supremacy of power of Governement , to your Pastors and Elders in all your Parishes , which maketh the Church a Monster with many heads ; therefore you put this , for envy upon the Magistrate , who yet hath the word of God above him , which the Pope hath not , who setteth himself above the Word of God. Ans . 1. If we give a supremacy royall , and princely to the Ministers , which they call Archi●ectonica , as the adversaries doe to the Magistrate ; multitudes of Popes behoved to be in the Church ; but we make them meer Heralds , Trumpeters , and Messengers to relate the will of God , void of all royall power , and having neither earthly majesty , power , nor Sword. 2. It is not our Argument , that in which they conceive we repose , to wit , that we thinke the adversaries resolve all ultimatè , and last which concerneth the government of the Church , in the will of the Magistrate , as on an infallible rule , we grant they teach that the Word of God is to rule the Magistrate in the matters of the first Table , and justice and equity in the things of the second Table , but they say this in words onely , but the Magistrate as Magistrate may mould out of his high dominion what Church government he will , and this by consequent resolveth all in the Magistrates will ; and that they teach , that when the Magistrate doth command against the Word of God , then it is better to obey God then men . And 2. This we infer as an absurdity that they cannot shun that there is such a new officer , a new Church head , a creature most like a Pope in every Christian Kingdome brought in the Church , who is above Bishops , Pastors , Doctors , who by office must carry the minde of God to Pastor and people , who hath the keyes of the House to make and unmake , call and send , recall and exantorate ministers as his Servants and Heralds . 3. Looke what power the Magistrate as a Magistrate hath in civill affaires , the same hath he in dispensing Word , Sacraments , admitting to , or rejecting from the Sacraments , calling of ministers , excommunicating by this way , and so by office , he is no lesse essentially a Pastor to watch for the soule , then he is a civill Judge . 4. How doth this confound the two Kingdomes ? the Kingdome that is of this world , and fighteth with the Sword ; and the Kingdome that is not of this world , and fighteth not with the Sword ? if the magistrate as the magistrate and armed with the sword , be the supream Head over both , and as he beareth the Sword have a carnall dominion over the Church as the Church ? 5. If God have made the subordination of ministers as ministers , and servants of the magistrate as a magistrate , then the visible Church hath no ordinary right , to Ordinances , Word , Sacraments , discipline , but by the magistrate ; and all that the Churches did in the Apostles times , or the first three hundred yeers after Christ , being contrary to the magistrates will , must be either seditious , or then it was by no rule of the Gospell , but by an extraordinary dispensation ; and we shall have no warrant for any dispensing of the Word , and of Seals , or Government from the Apostolique Church , because all that must have beene beside the rule and extraordinary . 6. From this pretended subordination , as the supream magistrate may doe all that the inferiour magistrate may doe , because the King is eminently all that the inferiour Magistrate is , and something more ; so may he dispense the Word and Sacraments , in regard that the King is by the same officiall power over the Church as the Church , in sacris , in all matters of Religion , as in civill things , and containeth in him , in a high and eminent manner , all that the Church and Pastors can doe , as they are such , and because the King hath the same power , in all Arts and Trades , then by his Royal power he might ( if he had time and leasure ) build houses , because of his royall Eminency over all Trades , he might sit at the helme of any ship , and steer and rule it , he might paint Images , he might plow the ground , because he hath the like Royall power over masons , Sailors , Painters , Husband-men , carpenters , and the like , as he hath over the common-wealth , and the Church ; we must then say that God hath called the King to all these to be a minister , a mason , a Sailor , a Painter , and if he had leasure , he hath Gods calling to be a Preacher , a Sailor , as to be a King , yea , and that as King he is all these : Now the Apostle clearly distinguisheth between him who exhorteth and teacheth in the Church , Rom. 12. and him who is the Minister of God , and beareth not the sword in vaine , Rom. 13. and clearly insinuateth a distinction of calling , so that God never called one man to all callings , as it is 1 Cor. 7. 17. But as God hath distributed to every man , as the Lord hath called every one , so let him walke , ver . 20. Let every one abide in the same calling wherein he was called : And it is clear , if the King be a Head in the body ▪ 1 Cor. 12. then he is not the feet , though he have need of the feet , for then the eye should be both eye and eare , and hand , and therefore the King cannot be all . Pareus in Rom. 13. saith , the King cannot doe some things ob defectum juris ex Dei limitatione , He cannot preach . Ans . Ergo , Preaching belongeth by Divine right to another , and it s not subordinate to him , jure Divino . 2. Saith Pareus , he wanteth law to use the wi●● of another man as his owne . Ans . Then the right of Husband and Wife is not subordinate to the King , so as he may use the right of a Husband , because it is against the seventh Commandement , nor can he invade the right of Pastors to dispense Word and Sacraments , it being against the second Commandment , he not being called thereunto . 3. Other things ( saith he ) he cannot doe for want of skill , as to teach in a Colledge , and others he cannot doe , because they are fordid , as to sew shooes . Ans . If God have not called the Prince to these , it is not onely sordid , but unlawfull for him to thrust his sickle in another mans field , for God must call to a lawfull calling , else men use a lawful thing unlawfully , so it is sordid and unlawfull for him to judge those , and the like . Erastus I know roundly granteth that the King or any Magistrate may lawfully dispence the Word and Sacraments , nothing hindereth him , but want of time , which is a better Answer then others give , who hold the same principles with Erastus , and that the King hath the same Royall power in things civill and Ecclesiastick , except the adversary flee to our distinction of power and persons , and of things civill and sacred , they shall never expede themselves . But the King ( say they ) is not capable of 1. The power of Order , he cannot be a Pastor , or a Doctor . 2. He cannot as King be capable of internall power of jurisdiction , he cannot preach , he cannot dispense the Sacraments , but he is ( say they ) capable of externall power of jurisdiction , to governe the Church , excommunicate , to debarre Apostates and Hereticks from the Sacraments , to create Prelates , Primates , Metropolitans , and such cattell , to call and ordaine , make and unmake Ministers , to make all Canons and Ecclesiasticall Lawes , and appoint religious Ceremonies , as holy Surplice , crossing , oyle and spittle in Baptisme , to create holy dayes , to command men to kneel to bread , and to order all the externall worship of God , and beside the Word , to order many little and smaller things in the borders of worship externall , such as is some little Idolatry , and Superstition : And ( for ought I know ) by their way , who hold there is no certaine forme of Government of Gods House in the Scripture , some harmelesse and innocent golden Calves , as lawfull as religious symbolicall Ceremonies . This power is no more due to the Magistrate as the Magistrate , then to dispense the Sacraments , as I have said before : Nor doe the Arminians much honour the Magistrate , who walking in the steps of Erastus doe hold , that the Magistrate having power of publique places , Preachers are obliged not to preach in publike places , if the Magistrate forbid them , but they may preach in private places . But 1. These same Arminians hold that Pastors are to preach whatever in their conscience seems to be the truth of God ; a principle of those who are for tolleration of all Religions ; though Iudaisme & Turcisme , a way ( I am perswaded ) most abominable , and which the Lord of his Church will crush , when he shal bring down other Antichristiā untruths to the ground ; Now it seems to the conscience of Papists and many Hereticall teachers , that they are obliged to preach Turcisme , & Iudaisme in the Temple , and in publike , & that distinction is false & vain , as it is in very deed contrary to the truth of God , to preach what they think the truth of God , & to preach it in publike or private , or in any place is indifferent as touching the place . 2. The Lord hath no more given to Magistrates power of places , or actions religious in places , then he hath given to them power of truths : Ergo , they must be obliged in conscience , rejecting a ●●i● and saplesse distinction , to preach in publike places : for as that juditio●s and learned professor Iac. Triglandius saith , The place is accident all to the worship , and changeth not the nature of it ; and truly as that learned professor saith , it is a poor honour that they put on the Magistrate , to limit all his power to places and stipends . 3. The Apostles knew not this distinction , for they not only preached truth , the Scribes and Pharisees forbidding them ; but in publick places , and at all occasions , and dayly in the Temple , and in every house , they c●●sed not to teach and preach Iesus Christ , Act. 6. 2 , 4. & 4. 1. 20. & 5. 20 , 21. The Magistrate being Antichristian forbiddeth not preaching of saving truths , because of the place , be it private or publick ▪ but he forbiddeth them , because they are saving , and if Iesus Christ have called a man to preach in publick , in the house tops , the Magistrate hath no power from God to silence him in publick more then in private ; the Magistrate forbiddeth that any teach false Doctrine , not for the place , but because it is injurious and hurtfull to humane societies that men should be principled in a false Religion , and cannot but disturbe the publick peace . IX . Asser . The Christian magistrate must here come under a threefold consideration . 1. As the Object of that high office is meerly and purely civill , and positive relating only to a civill end of Peace : as in importing , or exporting of goods , of wooll , waxe , moneys for the good of the common-wealth , the crying up or crying downe of the value of coyned Gold or Silver , the making of Lawes meerly civill ; as not to carry Armor in the night in such a City : So in Warre , Commanders , Captains and Colonels are Magistrates to order the Battle , lay stratagems , the way of besieging Townes , of fortifying Castles , of issuing out mandates for the Navy ; The Parliaments power in disposing of Fouling , Fishing , Hunting , Eating of Flesh , or not eating at such a time : all these ▪ as the Word of God doth not particularly warrant the one side more then the other , are meerly civill and positive ▪ It is sure the Magistrate hath a supremacy , and an independency above the Church or Ministers of the Gospel in all these ; and as these prescinde from all Morality of the first and second Table , I hold that neither the power nor person of the Magistrate is subordinate to the Church and Church-assemblies , and Ministers of the Gospel should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and exceed the limits and bounds of their calling , if they should meddle with these ; as the Church should exceed their bounds , if they should make Canons touching the way of sayling , painting , tilling the earth according to such and such principles of Art , for these are without the sphere of the Churches activity ; in this consideration that learned and grave Divine Doctor Andrew Rivetus in Decalo in c. 5. saith well , pag. 204. That as we beleeve a man well skilled in his owne Art , so that his judgement is a supream rule ; so the supream authority of the Magistrate to us in things positive , is a rule ; for indeed it cannot be denied but there be Arcana Imperi● secrets of State that are not to be communicated to Pastors or to any , in which the Rulers have a supremacy . The Magistrate falleth under a second consideration , as he giveth out Lawes just or unjust , and executeth judgement in the morning , or suffereth the eyes of the poore , the widdow and Orphane to faile for went of justice ; and in these he is not subject to the Church and Pastors so , but only as if he sinne in making Lawes , the Pastors may humbly supplicate that he would recall those unjust Lawes , and judge over againe righteous judgement , and this exhorting of the Pastors is a subjecting of the Magistrate to the Pastors quoad actus imperatos ; so have Generall assemblies in the Church of Scotland humbly supplicated the King and Parliament to retreat Laws made against the liberties of the Church , in savour of Antichristian Prelates and Ceremonies ; but quoad actus elicitos : The Church and Pastors themselves cannot usurpe the throne , and give out civill Lawes that are righteous , and judge righteously : for the poor in the place of King , Parliament and Iudges ; for in this also the judges are supream and independent , and subject only to God the Creator , as his Vicars and Deputies in Gods universall Kingdome of power called universale regnum potentiae , by Divines ; they are Gods , and the shields of the world , and here only as they erre , not as they iudge , are they subject to rebukes and threatnings , and admonitions of the Church and Ministers of the Gospel : Even as the Magistrate may command the Pastors to preach and dispense the Sacraments aright , but the Magistrate himselfe can neither preach nor dispense the Sacraments : so the Schoolmen say , that the actions of the understanding depend on the will , quoad excercitium , the will may set the mind to think on this or that truth ; but not quoad specificationem . The will it selfe can neither assent , nor dissent from a truth , nor can the will command the mind to assent to a known untruth , or dissent from a known truth ; the mind or understanding naturally doth both , and this distinction holdeth in acts of the civill power , and in acts meerly Ecclesiasticall ▪ The third consideration of the Christian Magistrate is as he is a man , and a member of a Christian Church who hath a soul to be saved , and in this , he is to submit to Pastors , as those that watch for his soul , Heb. 13. 17. as others who have souls to be saved . X. Ass . Hence I am not affraid to assert a reciprocation of subordinations , between the Church and the Magistrate , and a sort of collaterality and independent supremacy in their own kind common to both , for every soul , Pastors and others , are subject to the Magistrate as the higher power , in all civill things , Rom. 13. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. Tit. 3 ▪ 1. 1 Pet. 2. 13 , 14. Mat. 22. 21. and all members of the common-wealth , being members of the Church in soul-matters , are subject to the Church and Pastors in their authoritative dispensing of Word , Sacraments and Church censures : Nor are any Magistrates or other who have souls excepted , Heb. 13. 17. Mat. 16. 19. Mat. 18. ●8 . Joh. 20. 21. Act. 15. 20 , 21 , 22 , 23. Mat. 10. 4● , 41 , 42. So Protestant writers who have written on this subject Teach : As the learned Walens , judicious Trig. that most learned Divine , And. Rivetus ; the grave and learned professors of Leyden , Zipperus , Calv. Petr. Cabel Javi●● , reverend and pious M. Iohn Cotton , judicious P. Mar. D. Pareus , all the Protestant confessions . The Augustine confession distinctly of Helvetia . The confession of Sweden , the Saxon. The English confession and that of Scotland , all our Divines ; while Erastus , Vtenbogard , Hu. Grotius , Vedelius , ( Bullinger , Gualth●rus , going before them ; yet not every way theirs ) did teach the contrary . The Arminians in Holland did thus flatter the Magistrate for their owne politick ends , and some Court Divines made the King of England Head of the Church , in the place of the Pope , which P. Mar. excused and expounded benignly ; some say it is against reason that there should be two supream collaterall powers , and especially in a mutuall subordination . But can we deny this reciprocation of subordinations ? it is evident in many things ; if the King be in an extream feaver , one of his own subjects , a skill'd Physitian forbiddeth him to drink wine , the King is to obey him as a Physitian , by vertue of the sixth command , as the King would not kill himselfe : And yet by vertue of the fifth command , the Physitian being the Kings subject , is subject to the Laws of the King. The Queen of Scotland as a wife , was to be subject to her Husband in the Lord , as the Word of God commandeth , Ephes . 5. 22. and her owne Husband not being King , but a subject , was to obey his Wife , the Princes and supream Magistrate according to the Word of God , Rom. 13. 1. 1 Pet. 2. 13 , 14. Tit. 3. 1. Yea , all Arts have a sort of collaterall and co-equall dignity , and we are to believe a skilled Artist in his owne Art , though this Artist be a servant , a vassal , a slave to those who do yeild to him in his owne Art. CHAP. XXV . Quest . 21. Objections touching the subordinations of Magistrate and Church removed . THere is nothing more hated by the Adversaries then the pretended emulation of those two superlatives and highest powers : Some Object , 1. Are not all powers on earth subject to the Magistrate ? Ministers of the Gospel not excepted ; doth not the Magistrate command the Pastors to preach the Word ? Ans . All power deviating offensively , and to the disturbance of societies in Morals , is subject to the Civill power and the Sword ; and every power failing against the Law and Gospel within the bosome of the Church , is subject to the Word of God , in the mouth of the Ministers , who are nothing but Servants and Heralds ; so that the subjection is to God , not to the Church , and in a spirituall and Ecclesiasticall way : See P. Martyr . Lo. Com. l. 4. c. 13. & seq ; It s but a poor evasion of Vedelius , to say , That the Magistrate is subject to the Church Catachrestice & abusive , unproperly and abusively . 1. Because the Ministers as the Ambassadors of Christ do properly and not abusively preach the Gospel to Magistrates . 2. Magistrates are not unproperly the sheepe of Christ ; yea , they are to the adversaries chief Members of the Church ; Ergo , they are that way subject as other Members , as Pareus saith , Com. Rom. 13. Nor , 3. Will that prove any thing that the Pastors are Ministers , not Lords : for to people and Prince as they have souls to be saved , they are Ministers , and by this people should abusively be subiect as well as Magistrates : But Vedelius freeth Magistrates from subjection to Pastors ; because they are subject to the Word of God , not to Pastors , but so are the people subject also the same way . Obj. 2. Then may the Church censure all sinnes , even those that are most proper to the civill judge , such as sorcery , parricide , sodomie , for the which the Magistrate is to draw the sword , and for which the Lord made the land to cast out seven great Nations . Ans . The case is one within the Church , and another without the Church . 2. It is one in the case of a confused , or backs●●ding Church , another in the Church rightly constitute and pure ; without the Church , God intendeth nothing , either in the intention of the worker or the work ; but the externall peace of humane society : Then , I grant the Magistrate is at the first without any previous labours of religious men , to save the soul of the offender , to take care of peace and the conservation of humane society ; But within the visible Church , where the Gospel is preached , it is presumed , that God intendeth salvation in regard of the intention of the work , the Gospel being preached to all within the visible Church ; if therefore any within the visible Church , fall in horrible scandals , and such as are capitall , in the intention of Gods dispensation , without the Church , God intendeth nothing but peace ; But in regard of the intention of Gods dispensation , within the Church , where the Gospel is preached , he intendeth both peace by the godly Magistrates care and eternall life , by the preaching of the Gospel ; Because therefore life eternall is more necessary then externall peace , it is necessary that the Church first labour to try , cognosce of , and cure the mans soul by rebukes , threats , conviction ; and ( if need be ) by excommunication , that the souls of many may be saved from the contagion of scandal , before the Magistrate punish either to death , ( if the scandal so deserve ) or by any coactive way by the sword , the genuine fruit whereof is not repentance and gaining of the mans soul , except by accident and through the co-operation of a higher hand , above nature even of free grace ) but the externall peace of the common-wealth ; hence in a constitute Church , the Magistrate is not to proceed with the sword against the body of any Member of the Church , while the Church first try and attempt how to save his soul ; therefore the Magistrate is to sentence none as punishable by the sword , while first he be laboured on by the Church , and upon a previous sentence of the Church ; then must the Magistrates judging of a scandalous Church-member be subsequent , and the Churches judging antecedent : But , 2. If the Church be remisse , this is a defect ▪ and somewhat extraordinary ; if the Magistrate command the Church to do their duty , and they neglect to do it , the Magistrates cognizance then may be antecedent and not consequent , and the case of a Church erring in a fact , is , as if , in that fact , there were no Church . Obj. 3. Those are subordinate to the Church , whose judgement and sentences are subjected to the Church , to be tryed or condemned by the Church , but the judgement and sentences of the Magistrate are subjected to the Church ; Ergo , and by the like they prove , Pastors to be subjected to the Civill Magistrate , because their preaching , their dispensing of the seals , their sentences in their Presbytery are subjected to the Magistrate , so as he may absolve , or condemne . Ans . Vedelius shall never prove the Major , as touching the subjection or subordination in question ; he is subject to the Magistrate , whose sentence or judgement is subject , in an antecedent cognizance , and in a coactive corporall way , it is true : But now the assumption is false , in a constitute Church , the sentence or thing sentenced or judged by the Church , is subject to the Magistrate in a subsequent cognizance , and in a corporall coactive way only : But not in an antecedent cognizance , and by a way of Ecclesiasticall censuring ; we acknowledge a subordination of the Churches sentence to the Magistrate , in regard of the Magistrates externall care to punish iniquity in any ; not in regard of intrinsecall judging and dealing with the conscience , the Church is to give a reason of their sentence from the Word of God , to the Magistrate when he demandeth it . Obj. 4. Ministers as Ministers are subjects of the King ; Ergo , the King judgeth them as Ministers . Ans . I deny the antecedent : The Ministery as such is an Ordinance of God , and cannot be judged ; nor are Ministers , nor Painters as Painters , nor Musitians as Musitians , nor Saylors as Saylors subjects ; these reduplications be consening and deceiving notions ▪ painters as painters are regulated by Art , & subject to be judged by painters ; but as men they are subjects , & so are Ministers as men subject to Cesar ; as Ministers they are the servants of Christ , & not subjects . Ob. As Ministers they are either Magistrates or subjects ; but Ministers as Ministers are not Magistrates : He that is not with Christ is against him , M. Coleman in his Brotherly examination , p. 21. saith , He that doth not manage his office under Christ , and for Christ , must manage it under the Devil , and for the Devil ; if therefore the Christian Magistrate do not manage his office under , and for Christ , he must manage it under , or for the Devil , which were blasphemous . Ans . I deny the Major proposition : Ministers as Ministers are neither Magistrates , nor subjects ; but formally the separated servants of Christ , set a part for the work of gathering the Saints : Now to be subjects , is to be judged by the Magistrate in those things , in which they are subjects , that is , in all Civill businesse they are , and false teaching discerned by the Church to be false teaching , or in case the Church corrupt themselves , then are Ministers obnoxions to bodily punishment to be inflicted by the Magistrate ; But this is properly to be a subject of the Magistrate , to be lyable to the civill cognizance , trying , and bodily punishment inflicted by the Magistrate , and to be a subject ; and a member of the other Kingdome , is to be subject to the Ecclesiasticall cognizance , tryall , and censure of the Church , as a matter that concerneth the soul ; hence the former concerneth the body and outward man , the latter the inner man , and the soul . 2. The former concerneth peace with men and edification , to be procured by a mean extrinsecall to edification , to wit , by the sword ; the latter concerneth peace with God , by a spirituall sword , the Word of God. 3. The former is carnall , and of the Kingdome of this world ; the latter spirituall and of Christs other Kingdome , that is not of this world , Ioh. 18. 36. 4. The former worketh by coaction and bodily violence ; the latter by removing unwillingnesse and making a rebellious soul obedient . 5. The former is an act of justice not terminated on repentance , or the mans turning to God , as an end ; for whether this end be obtained , or no , the Magistrate is to use the sword , the other is terminated on repentance , as its end : He that is not with Christ , is against Christ , and with the Devil ; It s true , in all professors of the Gospel ▪ as professors , no man , but he must be either on the one side , or on the other , either for , or with Christ , or against him : But it is not true with every reduplication ; thus Ministers as Ministers are subjects of , or to the King , and to obey him in the Lord , and so with Christ , hath this sense , Ministers essentially and formally are subjects of , or to the King to obey him in the Lord ; so as Ministers do lose the essence and formality of the office of the Ministery ; if they be not the Kings subjects , and with Christ ; this is most false , for Iudas should not be a Minister of Christ then , in that he was not subject to the Law of Cesar , that is , that the servant and disciple should be for , and under his master and Lord , it only followeth ; Ergo , Iudas was not a godly Minister , but under the Devil , not under Christ ; Magistrates do neither essentially as Magistrates cleave to Christ , nor ●ight against Christ ; but as holy men they cleave to Christ , as sinfull men they fight against Christ . 2. Master Coleman knoweth that we speak of the office of a Magistrate as a Magistrate , not under the accidents of Christian , or heathenish ; there was no reason he should apply his Argument to the Parliament , except to make us odious , as if we did not as much honour or pray for the Parliament and King , as himselfe : But it concludeth equally against all Magistrates , and let him see it in a heathen Magistrate as a Magistrate : for a heathen Magistrate as a Magistrate , doth either manage his office under Christ , and for Christ , or under the Devil , and for the Devil . This I and Master Coleman also shall deny , for a heathen Magistrate as a Magistrate , doth not manage his office under , or for Christ , as mediator ; because he is utterly ignorant of Christ , for he hath no more , but what God as creator and nature gave him , saith Master Coleman , pag. 20. and the other horne of the Argument , is as weak for this , The heathen Magistrate as such manageth his office under , or for the Devil , is blasphemous , for so Magistracy and the office should be intrinsecally unlawfull , and for the Devil : But it is intrinsecally the Ordinance of God , Rom. 13. and apply this to God as creator , it shall appear of force . The Magistrate as the Magistrate , doth either manage his office under , and for God creator , or under , and for the Devil . The former part is true , because God creator and nature made the office of Magistracy , apply it to a heathenish husband , Father , Master , Musitian , Painter , under these reduplications and it shall make the relation of Husband Devilish , or this proposition , ( a Husband , a Father as a Father , and a Husband , manage their office , under , and for Christ the mediator , or under , or for the Devil ) is most false and blasphemous : the former part is false ; for there should have been , and was Father and Husband which did manage the duties of these relations , for God creator , not for Christ mediator ; though Christ had never taken on our nature , never been mediator , never been King and Priest of his redeemed Church . The latter part is blasphemous , for then Adam had managed the part of Husband and Father under the Devil , and for the Devil , even before he fell in sinne , and in the state of Innocency . 3. Mr. Colemans meaning is , that the Magistrate as the Magistrate , and by office is under Christ mediator , as his supream and immediate vicegerent as mediator ; now in this sense , Christs saying ( he that is not against us , is with us ) shall not prove the truth of the proposition , which must be this , and is most false , to wit , that ( The Magistrate as the Magistrate , by office , is either under Christ mediator , as the supream and immediate vicegerent of him as mediator , or he is by office under the Devil . ) This we deny , for one might argue thus of the Apostle Paul , who was either as an Apostle for Christ , or against Christ ; Paul as an Apostle is either under Christ the mediator , and his supream and immediate vicegerent , having power of both Swords , or he is under the Devil : The proposition is most false ; for Paul is neither of them , so say we here ; the Magistrate doth neither manage his office , as a Magistrate under Christ mediator , as his Vicar , and a little head of the Church ; nor yet doth the Magistrate manage his office under , or for the Devil , God save the Magistrate , datur tertium , he is for Christ as a Christian , and as a Christian ; but as a Magistrate he is not for Christ as mediator , that is , as having his office of Christ as mediator , and being from Christ a Magistrate , that is , as M. Coleman expoundeth it an officer , having power of both the Swords : for Mr. Coleman saith , p. 20. Christian Magistracy is an Ecclesiasticall administration ; Ergo , he hath the power of the Spirituall Sword , and Paul , Rom. 13. saith , he hath from God the power of the other Sword : Yea , we cannot say that a Magistrate as a Magistrate , or a Minister as a Minister , are either redeemed and saved in Christ , nor no redeemed , or no saved in Christ , but in another reduplication : The Magistrate as a Magistrate , is not redeemed , but as an elected man ; nor is he damned , or not redeemed as a Magistrate , but as a reprobate and an unbeleeving man ; and the like ▪ I say of a Minister , he that is not with Christ , as his immediate and supream swordbearer , is not against Christ , for so all the world except the Prince , should be against him . Obj. 5. The Magistrate as he defendeth the body , and goods , so also the the fame of men ; hence what is a matter of good or ill report is judged by the Magistrate , who may put ill doers to shame , Iudg. c. 187. But Church scandals , blasphemy , heresie , apostacy , are matters of ill report , and of shame ; Ergo , they are to be judged by the Magistrate . Ans . Non concluditur negatum , We deny not but the Magistrate may judge and put to shame offenders , but it is civill shame , by which the Magistrate judgeth any offender to be an evill Citizen and hurtfull member of the common-wealth , Iudg. 18. 17. The Church hath no power thus to judge , or thus to put to shame : But there is an Ecclesiasticall shame , in which the Church judgeth , whether such a man be a sound and faithfull subject of the Kingdome of Christ , or a hurtfull Member of the Church , and of this shame speaketh Paul , 2 Thess 3. 14. keep no company with him , that he may be ashamed ; and the same way we are to distinguish , a good name for it is an honour , that it be said of any man , as Psal . 87. This man was borne in Zion . Obj. 6. What the Magistrate as a Magistrate punisheth , that as a Magistrate he judgeth ; but as a Magistrate he punisheth Idolatry and heresie ; Ergo , as a magistrate he judgeth it . Ans . What the Magistrate punisheth , that he judgeth distinguo : What he punisheth , that he judgeth , the way that he punisheth , for as he punisheth civilly and with the sword ; so he judgeth in a civill way , not as a Church scandal , but as a civill disturbance . 2. In a constitute Church , by a subsequent judging after those whose lips should preserve knowledge , have judged it to be Idolatry , and heresie ; he is to judge it , and in order to corporall punishment , its true , and thus the Major is granted : But the assumption is false , for the Magistrate judgeth nothing as scandalous , no Idolatry , or heresie , with an antecedent judgement , and with order to Ecclesiasticall punishment to gain the soul . Obj. But there is no other judging or punishing required , but such as the magistrate inflicteth . Ans . This is a false principle , and everteth all Church Government . Obj. 7. But so you make two supream magistrates , the King and the Church , two collaterall supremacies ; yet so as the magistrates conscience lyeth under the feet of the Church . Ans . The Church hath a Ministery , no dominion of Magistracy . 2. There is a collaterality without equality . The Magistrate is highest and worthiest , the other hath no dignity , no supereminency , but to be authoritative declarers of the mind of Christ . 3. The Magistrate is no more tyed to the judgement of a Synod , or Church , then any private man is tyed in his practice ▪ the tye in Discipline and in all Synodicall acts and determinations , is here as it is in preaching the Word , the tye is secondary , conditionall , with limitation in so farre as it agreeth with the Word , not absolutely obliging , not Papal , qua or because commanded , or because determined by the Church , and such as Magistrates , and all Christians may reject , when contrary to , or not warranted by the Word of God. Obj. 8. But Pastors have authority equally immediate and independent under God , as the magistrate hath , and what more can they have except the Crowne and Scepter ? is not this an emulous and odious equality , beside a collaterality ? hence they cry the liberty , the liberty of the Kingdome of Christ , the right , the power of the Church is taken away , so often as the magistrate punisheth scandals . Ans . Non-subordination can never inferre equality , who denieth that the Magistrate may command the Husband and Wife to do a duty to each other , the father not to provoke the son , the sonne not to disobey the Father , the Pastor and People , the Master and Servant , the Captaine and Souldier , to do a duty each , one to another . And there is a proper right and liberty , and power immediately given by God , without the King or Magistrates interposing of their authority : to all these , the Kings authority maketh not the man a Father , nor the Sonne subject to the Father , nor the Servant to the Master , nor the Souldier to the Commander . God immediately made those powers , and God in the Law of nature hath given a power to the Father over the sonne , without the Magistrate ; yea , though there had never been a Magistrate in the world : so the Pastors and Elders by divine institution , have a power and liberty to feed and governe the flock , over which the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers , and set them over as those who must give an account to the great Shepherd , Acts 20. 28 , 29. 1 Thes . 5. 12 , 13. Heb. 13. 17. 1 Tim. 5. 17. now it no more followeth that all Fathers are equall to the Magistrate , all Masters , all Captains to the King , then that the Church or Pastors are equall to the King , for Fathers , Masters , Captaines , Husbands have immediately from God in the Law of Nature , a supream , a high and independent Authority as the Church hath , without any intervention of the will or authority of King or any earthly Magistrate , and without any subordination as they are such to the Prince . 2. The emulation between the Magistrate and Pastors is no more in point of government , then in point of preaching , exhorting , rebuking even of Kings and all that are in Authority ; now we have both demonstrated from the Word , and have the grant of Adversaries , that in point of preaching and rebuking , the Pastors have an immediate supremacy and independency under Iesus Christ ; and all emulation here , is from men who will no● submit to the yoke of Christ . 3. If the Magistrate should usurpe over Husbands , and Masters and Fathers , their jus maritale , herile , Paterum , and spoil them of Husband-power , and masterly and fatherly power , as our Adversaries counsell the Magistrate to take the spirituall right and power of the keyes of the Kingdome of God , from the Church and Pastors , the former should complaine , as do the latter . Object . 8. But if the Kingdome be heathenish , and the heart of the King be first supernaturally affected , then Religion beginneth at him as a Magistrate , and he may appoint gifted men after they are converted to preach the Gospell ; Ergo , The first rise of Religion is from the Magistrate as the Magistrate . Ans . If the King be converted first as a Christian , not as a Magistrate , he may spread the Gospell to others , and preach himselfe but not as a Magistrate , as Iehoshaphat commanded the Levites to do their dutie , so might he command those of the house of Aaron , who had deserted the Priests office , to take the office on them , to which God had called them , so here gifts and faithfulnes appearing to the new converted Prince , he is to command those so gifted , ( for their gifts and faithfulnes is as evident a call as to be borne the sonnes of Aaron , ) to take on them the calling of preaching and of dispensing the Seals . But ▪ 1. he ordaineth them not Pastors as a Prince , but commandeth them to follow the calling which now the Church not constitute , cannot give . 2. He can preach himselfe as a gifted beleever , in an extraordinary exigence , but he cannot doe this as a Magistrate , yea , Moses did never prophecy as a Magistrate , nor David as a King. 2. All the rise that Religion hath from the Prince as the Prince in this case is civill , that men gifted may be commanded by civill Authority , to dispence Word and Sacraments , but nothing Ecclesiasticall is here done by the Prince as the Prince . 3. The highest power in the Church as the Church , and the highest amongst men , as men , are much different . The Magistrates power in commanding that this Religion that is true and consonant to the Word of God be set up , and others that are false be not set up in his Kingdome , is a civill power , and due to him as a Magistrate , but a highest Church power , to dispense Word and Sacraments agreeth to no Magistrate as a Magistrate ; but it followeth not , that when the true Religion is erected by his power as a Magistrate , that he may as a Magistrate dispence Word , Sacraments , and Synodicall acts and censures ; except God have called him to preach the Word , and to use the sword of the other Kingdome , as a Member of the Church joyned with the Church . Object . 9. But the Magistrate is unproperly subject to the Pastor , who is but a meer Herald , servant , and Minister , who hath all his authority from the word of another , and so it is but imperium alienum , a borrowed power , he is subject properly to Christ speaking in his Word . Titius is subject to the King properly , but unproperly to the Kings Herald . Ans . 1. Let the subjection be unproper , there can no conclusion from thence be drawn against us , If 1. The Pastors as Pastors have their commissions from Christ and be his immediate Servants , and have no Commission Pastorall from the Magistrate , as the power of the Herald floweth immediately from the royall power of the King , and he is the Kings immediate servant ; then to obey him in those acts which he performeth in the Kings name , is to obey the King ; and in those acts subjects doe properly obey the Herald ; and so here Heb. 13. Obey those that are over you in the Lord , according to that , He that heareth you , heareth me , he that despiseth you despiseth me . 2. It is enough for our purpose that Magistrates are so to obey Pastors in the Lord , and Pastors are so supreame under Christ as the Magistrate is not above them , and they have their Ambassage , calling , and commission immediately from Iesus Christ , without the intervention of the Magistrates Authority . Obj. But the obedience of the Magistrate to the Pastors , is not absolute , but conditionall , if they command in the Lord ; Ergo , It is no kindly obedience and subjection . Ans . It followeth not , for so we should give no kindly obedience to Kings , to Parents , to Masters , for we obey them onely conditionally in the Lord , as they warrant their Commandement from the Word . Yet Vedelius will not say , it is unproper subjection we owe to the King , nor can he say that the Royall power is imperium alienum , a begged power , all obedience to men this way is begged , and if we come to Logick , if I should say the nature and definition of obedience agreeth not univocally to obedience to God , and to obedience to the creature , Vedelius should hardly refute me . It is enough Ministers of the Gospell discharge an Ambassage in the roome and place of God , 2 Cor. 5. 20. God commandeth in his Ministers , a limited obedience , is kindly obedience . Obj. 10. The keeping of the booke of the Law is given to the King , Deut. 17. and 2 Kin. 11. v. 12. Iehoiada the Priest gave the booke of the Testimony to King Iehoash , when they made him King , the Priests indeed kept the booke of the Law in the side of the Arke , but as servants of the King , and custodes Templi . Ans . You may see solid answers to this , in Walens , Cabel Iavius , and Iac. Triglandius . 1. The booke of the Law was given to the King for his practise , that he might feare the Lord his God , and his heart not be lifted up above his brethren , Deut. 17. 18 , 19 , 20. and this was common to him , with the Priests and all the people of God , but to the King in an exemplary and speciall manner , that 1. The people might follow his Example , and therefore these same words which concerne the practice of the King , Deut. 17. 19. are also given to the people , Deut. 6. 2. and 10. 13. and 111 , 2 , 13 , 22. and 12. 1 , 2 , 28. and 13. 4. and 27. 1. and 28. 1. with a little change , sure no change that by any consequent will make the book of the Law to be delivered to the King to this end , that his lips by his Royall office , should preserve knowledge , and that the people should require the Law at the Kings mouth , which was the speciall office of the Priest , Mal. 2. 7. as proper and peculiar to the Priest , as the Covenant of Levi , ver . 8. and that they should not be partiall in the Law , but should teach the people the difference between the cleane and the unclean , the precious and the vile in Iudgement , not accepting the persons of father and mother , Ezek. 44. 23 , 24. and 22 , 26. Lev. 10. 10 , 11 , Ieremiah ▪ 15. 19. Deut. 33. 9. Yea , it was no lesse peculiar to the Priests , then to offer Sacrifice to the Lord , Leviticu● 10. 10 , 11 , 12 , 13. Mal. 2. 7 , 8. compared with v. 2. and with c. 1. v. 6 , 7 , 8. Now the King as King was not a confederate in the Covenant of Levi , to burne incense and teach the people , but in a farre other Covenant , ● Kin. 11. 17 , 18. 2. In which the King was to use the sword in defence of the Law and punishing Idolaters : for 1. the King is neither commanded to teach Priests and people out of the booke of the Law ; Nor 2. rebuked for his neglect in this : both these we may read of the Priests every where in the Prophets , Deut. 33. 10. Mal. 2. 7. Lev. 10. 10 , 11. Ier. 2. 8. and 6. 13 , 14. Hos . 4. 6 , 7 , 8. Deut. 17. 11 , 12. yea the booke of the Law is put in the keeping of the Priests and Levites , Deut. 31. 25. And Moses commanded the Levites , which bare the Arke of the Covenant of the Lord , saying , 26. Take this book of the Law , and put it in the side of the Arke of the Covenant of the Lord your God. Now if the Priests had been onely the Kings servants immediately subordinate to the King , and mediately onely to Iesus Christ , the Arke , all the holy things , the booke of the covenant , the burning of incense before the Lord , had been principally and first injoyned to the King. Ezra the Priest read the book of the Law , not Nehemiah ; nor was it ever commanded that the King should read it in the hearing of the people , and give the sense of it , as the Priests were to doe by their office ; Hilkiah 2 Kin. 22. found the booke of the Law that was lost , and Shaphan the Scribe read it before the King , that they might see their Apostacie , and Iosiah might accordingly reforme , 2 King. 22 9 , 10. Object . 11. Isai . 49. Kings shall be thy Nurse-fathers : Ergo , Kings were Fathers and heads of the Church . Ans . This text is brought for the Popes Supremacy , but it is Isai . 60. 10. Their Kings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall serve thee , this is no dominion . And the breasts of Kings , which the Church is to suck , is not the sincere milk of the Word , which the King preacheth by himself or others , but the externall strength , dignity , that the King shall adde by his Authority to the Church , but the Tutor cannot ●ob the Pupil of the Law and priviledges of the inheritance . 2. The Prince is not a father spirituall of the second birth of the Church , as Paul was , 1 Cor. 4. 15. Object . 12. He for whom we are to pray , that under him we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty , and procureth the good of the Church as the Church ; to him as the supream Officer and Shepherd , is the Church as the Church subject ; but the Magistrate is such , 1 Tim. 2. 1 , 2. Ergo. Ans . The Major is false , and the Assumption untrue also , and all that the conclusion can bring forth , is , that the Prince hath 1. An externall coactive care by way of dominion to procure the removall of Wolves from the fold . 2. To procure the good of the Church , in order to a naturall and civill good . 3. To procure good to the Church as the Church in a coactive way , by the sword , in punishing Idolators . 2. The Church as the Church is not subordinate to the Prince , but as Subjects of the common wealth , because he by a coactive power may procure the good of the Church as the Church ; for indirectly and by the sword , the Magistrate defending godlines , and procuring the good of souls , doth not prove that his dominion and sword extendeth to their soules , or that he watcheth for their soules , as Heb. 13. 17. Obj. 13. The Kings of Israel and Iudah have reformed Religion . Ans . I cannot trouble the Reader , to adde here what I have answered elsewhere , but let the Reader see Triglandius , Ant. Walens , Gabel Iavius in the cited places , they have in the defection of the Priests , which is extraordinary , Reformed Religion . 2. They did many things as Prophets , not as Magistrates . 3. They have done much in Religion , quoad actus imperatos , non elicitos , by their civill power commanding Priests to doe their dutie . Object . 14. It s true in severall respects , he that is a Governour , may be a subject , but in one and the same spirituall respect , to judge and to be judged , to sit on the Bench , and stand at the barre of Christ Iesus , is as impossible as to reconcile the East and the VVest together , so The Bloodie Tenent , I demand if the Church be a Delinquent , who shall judge ? It is answered the , magistrate . Again if the magistrate be a delinquent , I ask who shall judge it ? It is answered , The Church . Whence I observe ( which is , in most cases of the world monstrous ) that one person , to wit , the Church or the Magistrate , shall be at one time the delinquent at the Barre , and the judge upon the Bench : for the Church must judge when the magistrate offends ; and yet the magistrate must judge when the Church offends , whether she contem●● civill authority , in the Second Table for thus dealing with him , or whether she hath broken the rules of the first table of which ( say they ) God hath made him a keeper and preserver , what blood , what tumults hath been , and must be spilt upon these grounds ? Ib. so the Church calleth one of her members to office , and ordaineth him an officer : The Magistrate opposeth him as an unworthy officer , and according to his conscience suppresseth him ; upon this the Church complaineth of the Magistrates violation of her priviledges , and that he is turned persecutor , and not prevailing with admonition , She excommunicateth the Magistrate : The Magistrate again not induring such violation of ordinances , he cutteth off with the sword , such prophaners of ordinances . Ans . All this is but wind , devised against the Magistrates punishing of Idolaters , and I shew the same followeth upon the Magistrates , or Church erring , the one in abusing civill authority , or the other in prophaning ordinances , or preaching the word ; for instance , The Iudges of a land , or of Ierusalem , make grievous and bloody decrees against the poor , the widdows and the Orphane : A faithfull Isaiah , a zealous preacher by authority from the Lord , judgeth and condemneth according to his conscience , these judges , and cryeth out , as Isai . 10. 1 in the name of the Lord ▪ before all the Congregation : Woe be to you who decree unrighteous decrees , and write ( in the Bench ) grievousnesse , to turne aside the needy from judgement , and to take away right from the poore : Now the Magistrate that decreed those decrees , judgeth in his conscience they are righteous decrees , and he according to his conscience no● induring that Isaiah or any preacher should thus abuse and prophane so holy an Ordinance of prophecying , and preaching : as to preach lies in the name of the Lord , he proceedeth in his civill court , and cu●teth off with the sword such false Prophets , because they ●lander the Lords annoynted , and preach lies of him : is not here a reciprocation of judging in the same cause ? What will the Author say to this ? O saith he , the Magistrate ought not to use his sword against those Prophets , for they preach according to their conscience the truth of God : But say that Shimei were a Prophet , and he calls David his Prince a bloody murtherer ; and saith , this evill is come on him , for rising up against Saul his Master ; The Magistrate may not punish him with the Sword , for railing against the Lords anoynted . 2. And if the Magistrate ought not to strike with the sword any Prophet , for preaching according to his conscience , for that is persecution to this Author ; how shall the Prophets judge and condemne the Magistrate , for those same decrees which he hath given out according to his conscience ? for this is a persecution with the tongue , Mat. 5. 11. Iob 19. 22. and it is one and the same spirituall cause , saith this Author . 3. The same very Author and the Parliament , do reciprocally judge and condemne one another ; for the Parliament make warre against Papists , for drawing the King on their side , and causing him make warre against the Lambe and his followers , that is , against godly Protestants : Now suppose Priests and Iesuits , preach this to the Queen and other Papists , and they according to their conscience make warre against the flock of Christ , and the Parliament according to their conscience make warre against them : this Author sitteth downe , and judgeth and condemneth both sides as bloody persecutors , for point of conscience : Now though the Author in his Bench with his penne condemneth and judgeth both according to his conscience ; yet if the Papists or possibly the Parliament , had this Author in their fingers , might not they reciprocally judge and condemne him ? I think he cannot deny ; how justly they should reciprocally judge the Author , I cannot say . 3. This Author would have a contradiction , such as is to make East and West both one , that one and the same man both sit in the Bench , and stand at the barre , that the Church judge the Magistrate , and the Magistrate judge the Church : But I hope contradictions were no more under the Old Testament to be admitted , nor under the New. Now in the Old Testament the King might put to death the Prophet , who should prophecy blasphemies , and again the Prophet might judge the King , by denouncing the judgement of the Lord against the King ; let the Author say how the King , both did sit in the Bench , and stand at the ba●●e in divers respects : I think A●hab might judge and punish Micaiah unjustly , for prophecying that he should dye at Ramoth Gilead , and Micaiah might in prophecy give out the sentence of death justly against him ▪ but here be two contrary sentences , the like may fall out in Synodicall constitutions . 2. To answer to his reasons . 1. It followeth not that in one and the same spirituall respect , one and the same person judgeth on the Bench , and is judged at the Bar ; for the Churches judging is in a spirituall respect , as the officer ordained , may promote the building of Gods House , the Magistrates suppressing him is no spirituall respect ; but as it disturbeth the peace of the State , that so unworthy a person is an officer in Gods House , and is hurtfull to the Church of God in their edi●icatio● , which the Magistrate is to promote not in spirituall , but in a civill coactive way , by the power of the sword . 3. That one judge on the Bench , and the same stand at the Barre and be judged , at divers and sundry times , is not so impossible , by farre , as to reconcile East and West together ; A●●●b may judge Naboath to be condemned and stoned for his vineyard to day , and immediately after Elias the Prophet may arraigne him before the Barre and tribunall of God to be condemned , and adjudged to dye in the portion of Iezreel , where the dogs may lick his blood : It is true Elias is not properly a judge , but a declarer , in a propheticall and authoritative way of the judgement of God ; but this is all the judiciall power which we ascribe to Church , or Presbytery and Pastors ; they are meer Ministers or servants to declare the will and sentence of God : When the Minister preacheth wrath against the King for his sins , he judgeth the King in a Pastorall and Ministeriall way , which is all we contend for , in many officers united in a Church way , and at that same time , the King hath power after that , to judge him for preaching treason for ●ound Doctrine ; if it be found to be treason by the Church , and this reciprocation of judging we maintaine as consistent and necessary in Ministers of Gospel and Magistrates : But such a distance betweene them , as between East and West , we see not . The Author should have shewne it to us by his owne grounds : The Church may excommunicate a Magistrate as a persecutor , who cutteth off Idolaters for their conscience ; yet the godly Magistrate may judge and punish them with the sword , for abusing the ordinance of Excommunication , so as to excommunicate the godly Magistrate , because he doth punish evill doing with the Sword , Rom. 13. 4. 4. The Author infers that tumults and bloods do arise from these two ▪ But that will not prove these two to be inconsistent and contr●dictorious ; tumults and blood arise from preaching the Gospel , what then ? Ergo , the Gospel is a masse of contradictions , ●● followeth not : The ●umul●s and blood have their rise from mens lusts , who are impatient of the yoak of Christ , not from these two powers to judge Ecclesiastically in the Church , and to be judged civilly by the Magistrates : The Author draweth his instance to the actuall judging of the same thing contradictory wayes ; for example , the Church ordaineth one to be a preacher , and this they do Ecclesiastically , and the Magistrate actually condemneth the same man civilly as unworthy to be a preacher : It is one thing to say , that the Church hath power to judge righteously in an Ecclesiasticall way any matter , and another ( that the Christian Magistrate hath power in a civill way , to judge righteously the same matter ) and a ●ar other thing it is to say , The Church hath a power Ecclesiastically to judge a matter righteously , according to the word , and the Magistrate hath power to judge the same matter civilly in a wrong and unjust way ; the former we say , God hath given a power to the Church to ordaine Ecclesiastically , Epaphroditus to be a preacher of the Gospel , because these graces and gifts are in him that are requisite to be in a faithfull preacher ; and God hath also given a power to the Christian Magistrate to adde his civill sanction to the ordination and calling of the same Epaphroditus : But we do not teach that God hath given to the Church , a power to call Epaphroditus to the Ministery in an Ecclesiasticall way , and that God hath given a power to the Christian Magistrate to anull this lawfull ordination of Epaphroditus : Now the Author putteth such a supposition , that Church and Magistrate have two lawfull powers toward contrary acts ; the one of them a power to give out a just sentence , the other a power to give out an unjust sentence in one ▪ and the same cause , which we teach not : God gave to none either ▪ in Church or State a power to unjustice , ad malum n●●la ▪ est potestas . Obj. 14. How can the Magistrate determine , what the true Church and ordinances are , and then set them up with the power of the sword ? and how can he give judgement of a ●alse Church , false Ministery , false Doctrine , and false Ordinances , and so pull them down by the sword ? and yet you say the Magistrate is to give no spirituall judgement of these , nor hath he any spirituall power for these ends and purposes . Bloody Tenent . Ans . The Magistrate judges of these as a Magistrate , not in a Pastorall way or Ecclesiastically ; for then by office , he should be a preacher of the Gospel , but civilly as they are agreeable , or contrary to the Laws of the Common-wealth made concerning Religion , and in order to the civill praise and reward of stipends , wages , or benefices , or to the bodily punishment inflicted by the sword , Rom. 13. 4 , 5. So , though the object be spirituall , yet the judging is civill , and the Magistrates power in setting up true , or pulling downe false ordinances , is objectively spirituall or civilly good , or ill ( to speak so ) against the duty , or agreeable to that which men owe as they are members of a civill incorporation , a City or Common-wealth : But the same power of the Magistrate is formally , essentially in it selfe , civill , and of this world . CHAP. XXVI . Quest . 22. Whether appeals are to be made from the Assemblies of the Church , to the civill Magistrate , King or Parliament ? and of Paul his appeal to Cesar . FOr the clearer explanation of the question , its possible these considerations may help to give light , 1. There be these opinions touching the point : Some exclude the Magistrate from all care of Church-discipline , ● . As Iesuits and Papists will have Princes not to examine what the Church , the Pope and the cursed Clergy of Rome decrees in their Synods . To these the Sorbonists of Paris oppose , and the Parliament of France cause to be burnt by the hand of the hangman , any writings of Iesuits that diminisheth the just right of the Magistrate . 2. Those who in the Low-countries did remonstrate under the name of Arminians , as they are called , hold , that the Magistrate ought to tollerate all Religions , even Turcisme and Iudaisme not excepted , because the conscience of man cannot be compelled : Some of them were Socinians ▪ as Henry Slatius , who saith right downe , he that useth the sword , or seeketh a Magistracy ▪ is not a Christian ; yea , war is against the command of Iesus Christ , or in any tearms to kill any ; saith Henry Welsingius , Episcopius their chief man will have the Magistrate , going no further then reall or bodily mulcts or fines , Ioan. Geisteranus pronounceth it unlawfull to be a Magistrate to use the sword : But all say the Magistrate ought not to use the sword against Hereticks , Blasphemers , Idolaters , or against any man , for his conscience or Religion . 3. Those that think the Magistrate bear the sword lawfully , yet do confine him to the defence of the halfe of Gods Law , the duties of the second Table , and not to these all , but to such as border not directly on conscience ; for if some should sacrifice their children to Molech and Devils , as some do , the Magistrate were not to punish them , it being a joynt of their Religion and a matter of conscience : and all these will be found to give to the Magistrate as the Magistrate , just as little as Iesuits do in the matters of Religion , and that is right downe nothing , except possibly the Magistrate be of their Religion only , whom he Governs only as a Christian man ; the Magistrate hath more with these , then with Papists . 4. Erastus giveth all in Doctrine and Discipline , both in power and exercise to the Magistrate , even to the dispensing of Word and Sacraments . 5. Others forsaking Erastus in a little , But following him in the main , deny power of order . 2. Power of internall jurisdiction granteth to him all the externall government of the Church . 6. We hold that the Magistrate keeps both Tables of the Law , and that he hath an inspection in a civill coactive way , in preserving both Tables of the Law ; but that he is not as a Magistrate a member of the Church , but as a Christian only . 2. The exercise of Discipline is one thing , and the exercise of it , ( as the modus ) the way of exercising of it , either in relation to Ecclesiasticall constitutions , or in relation to the politick and civill Laws of a Common-wealth , is a far other thing . 3. As the Church is to approve and commend the just sentence of the civill judge in punishing ill doers , but only conditionally in so far as it is just , so is the magistrate obliged to follow , ratifie , and with his civil sanction to confirme the sound constitutions of the Church : But conditionally , not absolutely , and blindely , but in so far as they agree with the Word of God. 4. Hence there is a wronging of the Church as the Church , and a civill wronging of the Magistrate as the Magistrate , or of the members of the Church as such , or of the members of the Common-wealth as such , the former and the latter both cannot belong to one judicature : No more then the failing of a Painter against the precepts of Art , because he hath drawn the colours , proportion , and the countenance beside the samplar , and the failing not against Art , but against the Lawes of the King , in that he hath lavished out too much gold in the drawing of the image , doth belong to one judgement ; for the Painter as a Painter , according to the Law of Art , must judge of the former , and the Magistrate as a Magistrate of the latter . 5. An appellation is one thing , and the complaint of an oppressed man is another thing ; or a provocation to a competent judge is one thing , and the refugium , the refuge and fleeing of an oppressed man to a higher power , is another thing ; if the Church erre and fail against the Law of Christ in the matter , and decree , the man to be a heretick , who is none , and that to be heresie which is truth ; the oppress●d man in a constituted Church may have his refuge to the godly Magistrate and complain , but he cannot appeal , for an appellation is from an erring judge to an higher judge , in eadem s●rie , in the same nature and kinde of judicatures , as from a civill Court to a higher civill Court , and from an Ecclesiasticall Court to a higher ; as suppose the Church of Antioch judge that the Gentiles must be circumcised , the godly there may appeal to the judgement of Apostles and Elders , in a Councell conveened from Antioch and Ierusalem both : and therefore because the Magistrate can no more judge what is heresie , what truth , as a Magistrate , then he can dispense Word and Sacraments ; an appeal cannot be made to him , who is no more a judge , ex officio , nor he can dispense the Sacraments ex officio , but a complaint may be made to the Magistrate ; if the Church fail in their judging , the Magistrate is to command the Church to judge it over againe , but the Magistrate cannot judge it himself ; as there is a complaint made to the Magistrate that the P●inter hath not drawn the image exactly , according to the samplar , the Magistrate judgeth not of the Art of the Painter , nor can the Magistrate as the Magistrate draw the image himselfe ; But the Magistrate may judge of the Painters breach of promise , who did ●action to draw it exactly according to the samplar , and hath not kept faith to the man who payeth him wages ; and therefore the Magistrate may either punish his ▪ morall error , his breach of promise , not his error of Art , ( the faculty or company of Painters must judge of of that ) or then command the Painter to paint the same image again , according as the Painter convenanted : But it may be objected , You then make the Magistrate to meddle no more with matters of faith , and preaching truth or falsehood , and giving out Ecclesiasticall rules in Church government , as Act. 15. then he meddleth with painting according to the principles of Art ; now painting according to Art belongeth not at all to the conscience of the Magistrate , but sound preaching ; right ruling in Gods house , belongeth in a far nearer relation to the conscience of the godly Magistrate . I Answer , As touching the formall judging Ecclesiast●cally , and as concerning this , that the Magistrate should say , it seemed good to the Holy Ghost , and to me ▪ or his dispensing of Word and Sacraments , or his burning incense before the Lord , it no more belongeth to him as a Magistrate , to do these in his owne person formally ; because God hath not called him to act these , then it belongeth to him to paint an Image , to sew shooes , to si● at the helme of a Ship , and stir and guide her to such a Port , as is clearer , Heb. 5. 4. 1 Cor. 7. 17. 21. Rom. 10. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 17. and 3. 1 , 2 , 3. Act. 13. 23. and 20. 28 , 29 , 30. Heb. 13. 17. 2 Chro. 26. 18 , 19 , 20 , 21. But in another consideration , as sound or unsound dispensing of Word and Sacraments , as right or unjust ruling in the house of God , may more or lesse hurt , or benefit the souls of men , which he is to care for indirectly , in ordine ad penas vel premia civilia et corporalia ; it belongeth more to the Magistrate , to take care of the Church , of Religion , of preaching and , governing Gods house , then any painting or Arts in the earth : Again , the Church proceeding in these things , that are against common iustice in all judicatures , no lesse then in the Church , as to condemn the party never heard , or not convinced , either by confession , or under two sufficient witnesses , or to do manifest unjustice in the manner of proceeding , leaveth a clear place to the wronged party , by the Law of nature ▪ if not to appeal ▪ yet to flee and have re-course to the Christian Magistrate , who is Par●ns Patrie ▪ the father of the Common wealth ▪ 6. The question may ▪ either be of any really ▪ wronged by the Church whether he may appeal to the Magistrate , or whether he who either beleeveth , or thinketh , or falsly lyeth , and saith that he was wronged , may appeal to the Magistrate . 7. An Appeal is different from a Declinature , a Declinature is properly a refusing to be judged , because the judge is incompetent , and the businesse belongeth not to him ; those who follow Erastus , and deny all power of censures to the Church , doe decline , but not appeal from the Church , thinking the Church hath no power at all to judge or censure the scandalous . An Appeal is properly from the same inferiour judicature , to a superiour judge , in eadem serie , in the same kind , and it is either proper or unproper : Proper it is , when a particular Church doth appeal to a Synod of many Churches in the same place : Unproper , when either a wronged person hath recourse to one or many Pastors of Authority , as Chrysostome , Flavianus , Athanasius appealed to the Bishop of Rome , that he would request the Church to proceed orderly : Or , 2. The godly Magistrate would command that the Church would unpartially proceed to right an oppressed man , as Cabeljavius saith . Or , 3. When there is no Synods to be had , then as Triglandius saith well from Beza , the Christian Magistrate may provide ●it meanes of releeving the oppressed . 8. This would ever be remembred , that in case of the Churches erring in judgement , which must be thought of as a sort of extraordinary case , the godly Magistrate may do more , then what ordinarily he can doe ; and so may the Church , when the Magistrate oppresseth in judgement , as great Iunius saith . 9. We grant when any complaineth to the Magistrate , that they are oppressed in judgement by the Church , that the Church is obliged to give an account of their doings , but that from common charitie to remove the scandall , and that they owe to all Christians , as may be evidently collected from 1 Pet. 4. 15. but this will not prove a subordination to common Christians as to Iudges , nor yet to the Magistrate . 2. The Magistrate , when his judging is deemed scandalous , is to give an account to the preachers of the Gospel , who watch for his soul : as King Saul gave an account to Samuel , ( with a false Apologie , I grant ) that he had obeyed the Commandement of the Lord ; but if Saul had been faultlesse in sparing ●gag and the cattell , yet was he obliged to give an account to Samuel . But that will not prove that King Saul was subordinate to Samuel to be judged of him , because Prophets are but servants and Ministers to declare Gods will , yet is it all the subordination that we require in this , according to that , And the people beleeved the Lord and Moses . Now all the Arguments before alledged to prove that Pastors as Pastors are not subordinate in their pastorall acts to the civill Magistrate , do also prove that there is no appeal from the Church in an Ecclesiasticall businesse to the civill Magistrate : For 1. If two Painters contend touching any controversie in the mysterie of their Art , they cannot appeal to the King as Iudge ; the King then should formally be a painter , and which is absurd , not by accident ; but as a King and so here , if the King were the judge , to whose determination we might appeale from the Church in a Church controversie , sure the King as King should be a Church Officer : if the Priests in controversie touching burning incense , or offering strange fire to God , should appeal to the decision of the King as the King ; sure the King in that as King should be an eminent High Priest , and right of burning incense to the Lord , should belong to him , in as farre as the Kings lips in that controversie should preserve knowledge , and they should seek the Law from his mouth , which is proper to the Priests , Mal. 2. 7. Ezek. 22 , 26. and 44. 23 , 24. Deut. 17. 11. 2. The Church of Antioch should have appealed to Cesar , if he had been a Christian , in the controversie touching circumcision ; he should have determined who were perverters of souls , who not , and should have said by his office , as Emperour , It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to me . 3. We have not any practise , or precept or promise in the Old or New Testament , for any such appeal , except they say , all hard questions belonging to the Priests office were to come before Moses as a civill Magistrate , and not as the great Prophet to whom God revealed his minde . 4. If so , then all Church controversies in doctrine and discipline , should be ultimately resolved into the will of the Magistrate , speaking according to the word , and faith in most points should come by hearing a Magistrate determining against Arrius , that Christ is God consubstantiall with the Father , and all binding and loosing in Earth as in heaven , should be from the Magistrate as the Magistrate , he should forgive and retaine sins , and Christ should have given the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven to the Magistrate as the Magistrate , certainly we should have the doctrine of the Church of Christ , and the building and edifying thereof most obscure in the New Testament , in which there is not one word of such a supream and chiefe officer as the Magistrate . 5. The Parliament , colledge of civill judges , as they are civill Magistrates , should be the Church assemblies , and determine all doctrines , debarre the ignorant and Hereticks , and Apostates from the Sacraments , and totally cast them out of the Church and excommunicate them ; I see not but then the Parliament as the Parliament is the Church , and the two Kingdomes , Ioh. 18. 36. must be confounded , and no difference at all made between the civill state and the Church , because the Magistrate as the Magistrate is made by the adversaries the chiefe officer over the Church , the Ecclesiasticall head , the mixt Governour , halfe civill , whole Ecclesiasticall , in whose power all Pastors , Elders preach , dispense Sacraments , make Church-canons , as his Ministers and Servants ; Christ when any brother trespasseth against a Christian brother saith , Tell the Church , never , Tell the christian Magistrate . But truly it is a great mistake in the learned Mr. Pryn to call them Anti-Monarchicall , Anti-Parliamentary , and Novators , who deny that the Parliament hath any Nomothetick power in Church-canons . Nor hath hee in any measure answered the Arguments of those Learned and godly Divines , Mr. Iohn Goodwin , and Mr. Hen : Burton ; he is pleased to cite the practise of many Parliaments of England , who laudably impatient of the Popes yoke , have made Church-canons , when the man of sin sate upon the neck of the Christian church ; but these numerous citations of Parliaments and Councels in time of Popery conclude nothing against us , who grant when the Church is not her selfe , the christian Magistrate may extraordinarily reform and take from the man of sin his usurped power , but in a constituted Church the case must be otherwise : and 1. Whereas he proveth Emperors and Kings to have a power to convocate Councels ; It hath not strength against us , all our Divines teach so . But how , 1. an accumulative civill power , so Iewel , Alley , Bilson , Whitaker , Willet , White , Roger , he might have cited more ; but no privative , no Ecclesiasticall power , so as Synods may not lawfully conveen without the command of the civill Magistrate ; our Divines say many Synods and Church meetings were in the Apostolique Church without the consent and against the will of the civill Magistrate ; our Divines oppose the Pope , who claimeth the only accumulative , civill , privative , and Ecclesiastick power to convocate Synods , and that no Synods are lawfull without the consent and mandate of the holinesse of such a Beast . 2. Master Prinne saith , The Magistrate hath power to direct , for time and place , and to limit for matter and manner , the proceedings , liberty and freedome of all Church Assemblies : But , 1. he asserteth this in the most , from corrupt practises . 2. He proveth , Laymen should have hand as well in Synods , as Clergymen , the one having interest in the faith , as well as the other . Ans . Then must all the people be members of Synods , for all have alike interest of Faith : but this proveth not interest of defining , which is the question ; in dispensing Word and Sacraments , they have interest of trying all things , as well as Pastors : but it followeth not ; Ergo , they may dispense Word and Sacraments , no lesse ; yea , more principally then Pastors , as Erastus saith , the Magistrate more principally determineth Synodicall constitutions : Hence this is easily answered , we may appeal in Church businesse to him as to the supream judge , who may punish the erring Church and Pastors ; but the Magistrate may in Church businesse do this : For answer , 1. I retort it , the Magistrate in making civill Lawes , that must in their moralitie be determined by the Word of God , may appeal to Pastors , whose lips by office should preserve knowledge ; Ergo , the Magistrate in making civill Lawes , may appeal to the Pastor , which is absurd . 2. If men in Church-constitutions may appeal to the Magistrate , as to one who may in his person determine Synodically in Assemblies above all the Pastors , 1. Because Magistrates may punish the Pastors erring and oppressing in Synods . 2. Because the Magistrate and all laymen have interest in the faith , as well as Pastors , then may people in hearing the Word and receiving the Sacraments , and in all Pastorall rebukings and threatnings , in believing of all Gospel promises and threatnings , and fundamentall truths , appeal from Pastors to Magistrates as Magistrates , and Magistrates as such may determine all fundamentall truths , all conscionall promises and rebukes ; and that is , formally they may preach , ( for he that can distinguish these hath a good engine ) Because Magistrates may punish hereticall preaching , and superstitions , and idolatrous abusing of the Sacraments by preachers , and Magistrates and all Laymen have interest of Faith , in Word , Doctrine , and Sacraments , as in Discipline ; yea , the Magistrate may punish the Priest that offered strange fire to the Lord , offered bastard incense ; and the people had their interest of saith , in sacrifices offered for their own sins : but can it follow , therefore the Magistrate might sacrifice and burne incense in his own person , as Mr. Pryn will have him to make Church-laws in his own person : Other Arguments of Mr. Pryns are light ; as , that there were brethren , and Lay-men that had hand in the Councell at Hierusalem , Acts 15. Ans . This is nothing for Magistrates as Magistrates , but all Christians as Christians so must have hand in Synods , which I grant in so far as concerneth their faith and practise , that they try all things , and try the Spirits whether they be of God or not ; but will it follow , Ergo , Magistrates as Magistrates are those only who govern the Church , and make all Ecclesiasticall constitutions , as having in them all power of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction , and deriving it to Bishops and Pastors at the second hand , as Mr. Pryn saith in the same booke . Obj. But the King is head of the Church ; Ergo , he maketh lawes to regulate the Family . Ans . The Antecedent is false , if not blasphemous ; it is proper to Iesus Christ only , Col. 1. 18. Eph. 1. 22. The King is the head of men , who are the Church materialiter , he is not formally as King , Head of the Church as the Church ; and therefore we see not how this Statute agreeth with the Word of God , Henric. 8. Stat. 37. c. 17. The Archbishops , Bishops , Arch-deacons , and other Ecclesiasticall persons have no manner of Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall , but by , under , and from the Kings Royall Majesty , the onely and undoubted supream head of the Church of England and Ireland , to whom by holy Scripture is given all authority and power , to hear and determine all manner of causes Ecclesiasticall , and to correct all vice and sin whatsoever ▪ for neither is the subject , the Archbishops , Bishops , &c. lawfull , nor is the limitation of the subject lawful , for Ecclesiasticall officers are the Ambassadors of Christ , not of the King. Obj. All Christians are to try the Spirits ▪ Ergo , Much more Magistrates . Ans . This proveth that Christians as Christians , and Magistrates as Christians , may judge & determine of all things that concerneth their practise , and that they are not with blinde obedience to receive things ; Mr. Pryn cannot say , that 1 Iohn 4. 1. is meant of a Royall , Parliamentary , or Magistraticall tryall , Iohn speaketh to Christians as such : But this is nothing to prove the power of the Magistrate as the Magistrate , for thought the man were neither King nor Magistrate , he ought to try the Spirits , 1 Iohn 4. 1. The speciall objection moved for Appeals is , that which Paul did in a matter of Religion , that we may do in the like case , but Paul , Acts 25. did appeal from a Church Iudge to a civill and a heathen Iudge , in a matter of Religion , when he said before Festus Acts 25. I appeal to Cesar ; Ergo , so may the Ministers of Christ far more appeal to the Christian Magistrate , and that Paul did this jure , by Law , not by Priviledge , but by the impulsion of the Holy Ghost , is clear , in that he saith , He ought to be judged by Cesar ; so Maccovius , so Videlius , so Vtenbogardus , so Erastus . Ans . 1. This Argument , if it have nerves , shall make the great Turk , when he subdueth people and Churches of the Protestant Religion , to be the head of the Church ; and as Erastus saith , by his place and office as he is a Magistrate , he may preach and dispense the Sacraments , and a Heathen Nero may make Church constitutions , and say , It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to me ; and by this , Nero by office is to excommunicate , make or unmake Pastors and Teachers , judge what is Orthodoxe Doctrine , what not , debarre hereticks , Apostates and mockers from the Table , and admit the worthie ; and Paul the Apostle must have been the Ambassador and Deputie of Nero in preaching the Gospel , and governing the Church , and Nero is the mixt person , and invested by Iesus Christ with spirituall jurisdiction , and the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven . This Argument to the Adversaries cannot quit its cost , ●or by this way Paul appealed from the Church in a controversie of Religion , to a Nero , a Heathen unbaptized Head of the Church , and referred his faith over to the will , judgement , and determination of a professed Enemy of the Christian Church ; and Paul must both jure by the Law of God , and the impulsion of the Holy Ghost , appeale from the Church to a Heathen without the Church , in a matter of Religion and Conscience ; then Nebuchadnezzar was head of the Church of Iudah , and supreame judge and governour in all causes and controversies of Religion , how can we beleeve the adversarie , who doe not beleeve themselves ? and shall we make Domitian , Dioclesian , Trajan , and such heads of the Church of Christ ? 2. It is not said that Paul appealed from the Church or any Ecclesiasticall judicature to the civill judge ; for Paul appealed from Festus who was neither Church nor Church officer , and so Paul appealeth from an inferiour civill judge , to a superiour or civill judge , as is clear , Acts 28. 6. And when Festus had tarried amongst them more then ten dayes , he went downe to Cesarea , and the next day sitting in the judgement seat , commanded Paul to be brought , vers . 10. And Paul said , I stand at Cesars judgement seat , where I ought to be judged ; he refused , v. 9 , 10. to be judged by Festus at Ierusalem , but saith , v. 11. I appeal to Cesar : Now he had reason to appeal from Festus to Cesar , for the Iews laid many grievous complaints against Paul , which they could not prove , vers . 7. And it is said vers . 8. That Festus was willing to doe the Iewes a pleasure , and so was manifestly a partiall Iudge ; and though the Sanedrim at Ierusalem could have judged in point of Law , that Paul was a blasphemer , and so by their Law he ought to die , for so Caiphas and the Priests and Pharisees dealt with Iesus Christ , yet his appeal from the Sanedrim , 1. corrupted , and having manifestly declared their bloodie intentions against Paul. 2. From a Sanedrim in its constitution false , and degenered far from what it ought to be by Gods institution , Deut. 17. 8 , 9 , 10. it now usurping civill businesse , which belonged not to them ; Paul might also lawfully appeal from a bloodie and degenerating Church judicature , acting according to the bloodie lusts of men against an innocent man , to a more unpartiall judge , and yet be no contemner of the Church ; this is nothing against our Thesis , which is , that it is not lawfull to appeal in a constituted Church , from a lawfull unmixt Church Judicature to the civill Magistrate in a matter of life and death . 3. Paul appealed from the Sanedrim , armed with the unjust and tyrannicall power of Festus , a man willing to please the bloodie accusers of Paul , as is clear , v. 9. And Festus willing to doe the Iewes a pleasure , answered Paul and said , Wilt thou go up to Ierusalem , and there be judged of these things before me ? 3. The cause was not properly a Church businesse but a crime of bodily death and sedition ; I deny not but in Pauls accusation , prophaning of the Temple , teaching against the Law of Moses was objected to him . Materialiter the enemies made the cause of Paul a Church businesse , but formally it was sedition . 1. It was a businesse for which the Sanedrim sought Pauls life and blood , for which they had neither authority nor Law by divine Institution , therefore they sought the helpe of Felix , Festus and the Roman Deputies ; so Lysias vvrote to Felix , Act. 23. 29. I perceived Paul to be accused of questions of their law , but to have nothing layd to his charge worthy of death , or of bonds : Now it is clear the Roman Deputies thought not any accusation for the Iewish Religion a matter of death and bonds , and therefore Gallio the Deputie of Achaia , Acts 18. 14. saith to the Iewes , if it were a matter of wrong and wicked lewdnes , O yee Iewes , reason were that I should bear with you . 15. But if it be a question of words and names , and of your Law , looke yee to it , for I will be no judge of such matters ; Ergo , to the Romans , all the blasphemies of the Iewish law was not a matter of wicked lewdnesse , nor of death : Now the story is clear , they were seeking Pauls life , and for names and words , the Iewes should not reach Paul , nor move the Romans to put to death a Roman , except they could prove sedition or treason against him ; and Acts 25. Festus saith to Agrippa , That the Priests and Elders desired to have judgement against Paul. 18. But against him they brought no accusation of such things as I supposed . 19. But had certain questions against him of their owne Superstition , and of one Iesus , who was dead , whom Paul affirmed to be alive : Here it is clear , all are but words , nothing worthy of death , which the Iewes chiefly intended ; therefore they accuse him of treason , as we may collect from Pauls Apologie , Acts 25. 8. Neither against the Law of the Iewes , neither against the Temple , nor yet against Cesar have I offended any thing at all . Therefore Act. 24. Tertullus a witty man burdeneth Paul with that which might cost him his head , v. 5. For we have found this man a pestilent fellow , a mover of sedition amongst all the Iewes , throughout all the world , see Acts 21. 38. of all which , though blasphemy according to the Iewish Law was something , yet sedition to the Romans , who only now had power of Pauls life , was all and some ; and when the Deputies counted so little of Religion , the Iews knew sedition and treason against Cesar behooved to do the turn , and Paul , seeing they pursued him for his life , appealed to Cesar to be judged in that . Now , except the adversaries prove that Paul referred the resurrection of Iesus , and of the dead , and his preaching Christ , and the abolishing of sacrifices , the Temple , the Ceremoniall Law , to be judicially determined by Nero as by the head of the Church , they prove nothing against us : Hence their chiefe argument is soone answered ; in what cause Paul was accused of the Iews , in that he appealed to Cesar : But he was accused not for his sedition , but for his Doctrine , Act. 26. 18. Ergo , Paul appealed to Cesar in the cause of Doctrine , not of sedition : For , 1. The Major is dubious , for in what cause he was accused of his head , which was the intent of the Iews in that he appealed , true ; but in what cause he was accused , in all and every Article of the points of his accusation and challenge , I deny that ; for as touching doctrinals , and his being judged by a lawfull Church , and rightly constituted , he appealed neither from the Sanedrim , nor from Festus , but declined Festus , nor in these did he appeal to Cesar ; he only appealed in all cases , which might concern his head and blood . 2. The assumption is false , for he was accused of sedition , as is evident from Act. 25. 8. and 24. 5. 3. Though the Priests and Elders were most corrupt men ; yet that they believed , that Cesar , or bloody Nero his lips should preserve knowledge , and that the Law should be sought from the mouth of Nero , as the head of the Church , can never be proved , which must be proved to justifie Pauls appeal in the tearms of the adversary . Obj. But may not Nero accuse Paul , that he dare preach his Iesus Christ in the Emperours dominions ? Ans . If his dominions be the Christian Churches conquered by his sword , he may accuse as he conquered , that is he may oppresse the consciences of men in accusing , as he oppressed them in their bodies and liberties in the conquering of them : But he may not as a conquerour accuse them for their conscience , he may if he conquer those that worship Sathan , cause instruct them in all meeknesse and lenity : But this he doth by the sword as a Christian ruler , to inlarge the dominions of Christ ; for when ●● conquereth their bodies , it is not to be thought that he conquereth their souls , or acquireth any new dominion over their cons●i●nces : But though he do as a Magistrate command them to be instructed , I doubt if he have a negative voice in imposing any Religion that he will , though they be heathens , though some learned Divines say be have a definitive voice , in setting up what Religion he will or tollerating it ; I conceive , though he have a definitive voyce in erecting the only true Religion in his heathenish dominions , when there be no Ministers of the Gospel there ; yet not for any false Religions , that being of perpetuall truth , God never gave authority or power of the sword to do ill , ad malum non est potestas : what other things Videlius and Vtenbogard have on the contrary , are answered : Hence we ask , 1. If the intrinsecall end of judging and censuring Ecclesiastically , be not the inlightning of the mind , the gaining of souls ; and if Nero , or Christian , or Heathen Magistrates , be appointed for that spirituall end ? 2. If Paul aymed to refer the judging of the Gospel to Nero ? 3. If Paul knowing the Sanedrim sought his blood , not the gaining of his soul , might not appeal to the Magistrate to save his life ? 4. If it was not the Law of natures dictate in Paul so to do , and not any positive constitution of the Magistrates Headship over the Church and Gospel ? 5. If the Ecclesiasticall judicature will swell without its sphere of activity , to dispose of the life and blood of the Saints ; if then the state of the question be not changed ; and if then it be not lawfull to appeal and decline , and provoke to the civill Magistrate ? 4. Moreover Paul appealed not to Cesar , in ordine ad censuram au● pen●m Ecclesiasticam ▪ in order to a Church censure , as if he thought Cesar should principally excommunicate and cast him out of the ●ynagogue , or judge him in an Ecclesiasticall way , whether he had done or preached against the Temple , and Law of Moses or not , which must be proved , if the adversaries will prove a proper appeal from the Church to the Prince , which is now our question . All this which is our mind is well explained by our Countryman Ioh. Camero . prelectio , in Mat. 18. 15. p. 151. Christiani principes sunt precipui in Ecclesia in sensu diviso , sunt precipui et sunt in Ecclesia , non in sensu conjuncto , non sunt prec●pui Ecclesiastici : Non enim obtinent principes directe authoritatem Ecclesiasticam , sed indirectè ▪ non quod velimus ulla in causa ullum eximi jurisdictione principis , sed quia ejus jurisdictio non nisi per media Ecclesiastica pertinet ad conscientiam , nempe , princeps non predicat Evangelium , non ligat et solvit peceatores , at de officio principis est dare operam , ut sint qui predicent Evangelium , ut sint qui ligent et solvant peccatores , uno verbo perinde principis est curare salutem animarum , ac eiusdem est saluti corporum prospicere , non est enim principis providere ne morbi grassentur directè , esset enim medicus , at indirectè princeps id studere debet , Itaque Collegium Magistratuum nullo modo Ecclesia dici potest , imo quatenus Magistratus est de Ecclesia , subjicitur hac in parte Collegio Ecclesiastico neque tamen ista inter se pugnant , idem ut imperet Collegio Ecclesiastico , et pareat idem , imperat enim quemadmodum medi●o imperat Rex , paret ut medicao , nam si medicum facientem officium morte multet , non faciet quod decet sapientem principem , sed quod faciunt furiosi et insani , sin veneficum assiciat extremo supplicio , faciet quod jus et fas , et quod non facere ne●as esset . Sic imp●●reges et insani prophet as jusserunt interfici , pius Rex et idem sapientissimus David Nathanem exosculatus est , Ceterum accipiatur Caute parendi verbum , Rex enim cum senatui Ecclesiastico paret , non paret illi obedientia civili quae Collegium respiciat , sed obedientia Religiosa que deum respiciat . Sic qui lictori misso a senatu parebat non parebat lictori , sed senatui . Yet it cannot be denied , but the same Camero ascribeth more to the Magistrate then is due , for there is no reason why he saith the Prince obeyeth the Church unproperly , more then the people ; for it is the same obedience that Prince and people yield , 2. He denieth that the Magistrate and Pastors differ in their end and object , but only in the way and means leading to the end ; and in the same doth that learned Divine Dav. Pareus , though both be against the Erastian way : for they say the Magistrates end and object , is not only peace and the good of the body , and of the externall man , but also of the soul even a supernaturall good , the externall salvation of men , because the Kings of Israel and Iud●ls were to read the book of the Law , and they only did reform Religion : Ans . This doth prove that the Church-teachers and Magistrate differ not in the materiall object and end , ( of the Iewish Kings I adde nothing to what I have answered before ) but in the formall end and object they differ : It s true , I have said that the intrinsecall end of the Magistrate is a supernaturall good : But , 1. That I speak in opposition to the Author of the bloody Tenent , to Socinians , and such as exclude the Magistrate from all meddling with Religion , or using of the sword against Hereticks , Apostates , and Idolaters . 2. That I understand only of the materiall end , because the Prince punishing Idolatry , may per accidens , and indirectly promote the salvation of the Church , by removing the temptations of Hereticks from the Church ; but ●e doth that , not in order to the conscience of the Idolater , to gain ●is soul , ( for Pastors as Pastors do that ) but to make the Church quiet , and peaceable in her journey to life eternall : but all this is but to act on the externall man by worldly power . But saith Camero , it is not true that the Church must meddle with every sin that is scandalous ; because for the circumstance it may be so hid , that the Church cannot judge it , especially in a matter of fact : A Physitian killeth a man either of temerity or negligence , there is no question but it is a great sin ; yet the tryall of this belongeth not to the Church : so the Pastor may exhort the Magistrate to do his duty , but to give judgement what way the King should do this , and when he sinneth in this , belongeth to him who governeth the Common-wealth ; for this must be true , eredendum est artifici in sua arte , You must believe every man in his owne Art and calling , otherwise great confusion should follow . Ans . Observe that Camero doth liberate the Magistrate from being subject to the rebukes of Pastors , but by accident ; because the sins of Princes are hidden in the dark obscurity of intricate causes which they judge : But so the sins of Painters and tradesmen are hid , because judges see not the mysteries of trades . This is no Argument , but such as will equally prove , that the poysoning of a Kings son , belongeth not to the King and Parliament ; for a medicinall and physicall trying , how the Physitian killeth a man , doth properly belong to the Colledge of Physitians ; and if it belong not for this physicall reason to the Church court , because it is not their Art to judge of medicinall potions , no more shall it belong to the civill judge to try this murther by poyson : for as Pastors as Pastors are not Physitians , and so cannot judge of the fact ; so Kings and civill judges , as such , are not Physitians , and cannot judge for circumstances of a fact of incest , murther , parricide , and of all sins acknowledged to belong to both Church and Magistrate , in divers respects , may make the fact equally dark to all . 2. It is true Pastors cannot prescribe what way the Magistrate should judge ; but if the Pastors cannot determine in hypothesie , that this is a fact of unjustice in a judge , and so rebuke , but credendum artifici in sua arte , we must believe the judge in his owne Art , he saith this is an art of justice : then Isaiah and Ieremiah should not cry out against unjust decrees , against crushing and oppressing the poor in the gate ; because the wickedst judges say , all their decrees are just , they defend the fatherlesse and widow , and do not crush them , and Pastors cannot rebuke the sins of unjust judges , but you must believe they do just and right in their owne art ; yea , many villanies and scandals are carried so mysteriously , and in the clouds , that we must believe the sinner in his owne art and trade of sinning , and believe the harlot , who wipeth her mouth and saith , I have not sinned . For the practice of Constantine the Great , in the cause of Donatus and Cecilianus I remit to Eusebius l. 10. c. 5. to Optatus Melivitanus who wrote the History of the Donatists carefully , to Augustine Epistle 162. and for the determination of the question , see what the Emperour writeth to the Councell of Nice , Zozome l. 1. c. 16. Ruffin . l. 1. c. 2. Eusebius in vita Constant , Deus vos constituit sacerdotes et potestatem vobis dedit de nobis quoque judicandi et ideo nos a vobis recte judicamur , vos autem non potestis ab omnibus judicari , propter quod Dei solius inter vos exspectate judicium , &c. That Nectarius was chosen and ordained Bishop of Constantinople by Theodosius Socrates l. 5. c. 8. saith not , but by the contrary a centum et quinquaginta Episcopis qui tum aderant ordinatus . Theodoretus l. 5. c. 8. saith he was designed Bishop by the Synod of Constantinople : Antiquity seemeth dubious in it , for Nicephorus l. 12. c. 12. Zozomen . l. 7. e. 8. Theodoretus . l. 5. c. 9. Historia tripartit . l. 9. c. 14. say that the Emperor ordained him , the Synod named him ; the truth is , the Bishops were devided in judgement ; and its like they referred the matter to the godly Emperour : In the mean time Athanasius Epist . de solit vita , Ambros . l. 5. orat ad auxentium , and l. 5. Epist . 32. ad valentinianum . Zozomen l. 6. c. 7. Concilium Toletanum . III. Concilium milevitanum . and divers others which I have cited elsewhere , make the Emperor a Son of the Church , not a Head and Lord , intra Ecclesiam , filium Ecclesiae , non judicem , non dominum supra Ecclesiam : I might adde Augustin , Epist . 48. 50. 162. l. 1. de doctr . Christ . c. 18. Cyril . Alexandrinus in an Epistle to the Synod of Antioch , all Protestant Divines of note and learning . CHAP. XXVII . Quest . 23. Whether the subjecting of the Magistrates to the Church and Pastors , be any papal Tyranny ; and whether we differ not more from Papists in this , then our adversaries ? The Magistrate not the Vicar of the mediator Christ : The Testimonies of some learned Divines on the contrary answered . IT is most unjustly imputed to us , that we lay a Law upon the conscience of the Magistrates , that they are bound to assist with their power , the decrees of the Church ; taking cognizance only of the fact of the Church , not inquiring into the Nature of the thing . This Doctrine we disclaim , as Popish and Antichristian : It hath its rise from Bonifacius the III. who obtained from Phocas a bloody tyrant , who murthered Mauritius and his Children , as Baronius confesseth : and yet he saith of this murtherer optimortum imperatorum vestigia sequutus , he made an Edict that the Bishop of Constantinople should not be called Oecumenick nor universall Bishop ; but that this should be given only to the Bishop of Rome : So Baronius yieldeth , this tyranny was inlarged by Hildebrande , named Gregorius the seventh , a monster of tyrannicall wickednesse , and yet by Papists , he is sanctitate et miraculis clarus , Baronius extolleth him , these and others invaded both the swords : Bishops would be civill judges , and trample first upon the neck , then upon the consciences of Emperors , and make Kings the hornes of the beast , and seclude them from all Church businesses , except that with blind obedience , having given their power to the beast , as slaves they must execute the decrees of the Church . Paul the III. the confirmer of the order of Iesuits , who indicted the Councell of Trent , as Onuphrius saith , up braideth Charles the V. for meddling with Church businesse : They write that Magistrates do not see in Church matters with their owne eyes , but with Bishops eyes , and that they must obey without examining the decrees of Councels ; and this they write of all subject to the Church , Toletus in Instruct Sacerd●t . l. 4. c. 3. Si Rusticus circa articulos fidei credat suo episcopo proponenti-aliquod dogma hereticum , mor●tur in credendo , licet sit error ▪ Card. Cusanus excit . l. 6. sermon . obedientia irrationalis est consumata et perfectissima obedientia sicut Iumentum obedit domino . Ib. sententia pastoris ligat te , pro tua salute , etiam si injusta fuerit : Envy cannot ascribe this to us , Calvin , Beza , yea , all our writers condemne blind obedience as brutish : But our Adversaries in this are more Popish , for they substitute King and Parliament in a headship over the Church , giving to the King all the same power in causes Ecclesiastick , that the Pope usurped . 2. They make the King a mixed person , to exercise spirituall jurisdiction , to ordaine Bishops , and deprive them ; and Mr. Prinne calleth the opinion of those who deny Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction , legislative ( a high word proper to God only ) coercive power of Christian Emperors , Kings , Magistrates , Parliaments , in all matters of Religion , ( what , in fundamentall Articles of salvation ? ) Church-government , Discipline , Ceremonies , &c. Anti-monarchicall , Anti-parliamentarie , Anarchicall , as holden by Papists , Prelates , Anabaptists , Arminians , Socinians , &c. It s that which Arminians objects to us , and calleth the soul , heart , and forme of papall tyranny . But that the Magistrate is not obliged to execute the decrees of the Church , without further examination ; whither they be right or wrong , as Papists teach that the Magistrate is to execute the decrees of their Popish councels with blind obedience , and submit his faith to them ; because he is a layman , and may not dare to examine , whether the Church doth erre , or not , is clear ; 1. Because if in hearing the word , all should follow the example of the men of Berea , not relying on the Testimony of Paul or any preacher ; try , whether th●● which concerneth their conscience and faith , be agreeable to the Scriptures or no , and accordingly receive or reject ; so in all things of Discipline , the Magistrate is to try by the word , whether he ought to adde his sanction to these decrees , which the Church gives out for edification , and whether he should draw the sword against such a one as a heretick , and a perverter of souls : But the former is true , the Magistrates practise in adding his civill sanction , and in punishing herericks concerneth his conscience , knowing that he must do it in faith , as he doth all his moral actions ; Ergo , the Magistrate must examine what he practiseth in his office , according to the word , and must not take it upon the meer authority of the Church ; else his faith in these moral acts of his office should be resolved ultimaté on the authority of the Church , not on the word of God , which no doubt is Popery ; for so the warrant of the Magistrates conscience , should not be , Thus saith the Lord , but Thus saith the Church in their decrees . 2. The Magistrate and all men have a command to try all things ; Ergo , to try the decrees of the Church , and to retain what is good , 1 Thes . 5. 21. To try the spirits even of the Church , in their decrees , 1 Joh. 3. 1. 3. We behooved to lay down this Popish ground , that 1. The Church cannot erre in their decrees . 2. It s against Scripture and reason , that Magistrates , and by the like reason , all others should obey the decrees of the Church with a blinde faith , without inquiring in the warrants and grounds of their decrees , which is as good Popery , as , Magistrates and all men are to beleeve as the Church beleeveth with an implicite faith , so ignorance shall be the mother of Devotion ; who ever impute this to us who have suffered for non-conformity , and upon this ground that Synods can erre , refused the Ceremonies , are to consult with their own conscience whether this be not to make us appear disloyall & odious to Magistracy in that which we never thought , ●ar lesse to teach and professe it to the world . 4. Their chiefe reason is , the Magistrate by our doctrine , by his office , is obliged , 1. To follow the judgement of the Church , and in that he is a servant or inslaved , Qui enim judicia aliorum sequi tenetur , is non regit , sed regitur , adeoque servus est , & mancipium brutum eorum , quorum judicium sequi obligatur , and the Magistrate ( say they ) as such , is neither to judge nor try what the Church decrees , but as a Burrio , or Hangman to execute that which the Church hath decreed . But 1. I put it in forme , and retort it thus , They are servants and slaves who are obliged not to despise , but to hear and obey , and so to follow the judgement of the Prophets , the faithfull Pastors of Christ , preaching the Word of God soundly and Orthodoxly . But not onely Magistrates , but all within the visible Church are obliged , not to despise , but to hear and obey , and so to follow the judgement of the Prophets , the faithfull Pastors of Christ preaching the Word of God soundly and Orthodoxely ; Ergo , Magistrates and all within the visible Church are slaves and servants . But the conclusion is absurd ; Ergo , some of the premises , but the Assumption is the word of God , Iudah was carried captive , because they would not hear the Prophets rising early in the morning and speaking to them : Also in the New Testament , this is true to the second coming of Christ , He that heareth you , heareth me , he that despiseth you , despiseth me . And this , He that will not obey the servant of the supream Magistrate , in that wherein he is a servant , and holdeth forth the Lawfull commands of the supream Magistrate , he will not obey the supream Magistrate : The Major proposition is the adversaries , the assumption is expresse Scripture ; let them see then to the conclusion . 2. When the adversary shall answer this argument with equal strength made against preaching and hearing the word , they will answer their owne argument made against Church-government . 3. This argument is made against Synods Popish , that cannot erre ▪ as our Protestant Divines object ; and therefore the adversarie is Popish here , not we : Thus they are servants and slaves who are obliged to follow the judgement of Councels absolutely , without limitation ; and because they say it , whether they warrant their decrees by the word of God , or not , that is a true Major proposition : But now the assumption is most false , for neither Magistrates nor any other , are to follow the judgement of the Church absolutely without limitation , and because they say it . The other part is , they are servants and slaves , who are to follow the judgement of the Church and Councels , with a reserve , and a condition , and limitation , in so far as they agree with the word ; now the Major is false . 2. He that is obliged to follow the judgement of another , does not rule , but is ruled , true , in that in which he followeth the judgement of another ; the Magistrate in so far as in matters of Religion , that concerneth his conscience , faith , and practise , he followeth Pastors ; he is not a ruler formally to those whose judgement he is obliged to follow : But in civill matters he may be , and is a ruler to those same ; for we answer to Papists who by this same argument would prove , that Churchmen are not subject to the Magistrate , nor to civill Laws : He that is a sheep , is not to rule and command his shepheard ; but the Magistrate is a sheep and a member of the Church , and Pastors and Doctors are shepheards : We answer , in divers considerations a Magistrate as a Magistrate in civill things , is not ruled by Pastors and Doctors , but he is to rule them : But a Magistrate as a member of the Church , as a Christian in things that concerneth his conscience , is a sheep and to be ruled , not a ruler to Pastors and Doctors , and so here ; and therefore , non concluditur quod est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 3. The adversaries are to answer this also ; for if Pastors and Doctors be as such , but servants under the Magistrate ; and if he have that same Architectonica potestas , that same supremacy and headship in Ecclesiasticall matters , as in civill matters , to command alike in both by the same power : Then , 1. The Pastors and Doctors are obliged to follow his judgement , without appeal or examination , and they are servants and slaves , and ruled , and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not over the Magistrates as Christians , neither over the people in the Lord. 2. The Elders as Elders , are not to examine what the Magistrates as Magistrates command in Ecclesiasticall matters or in Religion , they may possibly not as Elders but as as Christians , judge with the judgement of discretion , as all other Christians may do ; For Videlius , Erastus , and other Adversaries say , the Magistrate may not command what he pleaseth ; for in Church matters he may command but according to the rule of the word , and in civill matters according to equity , justice , and prudence . True : But , 1. The Magistrate as supream head of the Church , is by office , to judge what government of the Church is most agreeable to the word , what is sinfull , Antichristian , and tyrannicall ; and the Magistrates lips in thus judging , as he is a Magistrate , and not the Pastors are to preserve knowledge ; and both Pastors as Pastors , and the people as members of the Church , and as they may worship and serve God in this government , or may sin , are to seek the Law at the Magistrates mouth , and directions for their conscience from him , as from a Magistrate , and not as from a Christian , not from Pastors as Pastors that handle the Law. And if the government as a way of serving God , may be prescribed and held forth to the consciences of all by the Magistrate as the Magistrate ; by the same reason all the wayes of God , in which the Church of Ephesus , Pergamus , Thyatira , may so approve themselves to Christ , and as he is to walk in the midst of the Golden Candlesticks , and as a Magistrate , he is to forbid such sins in Government , as may procure the removing of the Candlestick ; and why may he not by the same reason , hold forth to their conscience all the other parts of the Gospel ? If any say , who can deny but the Magistrate as the Magistrate may command that which is obedience to Christ , and reward it , and forbid sin and punish it ? Ans . But the Magistrate as such , forbiddeth not sin as sin , for then as a Magistrate he should forbid sin under the punishment of eternall wrath , which he cannot do as a Magistrate , he onely can forbid sin under the pain of his temporary punishment , which he can inflict , and as it disturbes societies , and incorporations . Obj. The Magistrate as the Magistrate shall not serve Christ as Mediator , if he doe not command the dispensing of Word and Sacraments , as they are spirituall meanes leading us to a supernaturall end , and if he forbid not Idolatry and blasphemie against Christ as they are sins , and Gospel sins done against Christ , as Mediator . Ans . I utterly deny this consequence : For 1. the Magistrate may serve Christ as Christ , and promote and advance the Kingdome of Iesus Christ as Mediator , when he contributes his power to those things that materially conduce to a supernaturall end , though he doe not contribute any thing that formally conduceth to such an end . 2. So you may say a Christian Husband as a Husband ; a godly Physitian , as a Physitian , a Printer who printeth the Bible , do nothing serviceable to Christ as Christ , and in promoting Christs Mediatory Kingdom , when the one begetteth children , that being borne in the visible Church are made heires of the Kingdome of Christ ; and the other when by his Art and skill he preserveth the life of a godly and zealous Preacher : The third , when by his Art he publisheth in print the Testament of Christ ; the Physitian doth somewhat as a Physitian that is serviceable to Christ as Mediator , yet ( I hope ) it is no Ecclesiasticall businesse to restore to health a godly Minister ; nor to beget a child who is made an heir of Grace , nor to print the Bible ; so a Philosopher as a Philosopher doth convince one that worshippeth bread , that the man leaveth his error , and this is materially service to Christ , and a promoting of Christs Mediatory Kingdom ; but neither Husband , Physitian , Printer or Philosopher , are in these acts , the Vicars and Deputies of Iesus Christ , as the Magistrate is holden to be by the Adversary : Nor 2. do they as Ecclesiasticall persons formally advance the kingdom of Christ as do the preachers of the Gospel , far lesse more principally do they advance Christs Kingdom , as the Magistrate is supposed to do . Nor 3. hath their thus promoting of Christs Kingdom any influence upon the conscience as the Magistrate must have , if he forbid sin as sin ; now the Magistrate as such , doth nothing to promote formally the mediatory Kingdome of Christ , for he may doe , and doth all hee doth as a Magistrate ; yea suppose he were a Turk set over ▪ Christians as their Magistrate granting that Christ was a true Prophet , yet may he as a Magistrate , punish those who shall teach that Christ was a false Prophet and an impostor , and though his Magistraticall acts be serviceable to Christ materially , yet not formally . 1. Because this Magistrate denieth Christ to be the Saviour of the world , and yet as a Magistrate he justly punisheth the man that blasphemo●sly calleth Christ a deceiver , and an impostor . 2. Because as a Magistrate he believeth him not to be God , and so ex intentione operantis , he punisheth him not for a wrong done to Christ as Christ , and as the Saviour of mankind , but as a wrong done to the common wealth , and as a disturber of the peace thereof ; Hence these Propositions touching the Magistrates relation to the Mediator Christ and his Church . Propos . 1. The Magistrate as a Magistrate is not the Vicar nor Deputie of Iesus Christ as Mediator ; 1. Because this is the heart and soul of Popery , that the Papists teach that Christ as Mediator hath left a temporall , an earthly and visible Monarch as his Vicar on earth . Now that learned and singular ornament of the Protestant Churches , Andreas Rivetus hath well said , Christ hath instituted neither Kings nor Princes in the Church as his successors , nor any Vicars with a domination , but onely Ministers and Servants , who are to discharge their Embassage , in the Name of the onely Prince Christ ; for an Embassage cannot institute other Ambassadors , either Kings or Princes , but onely Ministers , who do serve , not reigne in the Kingdom of Christ , he himselfe onely reignes ; the Servants of this great King promote the Kingdom of their Prince , nor do they ever usurpe the royall power . Yea , all the arguments of Protestants that are brought to prove that the Pope , a Bishop , and a Church man ▪ because he is a Bishop and a Steward in the Church , and in Christs spirituall Kingdom that is not of this world , cannot be an earthly Prince and Monarch having power either directly or indirectly in ordine ad spiritualia , to dispose of Kingdomes and crownes , and enthrone and dethrone Kings , doe also prove that the King cannot be head of the Church , nor the Magistrate an Officer of the Church . Doe not Protestant Divines condemn that blasphemous speech of Cardinall Bertrandus , that Christ who was a temporall Lord on earth , should not seem a discreet and wise Prince , if he had not left a Temporall Vicar behinde him in the Church , and that of Armacanus to be false ; that Christ by birth was the true King of Iudea , and so a Temporary Prince , hence ( say they ) there should be a temporary Prince , and an earthly Monarch , the successor of Christ as King and Mediator . This Becanus the Iesuite maketh a speciall ground of the Popes Headship of the Church , and for this Suarez disputeth ; yea , the Iesuite Aegid . Conninck saith , It is the common and received opi●●●n of all the ( Romish ) Doctors , that Christ as man hath a true Kingly power , and a direct dominion over all the Kingdomes of the world , to give them lawes , and to exercise all Kingly power over them , though de facto he abstained from it ; and is not upon this pillar builded the Popes Supremacy ? and that which Augustinus de Ancona saith , Idem esse dominium dei & Pap● , it is the same dominion which God and the Pope hath , because it is the same jurisdiction of the Ambassador , and of the Lord who sent him ? I deny not , but many Papists give to Christ an indirect Kingly power , and to the Pope they give the same indirect power in ordine ad spiritualia , as Vasquez , and Pet. Waldingus and others ; but this we say ; if Iesus Christ forbid a preacher of the Gospell remaining a preacher to be a civill Magistrate or temporall Lord , as he doth both by precept and and practise , Luke 22. 24 , 25 , 26. and 12. 13 , 14. Ioh. 18 , 36. and 6 , 15. then upon the same ground he must forbid the civill Magistrate to be a Church Governour , as if God should forbid a Physitian to be a Painter , ( because the two callings cannot lawfully consist in the person of one man ) he should also forbid a Painter to be a Physitian ; then the Arguments against a Monarchy and Magistraticall power in the Bishop of Rome , must fight against any Ecclesiasticall power in a Magistrate , if then the Pastors doe as Pastors , rebuke , exhort , excommunicate , and censure , as directly subordinate to the Magistrate , then Pastors as Pastors discharge their office as inferiour and under Magistrates , and so they partake in so farre of a temporall dominion , being direct instruments under Temporall Lords ; and if the Magistrate as the Magistrate doe command them to dispense Word , and Sacraments and discipline , and make and unmake Pastors , and regulate and limit them , and make Lawes to them , then the Magistrate as the Magistrate doth partake of an Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction , and both are forbidden by Christ in the places cited . 2. If the Magistrate be the onely supream Church Governour under Christ , the government of the Church must be a visible Monarchy , and the Magistrate must have both the Swords , Temporall and Spirituall , and Christs Kingdom must be of this world , and the weapons thereof carnall to fight for Christ , and the supream Church-officer as such must bear the Sword , be a valiant man of warre by office , and Christs Kingdome must be not of this world , and the weapons thereof not carnall , but spirituall , Joh. 18. 36. 2 Cor. 10. 4 , 5. and the supream Church-officer must be no striker , no fighter , no man of war , no sword-bearer by office , which are contradictory . 3. We prove the Pope to be no Vicar of Christ , because we read not in the Word of any such Vicar , nor do we read any thing of a supream Church-officer , who is the Vicar of Christ . 4. No spirituall Ambassador as such , can substitute other Ambassadors with Majority of power , that he hath in his Name to dispense Word , Sacraments ; and Discipline ; nor can one great Ministeriall Church-head create lesser Ministeriall Church-heads , such as Justices , Majors , Sheriffes , Bailiffes , Constables , no more then the High Priest could substitute in his place other little High Priests , if he were sick and absent , to goe into the Holy of Holiest with blood once a yeere , no more then the Apostle Paul immediately called of God can substitute other lesser Apostles immediately called of God to act as lesser Apostles , but limited by the higher , in the exercise of power ; nor can these lesser Apostles create other Apostles yet lesser , and these in a subalternation yet lesser , while you come as low as a Constable , as the King doth send lesser Kings indued in part with his Royalty or Iudges under him , and those Iudges may appoint other Iudges under them ; and because the whole visible Catholick Church hath an externall visible policy , if Oecumenick councels have any warrant in the word , then ought Christ to have instituted one civil Emperour over all the Churches on earth , to conveen Oecumenick Synods , to preside in them , to limit and regulate them , to make Lawes to all the world ; and that this is not , it falleth out through mans corruption , but it ought to be according to divine institution , no lesse then every single Magistrate is by institution the head of every particular Church , indued as our adversary say with that supream power under Christ the mediator , that they call Potestas Architectonica , the headship of the Church . Proposi . 2. The Magistrate as such is not a Vicar of Christs mediatory Kingdom , 1. Because then as the Magistrates are called Gods 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Scripture , Exod. 21. 6. Psal . 82. 1 Ioh. 10. 34 , 35. so the Magistrates should be called little Mediators , or submediators , between God and man ; little Kings of the Church , little Priests , little Prophets of the Church : for God giveth his name to Magistrates , because he communicateth also to them some of his Majesty and power ; now what mediatory , what Princely , Priestly , o● Propheticall power hath Christ communicated to Magistrates as Magistrates : Erastus saith , they may dispense word and Sacraments , if they had leasure : But if they be by office , little mediators , and Pastors under Christ , they should take leasure ; for every Magistrate ought to say , woe be unto me if I preach not : And Master Coleman saith , that Christian Magistracy is an Ecclesiasticall administration ; he must speak of Christian Magistracy formally , as Christian Magistracy , otherwayes a Christian Tentmaker , a believing fisher was an Apostle ; if he mean that Christian Magistracy is a Church officer formally , he might say , it is a Mediatory office , and a Princely and Kingly office under Christ , to give repentance to Israel and forgivenesse of sins instrumentally ; would Master Coleman teach us how the Magistrates sword openeth the eyes of the blind , converteth men from the power of Sathan to God , begetteth men through the Gospel to Christ , as Pastors do ; and that formally as Magistrates , we should thank him . 2. Christian Magistracy , if it be a Church or Ecclesiasticall administration , then is it formally so either as Magistracy , or as Christian ; not as Magistracy , for then all Heathen Magistrates must formally , ho● ipso , that they be Magistrates , be Ecclesiasticall persons : so Nero when Rome makes him Emperour , they make him formally a Church-officer , and invest him with power to dispence Word and Sacraments , and Discipline , if he might find leasure for killing of men , and such businesse , so to do ; for quod convenit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 convenit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where doth the Old or New Testament hold forth such an office given by Christ , as a fruit of his ascension to heaven ? Where do the Apostles who shew us the duty of Magistrates , Fathers , Masters , Pastors , Teachers , Rulers , Deacons , Husbands , insinuate any such office ? If as Christian , Christian Magistracy be an Ecclesiasticall office and administration : Christianity , 1. Is common to the Magistrate with all other professors , Painters , Merchants , Seamen , Lawyers , Musitians ; and no more can Christianity make a heathen formally a Church-officer , then it can make a Painter formally a Church-officer ? can faith in Christ , and professing thereof make any to be formally Church-officers ? then must all be Church-officers that are Members of the Church , for posita causa formali ponitur effectus formali● : Now Master Coleman saith , The heathen Magistrate as a Magistrate is an Ecclesiasticall administration ; because ( saith he ) he should , and ought to manage his power for Christ ; as the heathen and uttermost parts of the earth are given for Christs possession and inheritance , and Christ hath given no liberty to a great part of the world , to remaine infidels and enemies to him and his Government : I suppose Christ hath all Nations given to him , and all Nations ought to receive Christ , though as yet actually they do not ; God and Nature hath made Magistrates , and these Magistrates thus made , God hath given to Christ : But , 1. The title of Christian added to Magistracy , by this is superfluous , and put in only ad faciendum populum , for Christianity maketh no man formally a Magistrate by M. Colemans way ; yet saith he pag. 17. a Christian Magistrate as a Christian Magistrate , is a Governour in the Church : he should say by his way , a Magistrate Christian as a Magistrate , is a Governour not only in the Church , but a Governour of the Church . Arg. 2. If the Magistrate as the Magistrate be the Vicar and deputy of Christs mediatory kingdom , then all and every Magistrate as Magistrate by his office , is obliged under the pain of Gods wrath , to command that the Gospel be preached , and that men believe and obey Christ as mediator , in all his dominions ; that so he may manage his office for Christ : But the latter is utterly false , and contrary to the Gospel ; Ergo , so is the former . The Major is undeniable , all service that Magistrates by office do , they sin before God , if they do it not ; and so must be obliged under the pain of sin , and Gods wrath to do it : And therefore are obliged to command that the Gospel be preached , and that men believe and obey Christ , if by office they be the Vicars and deputies of the mediatory Kingdom . I prove the assumption , These Magistrates amongst the Americans and other Heathen , who never by any rumour heard of Iesus Christ , are essentially and formally Magistrates : But neither are they obliged to command that the Gospel be preached , nor their people they are over , obliged to believe and obey Christ as mediatour ; because only those to whom Christ and the Gospel commeth , can be guilty of not receiving Christ the mediator , and of not promoting the mediatory Kingdome : Such Magistrates are obliged only with their sword to glorifie God the creator , and to punish sins against the Law of Nature , nor are they guilty for not punishing the not receiving of the Gospel , or for sins against the mediator , of whom they never heard ; for this is invincible and insuperable ignorance , and can make no man guilty , who never heard nor could hear of the Gospel , according to that , Ioh. 15. 22. If I had not come and spoken to them , they should not have had sin , but now they have no cloak for their sin , Rom. 2. 12. For as many as have sinned without Law , shall also perish without Law , and as many as have sinned in the Law , shall be judged by the Law ; Ergo , they that never heard of the Gospel or the mediator , cannot perish , nor be judged for refusing the Gospel ; and it were strange , if Magistrates were invincibly ignorant of their office , which is to set up the mediator Christ and his Church and visible Kingdom , if yet they never heard , nor ever could hear of the Word of the Kingdom ; for then to do and performe the duties of their office , should not only morally , but invincibly and physically be impossible , and so they should not be obliged to do the duties of their office . Obj. 1. When the Heathen Magistrate is converted to the faith , and becometh a Christian Magistrate , he is obliged by his office as a Magistrate , to command his people to honour and receive the Lord Jesus , and the Ministery of reconciliation , and to punish such as blasphemeth the mediator Iesus Christ , such as Arrians , Antitrinitarians , and others ; Ergo , that officiall obligation lay on him before as a Magistrate : for you say that the heathen Magistrate turning Christian , acquireth no new Magistraticall power by turning Christian , which he had not before while he was a heathen Magistrate ; onely Christianity maketh him use the officiall power of a Magistrate , which he had before , while he was a heathen ignorant of Christ , now for the honour of the mediator Christ , and the promoting of his mediatory Kingdome . Ans . 1. The Antecedent is denied , for when the heathen Magistrate is converted to the Christian faith , he is not obliged by his office , as a Magistrate to command his people ( whom we suppose now to be hearers of the Gospel , and possibly converted also ) to believe and prosesse Christ , nor is he obliged as a Magistrate to promote the mediatory Kingdome of Christ , as his mediatory and spirituall Kingdom ( he or his sword have nothing to do with spirits or consciences as they are such , nor with the subjects of a spirituall Kingdom ) nor can he punish blasphemers of Christ as such : nay , nor can he punish such as sin against God the creator , as they sin against God the Creator , by vertue of his office of a Magistrate , for so formally he commandeth obedience to Christ mediator , or to God creator , and punisheth sins and blasphemies against the mediator , or against God the creator only as such obedience and such blasphemies , may promote the externall safety , prosperity , and peace of the civill society , whereof he is head , or may dissolve the sinnues and nerves of that society . What he doth to uphold that society which is a part of Christs redeemed Kingdome , ●e doth it as a Magistrate in a far other Notion then the Pastors and reachers , who by office as spirituall watchmen , are to promote Christs mediatory Kingdom , as such a spirituall incorporation professing union with Christ the head of the body the Church . Obj. 2. But yet it will follow that the heathen Magistrate remaining heathen , is invincibly ignorant of his office ; for in so far as he remaineth a heathen , he cannot promote the mediatory Kingdom of Christ in any Notion ; nay , not so much as it is a mean conducing to the externall safety and peace of that civill society , whereof he i● head ; Ergo , he must , while he remaineth an heathen , and never by rumor heareth of the Gospel , be by office a promoter of Christs Kingdom , and by office a punisher with the sword , of all such as blasphem the mediator Christ , though through his owne sinfull ignorance he cannot put forth in acts or exercise the very officiall and Magistraticall power , which he hath by office , and actu primo , while he remaineth an heathen Magistrate . Ans . 1. It followeth not that the heathen Magistrate , being ignorant ( while he remaineth in that state ) of some acts , which would conduce to the peace and externall safety of the State , if the state were Christian , that he is invincibly ignorant of his office ; to be unable to exercise some acts of an office not consistent with an heathenish state , can never argue invincible ignorance of the office . 2. The consequence is nought , that because he is ignorant of some acts , and cannot exercise them ; that therefore the heathen Magistrate remaining heathen , is by office , and actu primo , an officer and vicegerent of Christs mediatory Kingdom : for at no time , and in no state , hath the Magistrates sword any influence in the mediatory Kingdome at all , but in so far as the sword may procure externall peace to the society of that Kingdome as they are a civill body , which peace he might by office procure by other means then by commanding the Gospel to be preached , or by punishing such as blaspheme Christ : for though the materiall object of the Magistrates sword be the spirituall Kingdom of Christ , yet the formall object is the naturall and civill peace of this Kingdome as a civill society , for to promote spirituall means , and to punish spirituall sins , such as heresie and blaspheming of Christ , do often conduce very much for civill peace . 3. It is false that the heathen Magistrate is unable to exercise his magistraticall power for the mediator Christ through his owne sinfull ignorance , his not knowing Christ of whom he never heard , is not any sin at all , nor is he obliged to know or believe in him , of whom he never heard , Rom. 10. 14. Arg. 3. Every Magistrate is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an humane Ordinance , 1 Pet. 2. 13. and is appointed by God the creator , and by a rationall Nature , yea saith Mr. Coleman , God and Nature made Magistrates , he must mean God the Creator and Nature , but I hope God as creator , and Nature made not the Magistrate the head of the Church , the Vicar of the Mediator Christ , this must have its rise from a higher fountain then Nature ; Ecclesiasticall Offices tend to a supernaturall end , Magistracy and humane Laws ( saith Suarez ) is from Nature , and the Law saith , de jure gentium est omnis principatus . That excellent and learned Lawyer , Ferd. Vasquius saith , That all Princedome hath its rise from the secondary Law of Nature , to wit , à jure gentium , from the Law of Nations : Hence Kings , Princes , Parliaments , Iudges , Lord justices , Majors , Sheriffes , Constables , &c. in their root are naturall , but in particulars , Rulers are from the prudence of humane societies , there is a higher institution for Church ▪ officers , Eph. 4. 11. they have not their rise from Nature , and therefore that Celebrious and renowned Antiquarie , D. Salmasius in that learned work of his , De primatu papae condemneth the dignity and jurisdiction of Patriarchs above Metropolitans , as flowing from the writs of Princes , and Synodical constitutions of Fathers , not from any Divine Institution , the highest was as Theodoret saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ Now God as creator and Nature doth not , sure Nature cannot appoint a Vicar of the Mediator Christ , for if the Magistrate be an Ecclesiasticall administration , then it must be an office intrinsecally supernaturall , and intrinsecally and directly tending to a supernaturall end ; now the Papists for shame doe build their head of the Church upon a divine institution , and on Christs words , Thou art Peter , and on this rock I will build my Church , and I will give to thee the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven ; Christ never said any such thing to a Magistrate ; and if the Magistrate be an Ecclesiasticall administration , and the head of the Church , and the Vicar of Christ as Mediator , he must have more then this , and the keyes of the Kingdom of God must be given to him above Peter and all the Apostles , for all Church-officers act their part as such , à & sub Magistratu , from and under the Magistrate , as his Vicars , so as the Magistrate in America who lived and died never hearing of the Gospel , nor of his Lord Mediator , is yet by office the Vicar of the Mediator , and obliged as a Magistrate though a meer heathen to beleeve in him of whom he never heard , if the adversary say right , which is unpossible , Rom. 10. 14. But saith Mr. Coleman , If Christ be rightfull King of the whole earth , where did Christ grant a liberty to a great part of the world , to remain Infidels and enemies to him and his Government ? Arg. 4. In Answer to which , I draw a fourth Argument ; All the Heathen Magistrates who never heard of the Mediator Christ and the Gospel , cannot by office be the Deputies and Vicars of the mediatory Kingdom , for they are not the professed subjects of Christ as Mediator , nor given to him as his possession and inheritance , neither actually , nor in Gods decree ; for thousands of them lived and died without Christ or any obligation to beleeve in , or serve the Lord Iesus as Mediator , for if Christ be not their rightfull King as Mediator , nor their King at all as Mediator , they cannot be his subjects as Mediator , far lesse can they be his Deputies and Vicars by office of his Kingdome ; but Christ is not King as Mediator in any sort or title of such as are Heathen Magistrates , for as Mediator he is neither King , titulo & jure acquisitionis , nor efficaci applicatione , neither merito , nor efficacia , he neither gave a price as Mediator to buy them , because the adversaries then must say , that Christ is so King of the whole earth , as he hath died for all and every one of mankind : nor are they his subjects so much as in the profession of the word of his Kingdom , for they never heard it ; if the Adversaries can say that Christ died for all and every one of mankinde , and so for these Heathen Kings , I can refute this Article of Arminianisme ; and though Christ had died for them , yet are they not subjects in so much as in profession , and so in no capacity nor obligation to serve with their sword , Christ as Mediator , for they are not in that state obliged to beleeve in him , nor to know him as Mediator ; how then are they obliged by office to serve him as Mediator , except he had revealed himself to them in the Gospel ? Hence I need not prove that Christ is their King by efficacious applying of the merits of his death to them , nor can any say this Argument may prove that Pastors by office are the Ambassadors of Christ , because they are not all the subjects of Christ given to him as Mediator , either in the decree of Election , nor actually redeemed ; for many Pastors who are by office the Ambassadors of Christ as Mediator , are Reprobates , as was Iudas and others ; for the Argument is not drawn from any saving claime that heathen Princes who never heard of Christ hath to Christ , but it is drawn from no claim at all , no not so much as in profession ; now this claim in profession all Pastors have , else they cannot be Pastors . It is doubtsome that Master Coloman saith , and not to a purpose , That Christ granteth not a liberty to the greatest part of the world , to remain infidels and enemies to him and his Government : For thus he giveth them a liberty negative , so as they are not obliged to believe a Gospel that they never heard , nor is their negative infidelity a sin , for which they are condemned : they are condemned , Because they glorifie not the Creator as God , Rom. 1. 21. And do not the things of the Law , that are written in their hearts , Rom. 2. 12. 14. Mat. 25. 42 , 43 , 44. And in this sense God giveth to them liberty to remain infidels , but he giveth them not liberty positively to remain infidels and enemies to Christ , that is , he willeth not voluntate signi ; that they should live in a sinfull course of unrenewed nature ; but they are not positively enemies to Christ and to his Government , who never by the least rumour heard of Christ or his Kingdom or Government : Hence all our Divines say , that privative unbeliefe of those that hear the Gospel , doth condemn , but not the negative unbeliefe of those who never heard the Gospel : Thus the adversaries must say , except they with Arminians , and especically with Moses Amyrald teach , That there be two wayes of preaching Christ , and two sorts of faiths in Christ , one of those that hear the Gospel , and another of those who are to believe in Christ , though they never hear of , or know any letter of the Gospel , who yet by the book of creation and providence are obliged to believe in Christ , which were an irrationall obligation , Rom. 10. 14. Arg. 5. All power mediatory in Heaven and in earth , that is given to Iesus Christ as Mediator , is all spirituall , all Ecclesiasticall power ; and therefore Christ upon this receipt of all power , Mat. 28. 18. draweth a conclusion , v. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Go●ye therefore and teach all Nations , &c. but a Kingly power of this world by carnall weapons , and by sword to fight , is not given to Christ mediator ; for he denieth expresly , Ioh. 18. 36. that he hath such a Kingdom as Mediator , or that he was instructed with the sword as Mediator , Luk. 12. 13. Now as God and Creator of the world , Christ could not deny but he had a Kingdom worldly , and that he hath a regnum potentiae , an universall Kingdom of power , as Lord of Hoasts ; to dispose of all the Kingdoms of the world , and to rule amongst the children of men , and to rule over the children of men , and to give them to whomsoever he will , Dan. 4. 25. & 8. 18. ●er . 27. v. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. Psal . 24. 1. Psal . 50. v. 12. Nor is this Kingdom and Power given to Christ , nor is he made Prince and a King as God ; but as Mediator to give repentance to the House of Israel , and forgivenesse of sins , Act. 5. 31. I grant it is said , Phil. 2. 9. God hath highly exalted Christ , and given him a name above every name , that at the name of Iesus every knee should bow , of things in heaven , and of things in earth , and things under the earth . What ? doth not this ( say the adversaries ) comprehend a royall power given to Christ ? and hath not Christ from this power to substitute Magistrates in his place , as his vicars under him , and as little mediators ? I answer , it doth in no sort follow : for that is a spirituall power , as is clear , Rom. 14. v. 9. For to this end Christ both died , and rose , and revived , that he might be Lord both of dead and living , v. 11. For it is written , as I live saith the Lord , every knee shall bow to me , and every tongue shall confesse God : So it is clearly expounded of Christs exalting at the right hand of God , Act. 5. 31. for spirituall and supernaturall ends , I grant as Mediator and King he breaketh his enemies , Devils , and men , Psal . 2. 9. With a rod of yron , and dasheth them in pieces like a potters vessel , and maketh his enemies his footstool , Psal . 110. 1. But that is no carnall power , such as earthly Kings useth , it is a spirituall power , for the reason is given , ver . 2. The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Sion : By which v. 5. as a great Anti-royalist , He strikes through Kings in the day of his wrath : Now Christ as Mediator sendeth not out Kings and Princes to conquer souls to him with their sword : Renowned Salmasius saith , When Christ sent his Apostles first to preach the Gospel , and to lay the foundation of the Christian Church , did he send out with them lictors , pursevants , men of war with a bundell of rods , and with axes to compell men to come in to his Kingdome ? Commanded he to smite them with swords and axes , who would not receive the Gospel ? No , yea he would not have them to take with them a staffe , a scrip , or shoes : But though Christ subdue all his enemies , Devils , and wicked men , it shall never follow that Christ is for that , King and head of Devils , and wicked men : For Christ is as Mediator King and Head , or mediatory King and Head of those that are the subjects , and redeemed conquest of this King , and of those who are members of the body of which he is Head , now this body is his Church only , Col. 1. 18. He is the Head of the Body the Church , Eph. 1. 22 , 23. And gave him to be Head over all things to the Church , Which is his Body , the fulnesse of him that filleth all : The Body of Christ to be edified , Ephesi . 4 12. Till we all ( all that body of the Saints to be perfected , v. 11. ) come in the unity of the faith , and of the knowledge of the Son of God , unto a perfect man , unto the measure of the stature of the fulnesse of Christ , v. 16. from whom the whole Body fitly joyned together , and compacted by that which every joynt supplieth , according to the effectuall working in the measure of every part , maketh increase of the Body unto the edifying of it selfe in love : Now never Divine can say , that Devils and wicked men , who shall bow to Iesus , are the subjects of this Kingdom of Christ , who have right to the fruits of the Kingdom , Righteousnesse and peace , and joy in the Holy Ghost , Rom. 14. 17. far lesse that they are of the Body ; that is , Christs Body , Christs fulnesse , Christs Body to be perfected , edified , to Come in the unity of faith , and of the knowledge of the Son of God , into a perfect man , &c. Arg. 6. These Megistrates that are the mediatory vicars , deputies , and heads of the Head Iesus Christ and his Kingdom , these are of his Body , and subjects under the King and Mediator Christ , the chiefe Head and King : For it is not to be presumed , that Christ will appoint these to be heads and vicars of his Body , and little Kings over his Kingdom , as he is Mediator , who are not members of his Church , nor subjects of his mediatory Kingdom : But Magistrates as Magistrates , are not members of his Church , nor subjects of his mediatory Kingdom : no more then Husbands as Husbands , Fathers as Fathers , are members ; and their should have been Husbands and Fathers , though the Lord Iesus never had been Mediator , advocate , and Priest of a redeemed Church . Obj. But are Pastors and teachers , and Elders as such , members of the Christian Church ? Ans . If eyes and ears be members of the body , and watchmen members of the city , then are they , ex officio , by their office members of the Church ▪ But if the Magistrate as a Magistrate be a member of the Church , then all Magistrates , Heathen , and Turkish are members of the Christian Church , ex officio , by vertue of their office . Arg. 7. That opinion is not to be holden which layeth ground , that Christ Mediator is a temporary King , hath under him Magistrates , even heathenish , who have nothing to do with a Mediator to bear a temporall sword : for a supernaturall and spirituall end as Christ● under heires , he himselfe being the first heir of all such ▪ and so maketh heathens within the verge of the mediatory Kingdom ; as if Christ were as Mediator , a King to Heathen , and all and every one of mankind , who must have Magistrates , and so maketh the Kingdome of men as men , and the Kingdom of Grace commensurable , and of alike latitude and extension , and maketh nature and grace of equall comprehension : But such is the former opinion , the proposition cannot be denied , except by Arminians , Socinians , Papists , who do maintain an universall redemption , a grace universall , a Catholick Kingdom of Grace comprehensive of all and every man , of Pharoah , Evil ▪ merodach , Belshazer , all the Kings of Romans , Persians , Assyrians , Chaldeans , and of Turk , India , and such as worship the Sunne and Moon , the Devil , and the work of mens hands : The assumption is granted by Master Coleman who saith , Christ is the rightfull King of the whole earth , he meaneth Christ as Mediator , to whom the Father hath given a Kingdom . Obj. Doth not Christ as King make all his enemies his footstool , and subdue all things to himselfe ? Ergo , his Kingdome is as large as all things . Ans . The Lord Iesus Christs power Kingly , and his power mediatory , which includeth a power as God ( for he is Mediator and a mediatory King , according to both natures ) doth no way make him King of Devils , of Hell , of sin , of the reprobate , and damned , no more then Davids power over Ammonites , and Moabites , makes him King and feeder of the Ammonites and Moabites : Never Divine said , that Christ was King of Devils , and King of Hell ; though he subdue Devils and Hell , and make them his footstool , Col. 2. 15. But as hability and gifts was not sufficient to make Christ a Priest , but he behooved to have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 authority and a lawfull calling , Heb. 5. 4 , 5. so he behooved to be called , set , and established on the Holy-hill of Zion , as a King of the Fathers making , Psal . 2. 5 , 6. Psal . 89. 26 , 27 , 28 , 29. Luk. 1. 32 , 33. ver . 68 , 69. 54 , 55. And therefore though as King and an eternall King , he subdue all things , even his enemies ; yet it followeth not , he is King and Mediator , and Head of his enemies . Arg. 8. All those whom Christ maketh officers , Legats and Ambassadors of his mediatory Kingdom , they have either the word of the Kingdom committed to them , as Pastors and Doctors , and of old , Apostles , Evangelists , Prophets , that they may make work on the consciences of men to make them Kings and Priests unto God , or they are by the word of admonition and rebuke , to deal for the same end , as governours and Elders , 1 Cor. 12. 28. 1 Tim. 5. 17. for the officers of the Kingdome , and sword or scepter of the Kingdome , the Word of God , Psal . 45. 4. Rev. 19. 15. Heb. 4. 11. Rev. 1. 16. which are the means , are congruously proportioned , to the end , the gathering of the Saints , the perfecting of his body , Eph. 2. 11 , 12. But never did Christ appoint the Magistrate with his sword , and his temporary rewards , and praise of well doing , to have any action on the conscience of men , or to co-operate for so high an end directly and kindly ; for sure the sword cannot reach that end , except indirectly and by accident , in some imperated acts : He may procure that there be such means as word and seals , and Church-officers , and so be an intrinsecall mean to set up those which are the spirituall and truly intrinsecall means , and this is all . Object . 1. Was not this the first step of papal tyranny , that the Church-men would be exempted from the power of the Magistrate , and s●t themselves up as supream , collaterall , Independent powers in all Ecclesiasticall affairs , as the Magistrate was supream in all politick businesse ? Ans . It is a calumnious consequence , Pastors and Teachers will not be judged by the Magistrate in things meerly Ecclesisticall , ●o stand to his Ecclesiasticall decision , as if his lips , ex officio , should preserve knowledge ; Ergo , Pastors and Doctors do exempt themselves from the Lawfull power of the Magistrate in his civill judging by the sword ; it is as if they would say , Church-men refuse to submit to an usurped and unlawfull power of the Magistrate ; Ergo , they refuse to submit to their lawfull power . 2. They bring not one word to prove , that this was the first step of papal tyranny ; now a supremacy ▪ and independency in doctrinals and civill things , the adversaries deny not : If King Ahab finde the Priests of Iehovah turn Priests of Baal , and the Prophets prophesie lies , we and the adversaries agree that King Ahab hath a supream independent power , to judge and punish them with the sword , and if King Ahab will take on him to burne incense to the Lord , the Priests and Prophets of the Lord have an immediate supream independent power , to rebuke King Ahab for usurping that which is independently and incommunicably proper to the Priests onely , and they may refuse to bee judged by King Ahab , when he would judge them for giving out this sentence , It belongeth not to King Ahab , or King Vzziah to burne incense to the Lord , but to the Priests , the sons of Aaron , 2 Chron. 26. Will they say this supremacy of the Priests is a step to papall Tyranny ? 3. This is rather papall Tyranny it selfe that the Magistrate as head of the Church , and as an Ecclesiasticall person may as a Magistrate governe , in all externalls , the Church , as he pleaseth , with a royall , supream , independent power ; and because the Magistrate may send others to rule for him , 2 Chron. 19. 8 , 9. 1 Pet. 2. 13 , 14. Ergo , he may commit this royall power to a creature called a Prelate as to his Deputie , in his name to judge ; as Phocas gave first a supremacy to Boniface the third , which no Bishop of Rome had before ; and judge if this be not the first step to Papall Tyranny ? They possibly may say , The Magistrate can commit no Magistraticall power to any Churchman , for Christ for bad them to take on them the civill domination of the Lords of Gentiles , Luke 22. 26 , 27. Ans . But this is an Ecclesiastick , not a civill administration ; and if it be a lawfull Ecclesiasticall supremacy , why may not the Magistrate who hath power to send Deputies to act in his name , depute a lawfull Ecclesiasticall power , to Ecclesiasticall persons , Pastors and Doctors , who in the mind of the adversaries are all but the Deputies of the Magistrate in all that they doe . Obj. 2. But is it not Popery that the Magistrate shall be obliged as a Lictor to execute the decrees of the Church ? Ans . I know not , if the Lictor with blind obedience be to behead Iohn Baptist , or if Doeg should kill the Lords Priests , because King Saul commandeth him . 2. This Argument concludeth that neither Magistrate nor people should beleeve Articles of faith , because the Church and Pastors saith so , but because Iehovah saith so , nor is the Ruler to beleeve or execute what the Church decrees , because they decree it , but because he beleeveth it is the will of Christ , what they give out in Name of Christ . 3. Is it not Popery that the Pastors and Teachers should execute the lawes of the Magistrate both in dispensing Word , Sacraments , and Discipline ? for they may not as Pastors and Doctors judge whether the Ecclesiasticall decrees of the Magistrate be the will and minde of Jesus Christ or no. The Magistrate in doctrine and discipline is the onely supream judge here , as in all causes civill , as he exerciseth a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a dominion in the on Luke 22. 27. so also in the other , except the Adversaries shew us a difference . Yea as Mr. Pryn with the Erastians say , Because there is no certain form of the government of the Church in Scripture , he hath an Arbitrary power as Magistrate to appoint any government in the Church not contrary to the Word , any Officers , Prelates , and Cardinals , any ceremonies as pleaseth him , and may impose them on the consciences of Pastors and people , which is the highest Papall Tyranny on earth . Obj. 3. If the Magistrate be therefore subject to the Church not as a Magistrate , but as he scandalously transgresseth the Law of God , so that the Church may not rebuke and censure him , as either a Magistrate , or as a Magistrate doing his duty , but onely as a Transgressor : Then neither 1. one particular Pastor as a Pastor is subject to the Church , yea no man in a lawfull calling or relation as such is subject to the Church , for the Church cannot rebuke or censure a Husband as a Husband , a father as a father , a Painter as a Painter , no more then the Church can censure a Magistrate as a Magistrate ; for then should the Church censure and condemn all these relations and callings , as husband , father , painter , Magistrate as intrinsecally unlawfull . Nor can the Church censure and rebuke husband , father , painter , musitian , &c. when they do right , and doe but fulfill their relations and callings , in doing the duties of husband , father , painter , no more then the Church can censure and rebuke the Magistrate when he doth his dutie . Ans . 1. This is not the totall , compleat , and adequate cause , why the Magistrate in spirituall things is subject to the Church , but the halfe of the cause onely ; you must take in the other consideration , he is in spiritualibus , subject to the Church , not only as he doth sin ; but 1. As he may sin scandalously . 2. As he may be directed , informed , and swayed with precepts , promises , counsels , threatnings toward a supernaturall end to eternall life ; take in all these three , and we grant all . The Magistrate and all in other relations and professions and callings are equally in spirituall things subject to the Church , as the Ministers of Christ , and in all other relations and callings , as fathers , husbands , painters , musitians , are in civill things equally subject to the Magistrate , according to the three former cases in a civill consideration . Obj. 4. But then you must prove solidly from the word , that the Magistrate is subject to the Church in spirituall things ? Ans . It is enough if I prove that the Magistrate is subject to the Church , to Pastors and Doctors in things belonging to his soule , and as a man and a Christian in civill things are subject to him , which to me is clear in the Word of God , as 1. Because Timothy and all watchmen in their person are commanded to rebuke them that sin before all , and that in the sight of God , and the Lord Iesus , and the elect Angels , without preferring one before another , or doing any thing by partialitie , 1 Tim. 5. 20 , 21. 2 Tim. 4. 2. And if Levi must not know his father or his mother , in the Lords cause , Deut. 33. 9. and Ieremiah in rebuking not be dismayed of Kings , Princes , and Prophets , Ier. 1. 17. neither must Ministers accept the persons of judges , Christ rebuked his mother to whom otherwise he was subject , Ioh. 2. 4. Luke 2. 51. 2. There is the practise of the Prophets , Christ and the Apostles , that they have rebuked Kings , Rulers , Magistrates , Priests , Prophets , every page almost of the Old and New Testament saith this . 3. God hath no whit exempted the Rulers from rebukes , as they be men , they can and do sin . 4. Princes are the sheep of Christ , and redeemed as a part of the flock for the which Christ gave the blood of God ; Ergo , they are to be fed and watched over , lest they also as grievous wolves prey upon the flock , Acts 20. 28 , 29 , 30. then there must be some over them , and those who should speake the word of the Lord to them , and so the word of rebuke , and who should watch for the souls of Magistrates , as those who must give an account , whom the Magistrates must obey as others in the same condition who have souls , Heb. 13. 7 , 17. 1 Pet. 5. 1 , 2 , 3. ▪ 1 Thes . 5. 12 , 13 , 14. 5. All the censures of the Church are for the good of soules , that the Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord , 2 Thes . 3. 14 , 15. 1 Tim. 1. 19 , 20. 1 Cor. 5. 5 , 6. and for edification , 2 Cor. 10. 8. Iude v. 23. Ergo , the souls of Magistrates should not be defrauded of this mean of edification . 6. Pastors as Ministers , Stewards , Ambassadors , Watchmen , are intrusted with the word of reconciliation , 1 Cor. 4. 1 , 2. and 1 Cor. 3. 5. and 4. 15. 2 Cor. 5. 19 , 20. 1 Tim. 3. 1. 2 Cor. 4 7. Ergo , they must divide the Word aright to all within the family , 2 Tim. 2. 15. and rebukes and censures are a part of the word of reconciliation , no lesse then promises , and they are to prophecy death and life , as God in his word commandeth , Ezek. 3. 17 , 18 , 19 , 20. and 13. 19. and 33. 7 , 8 , 9. 10. 7. The power of the Lord Jesus in censuring , is extended to men as ●ll doers , not as Magistrates , or not Magistrates , 1 Cor. 5. 2. Gal. 5. 10. the power of binding and loosing is extended to a trespassing brother , who will not hear the Church , Mat. 18. 15 , 16. and 16. 19 , 20. The Magistrate is a brother , Deut. 17. 15. one of the Israel of God , as Saul was of of the Tribe of Benjamin , David of Iudah . 8. The Church may judge such as are within the Church , 1 Cor. 5. 12. but such is the Christian Magistrate . 9. Correction is a priviledge of sons and Members of the family , Heb. 12. 6 , 7. Rev. 3. 19. Ergo , the Magistrate should not be deprived of that wherein all Christians share , Gal. 2. 28. 10. Discipline is a part of Christs Kingly government , if the government be on Christs shoulders as King , as it is Mat. 28. 19 , 20. Ephes . 4. 11 , 12. Esa . 22. 22. and if the Gospel be the Word and Scepter of his Kingdome , Mark. 1. 14 , 15. and 4. 11. Matth. 21 43. Luke 4. 43. and 8. 1. Acts 1. 3. and 8. 12. and 20. 25. and 28. 31. Psal . 45. 3. Rev. 1. 16. Then if Magistrates be the subjects of Christ as King of the Church , they must be subject to those who preach the Kingdome , carry the Scepter , and rule under Christ as King. 11. Upon the same ground , if they decree grievous decrees , Isa . 10. 1. Micah 3. 1. and be wolves ravening the prey , Ezek. 22. 27. let them have either Royall or Parliamentary power , they are to be rebuked , debarred from the holy things of God , excommunicated , and their sins bound in earth , as in heaven , Mat. 18 , 18. Mat. 16. 19. Nor should Courts or Parliaments or Thrones , be cities of refuge to unjust and scandalous men . 12. Upon the same ground Magistrates are not to be deprived of the good of private rebukes , and admonitions , except we hate the Magistrate in our heart , and strive not to gain his soul , Levit. 19. 17. Mat. 18. 15 , 16. Luk. 17. 3 , 4. Psal . 141. 5. 13. Erastus himself granteth , that Magistrates may be rebuked ; and when he granteth that Apostates and Idolaters are not members of the Church , and that they are to be cast out of the Church , as he doth also ; he must either grant that Christian Magistrates cannot turn Apostates and Idolaters , which is against Scripture and experience , or that if they turn Apostates and Idolaters , they remain no longer members of the Church , but are to be excommunicated ; or then Christ must have made some speciall exception , that Kings though Idolaters and Apostates , do yet remain members of the Church , and are not to be cast out of the Church , which ( beside that Erastus cannot shew ) is contradictory to his words : Hence it is clear , the Magistrate if he turn as Saul did , a wicked man , he is to be excommunicated : But 1. By whom ? by the Church ? Erastus will deny he can be judged by the Church , because he is above the Church : by himselfe ? that is against reason : By other Magistrates ? he is the only supream in that Church , and by what reason he is above the Church , he is above the other Magistrates , and other Magistrates are guilty of the same fault . Obj. 5. The supream and principall power ( called Architectonica of governing the Church in externals , either agree to the Magistrate , or to the Church ; not to the Magistrate ( as they say ) if to the Church : Then 1. The universall care and inspection over the Church is taken from the Magistrate , and given to the Church ; Ergo , 2. Then the Christian Magistrate not indirectly only , but directly must be obliged to follow the judgement of the Church , in ordaining , depriving , punishing of Ministers , or of any excommunicated . 3. The subjects must be obliged not to obey , yea , to disobey the Magistrate , if he decern any thing contrary to the Church ; and the Magistrate as a lictor and servant must execute all . Ans . 1. There is no reason to say , that the supream and principall power by way of royall dominion ( as the argument supposeth ) in Church matters , should agree to either Magistrate on earth , or Church ; it is a Rose of the Crown of him who is the only King of Kings , and Lord of Lords , and so the Major is false : Nor is that care and inspection which is due to the Magistrate , taken from him when we ascribe to Christ what is his due . 2. Neither doth it follow , that the Magistrate is directly obliged to follow the judgement of the Church , except we did make the judgement of the Church supream and absolute , and armed with such a dominion as the adversaries give to the Magistrate ; in which case it followeth , that the Church is directly and absolutely obliged to follow the judgement of the Magistrate , according to the way of the adversaries ; and that if this argument be good , they must ascribe blind obedience , either to the Church or Magistrate , not to the Magistrate they say ; Ergo , to the Church : Nor can they take it off by saying that the Magistrates dominon is limited by the Word of God ; for they know that we teach , that all the constitutions and decrees of Synods made by the Church as the Church , is limited by the Word of God ; yet they cease not to object to us , that we make the Magistrate a servant , and a lictor to the Church , and obliged by his place to give blind obedience to the Church , and therefore they are obliged to answer the argument , and remove papal dominion from their way , according to their owne argument , if they will be willing to take in to themselves , with the same measure , that they give out to others : But if they give a ministeriall power of judging to the Church , ( the argument is easily answered ) which they cannot give to the Magistrate , except they make his office to oblige the conscience , and his commands as magistraticall to be given out under the pain of the second death : Now his sword is too short to reach to this , I hope , except you make the vengence that he executeth on evil doers Rom. 13. to be eternall fire , and his sword to be no materiall nor visible sword , but such as commandeth Devils and Hell , which is absurd ; for the Magistrates power of judging and commanding , is commensurable to his power of rewarding and punishing , that is , both is temporary , within time , on the body of this world : The Pastors have a power of commanding , though only ministeriall , but free of all domination , or externall coaction , which is spirituall , and the punishment is accordingly spirituall , a binding in earth and heaven ; I borrow only the word of punishment , it being no such thing properly . Obj. 6. If the end of the Church be a spirituall , and of the Magistrate be a temporall good ; and if the Magistrate have no spirituall power to attain to his temporall end , no more then the Church hath any temporall power to attain to her spirituall end ; is not this a contradiction , that the Magistrate should determine what the true Church and Ordinances are , and then set them up with the power of the sword ? for the Magistrates power to judge and punish in spirituall causes , must be either spirituall or civill , or then he hath none , and so acts without commission : Now for civill power , the Magistrate hath it only over the bodies and goods of men , and hath it not over the soul , nor can he have it ( say ● ) in soul cases : It is confessed that the Magistrate hath no spirituall power to attain a temporall end , and therefore those who provoke the Magistrate , without either civill or spirituall power to punish , or prosecute , in spirituall causes , are to fear that they come too near to those frogs that proceed out of the mouth of the Dragon and Beast , and false Prophet , who with the same argument stirre up the Kings of the earth to make war against the Lambe and his followers , Rev. 17. Bloody Tenent . Answ . 1. All this argument is builded on a great mistake , and a conseqence never proved , except by this one word of the Author . ( Therefore say I ) and it is this : The Magistrate hath no civill power over the soul , therefore ( say I ) he hath no power in soul matters , and cannot judge and punish in spirituall causes . Sir , this is a non sequitur , The learned Divine Rivetus saith well , The Magistrates power in spirituall things to judge and punish , is formaliter , and in it self and intrinsecally civill , but objective in regard of the object and extrinsecally , it is spirituall . 1. I ask when the Author and his take a professor into Church-communion , they judge whether he be just , mercifull , and peaceable , when they excommunicate any member , for murther , for unjustice in taking away the goods of his brother ? whether the Church doth judge and punish in the causes of justice , mercy and peace , which properly belongeth to the civill Magistrate , not to the Church properly ; but only ratione scandali as they are offensive in the Church of God : I ask ( I say ) if the Churches power in judging and punishing be civill , or spirituall ; not civill , for this Author will say , that the Church hath no power over the lives and goods of men , those belong to the Magistrate , and to his civill power : Yet he cannot deny , but the Churches power in judging and punishing here , is formally spirituall , and objectively and unproperly civill ; so say I the Mgaistrates power in spirituall causes , is formally civill and objectivel● only spirituall , and he neither hath , nor needeth any spirituall power formally to attain his temporall end , nor needeth the Church any power formally civill to attain her spirituall end : The reason is , because powers have their specification and nature from their formall object , not from the materiall ; because the Magistrate punisheth here●ies and false Doctrine as they disturbe the Peace of the civill State ; therefore his power is civill , and because the Church censureth unjustice , incest , 1 Cor. 5 , 1 , 2. and sins against the second Table , because they are scandalous in the Church , and maketh the name of God to be ill spoken of , though materially those sins be punishable by the Magistrate , yet is the Churches power spirituall , because it judgeth those as scandalous and offensive to God ; and therefore the power is spirituall , because the object , to wit , as scandalous to the Church , and as offensive to God is spirituall , even as destructive to civill Peace , is formally a civill object . 2. The Magistrate without any spirituall power judges what is the true Church and true ordinances , setteth them up by his sword ; he doth set them up only for a civill end , because they conduce most for the peace and flourishing condition of the civill state , whereof he is head , not that the members of his state may attain life eternall ; for the Magistrate intendeth life eternall to his subjects in setting up a true Church , and true Ordinances , not as a Magistrate , but as a godly man : As the woman of Samaria brought out the Samaritanes , that they might receive Christ in their heart by saith , as she had done : But as a Magistrate he intendeth not life eternall to his subjects ; so a Master as a Master , hireth a man to serve who is a believer , and as a Master he judgeth such a one will be most faithfull , and active in his service ; now the Master judgeth him not to be a Saint , that he may be a fit member of the Church : The Church only as the Church is to judge so of this servant , nor doth he judge him a believer , that he may obtain life eternall , nor doth he love and chuse him as his servant , that he may obtain life eternall ; Christians as Christians , judge and love one another that way : So the Husband as a Husband doth chuse a believing woman for his Wife , judging she will perform the duties of a Wife , better then an unbelieving Wife , he judgeth her to be a believer as a Husband , and loveth her with a Husband-love as a Husband ; but if he love her because the image of God is in her , and as an heir of life eternall , then he loveth her as a Christian man , not as a Husband , and it is a Christian love he hath to her , such as he hath to other godly women that are also co ▪ heirs with himself of life eternall ; and this is a lawfull and a Christian love : But if this Husband should bear a Husband-love , such as he doth to his own Wife , to all other godly Wives , it should be an adulterous and unlawfull love : So the Magistrate as a Magistrate , judges , loves , chuses , and setteth up true Ordinances , a true Church , as means of a flourishing Kingdom , and of externall Peace , and pulleth down the contrary as means destructive to the peace and safety of his subjects : But he judgeth not in a spirituall manner , and with any spirituall power of the sword , of those as fitting and conducing to life eternall , and inward peace of conscience with God ; but as a justified and believing Saint , he judgeth , chuseth , and loveth Ordinances , and the true Church in this consideration , and no wise as a Magistrate : If those Relations of Magistrate and Christian had been considered by the Author , he had not compared the Magistrate punishing idolatry to the Dragon , and the godly Pastors who exhort the Magistrate to punish false teachers to the Beast , and the false Prophet , who maketh war with the Lambe : For the godly magistrate who advanceth the throne of the Lambe , is praise worthy ; he doth cut off all wicked doers from the city of the Lord , Psal . 101. 8. and doth this as a Magistrate , that his Kingdome might have peace and well grounded prosperity ; but as a man according to Gods heart he doth it formally set on high the throne of the Lambe , nor would he have compared those worthy and dear brethren of New England the Saints of the most high , especially reverend Master Cotton to the frogs that proceeded out of the mouth of the false Prophet , Rev. 17. 3. Nor do the Papists use this argument at all , but another argument , and for a contrary conclusion ; for the Pope as the Pope is an earthly Monarch , and as Pope hath power to translate Crowns and Kingdoms , and as Pope the Holy Ghost in him commandeth the Kings of the Earth , to make war with the Lambe and his followers , as Papists teach ; do we ascribe any such power be the Church or Churchmen ? are Malignants , Prelates , and Papists , the followers of the Lambe ? Obj. 7. If the people may erect what government they will , and seems most fit for their civill condition ; then governments by them so erected have no more power , nor for no longer time then the civill power or people consenting and agreeing shall betrust them with ; for people are not deprived of their naturall freedom by the power of tyrants : And if so , that Magistrates receive their power of governing the Church from the people ; Then a people as a people naturally considered ( of what Nature or Nation soever in Europe , Asia , Africa , America ) have fundamentally and originally as men , a power to govern the Church , to see her do her duty , to correct her , to redresse , to reform , to establish , &c. And this is to subject God , Christ , heaven , the spirit , to naturall , sinfull , and unconstant men : Indian and American governments are as true and lawfull governments as in the world ; and therefore their governours are keepers of the Church and of both Tables ( if any Church should arise or be amongst them ) and therefore ( if Christ ▪ have betrusted the civill power with his Church ) they must judge according to their Indian and American consciences , for others they have not . Ans . 1. No doubt the power that makes Magistrates , because of vertue and dexterity to govern , may unmake them when they turn tyrants , and abuse their power ; and upon the same ground , as men create Magistrates , so Christian men as Christian men , act to chuse Christian and gracious Magistrates : as if a Husband as a man chuse a Wife ( as grace perfumeth and spiritualizeth all the common actions of men ) so Christian men are to chuse Christian Wives , Christian Masters , Christian servants ; so is a Church to chuse a Christian , not an American Magistrate , Deu. 17. they are not to chuse a stranger , but one from amongst their brethren , and men fearing God , and hating coveteousnes , Exo. 18. 21. Deu. 17. 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20. and 1. 16. and that a Christian Magistrate receive power to govern in the Church ( I deny him to be a Governour of the Church ) from Christian people , I see no inconvenience : Suppose that a Christian woman chuse a Pagan Husband , she sins in her choise ; and as a sinful woman chuseth a Pagan who hath no other then a Pagan conscience , to be the guide of her youth , and her head , and to love her , as Christ loved his Church , and to rule her according to his marital and Husband-power in some acts of her Christian conversation : Yea , when Christians did fight under Heathen Emperours , they gave power as all souldiers do to their Commanders , to those Heathen Captains , to command Christians according to their Pagan consciences , for other consciences it cannot be supposed Heathen have as this Author speaketh ; nor do I see such an inconvenience , that men as men chuse a Magistrate who is a Heathen , to see not the Church as the Church ; but men of the Church do their duty , and to punish them civilly when they omit Church duties , when providence compelleth Iudah : Yea , when God commandeth Iudah to submit to a Babylonish or Persian King , who according to his Babylonish conscience is to command them to keep the oath of God , to abstain from murther ▪ yea , to build again the house of God , and is to punish the men of Iudah , if they do the contrary : Here evidently the Church is to chuse Heathen Kings , who according to their Heathen consciences , are to judge and punish sins against both Tables ; but they chuse them to adde there auxiliary power to help and desend the Church , not any privative or absolute power to set up what ordinances they will : Nor is it supposed that men as men may give to Indian and American Magistrates , power to judge , by rule of Indian consciences ; what is blasphemy against Iesus Christ , what is apostacy from the Christian saith , to Iuda●sme , and to punish it : For in that fare , the Indian Magistrate is uncapable of Magistracy in those acts , though essentially he be a lawfull Magistrate in other acts ; just as Christian men and Saints by calling may make a Christian Corinthia● amongst themselves , their Magistrate ; and yet he cannot judge whether Ti●ius the Physi●ian in Corinth hath poysoned Sempronius , as he hath a Christian conscience , but not a medicinall conscience ( to speak so ) or the skill and art of a Physi●ian to know what is poyson , what not ; yet did men as men create this Christian Magistrate , to judge & punish murthers , and poysoning of Christians . 2. Let us also turn the Tables : the Author cannot deny , but Ten thousand Christians and Indians , half of each side , may come to be one civil incorporation ; they create with common consent a Christian Magistrate over themselves , this they do as a society of men . The Indians worship their God in that society , by offering their children to the Devil , and this is their Indian conscience ; for it is not to be supposed that an Indian can worship his God with other then an Indian conscience : By this Authors way , Indians and Christians gave to this Christian Magistrate , to judge of this Indian and bloody worship , with a Christian conscience , for it is supposed he can judge with no other conscience : I demand whether or not this Magistrate be obliged to punish such horrid shedding of innocent blood ? If he be , he is set over this incorporation to bear the sword of the Lord , and with a Christian conscience to judge and punish Indian consciences : Is not this as great an inconvenience as what he objecteth to us ? Besides that , according to this way , he must not punish the killing of the children to the Devil ; why ? this is against the will of the meek Saviour in whom the Christian Magistrate believes , to persecute an Indian for his conscience , as this Author thinketh : Now it is no lesse an Indian conscience worship , and no murther to offer an innocent child to the Indian God , then it was to the Jews to offer an innocent Bullock or a Ram to Jehovah . Obj. But God hath forbidden in the Law of nature to kill infants to God upon any pretence . Ans . In the Law of nature God hath forbidden all false worship . 2. The Law of nature hath forbidden to offer any blood to God , that is , the Law of nature will never warrant us to offer in a whole brunt offering an innocent Beast to God , created for the use of man , and it should be against the Law of nature , to kill Beasts for any religious use , or for any use , except to be food or medicine for man : Except God in a positive Law , had commanded whole burnt offerings , and offering of Beasts to God : so the Law of nature forbids Indians to kill infants ; but they tell you , there is a positive Law of their God , and in conscience they are obliged to kill their children to this God , and you must convince their conscience , that this is murther , not right worship , by reason and light of truth , not with a club and force of sword , which hath no influence upon the conscience . 3. It followeth not , that God hath subjected God , Christ , Heaven , the Spirit to naturall men ; for an Indian Magistrate remaining an Indian , never received power from mem as men , nor from God , to judge of Christian worship : yea , Indian Magistrates as Indians are uncapable of judging or punishing what is against Christ , Heaven , the Spirit , and yet they are Lawfull Magistrates ; for their ignorance of Christ excludeth them from having any such formal power ; what Magistraticall power they have which they cannot put forth in acts , is not to a purpose for this power , which they cannot exercise , shall never subject , Christ , Heaven , the Spirit to the consciences of naturall men , or Indian Magistrates : this consequence therefore should have been proved ▪ not presumed as a truth . 4. He saith , If any Church should arise amongst those who have Indian Magistrates , Christ should betrust the Indian civill power with his Church . I answer , This is non-consequence also , for the state of heathenship in the Indian , should exclude him from any such trust ; if a Church arise they are to be under the Indian Magistrate , while God in his providence free them from under him , that they may chuse a Christian Magistrate , who may be a nurse-father to them ? 5. The Lord be trusteth his Church to the civil power as an auxiliary power , not to exercise any magistraticall power over the Church , and over their conscience ; but only for the Churches good , and for their conscience . These would be distinguished , a governour of , or over the Church . 2. A Governour in the Church . 3. A Governour for the Church ; neither Christian nor Heathen Magistrate is a Governor of the Church , or over the Church : An Heathen Magistrate may be a Governour in the Church , giving to the Church in his dominion leave to live under him , as Nebuchadnezzar did to the Church in captivity . The Christian Magistrate is a Governour for the Church ; 1. Men are governed as men politically by Magistrates though Heathen . 2. Men are governed as Christians and Citizens of Heaven , and Members of Christs invisible body , by the inward government of the Spirit and Word . 3. Men are governed as Members of Christs visible Body in Church-society Ecclesiastically , by Church-officers called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Heb. 13. 7. 13. who watcheth for our Souls , and are over us in the Lord , and must give an account to God , whom we are to obey in a Church-society : so Pilate is called , Mat. 27. 2. it is given to Kings and Rulers , 1 Pet. 2. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Act. 23. 24. so it is opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to one that serveth , Luk. 22. 26. no question it is a word borrowed from the seventy interpreters who use it , Iosh . 13. 21. Mich. 3. 9. Ezech. 44. 3. Dan. 3. 2. the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Rom. 12. 8. 1 Thes . 5. 12. are ascribed to Church-officers : Yea , the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Ruler or a Commander , Act. 23. 5. is ascribed to the High-Priest , who was but a Church-officer , and the stile given to Rulers , Exod. 22. 28. from which these words are taken , is Gods : so Ioh. 10. 35 , 36. compared with Psal . 82. 1. Exod. 21. 6. and proveth the same , though Church-officers be onely Ministers , not Lords , not Princes , having any dominion over the Lords inheritance . Obj. 8. But is not this an easie way to extricate our selves out of all doubts , if we say in Church-government , that the doctrinal and declarative part is in the Ministers of Christ , as Mat. 28. Go teach , &c. and the punitive and censuring part in the Christian Magistrate , Rom. 13. according to that for the punishing of evill doers , as Mr. Coleman saith . Ans . This Erastian way will intricate us not a little , and is destructive of the Covenant of both Kingdoms . 1. It s a distinction void of Scripture and reason , for the Apostolick Churches by it must have no Government as Churches at all : for to publish the Gospel which is made the one half ; Yea , all Church-government ( for this punitive part is a dream ) is not Church-government , nor any part thereof . 1. Master Coleman desires that the Parliament would give to preachers Doctrine and power of preaching and wages , learning and competency : as for Governing of the Church , let the Magistrate have that , Ministers have other work to do , and such as will take up the whole man. Sermon , Pag. 24 , 25. Then preaching the Word to the Church , cannot be any part of Governing of the Church . 2. Because Church government is properly acted by the Church , with the power of the keyes , to bind and loose in earth , as in Heaven by Church-censures , and pardoning of an offender , and committed to many , to the Church , to a society gathered together , Mat. 18. 18. 1 Cor. 5. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. But publishing of the Gospel is done by one single Pastor , even to the end of the world , even where there is no Church , even in the hearts of the Athenienses , Act. 17. 33 , 34. of Felix , Act. 24. 25. of the Iayler not Baptised , Act. 16. 29 , 30 , 31. of the woman of Samaria , Ioh. 4. 28 , 29 , 30. The Gospel exerciseth a doctrinall and externall government on thousands , the like without the Church visible : yea , and who never are members of a visible Church ; is this any Church-government of which we now speak ? and in all the Scripture a power of the keyes to govern the visible Church , was never committed to any one single man by Iesus Christ ; if an Apostolick-priviledge of Pauls excommunicating his alone be objected , I can easily answer , Apostles continue not to the end of the world . 2. This doctrinal publishing of the word , is the plants and flowers of the Gardens but Church-government is the hedge , and those two are not to be confounded . 3. Paul differenceth them as two distinct qualities of a Preacher , 1 Tim. 3. while he will have him apt to teach , ver . 2. and v. 4 , 5. one that can rule the Church of God well ; and 1 Tim. 5. 17. ruling well , is distinguished from labouring in the Word and Doctrine as a charge worthy of lesse honour , from a charge worthy of double honour . 4. All Protestant Divines distinguish Doctrine and Government , the former belonging to the being and essence of a visible Church , as an essentiall note thereof , I mean the publike and settled publishing of the Gospel ; the other is only a thing belonging to the well being of the visible Church , and an accident thereof ; so it is a heedlesse tenent to make the former a part with the latter . 5. When we swear a conformity of Doctrine and worship in one Confession , one Catechisme , one Directory , we do not swear the same over again , when we swear to endeavour the nearest uniformity in Church-government , &c. which we cannot but do , if the Doctrine and Worship be nothing but a part of Church-government ; or if it be all Church-government : n●w if Mr. Colemans punitive part be but his own dream , as I hope is easily proved , there is no Church Government at all . Now how Mr. Coleman did swear to indeavour the nearest uniformity of a Chimera , and a thing that is just nothing , let himself consider . As for Mr. Colemans punitive part of Church Government by the Magistrate , this by his way is done by the power of the sword of the Magistrate , saith he , and therefore citeth Rom. 13. He beareth not the sword in vain , &c. Hence either the Apostolique Church had no censures at all , and so no visible government and order , but preaching of the Word was all ; and except we would adde to our pattern , and be more wise then the Holy Ghost and the Apostles , we ought to have no Church Government , but onely preaching the Word ; or then the Apostles , Pastors , and Teachers medled with the sword of the Emperour Nero in discharging the punitive part , for with no other instrument doth the Magistrate punish ill-doers , but with the sword , Rom. 13. 4 , 5. This text Mr. Coleman citeth to make bloody Nero a Church-governour : But no ground is for this in the Word , that Paul , Peter , Timothy , Archippus meddled with the Emperours sword , or that the weapons of their warfare were carnal ; or that Paul was the Minister of God , bearing the sword for the punishment of evil doers : I think Paul speaketh of civil bodily punishing , Rom. 13. and no violence greater can be offered to the Word of God ; for if that power be an Ecclesiastical administration , every soul , and so the Christian Magistrate , is to be subject to this Ecclesiastical and Church power ; and if so , then to the Church : If Mr. Coleman deny the consequence , I conceive to be subject to the Magistrate , is Rom. 13. to be subject to the power civil , that is , of God : If the Magistracy be an Ecclesiastical ordinance and a vicegerent power of the mediator , as they say it is ; then to be subject to the Magistrate , is to be subject to this Church power , and to be subject to the Church . 2. The punishing power of the Magistrate as such , doth not bind and loose on Earth , and open and shut Heaven ; for then hoc ipso , because the Magistrate doth judge and punish evil doers , the mans sin should be bound in Heaven ; now so the judging and punishing power should take hold of the conscience : But it is certain , the Magistrate as judge may take away the life of a Capital Delinquent , when he knoweth the man repenteth and believeth , and findeth mercy with God ; Ergo , this magistratical power is not Ecclesiastical ; for if the man to the knowledge of all repent , the Church hath no power to bind his sin on Earth , nor will God bind his sin in Heaven ; but yet the Magistrate as a Magistrate is to punish ; Ergo , this punishing power is no Ecelesiastical power , nor any part of Church-government . 3. The punitive power of the Magistrate hath influence on men as ill-doers , whether they be within the Church or without the Church , and worketh on men as Members of the Common wealth , whether Christians , or Heathens , Indians , or Americans : But no punitive power of the Church , is or can be extended to those that are without the Church , but Pastors and the Church leaveth them to be judged of God , 1 Cor. 5. 12. nor can they be cast out of the visible Church , who were never within it . 4. The punitive power of the Church as such , floweth from Christ as Mediator , Head and King of the Church ; because Christ as Head and Mediator , hath appointed a shepheards staffe , discipline , or rebukes , Church-censures , and Excommunication for his sheep , his redeemed ones , family , and people , for whom he is Mediator , his Scepter and Rod must be congruously and sutably proportioned to his Crown , and spiritual Royal power : But the punitive power of Magistrates floweth from God the Creator , as the whole world is the family of God ; so for the preservation of humane society , the Lord hath been pleased to appoint Magistrates , and the punitive power of them by the sword , to correct ill-doers for the peace , good , and safety of humane societies . 5. All punitive Church-power is for edification , 2 Cor. 10. 8. That the mans spirit may be savdd in the day of the Lord , 1 Cor. 5. 5. that the party may be gained by private and publike Church rebukes , Mat. 18. 15. If he hear thee , thou hast gained thy Brother , v. 18. If he neglect to hear the Church , let him be to thee as an Heathen , &c. Ergo , if he hear the Church his soul is gained , 2 Thess . 3. 14 , 15. 1 Tim. 1. 19. but the intrinsecal end of punishing an evil doer , is not the gaining of his soul , but a political civil satisfaction of justice for a wrong done to humane society , that others may fear , and do so no more ; the Magistrate in using his sword as a Magistrate , looketh not to this as the intrinsecall end of the sword , to convert a soul , to augment the number of the subjects of Christs mediatory Kingdom ; nor doth he as a Magistrate proportion the measure of the stroke of the sword according to the repentance aud godly sorrow of the man who hath sinned ; but in justice his eye is not to pity or spare the blasphemer , though as dear to him as a father and friend , Deut. 13. 6 , 8 , 9. 10. Deut. 33. 9. whether he repent , or not repent ; but the Church censure , respecting intrinsecally the gaining of the soul , is proportioned to the offenders sorrow for his sin , that he be not swallowed with over much sorrow , 2 Cor. 2. 7 , 8 , 9 , 10. 6. This punitive part of Church Government , is neither in name , nor in thing : in Scripture Triglandius denieth that there is any Ecclesiastical , co-active , or compulsive power properly so called in the Church ; there is no violence used by Christ as King of his Church ; this shepheard carrieth the Lambs in his bosome ▪ Isai . 40. 11. Hyeronimus said well , The King or Magistrate ruleth over men that are unwilling , he meaneth in punishing them ; but the Pastor doth it to men that are willing : And renowned Salmasius citing this , addeth that of the Apostle Peter to the Elders , Feed the flock 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; It is not pena a proper punishment that the Church doth inflict , nor doth the Scripture speak so , nor is the thing it self punishment , or any punitive power here ; indeed all co-active power of the Magistrate as the Magistrate , and all punishment issuing from it , is against the will of the punished , and is inflicted with the dominion of the sword ; we know how the Adversarie side here with Papists who make all Church censures to be pennances inflicted upon penitents against their will : Therefore saith Salmasius , Of old , censures were so voluntary , that to deny them was a punishment , and they were desired and sought as a Benefit , as the ancient Canons of Councels , and Canonick Epistles , and writings of Fathers bear witnesse ; and this doth prove , if Iesus Christ have a willing people , Psal . 110. and if rebukes and censures be to the Saints as medicine that will not break the head , Psal . 141. 5. no medicine is received unwillingly by wise men , and no medicine is a punishment ; then the punitive power of the Magistrate hath no place in the Church as the Church . 7. The Magistrate dispenseth no Ecclesiasticall censures as a Magistrate : For 1. He rebuketh not as a Magistrate , for rebukes as rebukes intrinsecally tend to the gaining of the soul ; so as to receive rebukes willingly , is a Character of a child of God , and to hate it a signe of a wicked man , Ecclesi . 7. 5. Prov. 28. 23. and 6. 23. and 1. 23. c. 13. 18. c. 15. 5. 10. 31. 32. Prov. 5. 12. and 10. 17. and 15. 10. and 9. 8. and 13. 1. so the sword cannot inflict this censure , nor can the Magistrate cast out of the Synagogue or Church ; he can banish , which is a locall casting out ; but not excommunicate , if he be said to be an Ecclesiasticall person exercising punitive power in the Church , because he judgeth and punisheth sins against the Church , 1. This is nothing , except he inflict spirituall punishment of rebuking and excommunication , which he cannot do , because he hath not to do with the conscience , or the converting of a sinner . 2. If he be a Church-governour , because he punisheth sins against the Church , but in so far as they disturb the Peace of the State , then Pastors may be civil Governours , and use the sword , which Christ forbiddeth , Luk. 22. 26 , 27. and 12. 13 , 14. because they inflict spirituall punishment , such as publike rebukes on murtherers , parricides , but in a spirituall way , to gain souls to Iesus Christ ; and they rebuke murthers , thefts , thought not as committed against the State and Peace of humane societies , but as offensive to God , scandalous to the Church , and destructive to the souls of those who commit such offences : All the punishment Ecclesiasticall which we plead for ( though we borrow only the name , it being unproperly so called ) is spiritual rebukes , debarring of wicked men from the society of the Saints , and the holy things of God , that they pollute not such pearls . Bullinger is alledged by Erastus as a favourer of this way , and some private Epistles of Bullinger written to Erastus cited , but nothing of the publike writings of Bullinger : It is true he saith , he is pleased with Erastus his Theses , but 1. That he was not of Erastus his mind wholly , is evinced from these Epistles . 1. Bullinger strove with the Anabaptists of his time , who contended for either a Church of regenerate persons , or none . Bullinger . Diu cum Anabaptistis nostris contendimus hac de re , et ostendimus veram Ecclesiam posse esse , et dici Ecclesiam , quae excommunicatione hâc careat . 2. He saith , he himself , D. Wolphius , Lavater , Hallerus , Zwinglius , Gualther , never condemned the Church of Geneva ; Ergo , they never condemned Presbyterial Government . 3. He saith it will be for the edification of the Churches of the Palatine , that this excommunication be . Now we know divers there ascribed to the Magistrate plus aequo , and said that the tythes belonged jure divino to the Magistrate : The truth is these Divines were too obnoxious to the lust of Christian Magistrates . Calvin , Farel , complain much of the Magistrates usurpation in this . 4. They thought hard to exulcerate the minds of Princes to excommunicate the Magistrate , and longè magis abalienatos reddere , inferiores gradus conscendere , superiores vero intactos reddere : But was it not an abuse to excommunicate the poor people , and spare the Magistrate ? 3. Bullinger would not have the question of excommunication to come in publike ; why ? cum hoc tempore aliâs satis afflicta sit Ecclesia . 4. He seems to incline that none should be debarred from the Lords Table , that acknowledgeth their sins , coena sit libera omnibus peccata sua agnoscentibus et veniam a Christo petentibus ; we say Amen , so they be truly penitent to the Church , and not such as Paul speak of , 2 Tim. 3. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. to whom confession of sins before the Church is a manifest form of godlinesse . 5. Bullinger and Gualther writ to the Prince Elector to punish scandalous persons : But with all quanquam arbitramur illust . Principem admonitionem nostram sibi soli reservaturum , qua duntaxat dissidia manefesta in Ecclesia praevenire voluimus : Hence this ( tecum sentimus ) of Bullinger written to Erastus was ; 1. His private opinion , that he desired not to be known to the Churches ; therefore Erastus wronged Bullinger , who left his secret letters to be printed . 2. Many learned men in these Churches beside Anabaptists , and the Palatinate Catechisme were against Erastus . 6. He saith Zwinglius was the chief man to have excommunication brought in inductam cuperet . 7. He desired Beza not to answer Erastus , for peaces cause , and the same he wrote to Erastus . A learned and holy preacher to the Prince Elector , wrote thus to Bullinger . Queror ( fr. m. d. dilecte ) quod approbaris Theseis D. Erasti , contra disciplinam Ecclesiasticam scriptas , quae non tantum impiae sunt , sed viam sternunt ad Atheismum ; hortor et obsecro ut publicè testeris te novas illas Theseis improbare , Quod nisi seceris , futurum est ut videaris dissentire non tantum a doctâ illa vetustate , sed etiam a Zwinglio , et Oecolampadio aliisque , adeoque et cum teips● pugnare . Bullinger in 1 Cor. 5. Excommunicatio non est exercenda , ut Anabaptistae volunt , a toto Ecclesiae coetu , sed a dilectis ad hoc hominibus . Excommunicatio apud veteres est exclusio a communione Sacramentorum . Excommunicatio est supplicium temporale , disciplina externa ad medendam instituta . Bullinger in Mat. 18. esse Ethnicum et publicanum significat esse et haberi inter facinorosos , quibus nihil neque officij neque sinceri committas . Idem . Hortor ut salutare hoc pharmacum ( excommunicationis ) e caetu Sanctorum pontificis avarit●a eliminatum reducatur . Idem in Mat. 18. finis consilij domini est , ( in negotio disciplinae ) ut corrigantur scelerati in Ecclesia , et auferantur scandala . Bullinger in 2 Thes . 3. hic habemus abstensionem sen exclusionem , qua a tribuum societate et publicorum pascisorum usu-fructu excludimus ●on●●maces et omnes admonitiones contemnentes ; aliter etiam locus potest interpretari . These be contradictory to Erastus his expositions , and way which maketh excommunication nothing , and putteth all Church-discipline on the point of the Magistrates sword . I cannot say but that saying did too little prevail with Bullinger , Amicus Socrates , Amicus Plato , sed magis amica veritas : for Erastus was his intimate and too dear friend , etiam er●ores amicorum et n●●i sunt nobis pergrati . Bullinger in Mat. 18. in illa : Dic Ecclesiae . Excommunicatio est disciplina ●xterna sanctorum in Ecclesia conversantium , quâ ex communione abii●iuntur sanctorum , aut commodè alioqui corriguntur , coercent●●ve qui scandalizant Ecclesiam , — hae particulares Ecclesiae deligunt sibi quoque veluti Senatum Collegiumve optimorum virorum qui juxta Canonem sacrism disciplinam hanc exerceant : What is this but a Presbytery ? Ceterum qualis fuerit Ethnicorum et publicanorum reputatio facile est colliger● ex Evangelio et Paulo ad Ephe. 2. Certe alieni sunt a gratia , nihil Communionis haebentes cum sorte sanctorum . Bullinger , Ser. 5. decad . 10. pag. 384. Sicut autem dominus privatim voluit admoneri et corripi praevaricantes Ecclesiae Ministres , ita ejusdem admonitions et correctionis bonum extendit ad universam Ecclesiam : Ergo , h●buit vetus Ecclesia sanctum Presbyterorum senatum , qui delinquentes in Ecclesia diligenter admonebat , corripiebat graviter , adde et consortio excludebat Ecclesiastico , si nihil emendationis expectari posse videretur , — 1 Cor. 5. decrevi ut is qui hot seelus patravir , &c. Musculus in locis Commun . de Ministris verbi , pag. 204. disciplina Ecclesiastica includi● morum correctionem , tum privatorum , tum publicorum , deinde et judicia Ecclesiastica — hisce quoque de rebus non constituet Minister suopte arbitratu , sed erit ad institutionem earum director , et ad●ib●bit suffragia et consensum suae plebis , ne quid invitae Ecclesiae imponatur ; denique curabit ut plebs ipsa viros graves , timentes . Dei ac boni Testiomnij deligat , quorum cur ● et vigilantiâ Ecclesiae disciplina administretur , et si quid gravioris momenti accidat ad Ecclesiam ipsam referatur . I grant it was the error of that worthy instrument of Reformation that he referreth all to the Christian Magistrate : and so he saith , haec omnia — pertinen● ad illas Ecclesias tantum quae Christianum Magistratum non habent ; non potest hic certi quiequam praescribi , sed fideles et prudentes Ministri pro conditione temporum , publici status et necessitatis Ecclesiasticae disciplinam hanc sic attemperabunt , ut omnia fiant decenter , honestè et in aedificationem Ecclesiae in Mat. 18. Habendi sunt pro hominibus prophanis et a Rep. Christianorum alienis , qui excommunicati sunt . He favours not a little the Erastian way ; for he maketh Moses the institutor of Religion to Aaron , and the Ministers the servants of the Christian Magistrate , loc . de Magistratu . Wolfangus Musculus 16 de Magist . pag. 630. penes Magistratum est locorum Ecclesiasticorum constitutio ; defendere leges possunt Inferiores , sed constituere non possunt nisi Superiores , pag. 631 , 632. — Respondet ad illud dic Ecclesiae . Ecclesiae Dei magistratui pio ac fideli tunc distribuebantur ut ecclesiis ab apostolis plantatis usu uenit : Yet he goeth not with Erastus , for he saith , pag. 634. Neque docet Magistratus , neque administrat Sacramenta , sed haec faciunt Ministri , pag. 628. Moses primus Catholicus Israelis Magistratus — omnem in populo Dei religionem constituit ipsique Aaraoni et Levitarum ordini facienda et vitanda praescripsit — adeo ut cura instituendae ac moderandae religionis pertineat ad Magistratum , administrandae vero ad sacerdotem ; porro si peccaverit formam praescribit — quomodo procedendum sit cum impaenitentibus . Lucratus es fratrem ; fructus est laboris tui . Dic Ecclesiae . Tertius gradus habet provocationem ad totam ecclesiam h. e. ad coetum fidelium cujus vos estis membra ; est autem Ecclesiae hic cetus fidelium in quo verbum Christi et Sacramenta recte administrantur ; hanc formulam post secuti sunt apostoli , ut est 1 Cor. 5. 3. et 2 Cor. 2. 6. sit tibi h. e. quo loco aperti hostes Christi et aperti peccatores habentur ; sic illum habeto ; nihil sit tibi cum eo negotij , separa te ab illo , satis jam cognovisti hominem , constat eum induratum et reprobum esse ; hic est authoritas finalis sententiae Ecclesiae . Aretius Coment . in 1 Cor. 5. propositio . Homines Christum professi , quoad fieri potest , flagitiosos vitare debent . Corinthiis omni studio laborandum ut incestuosum suo et Ecclesiae bono ad tempus excludant . Finis excommunieationis alter vt salvus sit totus homo in di● mortis , vel in novissimo judicio — alter finis respicit Ecclesiam , sic omnibus vitanda est vobis contagio . In Matthew 7. Sanctum canibus non dandum . Vult Christus ostendere doctrinam Evangely et mysteria pietatis non esse Communicanda ingratis et contemptoribus — persecutoribus et voluptuarijs hominibus . Gualtherus in Matthew 18. homili . 220. Sit tibi volut quispiam Ethnicus et quispiam publicanus , id est , hoc judicio agnosce eum non esse civem aut membrum germanum Ecclesiae , et quia ipse sese a societate Ecclesiae segregat , dum hujus judicio refragatur , sit tibi Ethnici et publicani loco , cum quo nihil p●rro consorty habeas , sed Dei judicio illum permitte , qui tantam contumaciam inultam minimè sinet ; but he addeth , hunc ordinem observarunt olim Christiani homines dum nullos haberent Magistratus Christian●s . Interdum etiam Satanae tradebant tales , quod non ex paucorum arbitrio fiebat , sed cum publico Ecclesiae consensu , 1 Cor. 5. Quod autem hoc omne ad suam excommunicationem Anabaptistae detorquent nimium inepte et ridicul● ( ut alia omnia ) faciunt ; nam primo insolenter vendicant quod apostolis datum fuit , et Satanae tradere volunt homines excommunicatione suâ , quâ ne culicem quidem possunt occidere ; deinde etiam in coenam invehunt sine Christi instituto et exemplo : To which I must say the Anabaptists were right , and Gualther in an error in this point . Gualther . in 1 Cor. 5. accusat Eccl●siam propter incestum , quod incestuosum non sine publicâ totius Eccl●siae infamiâ nimis diu tolerarint — propter unius hominis scelus totam Corinthiorum Ecclesiam , et imprimis hujus praefectos et doctores ( quid hoc aliud est quam Col. legium pastorum et Seniorum ) tam graviter accusat ; sed ita illi merebantur , quod indulgentiores fuissent hactenus erga eum , quem punire poterant , et cujus libidinem coercere jam pridem debuissent . Tota Ecclesia excommunicat — erant in Ecclesia tunc constituti Seniores , at horum arbitrio causam non permittit apostolus` — quotquot ergo rem tanti momenti ad paucos referunt , vel etiam sibi soli vindicant excommunicandi potestatem , ij Ecclesiam jure suo spoliant , & Tyrannidem affectant piis intolerabilem . Nec enim mihi necessarium videtur , ut Ecclesiae Christi●nae ist a ad se trahant , quae principes habent vere Christianos , quorum authoritate , morum disciplina constitui & conservari potest , urgent quidem-Excommunicationem Anabaptistae , & quia hanc improbamus , nos Ecclesias impuras habereclamant ; sunt etiam alii qui etsi principes habeant verè Christianos , neque leges desint quibus morum licentia coercetur , ad hoc tamen senatu Eccl●siastico opus esse aiunt , qui in quorumvis mores animadvertat , et cui in principes quoque jus sit , et eos qui scandalum aliquod publicum dederunt , a caenae dominioae communione arceat , et eosdem non nisi suo judicio probatos , et praestitis prius satisfactionibus publicis ad Ecclesiae societatem et caenae usum rursus admittat — quasi vero non alia disciplinae forma institui posset , quam quae ipsis conficta est . Distingunt illi inter jurisdictionem Ecclesiasticam et politicam quoad meram disciplinam et scelerum poenas , at distinctio ista ex pontificorum officina deprompta est ; in sacris vero scripturis nusquam habetur . In Lucam . c. 12. in illa ( quis me constituit judicem ) docet ut singuli se intra metas suas contineant neque res aggrediantur a sua vocatione alienas : He speaketh against Anabaptists of that time who preached without a calling . The Reader may perceive that Bullinger , Gualther , and Musculus 1. Do acknowledge , that the place Mat. 18. and 1 Cor. 5. do clearly prove an Ecclesiastical excommunication , which Erastus denieth . 2. That Erastus expoundeth these two places against the mind of those his friends : And never Divine in the world , Protestant , Papist , Lutheran , never Councel , Father , Doctor , Ancient , or Modern , expounded the place Let him be to thee as a Heathen , as Erastus doth . 3. These Divines difference the Magistrate and the Church , in censures , power , function . Erastus confoundeth them , and saith as the Anabaptists of old did ; against whom , Luther , Bullinger , Gualther , Lavater , Musculus , Wolfius , Aretius , Simlerus , disputed , that the civil Magistrate may lawfully dispence the Word and Sacraments . 4. They never condemned the Discipline of Geneva ; Erastus doth . 5. They acknowledge there was in the apostolick Church , an Ecclesiastical Senate or Presbytery : Erastus saith , this is a devise wanting Scripture . 6. They denied Excommunication to be exercised by all the Church , as a devise of the Anabaptists : Bullinger saith , 1 Cor. 5. a dilectis ad hoc hominibus . Erastus saith , it must be exercised by the whole Church , if there be any such thing . 7. Bullinger and Gualther , think that Discipline is necessary in the Church : Erastus refuseth any such thing . 2. Bullinger and Gualther do think , that the Lords Supper , which is an action of publike thanksgiving and communion , should not be turned into a punishment , which is a Use that Christ and his Apostles hath not taught us : But this is easily answered , 1. The pearls and holy things of the Gospel are not turned into another Vse then Christ hath ordained ; because they are denied to dogs and swine as a punishment of their swinish disposition ; and if these pearls were given to swine , should they not be turned to another Use then is ordained by Christ ? Is not the union of members in a Church-body a sweet bound ? is this communion translated to a bastard end , unknown to Christ and the Apostles ? because the incestuous man is cast out of that Communion ? This is as who would say , the Table of the House is a symbol of a sweet Communion of all the children of the House ; Ergo , the Table is turned from its native Use , and is abused , if a flagitious and wicked son be turned out at the doors and removed from the Table . I think the contrary is true ; the Lords Table ordained for children , is converted into an Use not known to Christ and his Apostles , when the Table is prepared for dogs and swine ; and this argument is against Christ , Mat. 7. as much as against us . 2. By this the excommunicated cast out of the House , is not debarred from the Table of the House . What sense is here ? the offender is cast out from amongst the children of the Lords family , and yet is admitted to the Table of the family ? 3. These great Divines teach , that in the dayes of Christ and the Apostles , there was such an ordinance as excommunication , and that the Church who worketh not miracles , for any thing that we read , and received a precept from the Holy Ghost for Excommunication , as a moral and perpetual mean to remove scandals , to humble and shame an obstinate offender , to preserve the Church from contagion , and to edifie all , as is clear , Mat. 18. 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19. 1 Cor. 5. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6. 2 Thes . 3. 14 , 15. Rom. 16. 17. 2 Cor. 10. 8. that the Church ( I say ) or men must be wiser then Christ , and remove this mean of edification , and substitute the sword of the Magistrate that hath no activity or intrinsecal influence for such a supernatural end as edification : this cannot but be a condemning of the lawgiver Christs wisdom . Whereas Mr. Prinne and others say , that by the preaching of the Word , not by Church-discipline , men are converted to Christ , as witnesse the many thousands of godly people in England where there have been no government , but prelatical : I answer ▪ 1. This is to dispute against the wisdom of Christ who ascribeth to private rebukes and Church censures , the gaining of souls , the saving of the spirit , repentance , and humiliation , Mat. 18. 15 , 16. 1 Cor. 5. 5 , 6. 2 Cor. 2. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. 2 Thes . 3. 14 , 15. Rom. 16. 17. 2 Cor. 10. 8. because preaching is more effectual ; Ergo , is the Discipline not effectual ? 2. Consider if thousands more would not have been converted if Christs Government had been set up for which Mr. Cartwright , Mr. Vdal , Mr. Dearing , and the godliest did supplicate the Parliament . 3. Consider if there hath not been in Scotland as many thousands , comparing the numbers rightly , when the Church was terrible as an Army with Banners . 4. Consider how the Tigurine Churches and others , for want of the hedge , have been scandalously wicked . 5. The Magistrate by punishing drunkennesse , or fornication or extortion ( for he cannot take away the life for these ) doth not keep the lump of the whole Church from being leavened and infected with the contagion of such : The Church by removing and casting out such an one , must do that ; and the personal separating from such as walk inordinately , cannot be an act of the Magistrate , and yet cannot but be a perpetual and moral mean or ordinance that the Church is to use , not only when they have not a Christian Magistrate , but perpetually ; for we are to withdraw from those that walk inordinately , and are not to be corrupted with having intire fellowship with wicked men , whether the Church have a Christian Magistrate or no : I am to gain my brother by rebuking , and by telling the Church , and to esteem one that heareth not the Church , as an Heathen , or a Publican , that I may gain him : Whether there be a Christian or an Heathen Magistrate in the Church , except it can be proved , that the Magistrate as the Magistrate , is to gain souls to God : Yea , Musculus , Bullinger , and Gualther , have alike reason to say , there is no need that we rebuke privately a trespasing brother , and that we forgive him seven times a day , when the Church hath a Christian Magistrate , as they can say there is no need of Excommunication : for if the sword can supply the room of one spiritual ordinance of God , why not of another also ? and the text will bear us out as well to say , we are not to eschew the company of a scandalous brother , for shaming of him , and for the danger of being leavened by him , because the Magistrates sword may supply the want of that mean of edifying , as well as it may supply the want of Excommunication : Yea , they may say there is no need of publike rebukes by the Word , the sword may supply these also . The Helvetian Con●ession is approved by the Tygurine Pastors , by the Divines of Berne , Basil , Geneva . Deus ad colligendam vel constituendam sibi Ecclesiam eamque gubernandam et conservandam semper usus est Ministris — Ministrorum virga , institutio , functio vetustissima ipsius Dei est , non nova , non hominum est ordinati● — cumque omninò oporteat esse in Ecclesia , disciplinam , et apud veteres quondam usitata fuerit excommunicatio , fuerint que judicia Ecclesiastica in populo Dei , in quibus per viros prudentes et pios ( ipsisimum presbyterium ) exercebatur disciplina , Ministorum quoque fuerit ad edificationem disciplinam moderari , &c. Magistratus officium praecipu●m est pacem et tranquillitatem publicam procurare et conservare — Gallica Confessio . the 29. Credimus veram Ecclesiam gubernari debere eâ politiâ , sive disciplinâ quam D. N. I. C. sancivi● , ita ut , viz. in ea s●nt pastores , presbyteri sive Seniores et diaconi , &c. Anglicana , Art. 33. Qui per publicam Ecclesiae denunciationem rit● ab unitate Ecclesiae praecisus et excommunicatus is ab universa fidelium multitudine — habendus est tanquam Ethnicus et publicanus . Art. 37. Cum Regiae Majestati Summam gubernationem tribuim●● — non damus Regibus nostris aut verbi Dei , aut Sacramentorum administrationem — sed eam tantum praerogativam quam in sacri● scripturis a deo ipso , omnibus piis princibus semper fuisse attributam , hoc est ut omnes status atque ordines fidei suae commissos , sive illi Ecclesiastici sint , sive civiles , in officio contineant , et con●umaces ac delinquentes gladio civili coerceant . Scoticana , Art. 18. postremo loco ( nota verae Ecclesiae est ) disciplina Ecclesistica rectè administrata , sicut Dei verbum praescribit , ad reprimendum vitium , et vertatem fovendam . 24. Insuper Regum , principum , gubernatorum — esse potissimum et imprimis Religionis purgationem et conservationem affirmamus adeo ut non tantum propter civilem politi●●● , sed et propter conservationem verae religionis , ut Idololatria et superstitio quaevis supprimatur , a deo sint ordinati . The Belgick confession hath the same , Art. 30 , 31 , 32. and 36. Confessio . Augustana . nonnulli incommodè commiscue runt potestatem Ecclestasticam & potestatem gladii . It distinguisheth well between the power of the keyes in the Church , and the power of the sword in the Magistrate . ▪ To this agreeth Confessio Swevica , Art. 13. and Confessio Bohemica , Saxonica , Basiliensis , Tetrapolitana . Amongst our late writers , I should conceive that renowned Salmasius , that rich treasure of Antiquity , can stand as one for all to speak for us in this point . The Emperours ( saith he ) had of old a suffrage in chusing of Metropolitans , Patriarchs , and Popes , and of convocating General Councels : So as Ierome maketh it a Mark of a General Councel , that it was indicted by the Emperour ; and there was reason , because , it concerned the consciences of the Magistrate as the Magistrate , what Pastors , Popes , and Doctors there were in their dominions to watch over their souls , and the souls of their subjects . It is true , de facto , Honorius the Emperour did ordain Marcellinus moderator of the conference at Carthage between the Catholicks and the Donatists , The Emperours added the force of a civil Law to the Councels : So Iustinian . Constitut . 130. sanxit ut quatuor conciliorum Canone● pro legibus haberentur ; Ergo , the Councels had the force of Ecclesiastical Lawes , without the Emperours ; But they had not the force of civil Lawes , having civil penalties annexed to them , without the Emperours ; Ergo , the confirmation of Councels made by the Emperours , were politick and civil confirmations : for the decrees of the Councel of Ierusalem , were Ecclesiastical decrees , without the will , Law , and Authority of any Emperour on earth , and laid an Ecclesiastical tye on the Churches , without the Emperour , Act. 16. 4 , 5. So is that of Salmasius to be expounded , as he expoundeth himself . Principis est leges de Religione condere , de fide Catholicâ , de Episcopis , de Clericis , deque aliis huiusmodi que externam potestatem spectant , five 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 circa res et personas Ecclesiasticas , eaque fecere Christiani Imperatores in Ecclesia sui temporis , haeo enim est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 potestas qua principles legum sanctionibus non uni generi sibi subditorum consulere debent , sed in universum , omnibus tam laicis , quam Ecclesiasticis , quatenus Ecclesia est in Repub . et Reip. pars , non Respublica Ecclesiae . Now that Emperours appointed time and place of Synods , which were external circumstances , is clear : But that the Emperours nominated the persons , who should come , appointed an Ecclesiastical president in the Synod to moderate , and that they defined the number of Bishops , is denied : Except 1. That they did this in a great schisme , and when the Church could not agree amongst themselves : Or 2. In such a general defection , as was under Arrius , which was an extraordinary case . 3. That the Emperour requested by Letters , that such and such godly Bishops ●ight come to the Synod , not such : But whereas , d● facto , he as a Magistrate commanded such to come , and did discharge others under pains to come ( except they were other wayes incarcerated and known parties , and so could not be judges ) is against the liberty of the Church and the freedom of Synods . So Salmasius , Non igitur leges tantum facere d● religione ac fide omnibus observandas , dummodo verbo divino rei contraveniant , potest princeps Christianus , vel summus Magistratus , sed etiam suos subditos ad decreta Synodalia observanda quae verbo Dei conformia sunt , obligare , et Cogere : ubicunque sane imperio opus est per vim agente ac jubente , aut jurisdictione cogent●● , et ●●er●e●te , nihil istic habent qu●d agant verbi Ministri , neque jus agendi ullum , etiamsi de re aut persona Ecclesiasticâ questi● sit , aut de religione agatur , sed ad principes aut Magistratus ea vis coactiva oe illud jus imperativum et co●●●ivum pertinet . There is a Law making ( unproper I grant , because declarative in Mortal men , constitutive in the head Christ only ) touching Faith and Religion which is politick ; but it is when there is a constitu●e Church , subsequent , not antecedent , and in order to bodily coaction by the sword which is due to the Magistrate ▪ O● this Law-giving doth Salmasius speak as his words clear , and because bodily and externall co-action is not the Churches , therefore the Magistrate as the Magistrate according to Salmasius , hath no proper Ecclesiastick power . The reciprecation of subordination of Pastors and Magistrates is clearly taught by Salmasius Minister , Ecclesiae principem Christianum ligare et solvere id est , suspendere et excommunicare aque potest ut alium quem libet de grege per illam internam potestatem et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quam a deo acc●pit . At princeps rursus potest Episcopum per illam suam exteriorem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quae no● animam , sed corpus curat , cogere , coercere , ad officium comp●●●ere , si exorbitet , etiam deponere , et abijcere , et exilio punire , vita quoq●● , si meruerit , s●nt●ntiam , dicere , privare — a principe abjectus Episcopus Ministerij tantum atque officij functionem amittit , atque exercitium intra limites jurisdictionis duntaxatvel ditionis quae principi subjecta est — at non potestatem , quam in ordinatione accepit , per impositionem manuum , potest eripere princeps , cum nec eam possit dare . Cum sit duplex potestas Ecclesiastica , altera interna , externa altera , tam peccant qui utramque principi vel Magistratui civili tribunt , quam qui utramque denegant ministro Ecclesiastico . And he proveth that the Pastors have received immediately from Christ , and not from the Magistaate , their internal and external power of governing the Churches . Josias . Simlerus professor Tigurinus comment . in Exod. 20. in Mand. 5. Magistratuum officium est tollere idola , vi et armis — conciona●orum vero ut error●m ostendant , Idololatriam damnent , verbi gladi● jugulent , et Magistratum sui officij admoneant in rebus exteruis tollendis ut Can. 15 - Concil . Carthagi . 5. Lavater in Ezech. c. 44. Dominus dicit repellend●s a ministerio incircumcisos carne , hoc est , indulgentes libidinibus et incircumcisos corde , hoc est , imbutos pravis opinionibus ; collige quanta cura et diligentia requiratur a sacerdotibus , conformiter enim custodibus . Lavater in Ezech. 22. 26. reprehendit in sacerdotibus quod sancta sua violarint , non enim tractarint quemadmodum ipse instituerat . Nam in templo prostabant Idola , sacrificia non legitime offerebantur — an non hodie Sacramenta ab adulteris , ebriosis et aleatoribus admistrantur ? Idem in Ezech. 23. 38. et quum immolassent filios idolis . Si adultera de adulteri stratis surgens rectâ ad maritum suum veniat , et amorem coniugalem simulet , judicium est magnae impudentiae — redeuntes a valle Hinnon et cultu daemonum , tanquam re bene gesta , cruentis manibus templum ingrediebantur citra conscientiam oraturi . Ioan. Wolphius in Nehemiam ait , c. 2. v. 20. aedificatores Ecclesiae nihil agere debere quam quod in mandatis divinitus datum sit . Idem in Ezram , c. 10. hoc enim exemplo V. T. discimus quae facto opus sit in N. T. nempe ut crebris synodis in vitam , in doctrinam et mores , in vocationem Ecclesiastorum inspiciatur . Hence it is clear that Simler , Lavater , and Wolphius , do clearly 1. Difference between the two powers of the Sword and Church . 2. That the Priests in the Old , and Ministers in the New Testament are not to prophane holy things . 3. That by Assemblies and Synods Church-censures are to be dispensed . Yea , even Robert ▪ Burhillus de primatu Regio contra Becanum Iesuitam . c. 10. sed neque in exteriore jurisdictione , aut excommunicationis aut ordinationis potestatem regi facimus , aut cultus divini novas formulas procudendi , aut dispensandi — adde quod nec ●●s ●itribuimus , leges suâ solius authoritate ferendi quae canonum Ecclesiasticorum vim obtin●ant . The mind of D. Pareus and P. Martyr may be known by what is said , and is cleared in that learned dissertation of Iac. Trig. Nor shall I need to burden the Reader with citations of Fathers , Greek and Latine , Doctors , Councels , with all our Protestant Divines , Luther , Calvin , Beza , Farel , Marlorat , Piscator , Sibrandas , Iunius , Gomaras , Trelcatius , Bucanus , &c. which were easie to do if not needlesse , and acknowledged by the Adversary . I have also in answering Erastus ( I hope ) answered all that Mr. Prinne hath said , either in his questions , or vindication ; because most of all he hath ( I speak it not to diminish or detract from the learning of that reverend man , ●●r ●●sse to irritate ) is fully to be seen in Erastus : so that in answering Erastus , I hope , that ingenuous , zealous , and learned Divine will Acquiesce . The Lord establish Ierusalem and make her a peaceable habitation . FINIS . AN INTRODVCTION To the Doctrine of Scandal . Whether or no things indifferent can be commanded because indifferent ? WHat ever things are commanded under the tenor of things indifferent , and yet are not indifferent , are not lawful , nor can be in reason commanded : for so should they be of their nature both indifferent , and not indifferent : But humane Ceremonies are sush ; Ergo , they are not lawful . Indifferent things Basilius calleth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazianz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; so Laertius , and Gellius saith the same of them . Things indifferent cannot be good , but essentially neither good nor ill , and if they be not good , they cannot be apt to edifie , and so fall not within the compasse of things which can be commanded by Rulers . There is a twofold matter of a Church constitution , the one remote , the other nearer : The remote matter of Church constitutions are things indifferent , to wit , mens actions and the circumstances thereof ; and so they are the matter of Gods Laws ; for all our actions Physically considered to know , believe , will , love , joy , fear , speak , walk , laugh , &c ▪ are indifferent in themselves ▪ but God in the Law of Natu●● ▪ and his positiv● Div●●● Law ●●th 〈…〉 d●●●●m ●●●d 〈…〉 i● 〈…〉 put ●is d 〈…〉 ●●gal upon th●● ▪ 〈…〉 a● it is such , can be the nearest matter of any Church-constitution : No wise man would say that the Church might make a Law , that all should cast stones in the water ; yet ▪ God might make a Law thereof . For what actions hath no good , nor lawfulnesse , nor aptitude to edisie in themselves , these th● will of man can never make good , lawful , and apt to edifie , because onely God , whose will is the prime rule of all goodnesse , can create moral goodnes in actions : not to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge , is only good , because God hath so appointed in his Law ▪ and to eat of the fruit of that tree , had been as lawful and just , as not to ●a●● , if God had commanded eating thereof , under ●r●mises and threatnings ▪ 6. Hence ●● followeth that all actions and circumstances of their nature indifferent , must lose that indifferency , and receive from God some goodnesse , and aptnesse to edifie , before they can be the reasonable and nearest matter of any Civil or Ecclesiastical constitution ; because what rulers can in Law and reason command , that they must will as good and apt to edifie ▪ before they can bind others to will it . But neither the will of a ruler ▪ nor the will of any other can lawfully will a thing indifferent , as it is such : for a thing indifferent as it is such , is neither good nor evil , and the object of the will is alwayes good . 3. Rulers commandeth as Gods Ministers for our good , Rom. 13. 4. Ergo , the means and actions injoyned for the compassing of this end must be good , for if the end be good , the means as the means must be good ; Ergo , they cannot be indifferent . Things indifferent cannot be enacted as a L●w , except they were indifferent to all , to both weak and wilful ; for remaining evil to some they are scandalous , and cannot be commanded , except rulers would command sinful actions . The Apostles would make no Laws at all of things indifferent , except in the case of scandal , neither can our Ceremonies be indifferent . 1. Because they are sacred mystical signes teaching us some duties to God. 2. They are worship , and means tending to the honour of God , and being used for the honour of an Idol , as they are used by us , they should be the religious honour of an Idol . 3. They are pretended to be means apt to edifie . Ergo , They are not in their use indifferent . 4. The use of Ceremonies are Moral actions of man , not warranted by Gods Word . Ergo , They are unlawful , and so not indifferent . If then nothing be good , because Rulers command it ; but , by the contrary , they do lawfully command it , because it is good . The Churches power , is one and the same , in things indifferent , and necessary in matters of Doctrine , Discipline , and Order ; for in both , the Church doth not create goodnesse , but doth by the Light of the Word , or ( which is a part of the Word ) by natures Light , finde pre-existent goodnesse in Doctrine , Discipline , and matters of Order . Therefore Will of Authority , as Will , hath no power to dispose of the least Circumstance of time , place or person ; but the Churches power is Ministerial , and determined to what is good , expedient , and convenient . Object . Humane Actions according to their specifice nature may be indifferent in Gods Worship : For example , to pray to God in the morning , in your Bed , or out of it ; in the House , or in the Fields ; to Preach the Word in thi● , or that habit , in a Gown , or in a Cloak ; these are actions in their kinde indifferent , because they are neither commanded , nor forbidden ; for that is according to the kinde of action good , which is so commanded of God , that it is unlawful to neglect it , or to do any thing repugnant to it , as to love God and our Neighbour ; and that is evil according to its kinde , which is so forbidden by Gods Law , as it is not lawful to do it , or command it in any sort ; so it is evil to blaspheme God , to commit adultery . So Forbs . Ans . In the Field , or in the Bed , Cloathed with Gown or Cloak , when we Pray or Preach , are meer Accidents and Circumstances of praying and preaching , and we grant them to be variable and indifferent ; howbeit , they admit of Regulation Moral , and so are not simply indifferent ; for to pray in the Fields and Streets , to be seen of men , is vain glory . But I hope they are not indifferent in your meaning , as are Surplice , Holydays , &c. For you will not say the Church may make Laws that no Prayers be but in the Fields , no Preaching except the Preacher be cloathed with a Cloak . 2. It is not good Logick to say , ` To pray in House or Field , is an action according to its kinde , neither good nor evil ; when as it is an individual action , contracted to such a place , House or Field , because Field or House are indifferent in Prayer . To pray is not indifferent according to its kinde ; because Accidents of Actions are indifferent ; it followeth not that the action is indifferent , for then the Doctors Opinion , maketh an Act of loving God , and beleeving in Christ , indifferent in its kinde ; for it is as indifferent to love God in the Field , as in the House , and to love him while you are cloathed with a Gown , as with a Cloak : As it is indifferent to pray , in House or Field , cloathed with Gown , or Cloak ; so to love God , and the most necessary actions in the world hic & nunc , in this time or in this place , shall be actions according to their nature , neither good , nor evil , but indifferent , which is against the Doctors own Distinction . 3. Place or habit doth not constitute Praying , and Preaching in their specifice nature ; that were a wonder ; for their Objects do constitute their nature , and their Objects are God and Gods Word ; and if they be indifferent according to their nature , it shall be indifferent to pray to God , or to some other thing , possibly an Idol . Nay , if Actions good of their own nature , such as to Pray , or Preach , be made indifferent according to their kinde , because cloathed with indifferent Circumstances of time and place , and habit ; then by that same reason , Actions of their own nature evil , as to murther , commit adultery , should also become indifferent , from these Circumstances ; then should it be indifferent to kill in House , or Field , and indifferent according to its kinde , which is most absurd . Object . Howbeit it be objected , that every voluntary action is either honest , or not honest , yet there are some things honest , that are indifferent and free ▪ For there are two kindes of honest things , 1. Some honest and necessary things , as all the duties commanded in Gods Law , the contrary of these polluteth a man before God , and they are formally , positively , and inclusively laudable , and commendeth men before God , and are rewarded . This way every voluntary action is not either honest , or unhonest ; for there is a middle betwixt these two , to wit , something honest and lawful , but not necessary , but morally free , as Marriage , which commendeth not a man to God , so that he is therefore rewarded ; neither doth the contrary , to wit , non-marriage pollute a man before God , or is blame-worthy , because marriage is onely negatively honest , Honestum irreprchensibile , honestum exclusive , & honestum per compossibilitatem cum honesto formali & positivo . So marriage is neither positively honest , nor unhonest , but free morally . Neither is marriage necessary by absolute necessity , or necessity that toucheth the action ; for men may marry , and not to marry is no sin , onely marrying is necessary by a conditional necessity , 1 Cor. 7. 39. A Widow is free to marry whom she will , but with this condition , That she marry in the Lord ; the necessity toucheth not the action , but the manner of the action . And this necessity of the manner or goodnesse of the action of marriage , doth not make the action necessary , but leaveth it as free to men to marry , or not to marry ; and so there are some actions according to the spece or nature , that are indifferent , and not unhonest , yet lawful . So Doctor Forbs . Answ . 1. Marriage hath something in it natural , even before the Fall. It was naturally good , that man should not be alone , and this way , before , and after the Fall , Marriage in the ground that maketh it necessary , which is an aptitude and inclination to procreation , is most necessary ; and so now , after the Fall of man , all that burneth and marr●e●h not , despiseth Gods remedy of lust , and sinneth ; and so by necessity of Gods command in the Law of nature , and repeated by the Apostle , 1 Cor. 7. 2 , 9. it is necessary in individuo : And although , that which is meerly natural in marriage , as the Act of marriage according to the substance , be not formally laudable , and rewarded , because of the naturality thereof ; yet it is not for that free or indifferent . 2. And when the Doctor saith , That marriage is indifferent in its nature ▪ and free ; so that there is no necessity of the action , but onely of the goodnesse of the action , he speaketh wonders : For howbeit , marriage be indifferent by a Metaphysical indifferency of contrahibility to such and such persons , because marriage may be in some , without sin , and no marriage may also be in other some , without sin ; and so praying is indifferent ; it is in some without sin , and not praying is in some also without sin , when the man is necessitated to some other action , either Civil , Natural or Supernatural ; yet marriage is not Morally or Theologically indifferent : So as to marry , or not marry , is a matter of a mans free choice , and of his own free ▪ will not obnoxious to any binding Law , as is kneeling , not-kneeling , crossing , not-crossing , in the minde of our Adversaries . 1. If it were morally indifferent to marry , or not to marry , Rulers might make Laws either commanding all to marry , or none to marry , or some to marry ; some not to marry , which were no small tyranny , and the very doctrine of Devils . 2. The gift of Continency , is to some a commandment of God , that they marry not , and burning is to some a commandment , obliging them in conscience to marry , else they sin ; therefore to marry , or not to marry , is necessary to all men , or then unlawful , and so not indifferent , as our Divines teach against Papists , their Supererogatorie Works . The Lords calling of any to suffer for his Truth ▪ is instead of a command of God ; though the man might be saved , though he suffer not for the Truth . 3. If there be no necessitie in marrying , but onely conditional in the manner o● marrying , then all mankinde without sin might abstain from marrying , which it most absurd . 4. The place 1 Cor. 7. 39. saith not , that a Widow is under no necessitie of marrying , but onely under a necessity of well and spiritual marrying . For the libertie that the Widow hath there , is not , that it is indifferent to her to marry , or not to marry ; for since our Adversaries teach , That Rulers may make Laws in things indifferent ; they might then make a Law that no Widows shall marry , which were vile tyrannie . But the libertie that the Widow hath to marry whom she will , is opposed onely to a Law and Obligation Matrimonial , that she was under , while her Husband did live . And the words clearly speaketh onely of thi● freedom , not of Moral freedom of indifference , from all Law of God necessitating her to marry : The Wise is bound by the Law , as long as her Husband liveth ; but if her Husband be dead , she is at liberty to marry whom she will , onely in the Lord. But there are no smal oddes betwixt libertie to marry this or that man , because the Husband is dead , of which libertie onely the Apostle speaketh ; and liberty , and indifference without all restraint of Gods Law to marry at all , or not to marry : This latter libertie , the Scripture speaketh not of , onely the Doctor alleageth it . Object . Kneeling at the Sacrament , howbeit , antecedente and immediately it be necessary by Gods Law ; yet consequently , and by the mediation of lawful Authority , it is now necessary to us , not by necessity of the thing it self , but by necessity of obedience , order , and peace ; and so according to the practice , it is for the time necessary by Gods Law , and cannot be omitted without sin . So Forbes . Answ . Necessitie of obeying the Church can make nothing necessary and good , for the Church commandeth it , because it is necessary and good , and it hath not goodnesse , necessitie and aptnesse to edifie from mens will , and the Churches commandment . 2. I ask if no kneeling , now in Scotland laying aside the respect of Authority and Law , be in it self undecent , and unapt to edifie ; if not , then the Church hath no more ground and reason for order and decency in our Ceremonies ( for what I say of one , holdeth true in all ) then there is for the want of Ceremonies ; and if that be true , the sole will and lust of Authority maketh our Ceremonies lawful : What can Romish impudence give more to the Man of sin ? But if there be unorderlinesse and indecency in our Ceremonies , then kneeling now must be sin , even laying aside the respect of Humane Laws . 3. It is strange Divinity , That that which is no sin , of it self , cannot be omitted without sin , for the sole will and pleasure of men . Humane Authority then may make it sin , not to rub our Beards , not to claw our Heads , when we come to the Church to hear Gods Word . If Humane Authority can make an indifferent Act lawful , and the omission of it , sinful ; they may make all the indifferent Acts in the World lawful Acts , they might then make piping , leaping , laughing Acts o● Divine Worship , and might make a Decalogue of their own : And if they may make an indifferent Act to be sin , if it be omitted , they may by as good reason , make sinful Acts , as Adulterie , Incest , Murther , Robbery , to be lawful Acts ; For if mans inhibiting will be the formal reason of sin , then his commanding will must be the formal reason of obedience : And so Rulers might command Murther , Robbery , Incest , Blasphemy . Object . We may perform an individual act coming from deliberate will , and that without sin , and we may omit the same without sin : Whether we practise these indifferent actions , or omit them , we should refer both practice and omission to Gods glory ; and these actions we call indifferent or free , ( as indifferent and free is opposed to that which is morally necessary ) which are either necessary to be done , or necessary to be omitted , by necessity of a Divine Law ▪ Howbeit , every action that is not of Faith be sin , Rom. 14. 23. Yet the faith whereby I beleeve this action is necessary , and must be done , is not necessary to the eschewing of sin . But if I do it , that I do it in Faith , and for Gods glory , is necessary ; but the necessity of the goodnesse of the action doth not make the action necessary ; for it were to lay a yoak of continual doubting upon mens conscience , if they should beleeve every individual act , that they do , to be necessary ; for whether should they turn them , while they think of doing , or not doing these actions , that they know to be commanded by no Word of God ? That a Widow marry in the Lord , if she marry , is necessary ; but it is not necessary , that she marry , but it is indifferent to her , to marry , or not to marry . Doctor Forbes . Answ . It is a contradiction , that an action individual , should be indifferent , and so neither good , nor evil , and yet done in Faith , and referred to Gods glory : For the ground of doing , which is Faith , and the end , which is Gods glory , are individual properties necessarily concurring to the individuation of the Action Moral . 2. An action individual , that is meerly indifferent , and so without sin may be performed , without sin , or omitted without sin , cannot be an action of Faith referred to Gods glory : For what may be done without sin , and may not be done without sin , is a will-action , and wanteth all necessitie of reason , and so is an idle and sinful action ; but a sinful action may be done in fancy , but in Faith it cannot be done ; it may , in the vain intention of the doer , be referred to Gods glory , In intentione erronea operantis , but ex conditione operis , according to the nature of the work it serveth not for Gods glory . This way to cast stones in the water , should be of Faith , and referred to Gods glory : But shall I beleeve I am doing in Faith , and glorifying God , when I am casting stones in the water , and I have as good reason not to cast at all ? If one wilaction that may be done , and may not be done , may be of Faith , and referred to Gods glory , then may they all be of Faith , and referred to Gods glory : This is a laughter , rather then Divinitie . 3. I cannot beleeve that an action that hath as good reason to be omitted , as to be done , can be acceptable to God , because I have no ground for my Faith ; for my Faith here leaneth neither on Scripture , nor on Reason , but there is no reason why the action should rather be , nor not be , because it is indifferent ; yea , crossing and kneeling of themselves shall be of Faith , because I beleeve them to be of Faith : But it is a vain thing to say , that Faith maketh its object . 4. There are no actions in the World , but they have all their Moral necessitie from their intrinsecal goodnesse : For from whence is it necessary to love God , but from the intrinsecal goodnesse , that the love of God hath from Gods command ? For there is no necessitie an action to be at all ; yea , it is idle and superfluous , if there be no goodnesse in it at all . If then crossing and kneeling , ( laying aside the respect of Humane Laws commanding them ) have no necessitie Moral , from any Commandment of God , why they should be at all , their necessitie must be all from mans will : this is tyranny in Rulers , for their sole pleasure to command , under the heaviest pain , things that have no necessitie at all , but their will. 5. Neither is it any yoak to mens conscience , to square all their Moral Action by Gods Word , and so to see ( according as it is Written ) before they vanture upon any Action Moral . It is libertie to keep Gods way accuratel . Object . In general , no particular action is necessary , the goodnesse whereof that is commended and rewarded of God , may ●s well be had by the omission of that action , or by an other action , as by the doing of it ; but such an action in the individual use is true , and indifferent ; but i● the goodnesse necessary cannot be had at all , without that particular action , then the action in the individual use is necessary , although according to its nature , it be possibly indifferent . So to us now to kneel at the Supper , is necessary , that we may obtain the necessary good of due Obedience , and decent Vniformity , and eschue the contempt of Anthority , Schism , and Confusion . Forb● . Answ . 1. By goodnesse here , the Doctor meaneth , Concomitant and general goodnesse , which maketh not the action necessary to be done , and so it hath no goodnesse intrinsecal , but is an idle action , and yet it may be done , or not done without sin ; and when it is done , it is done upon no other motive , but the meer will and pleasure of the doer : We have hereby the Doctors learning , Such an idle action done in Faith , and done for Gods glory . 2. All our Ceremonies in their use , crossing , kneeling , wearing of Surplice , have no intrinsecal goodnesse , no internal moral equity of Order , Decency , and aptnesse to Edifie , wherefore it is necessary they should be done ; the doing of them in Faith , and for Gods glory , may be obtained as well by no●●-kneeling , none-crossing , none-Surplice . This is no small dash to the credit of Pearth Assembly ; for they saw no goodnesse in the Articles , but that which as well might have been obtained without them . Hence except the goodnesse of pleasing King James , they had no more reason for the Ceremonies , then to make an Act that all Ministers shall go to the Foot-Ball , the third day of May. 3. Then the meer pleasure of the King hath made kneeling necessary ; and good obedience to the fifth Commandment , mens will as will so is the onely formal reason of obedience to the ten Commandments , or disobedience . 4. Then we may of Faith , and for Gods glory , refuse the Ceremonies , if it be the Kings Will ; and in that point , the fifth Commandment standeth or falleth at the nod of the Kings Will. Such Mercenary Divinitie becometh not the lovers of Reformation . Object . There is a twofold maline in actions , One thar layeth a moral impediment on the act , so that it cannot be performed without sin : So to eschue the malice that is in adultery , we must eschue the act of adultery ; this malice polluteth the act , and should binder the act : There is another malice that polluteth the act , but doth not morally hinder the act , As when one feedeth the poor for vain-glory , vain glory polluteth the act , but hindereth it not : Vain-glory should be laid aside , and the poor fed . If one kneel at the Supper , thinking it not lawful to kneel before Creatures , his kneeling is evil ; but the evil in it doth onely pollute the act , and make it finful , but doth not morally hinder kneeling , because contumacio●s ignorance , pride , and contempt of Authority should be laid aside : Men should be docil , and see the law fulnesse of it , and obey the Church . Forbs . Answ . In things indifferent , the very malice adhering to the practice of them , howbeit , it adhere not inseparably to them , maketh the practice damnable : For eating Rom. 14. before a weak Brother , whose weaknesse might have been removed , if he would be docil , and know that their is no creature now unclean , is murther , Rom. 14. 14. Therefore , suppose all the Kings and General Assemblies on Earth , should command one to eat in that case , before the weak Brother , they were to be disobeyed ; and so the Doctor freeth us , that we cannot kneel at the Lords Supper . 2. Rulers may not make laws of things having no necessitie of Goodnesse , Decency , and aptnesse to Edifie , and onely good , because they will , when they see of necessitie , these laws shall inevitably ruine many souls ; for that is to have more regard to their own will , then to the salvation of peoples souls , whereas even Christ pleased not himself . 3. Many weak are uncapable of all Reasons or Arguments that can free our kneeling of Idolatry . Ergo , They should abstain , and not kneel with a doubting conscience ; better not eat as eat , with a doubting conscience , Rom. 14 23. 4. Pride and contempt are onely seen to God : Prelates have no place to punish heart-acts , they are to prove by two Witnesses , the Malice , and Pride , and Contempt of Authoritie ; but this is invisible to mens eies , refusal of obedience to Canons touching indifferent things , the necessitie whereof ( as the Doctor must say ) cometh onely from mans will , cannot be contempt : The neglect of a command of God , is indeed a virtual contempt of the Majestie , Authoritie , Power , and Justice of God , because a command of God hath Essentially , Equitie , and Justice in it , from Gods commanding Will : But a command of a thing indifferent , that may as well , without sin be left undone , as done , ( as our Doctor saith of our Ceremonies ) can never have equitie or goodnesse from Humane Authoritie ; and I never contemn Humane Authoriti● , except I contemn the just Laws made by Humane Authoritie * . Object . Of things alike lawful and convenient ; for example , sitting at the Lords Table , or not sitting , we are bound to the one rather then to the other , for lawful Authorities command ; for conveniency and goodnesse in external circunistances standeth not in such an indivisible point , but there may be circumstances good , better , and best ; a gesture , a day , a habit , may be so good and convenient , as another gesture , another day , another habit , are as good and convenient ▪ in which case , either no habit , no day , no gesture at all , shall be in Gods Worship , which were impossible ; else of two Circumstances , both of three degrees of goodnesse , one shall be chosen by the sole Will of Authority ; and so people must follow one order , rather then another as good , for the sole Will of Authority , without any prevalent reason in the thing commanded . Answ . 1. In such a case as that , where two Circumstances , both of three degrees of goodnesse occurreth , Rulers can reasonably tie people to neither , but leave it alternatively , to their liberty ; for why should liberty be restrained , where necessity of order , and deceney , doth not necessitate the Rulers will ? 2. In such a case the Rulers will , as will , should not be the formal cause , why one is enacted rather then another ; but the Rulers will led by a reason from conveniency , and so there were a prevalent reason , for the one rather then the other . 3. I deny that such a Metaphysical case of two things every way of alike conveniency can fall out , as the matter of a grave and weighty Church-constitution ; For natures Light , rules of Prudence , Prety , Charity , and Sobriety shall ever finde out , and discover an exsuperancy of goodnesse and conveniency , of one above another . 4. Granting there be three degrees of ▪ goodnesse and conveniency in fitting , and two degrees of goodnesse and conveniency in kneeling , in this case the object necessitateth the Rulers will to command fitting , and refuse kneeling . 1. Because good being the formal object of a reasonable Will , in both Rulers and people ; that which partaketh more of the nature of Good , is first to be chosen . Ergo , The Rulers will is determinated and morally necessitated to a circumstance of three degrees , before a circumstance of two degrees ; and we obey for the goodnesse of the thing commanded , and not for the will of the Rulers . 2. If people obey , and so embrace a Circumstance of two degrees , and refuse a convenient circumstance of three degrees ; they either make this choice for the goodnesse and conveniency of the Circumstance , or for the meer Will of Authority ; the former cannot be said , because of two Goods , known to be so , the one of three degrees , and the other of two degrees ; the Will cannot reasonably choose the lesse good , because a lesse good known as a lesse good , is evil , and the Will cannot reasonably choose known evil : A lesse good is a good with a defect , and so morally evil ; if then Rulers cannot choose evil , they cannot reasonably command others to choose it ; if the latter be said , the choice of people is reasonlesse , and their conscience resteth upon the meer Will of ▪ Authority , which is slavish obedience . How are we then bidden , try all things ? Object . In matters plainly determined by Scripture , Rulers are to follow the Word of God ; but in matters circumstantial or indifferent , where Scripture saith neither for the one side , nor for the other , what Rulers thinketh good , is to be followed , there being no evil nor impiety in that which they command . Answ . 1. This is to make Rulers in matters of Salvation lyable to the Scriptures of God ; but in matters which men call indifferent to make them Popes , and to hang our consciences upon their sleeve , which is most absurd . 1. Because Paul in matters most indifferent of dayes , and meats , would not have the Romans to hang upon his judgement , but will rule both their practice , and his own , by the Law of nature . Murther not , Scandalize not . 2. What Rulers thinketh good is not a rule for Constitutions , and for peoples obedience in matters circumstantial ; but the rule of Rulers here in making Laws , and of people in obeying Laws , is goodnesse it self , Order , Decency , aptitude to Edifie , in things that they command ; for it were strange , if in matters , that they call of salvation , not thoughts , but the Word of God should rule and square Canon-makers , but in matters indifferent , their thoughts should be a Law. 3. Scripture and the Law of nature , and right reason , which is a deduction from Scripture , is able sufficiently in all Canous and Constitutions to regulate both Rulers and people , and to determine what is conventent in Circumstances ; and the Lord here is an infallible Judge , speaking in his Word , as he is in all matters , which they call Fundamental ; yea , the Scripture shall be imperfect in the duties of the second Table , if it do not determine what is active scandal , or soul murther , as it doth determine what is Idolatry , what is lawful Worship . A Dispute touching Scandall and Christian libertie . Quest . I. Concerning Scandall . Whether or not Ceremonies , and the use of things not necessarie in Gods worship , when they Scandalize , be unlawfull ? I Doe the more willingly enter this Dispute , and with reverence to the more learned , shall examine the Doctrine of the late Doctors of Aberdene in their Duplyes . Because I occasioned their thoughts touching Scandall , by a private dispute of the nature of Scandall , which I undertooke while I was confined in Aberdene , with one of the chief Doctors . Our 10 Argument . Ceremonies and things not necessarie in Gods worship fail against Charitie , by the grievous cryme of Scandall . The practice of things indifferent , and not necessarie , is then unlawfull , when from thence ariseth the scandall or occasion of the ruine of ou● Brother . But from the practice of Ceremonies and things not necessarie ariseth Scandall , and occasion of the ruine of our brother . Ergo , the practice of such is unlawfull . Observe our Argument leaneth on a ground given , but not granted that the Ceremonies be indifferent , though to us they be evill : I prove the Proposition , 1 Rom. 14. 14. I know and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus , that nothing is unclean of it selfe ; but to him that esteemeth anything unclean , to him it is unclean . V. 15. But if thy brother be grieved ( weakened in his Christian race ) Now walkest thou uncharitably , destory not him with thy meat , for whom Christ died . 20. For meat destroy not the worke of God. Then for crossing , kneeling , holy dayes , destroy not him for whom Christ died , 1 Cor. 8. 9. 1 Cor. 10. 28. So the brazen Serpent must be removed , when it is a scandalous object of Idolatrie , Ezra 8. 22. Ezra for feare of Scandall , will not seeke a band of men of the King , lest the King should believe the hand of God would not bee with his people , as he had said , Yet a band of men had been more necessarie then the Ceremonies . So 2 King. 23. 10 Josiah is commended for defiling Tophet , to prevent occasion of offering Children to Molech : for this cause God iudgeth an house without Battlement , and the sending abroad a goaring Oxe to be murther , Deut. 27. 28. Exod. 22. 28. 29. 33. Exod. 23. ● . Deut. 7. 3. and Levit. 19. 14. Thou shalt not lay a stumbling block before the blind . Marrying with the Canaanites was forbidden , for the ruine occasioned by that , to the soules of Gods people . I prove the Assumption , a Gretzer saith , In Ceremonies Calvinists are the apes of Catholicks . 2. If such a worship had been in the Temple or Synagogue , so as the Jewes in the same act might , have worshipped Jehovah and the Canaanites Baall or Dagon , as at one table the Papists may kneele and adore bread , with the Protestant , receiving the Sacrament , it would be a raigning scandall . 3. Atheists have mocked Religion , for the Surplice , and other Masse-toyes . 4. Papists say Protestants are returning to their Mother Church of Rome ▪ 5. Wee cannot in zeale preach against Popish traditions , and practise Popish Ceremonies . 6. Lascivious carousings , drunkenness , harlatrie , come from observing of holy dayes . That this may be more cleare . 1. The nature of a scandall would bee cleared . 2 , The Doctrine of the Apostle Paul about Scandall proponed . A Scandall is a word or action or the omission of both , inordinately spoken or done , whence we know , or ought to know , the fall of weake , wilfull or both , is occasioned to th●se , who are within or without the Church . 1. It is a word or deed seene to others ▪ Sinfull thoughts not being seen , are not publick scandalls , though to the man himselfe they occasion sinne . Hence non-conformitie simply to a thing indifferent , must onely be scandalous , as joyned with contempt , formall contempt in things indifferent , is inward and invisible to men . 2. Omission of words and deeds scandalize . Silence in Preachers , when God ▪ matters go wrong is scandalous : So Sanches b 3. Not every word & deed doth scandalize , but such as are done unorderly . c Sanches saith these words and deeds , Quae carent rectitudine , which want some morall rectitude ; o● as Aquinas d saith , of themselves are inductive to sinne , doth scand●lize : or that e M. Anton. De Dominis Archiep. Spalatens . saith , which is indictive to sinne , or the cause of great evill , or hindereth good , as our faith , zeale , love , &c. that scundalizeth . For though none of these fall out , if the work or word , or omission of either be such , as of it selfe , is apt to scandalize , it is an active scandall . Hence every little scandall is a sinne , either in it selfe , or in the unordinate way of doing ● . But what objects are properly scandalous , shall be discussed . 3. When we know such words and deeds doe scandalize , and they be not necessarie to be done , yea , and if wee ought to know ; for though the pronness and procliviti● of our brethren , or others to sinne , be in some respect , questio facti , yet is it also questio juris , a question of Law , the ignorance whereof condemneth when the things themselves are doubtsomely evill , but not necessary to be done ; Hence the practice of a thing indifferent , when there be none that probably can be scandalized , and hath some necessitie , is lawfull : as Colos . 2. 16. Let no man therfore judge you in meat ●r drinke , &c. yet in case of scandall it is unlawfull to cat . See 1 Cor. 10. 27. Eat whatsoever is set before you asking no question for conscience sake . 28. But if any say , this is offered in sacrifice , to Idolls , eat not for his sake who shewedit , for conscience sake — Conscience , I say , not thine owne , but of others . Therefore practising of things indifferent , or non-practising , are both lawfull , according as persons are present who may be scandalized , or not scandalized ; but this is in things though in nature indifferent , yet in use having some necessitie , as eating of meats , but the case is otherwayes in things altogether indifferent , as our Ceremonies are , which are supponed to lay no ty on the conscience , before God , o incline to either side , as they say , to crosse , or not to crosse , laying aside the Commandement of men . For if no-crossing be all 's good , as crossing , then though there be non-scandalized , yet because it is such an action in Gods worship , as is acknowledged to be indifferent , and hath appearance of adding to Gods word and worship , it is inductive to sinne , and scandalous , though none should hence be actu secundo , ruinated , and made to stumble . But if any in Pauls time , as the case was , in the Church of Corinth should eat meates at a table , forbidden in the Law , he not knowing that a Jew was there , this may seeme invincible ignorance , because ignorance of a meere fact , not of a law , if that Jew should be scandalized through his eating , it should seeme to me , to be scandall taken , but not culpably given . 4. It is said in the definition , That these inordinate words or deeds occasioneth the fall of others . 1. Because the will of the scandalized , or his ignorance is the efficacious and neerest cause , why he is scandalized , that is , why he sinneth ; actions or words are occasions onely , or causes by accident , for none ought to be scandalized , as none ought to sinne , ad peccatum nulla est obligati● . 2. Because , as to be scandalized is sinne , so to scandalize actively is sinne , though actuall scandall follow not , as Peter scandalized Christ culpably , when he counselled him not to die for sinners , though it was impossible that Christ could be scandalized ▪ 5. It is said , ( whereby weake or wilfull , within , or witho●t the Church may be scandalized ) For I hope to prove that it is no lesse sinne actively to scandalize the wilfull , and malicious , then the weak , though there be degrees of sinning here , and we must eschew things scandalous for their sake who are without the Church . For the Second I set down these Propositions 1. from Rom. 14. 1. Proposit . The weake are not to be thraled in judgement , or practice in thornie and intricate disputes , in matters indifferent . This is cleare Rom. 14. v. 1. Ergo When people know not mistie distinctions of relative and absolute adoration , of worship essentiall or accidentall , they are not to be here thraled by a Law to practice Ceremonies humane . 2 Proposit . If a weake one eat herbs , fearing the practice of things forbidden by Gods law , he is commended , and his abstinence praise-worthy , as Rom. 14. v. 2. 3. and he ought not to be judged , and so ought not to be a wed by a Law. Then abstinence and non-conformitie is lawfull in such a case . 3. Proposit . He that eateth , he that eateth not ; he that practiseth , he that practiseth not indifferent things , is not to be judged . 1. God hath received the eater . 2. You are not to judge another mans servant . It is against the Law of Nations . 3. If the weake fall , God is able to raise them . Ergo , if he be not to be judged , as a contemner of Gods law in things indifferent , farre lesse should he be judged , by the Church law . 4. Proposit . Observers of dayes , or non-observers of dayes should have certaintie of Faith in these indifferent things ; Ergo , the light of the Word should lead Rulers , and People here , v. 5. in things indifferent . 5. Proposit . The observer of indifferent things , as dayes in that case at Rome , and the non-observers of dayes should not trouble one another ▪ because both are to observe , and not observe indifferent things , for Gods glory . 1. Both gives thankes . 2. Both liveth and dieth as Christs , for Gods glorie . 6. 7. 8. 9. Therefore Gods glorie is the end that ruleth the use of Ceremonies , as they are indifferent . Proposit . 6. v. 10. 11. 12. a Christian should not condemne a Jew ▪ no● one brother another , in things indifferent . 1. Because we are brethren . 2. Because it is Christs place to judge ; and condemne . 3. Because every man must give an account for himself . Ergo. Lawes of Rulers to condemne or punish , are not to be made in such cases . Proposit . 7. v. 13. When the use of things indifferent is a stumbling block and scandall to our brethren they are against charitie and unlawfull . Proposit . 8. v. 14. there is a Prolepsis . Meats clean , or not clean , may be eaten , but all meats are clean ; and Paul is perswaded of that by Iesus Christ . Ergo , The Apostle answereth , 1. by denying the major Proposition in two cases , and setteth downe a distinction . All things are clean in themselves , but they become unclean , in two cases . 1. If one weake in the faith believe ▪ that the meat , that he eateth , is against the word of God , the me at to him is unclean . 2 , If he eat before , one that believeth it is forbidden in Gods Law , to eat such meats , his eating is a stumbling blocke to the weake . But one might say , It is a taken Scandall , and not given : for it is lawfull to eat , thy brother deemeth it unlawfull out of ignorance of Christian libertie , so say Formalists Ceremonies be indifferent ; if any offend at the use of them , it is ascandall taken , not given . O but Paul forbiddeth to scandalize , or to eat . Hence the 9. Proposit . The use of things indifferent , as Ceremonies , before any Law ●e made of them ▪ by confession of Formalists , is indifferent ▪ and may be done ▪ and not done , but if they scandalize , Paul proveth by eight arguments they are unlawfull ▪ 1. If fighteth with Charitie , that for meat , so l●tle a thing , for the knot of a straw , a Ceremonie , thou slay thy brother ▪ for whom Christ died , v. 15. Where these reasons be . 1. It is uncharitable walking . 2. It is murther , slay not him . 3. It is contrary to Christs love , who died for thy brother . 4. It maketh Religion and Christian libertie , to be evill spoken of , v. 16. 5. From the nature of these things ▪ which are indifferent , these in which the Kingdome of God consisteth not , as Meats and Surplic● crossing kneeling , &c. when they scandalize , ought to be omitted , as being against righteousness , and being sinnes of murther . 2. Against Peace , sinnes of contention , 3. against joy of the Holy Ghost , making sad , and discouraging thy brother in his Christian ●ace , and he that serveth God in peace and righteousnesse , and joy is acceptable v. 18 , 6. The use of things indifferent in case of scandall conduce not to peace and edification , v. 19. 7. It is a destroying of the worke of God ▪ v. 20. illustrated by a repeated prolepsis , but the meat is clean ; ●ea , but ( saith Paul ) it is evill , and so morally unclean to him that eateth with offence , v. 20. 8. Ab equo & ●ono , we are to doe good , but to eat and drink with the scandalizing of our brother , and to practise Ceremonies is not Good ▪ Proposit . 10. The practising of things indifferent , or Ceremonies for the very ●●●●ing of the ●aith , that we have Christian libertie to practise , or no● practise in the case of scandall , is not lawfull , v. 22. set downe by a pro●epsis , Keep the faith of thy Christian libertie ( in case of scandall ) to thy selfe , and to God. Proposit 11. In the use of things indifferent , we are to allow our selves , that is to have the approbation of our Conscience , that what we doe is lawfully , v 22. Proposit . 12. He that practiseth indifferent things , with a doubting conscience , and not in faith , sinneth , and is condemned , v. 23. 1 Cor. 6 ▪ v 12 All things ( indifferent ) are lawfull in themselves , but they are not expedient . If we be brought under the power or band of them by law . Ergo , in the meanes of worship , not onely must we see what is lawfull , but also what is profitable and conducing to the end . He reasoneth upon a given , but not granted hypothesis , that Fornication is indifferent , as the Gentiles taught , as we doe in the matter of Ceremonies . 1 Cor. 7. v. 6. But this I speake by permission ▪ not of Commandement . Ergo in things , in which God hath granted us libertie , to doe , or not to doe , permission hath place , not obliedging necessitie , or penall lawes . 13 Proposit . There cannot be commanding Lawes in things that are polltickly good , or evill , according to the individuall complexion ▪ temperature , or gifts of singular men , to marry , or not to marry , cannot be commanded , for where God looseth , no power on earth can bind ▪ v. 33. 1 Cor. 8. v. 7. Paul condemneth them in the use of their libertie Christian , Howbeit there be not in every man this knowledge , then that Rulers may make lawes in things indifferent , without scandall , they must remove ignorance . 2. If there be but one person weake ( there is not in every man that knowledge ) in knowledge , a Law obliedging all , in things indifferent cannot be made . V. 8. There is a definition of a thing indifferent . It is a thing that commendeth us not to God , which neither helpeth , nor hindereth pietie , nor maketh a man better , or worse before God. Then Ceremonies pretended to be for order , decencie , edification , to stirre up the dull minde to spirituall duties , cannot be things indifferent . Hence observe 1. The materialls of worship , as linnen , cloathes , habites , gestures may be in their physicall consideration indifferent , but as applyed by formulistes , they cannot be indifferent , for in their use , kneeling appropriated to sacramentall bread , linnen appropriated to the body of a Priest , while he officiateth , cannot be but religious or prophane . 2. If God command gestures he commandeth this gesture , hic & nunc . If in generall , ●●ealing be forbidden , then for Achan , to steale this Babylonish garment , must be forbidden . 3. It seemeth to have been after-noon with Henry Lesly ( a ) of after cuppes , when he saith , if Papists and Protestants be two divers kindes of worshippers then their actions of worship must be indifferent , as be their agents , for actions are distinguished by their objects and ends , Papists in kneeling worship their God of bread , we in kneeling at the Sacrament worship the true God. For when a Turk and a Christian doe both worship Dagon , it is the same Idolatrie , though ●urcisme and Christianisme be different religions . Though kneeling to an Image , the similitude of God , and that same kneeling to Jehovah , represented in that similitude , Es ▪ 40. v. 8. make one formall object , the Image the materiall , Jehovah the formall object ▪ yet is it idolatrie . 4. Our circumstances of time and place , cannot properly be called indifferent , for they may be considered two wayes . 1 Physically . 2 Religiously . Physically . The Commandement injoyning a thing , injoyneth also time and place convenient , he that saith ( th● shalt not kill ) in that same very Commandement said ( Cain , thou shalt not kill Abel in this place of the field , at this time , ) so to believe , and to believe in this time and place , falleth both under one , and the same Commandement ; And it is true , the lawfulness of Worship may be marred by bad Circumstantiating of the worship , If one shall pray , when the Pastor doth preach ; But Circumstances must be convenient , and so commanded , and so not indifferent , but Circumstances have no religious respect put on them by God , and therefore in that state have no roome in Gods worship , V. 1● . If any man see thee , who hast knowledge , sit at meat in the Idols Temple shall not the conscience of him that is weake , ●e emboldened , to eat these things that are offered to Idolls . Hence a naked sight of that which is ordinarily exponed to be a Communion with an idoll , as kneeling religiously to bread is , must be a scandall . 2. The supposed knowledge of one , who saith , an Idoll is nothing , but directeth his worship to God , when externall gestures are used in an idolatrous way , doth not free the practise of such a worship , from scandall . V. 11. 12. 13. Scandalizing in eating things , otherwise poore and cleane , is a scandalizing of a weake brother , against the price of Christs blood , &c. 1 Cor. 10. V. 16. 17. 18. Communion in Rites and Cerimonies o● a raise worship , is a communion with the Idoll , and Satan . V. 22. Though you keep your heart to God , ye provoke the Lord to jealousie . V. 23. Rulers are not to seeke their owne , in things indifferent . V. 25. Things sacrificed to Idol● , yet in no religious state , are clean meates , and may be eaten . Surplice on a Noblemans porter is no Masse habit , and so not scandalous . 29. 30. In things indifferent , I must abstaine from ●sing my libertie , where I am in danger to be evill spoken of , and that our liberty be called licentiousnesse . Quest . II. Whether or no the Ceremonies and things indifferent commanded by humane authority be objects scandalous , and what rules are to be observed in eschewing scandalls . FOrmalists object , That Ceremonies be not no●ent agents in giving scandall , but men doe unjustly take scandall , whereas innocent Ceremonies give none . But observe that a scandall is given two wayes . 1 Physically . 2. Morally . Physically , when the object hath an influence meerely physicall in raising Scandall , in this meaning , as there be no passion , but it hath an action ; so there is no scandall taken , but it is some way given . The Pharisees are scandalized at Christs preaching . The preached Word had some influence on their corruption to scandalize it , but physicall , not morall : but sinfull and inordinate actions , scandalize morally by contributing , a morall influence culpably to the scandalizing of others . Hence the question is , wherein standeth this morall and culpable influence . The objects in Generall from whence commeth scandall be foure . 1. Things good . 2. Things sinfull and evill . 3. Things indifferent , inordinatly , or unseasonably done . 4. Things that have appearance of evill . A thing good of it selfe is not scandalous , but there be two Goodthing● . 1. Some simply necessary ▪ ●s to love God , not to steale , not to forsweare , these be never scandalous . 2. Some good duties positive of affirmative precepts , as not necessarie , hic & nunc , may be omitted to eschew scandall . School men move a question . If it be lawfull to omit workes commanded of God , or of the law of nature to eschew the scandall of our brethren ? I answer , a naturall commandement to eschew the scandalizing of my brother , obliedgeth in some Circumstances , but not simply , for it obliedgeth not when there occurreth a Commandement naturall of greater obligation , whether it be naturall or positive , if I cannot decline the transgression of the law of God , in the declining of scandalizing my brother , Certainly the Commandement of not scandalizing doth not obliedge , for I am more obliedged to have a care of my owne salvation , then of my brothers , and so to prevent my owne sinnes , the●● the sinning of my brother : yet Coeteris paribus , if all other things be alike , as a Becanus saith . A naturall command , such as is , ( not to scandalize ) that is , ( not to commit soule-murther ) doth oblige more , then a positive Commandement , as to heare the Word hic & nunc . I am obliedged hic & nunc , to omit hearing of the Word to keep my brother from killing himselfe , and to preserve my brothers temporall life . because , the Lord will have mercie , and not sacrifice . Though I be not obliedged universally to omit the hearing of the Word ▪ and receiving of the Sacraments , to eschew the scandall of my brother . 2. Sinnes publickly committed , are of their owne nature culpably scandalous . 3. In things indifferent , from whence ariseth a Scandall there be two things . 1. The use of the thing it selfe . 2. The use of it , with the non-necessitie of existence in it . As the causey stones are not scandalous , if any fall on them , nor the layer of the causey to be blamed therefore , because causay stones be necessarie , but if any lay an huge block in the way , which hath no necessary use there , he who doth so is the cause of the fall , because he contributeth to the fall , that which is the occasion , and so the cause of the fall , for every occasion is a certaine cause . 2. Because he contributeth such an occasion as hath no morall necessitie of existence , so the brazen Serpent having lost its vertue of curing and being adored as God , is formally a scandalous object , and the Prince suffering that to remaine , when it is not necessarie , and withall occasioneth the idolatrie of many , doth culpably scandalize , and so these who for sole will commandeth such things as the worship of God may want , doe also scandalize . They object , Christ might have healed on another day , then the Lords . Ergo , the non-morall necessitie maketh not the object formally scandalous , nor doth the contributer thereof culpably scandalize . Answ . That Christ should cure on the Sabbath , was morally necessary . 1. If it were but from his owne will , but mens will cannot make things necessary . 2. It was necessarie to shew , that the Sonne of man was Lord of the Sabbath . 3. That the Sabbath was made for man. and not man for the Sabbath . 4. To shew , that workes of mercy are to be preserred to workes of Ceremonies , and that God loveth mercie , rather then Sacrifice , When the dutie is onely possible , and the good lesse necessary , then the good of non-scandalizing , then we are not , for hope of a possible dutie , and lesse necessarie , to doe that from whence a Scandall doth arise . So it was not lawfull for Paul to take stipend , which should have hindered the promoving of the Gospell , though he might have imployed that stipend upon charitable uses , because that Charitie was a dutie onely possible , and incomparably lesse necessarie , then the promoting of the Gospell . So 1 Cor. 6. 7. Why suffer ye not rather losse ? yet by that suffering losse , they were lesse able for workes of Charitie , and to provide for their Familie and Children , but the gaine was temporall , and not to be compared with a good fame upon Christian religion , which was slandered by heathen , when they went to law , Christian against Christian , before an Heathen Judge . The fourth scandalous object , is that which hath appearance of evill . Not every thing is such , for good hath the appearance of evill . b Paybodie to elude this , sheweth a number of things which have appearance of evill , but ●are good , and he nameth among them , Hushaies abiding with Absolon in his conspiracie , which was plaine dissimulation , but that properly hath appearance of evill . 1. Quod plaerumque fit malo fine , as the Schoolemen define it , that which ordinarily is done for an evill end , as to ly in bed with another mans wife , to sit at the Idols table , to bow to an Image . 2. That which being good in it selfe , yet because of the circumstances is exponed vain-glory , as to pray in the streets , it s ordinarily exponed to be for this end , to be seen of men . These who expone that place , 1 Thess . 5. Abstaine from all appearance of evill , to be , abstaine from that which seemeth evill to the conscience , and judgement of the doer , or onely of doctrine reach not the Apostles minde : for to sit at the Idols table , to bow to an Image , and keepe the heart to God , are out of doubt appearances of evill forbidden in the text , yet are they not doctrines seeming evill alwayes , to the judgement of the practisers . They object , to looke up to the beavens and Sunne may have appearance of praying to the Sunne and heavens , for in the externall fact , no more could be done by a person adoring the Sun. Ergo , such appearances cannot be scandalous Objects . Answer , lifting up of the eyes in prayer , are naturall adumbrations and expressions of the elevation of the heart , required in prayer , Psal . 25. v. 1. and so commonly exponed by all Nations , and therefore cannot be appearances of evill . Hence these rules . I. Suppose all be strong , in whose presence I practise , a thing indifferent , yet if it have no necessitie , no aptitude to edifie , and have onely all its goodness from the will of commanders , in practising , I scandalize , 1. Because the strong are apt to sinne , and so apt to be scandalized , and the action is idle , and not reasonable , having no other reason but the meere will of Rulers . 2. If I probably know my practice , shall come to the knowledge of these , who shall be scandalized , I scandalize them in such an action . II. Rule . Though the practice of things indifferent , having some necessitie , be lawfull , as 1 Cor. 10. 27. Eat what is set before you ▪ asking no question for conscience sake ▪ Yet the ●aith and conscience of things indifferent , is never indifferent , we are never to judge a thing indifferent , necessarie , nor a thing necessarie , indifferent , and practice in that judgement , so erroneous is finfull , and not of faith , Rom. 14 ● . 22. III Rule . An universall omission of good , of obeying affirinative precepts , for the eschewing of scandall , cannot be lawfull for it is 1. necessarie for my salvation to obey affinnative precepts , though not in all differences of time . In this meaning a Augustine said , We are not to abstaine from good workes , ( he meaneth a totall abstainence ) for any scandall . And Tertullian b good offendeth non , save a wicked minde , But at sometime an obedience to an affirmative precept , hic & nunc may be omitted , when we see that from the doing thereof , the ignorant and weake will commit great sinnes . So c Aquinas , d Bannes . e Sanches for affirmative precepts of the law of nature ( saith f Bannes ) must sometime be omitted , for the eschewing of scandall , for they doe not obliedge , but when , and after such a manner , as is convenient . V. Rule . To doe any good action , or lawfull , or indifferent , when I probably foresee a scandall will follow , is an active scandall , for I preferre my owne will , to my brothers salvation ( saith g Antoninus , and h Navarret , ) and therefore saith ( i ) Antoninus ; A virgin going abroad , without just necessitie , where her beautie shall be a snar● to young men , or to goe out upon a necessary cause with a whorish attire , is an active scandall , her feet ▪ abideth not in her house , saith k Solomon . And l Navarr , saith , It is to sinne mortally and m Silvester saith , If the Popes commandement doe but smell of veniall sinne , and if by giving audience thereunto , it be presumed that the state of the Church shall be troubled , or a scandall shall arise , though the commandement goe out under the paine of Excommunication , it is not to bee obeyed . o Vasques , and p Suarez say , to sell , gift , or dispose of any things indifferent , when we foresee they shall abuse them , is to commit the sinne of active scandalizing . Yea , the forme of an Idol , though he never adore it , doth highly scandalize , and q Antoninus r Silvester , ſ Corduba , t Metina , u the Jesuit Zanches teach , That to contribute to that which we see , shall induce any to sinne , is to be guilty of scandalizing . And the reasons be these ; 1. We are not to preferre our will to the salvation of our brother . 2. Things lesse necessarie , then our brothers salvation , in that case become not necessarie , and so fruitlesse and idle . 3. Charitie inferferreth , that we hinder so far , as we can , the ruine of our brothers soul , Scandaell is spirituall homicide . 4. To contribute any morall help , and influence to our brothers fall , and soul-ruine , is to be accessarie to his sinne ▪ Hence Ceremonies and things not necessarie to salvation , may be omitted altogether in their specialities , when the practising of them doth scandalize , and so though kneeling in Gods worship cannot well be universally omitted , yet kneeling appropriate to such an act of worship may be omitted , and ought to be omitted , if it scandalize , and Ceremonies which scandalize universally , seeing they are not in their very kinde necessarie to salvation , are to be abolished . Yet I may adde one caution here . To contribute helpe for the doing of that , which of it selfe is necessarie , which I know , an other in respect of humane frailtie , will abuse to sinne is no active scandall . So to lay hands on a qualified Pastor is not sinne , though I foresee through humane frailtie , he will abuse his power in some things to sinne . So , for an Artificer to make swords , though he know some shall abuse them to murthering the innocent , is no scandalous work . I take not on me to prescribe rules for eschewing scandall in all occurrences of providence . The godly learned can see more then I can doe in this matter , where love should be warie to lay a straw in the way of any weake traveller . Quest . III. Whether or no we may deny obedience to the lawes of our Superiours , for feare of Scandall causleslie taken . THis is not my question , but a question of the Doctors of Aberdeen , yet it conduceth for the times , and because one of the learnedest of these Doctors did agitate the question of scandall with me in private , before the writing of that book , I desire libertie to vindicate my selfe , by discussing two chapters of this purpose . And first the question seemeth to me many wayes vaine . 1. They aske about denyall of obedience , which is not proved , but presumed to be obedience . 2. They presume that the Masters , the Lord Prelates of Pearth faction are our Superiours , by no law of God , or our Church was ever any superioritie conferred upon them . 3. They say for scandall causlesly taken : if they meane that there be no just reason indeed why any should take scandall , they say nothing against us , for we thinke to take scandall , is to sinne , if they know any just reason or cause of sinne , except Satan and mens free-will , we shall be taught of them . If they meane scandalously taken , that is , not culpably given by the practisers of Ceremonies , this is a Chimera , and to us no question , for we are not to denie obedience to lawfull lawes , for eschewing Scandall , when obeyers doe give no cause culpably of Scandall , they would have formed the question to our reverend and learned Brethren if they had dealt plainly . Whether or no , we may desist from practising Coremonies , which , setting aside the law of Superiours , are indifferent , when from the practising of them ariseth the ruine of many soules , for whom Christ died . In things necessarie commanded and forbidden of God , we cannot deny obedience , but the matter of the lawes is silenced in the question to deceive the reader . Duplyers . IF the Scandall arising from the Articles of Pearth come , ex conditione operis , from the very enormitie in these Articles , then are we to forbeare these ●rticles ever , and not onely while they be tryed in a lawfull ▪ Assembly for such are either sinne , or have a manifest show of sinne . But if the scandall arise not from the Articles themselves , but from malice or weaknesse , we deny that we are totally to abstaine from obedience to lawfull Superiours , for eschewing Scandall causlesly taken , and we marvell from whence ye have learned this strange and harsh doctrine . Answ . 1. Your enumeration is weake , for we know no Scandall justly taken , but proceeding from both these , weaknesse or wickedness of nature , is the neerest cause of all Scandall taken , because it is the cause of all sinne , and to be scandalized is sinne . Also it is here taken from the enormitie of the deed , in that practising of things indifferent , if a scandall taken either weakly or maliciously thence arise , there is enormitie in the deed , yet totall abstinence is not hence concluded , because , cessante ratione scandali , when the ground of the Scandall is removed , there is no enormitie in the fact . 2. You define to us , or rather divine , that then there is an irregularitie in the fact that justly scandaliz●th , when either the fact is a sinne , or then hath a manifest shew of sinne . And we wonder where you learned this strange Divinitie , for 1 Cor. 10. 27. To eat meat at a Feast that you are invited unto ▪ is neither sinne , because v. 23. 25. it is lawfull : The earth is the Lords , nor is it such as hath a manifest shew of sinne , as all having sense knoweth . One of your prime Doctors defined to me , these onely have manifest appearance of sinne , Quae pl●rumque fiunt malo fine , which for the most part are done for an evill ●nd , such as is to lye in bed with another mans wife , to kneele before an Idoll . The form●r , in the exposition of all is done for adulterie , the latter for Idolatrie . I am sure to eat meats at an Infidels feast , is not of that nature which is done ordinarily for an evill end , it is ordinarily done to refresh nature , and to sol●●e it , which hath no manifest shew of sinne , and yet if there be a weake one beside , who saith , that meat is offered to Idols , in that case to eat , is to scandalize 32. and is against the glory of God , v. 31. 3. You aske from whom we learned this strange doctrine to deny obedience to the lawes of Superiours for scandall causlesly taken ; And we answer , we learned it from the Apostle Paul , who saith 1 Cor. 8. 13. If meat offend my weake brother , I will eat no flesh ( I will abstaine totally and absolutely ) while the world standeth . This abstinence for the date of the worlds standing , God be thanked , is longer then the time to a lawfull Generall Assembly was at that time : yet the Apostle proveth , Rom. 14. That to eat , or not to eat , was at that time as indifferent , as to practise , or not practise Ceremonies , also who ever offended at Pauls eating of fleshes , were offended out of weakness , v. 7. and it was in that sense , scandall causlesly taken . Duplyers pag. 59. n. 34. The Author of the popish English Ceremonies , saith that both Cajetan and Bannes affirm , that we should abstain a spiritualibus non necessariis , from spirituall duties not necessarie to salvation , when Scandall ariseth from the doing of them , but none of the Schoolemen euer taught to abstaine totally , and altogether from any spirituall dutie , for eschewing the scandall of either weake , or wicked . Answer . What the author of the English Popish Ceremonies saith in that subject , all your learning shall never be able to Answer , for our brethren , required but abstinece from these Ceremonies , till they be tryed in a lawfull Generall Assemblie , for they never were yet tryed in a lawfull Assemblie , till the late Assemblie at Glasgow , anno 1638. 2. That Author argueth a Majore , and we desire an Answer , if we may abstaine from spirituall duties commanded by the most high Superiour the Lord our God. hic & nunc in case of Scandall . Ergo , farre more are we to abstaine , from practising of dead Ceremonies voyd of all spirit of life , in the case of scandall , yea and universally , and totally we are to abstaine , because the Superiours have no power to make lawes in materia scandalosa , when that which they command is scandalous ; and in the very matter soule-murther . Duplyers . Thomas and his followers say , Bona spiritualia non necessaria sunt dimittenda propter scandalum , in ijs quae sunt sub consili● , non vero sub praecepto ▪ We may omit spirituall duties for eschewing scandall which fall under counsell , but not under commandement . Answer . We conceive you not to be Papists , to hold this distinction , then farre more things indifferent for a time , in case of scandall may be forborne , when Counsells the performance whereof merit a greater degree of glorie in heaven ▪ may be suspended . 2. It is false , for a Aquinas saith , Actiones quantumcunque rectae atque utiles omittendae . So b D. Bannes . Duplyers . The most accurat Casuists and Interpreters of Thomas , deny , that we can deny obedience to civill and Ecclesiasticall lawes ▪ for ●schewing scandall of the weake . So Navarrus in man●ali cap 19. sect . 44. Vasquez to . 5 . Tract ▪ de Scandalo , dub . 1. sect . 5. Becanus to . post . part . 2 ▪ tract 1. cap 27. q. 5. Ferdin . de Castro Palao oper . moral . tract . 6. disp . 6 ▪ p●nct . 16. Duvall . 22. tract . de Charit . q. 19. art . And they ●ite Thomas , Duranaus , Almain , Anton ▪ ●lorent . Answer 1. c Aquinas saith , Excommunication may be omitted in the case of scandall . Now the Churches precept of Excommunication is no counsell , but a precept . And it is lawfull saith Thomas to rebuke our brother , and an act of Mercy and Charitie commanded ( saith d he ) in the law of nature , and so not a Counsell . Yet saith Thomas , in case of scandall it may be omitted . e Navar. doth contradict you , read when you please . And Ferdin●●d ▪ de Castro Palao , you thought we had not these authors to find you out● and give ●o Vasquez f right play , Wee may omit the ●●aring of a Masse which is no Counsell , but command to save the temperall life of our brother . g Becanus , h Duvallius may be seen to crosse you . Dupliers . The School-men well us not to forbeare obedience , with a quite disclaiming of the authoritie of the Law , as you doe . Ans , Lawfull authoritie of Prelates lawes we know none . 2. School-men say more , that the obligation of lawes doe cease in case of scandall . Duplyers . This kinde of forbearance for eschewing of scandall we improve . 1. Arg. The author of English Popish Ceremonies , part . 1. cap. 4. sect . 4. Not to obey the lawes of the Church in things whereof we are certainly perswaded they are not unlawfull and inexpedient , is a contempt and a scandall . But we are perswaded the things here , to wit , Articles of Pearth be neither unlawfull nor inexpedient . Ergo ▪ The major is yours , the Assump . we prove by the light of our conscience . Answer . The author sayth so indeed , but withall he sayth , that Church lawes bind not the conscience , because they are Church lawes , Sed propter rationem legum , for the reason of the lawes ; and such you cannot show to be in your Ceremonies . 2. The Assumption is badly proved , for your consciences are not transparent glasse ; except that light come out in arguments founded upon the law and testimonie , and where this is not , there is no light , Es . 8. 20. an erring conscience proveth nothing , so you beg the question . Duplyers 2. arg . n. 37. That which may be removed by information and instruction , cannot be awarrand to us of a totall abstinence , from the obedience of the lawes , or which is all one , of an avowed disclaiming of the authoritie of them . But the scandall of the weake taken by Pearth Articles , may be removed by information , or instruction . Ergo. I must crave here leave for a pause , and aske the question . 1. If information and light given to beware of the scandall of Ceremonies and things indifferent , can make them the lawfull object of Church Canons , D. Forbes and other say so . But 1. This is that which Papists say to our Divines , who object that Images are pits and snares to Idolatrie . This danger ( saith a Johannes de Lugo ) the Popes Professor at Rome , is easily prevented by the instruction and care of Prelates , who are to teach , that Images have no dignitie of themselves , but onely from the samplar . And so b Bellarm. the Jesuit , c Vasquez . d Estius . e The Councell of Magountine helpeth the matter . Let our Pastours ( say they ) carefully teach the people , that Images are not set up , that we should adore them , but that they should be helps for our memorie . 2. Paul gave strong reasons for lawfulnesse of dayes , and meats , that weake Jewes should not be scandalized at the eating thereof . yet he would neither passe them in a Church Canon , nor practise them himselfe , while the world standeth , 1 Cor. 8. 13. yea , he proveth Rom. 14. by eight strong Arguments , that it was not lawfull to practise them . Ergo , he presuproseth that information of Pastours should not take away the scandall of the weake , as Rom. 14. 14. There is nothing uncleane of it selfe . Ergo , It is lawfull to eat all meats , 1 Cor. 10. 26. The earth is the Lords . Ergo , eat what is set before you , v. 23. all things are lawfull , and yet he saith , eat not , give no offence , if meat offend my brother , I will not eat to the worlds end . 1 Cor. 8. 13. 3. This vaine argument presupposeth that the want of literall information , is the adequat cause of falling in scandall , a vaine reason . Peter actively and culpably scandalized Christ in his carnall counsell , Master , pitty thy selfe , Mat. 16 21. 22. 23. yet Christ was sufficiently inlightened , that he could not be scandalized . But certaine it is , that the will and depraved inclination is the cause why we fall in scandall , even when we know that others who publickly sinneth , doth sinne , and that we should not be scandalized . Now no reason in Pastors preaching , or in Church-Canon , can take away the inclination of the heart to evill , and therefore no information of Pastors can remove the scandall of the weake ; For then David in committing adulterie , Noah in drunkenness , Lot in his incestuous folly with his owne daughters , Peter in denying his Saviour , should not have caused others within , or without the Church to stumble , nor have culpably scandalized them ; So David . Noah , Lot , and Peter , had preached to all that heard of their fall , that adulterie , drunkenness , incest , and denyall of Christ , were grievous sinnes to be avoyded , and that it was sin for any to be scandalized thereat , for such information should have given sufficient literall information to beware of the like sinnes . Yea , a father might inclose in a chamber , his sonne and a beautifull virgin , and if he should sufficiently informe his son of the guiltiness , and punishment of harlotrie , he should not lay a stumbling-block before his sonne . Yet we all know , a stumbling-block may be layed before the inclination no lesse , then before the blind minde , yea suppose , to warne a Traveller of a pit , in his way , might be sufficient , to make the digger of the pit free of laying a stumbling-block in the way ( as it is not ) seeing to make a pit is not indifferent , yet it shall not free the Commanders of Ceremonies and the acts of Pearth Assemblie of active scandall , because men naturally loving life and health , hate to fall into pitts , which may indanger their life , and so have no inward morall inclination to fall into a pitt ; but men though informed of spirituall falls , and warned to beware of them , yet love and incline to Idolatrie , and therefore to warne them to beware , and yet set the powder neere the fire , is but to scorne the craft , and to mock men . Yea , in that they desire and require , that the people beware of the Ceremonies , and require that Pastours informe them of the danger ; they grant that Ceremonies are powder amongst the pitchers , and yet they be innocent , and indifferent creatures , as if they would call them indifferent pitts , indifferent whoores to allure , beware of them ; indifferent pest-cloathes , see that your inclination touch them not . Yea , then Ezechiah had given no scandall , if he had commanded the brazen Serpent still to stand , and had commanded the Priests to preach that the Serpent was not God , and therefore warned the people of their Idolatrie in burning Incence to it , onely let it stand as a memoriall of Gods power in curing the people , who were stinged with Serpents in the Wildernesse . So if the Israelites should give their sonnes and daughters to marry strange women of the Canaanites , if they should ordaine the Priests to teach carefully their married children , to beware , that they were not drawne away , by these idolatrous marriages , to serve the Gods of the Canaanites , they should not lay a stumbling-block before their sonnes and daughters . Yea , these who excell in light , may be weake in grace , and in hazard to be insnared , by the idolatrie and superstition of Ceremonies . 4. The law of nature provideth all possible and lawfull meanes for the removall of every thing , that may rnine his soule , for whom Christ died , but not onely information of the danger of Ceremonies , but also the removall of the pitts themselves , to wit , the Ceremonies are possible and lawfull meanes . 5. 1. This were an idle Sabbath work to expound such theams as these Sacramentall bowing is an humble adoring of God , not of bread , ( and as it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save beleevers , so it pleased Prelates , by the foolishnes of holy dayes and Saints dayes , to teach the people articles of faith , and by the Surplice to teach pastorall innocencie , and by confirmation to blesse children ▪ ) 2 c Calvin , and d Luther teach , that no word should be heard in the Church , nisi purum Dei verbum , but the pure word of God. Surplice humane and Saints dayes , crossing , kneeling , cannot be a text that Ministers can preach on , and expound , for they are commanded to speak Gods word , Ezech. 7. To read Gods law , and give the meaning and sense thereof , Nehem. 8. 8. and to expone the Scriptures , Luk. 24. 27. not to teach the meaning of wretched Ceremonies , for in that they should not be the Pastours of Christ , but speak with the mouth of Antichrist , and Exod. 12. 26. 27. If the children ask the fathers , what mean yee by this Passeover , they were to answer , It is the Sacrifice of the Lords Passeover . So if they ask what meaneth your kneeling to Bread , your Saints dayes , your Surplice and Crossing , you must answer , they are the Ceremonies of the Lords Supper , and Baptisme ; What uncouth bleating were this ? 6. Shall people ( saith D. Ammes e be fedde with this East wind , the vertue of Surplice , when there be so little time , to learne the maine things of the Gospell ? also some preach none , some studie never Ceremonies , some blush to speake of such toyes . Yea ▪ and alas often saith , f Bannes the weake are not capable of distinctions , it is hard to draw the wits of rude people along the untwisted threed of distinctions , that the elements are objectum adorationis à quo significative and objectum adorationis relativae materiale , non adorationis formale . I conceive the Doctors of Aberdeen have adoe with their wits to understand them , they must be taught of D. Mortounes essentiall and accidentall worship ; of Bellarmines additions perfecting , and additions corrupting the word of God. And whereas D. Forbes saith ; It is a shame for Ministers , and teachers of others to pretend weaknes , though the flock might be ignorant . Answer . Weakness , is weakness of faith , Rom. 14. 1. and weaknesse of grace , not weakness in literall light . And I thinke Ministers may pretend this upon too good grounds , and weaknes of faith is often a great inclination to superstition . 2. Though the Ministers refusing the Ceremonies , should understand them as well as these who writ bookes for their defence , yet it will not follow that they should practise them , for their forbearance is for feare of scandalizing the weak . Paul had perfect knowledge of his Christian libertie , as any man , yet he would not eat meats to the worlds end , which should offend his brother . The stronger should not scandalize the weak , because they are stronger . Duplyers pag. 63. n. 38. Thirdly , if for Scandalls taken , especially by the malicious , we may disclaime the authority of a Law , then we may ever disclaime the authoritie of all lawes of Church and State , for there is nothing commanded by lawes , but some , either through weaknes , or through malice , may take offence at it . Answer . 1. For scandalls taken , and also given , by either weak , or wilfull , when the matter is indifferent , and hath evident conformitie with Jewish and Popish rites , and is not necessarie , we may disclaim the authoritie of all such lawes , true . Ergo , we may for scandall maliciously taken , deny the authority of all lawes , it followeth not . Ex affirmatione sp●ciei male colligitur negatio generis . It is not for taken scandall , but for given scandall , that we disclaime the authoritie of these lawes . 2. The Doctors will have us believe , upon the sole light of their conscience , n. 36. that they thinke the Ceremonies lawfull and expedient . But for us , they will not credit us in that , but out of malice we are soandalized , and not out of weaknesse . Duplyers n. 39. 4. arg . Fourthly , We ought not for eschewing scandall causlesly taken , to injure or offend any man , by denying to him , that which is due to him , and therefore we ought not , for eschewing scandall causlesly taken ▪ to offend and injure our Superiours . The Antecedent is proved ▪ for if a man be excomm●nicated , shall his wife , children , and servants flie his company , and so deny these duties which they owe to him , for feare that others be scandalized ? and if we may not for scandall causlesly taken abstaine from these duties , that we owe to private persons farre lesse may we abstaine from obedience , which we owe to Superiours , &c. Answer . Against the Law of disputing , you lay downe a ground , which is a principall part of the question that is practising these Ceremonies be obedience due to Superiours , and none practising for a time an injuring of Superiours in their due , though Gods affirmative precepts be omitted for a time , as the not hearing the Word , the not receiving the Sacraments , in case of Scandall , Gods due is not taken from him . If you will be more zealous for the honour of Prelates and men , then for the honour of God. Answer the Argument your selfe : I am not to reprove a scorner because of the scandall , he shall but trample , as a sow , upon any word of reproofe , yet the scandall were causle●ly taken if we should doe so , The good word of God should furnish no just cause to him , yet am I not taking from God his due , and your bare word , that this is disobedience to Superiours , not to practise Pearth Ceremonies is not enough to us . 2. Your probation is weak , That children and wife keep company with the Excommunicate father , is a commandement of the law of nature , and Gods necessary law , and to deny this to an husband and father is such a sinne , as the eschewing of a scandall can never legitimate , but I hope kneeling to Bread , and Crossing , and Surplice ( commanded in our Canons and Service-book ) are at the best commanded by a positive law , and not commanded in the law of nature , and so very unlike to naturall duties that wife and children owe to father and husband . 3. I retort this Argument . We may not wrong men in that which is their due . Ergo , We may not wrong God in his due , but it is his due ; ( Murther not him for whom Christ died practise not Ceremonies before the weake who shall be scandalized thereat . ) Duplyers 5. arg . n. 40. What if the thing be commanded by the Civill Magistrate under paine of death , and by Ecclesiasticall authoritie under paine of Excommunication , shall we for feare of scandall causlesly taken , which may be removed by information , or for the scandall of the malitious , abstaine from a thing lawfull and expedient injoyned by authoritie , and incurre these grievous punishments of death ▪ temporall and spirituall ? We believe your selves , who speake most of scandall , would be loath to take such a yoake upon you . Answer . The first part of this Argument is Logick from a sore ▪ skinne ▪ That which we are bidden doe under paine of death , that we must doe , the just logick of the King of Babylon , to prove it is lawfull to worship the Kings golden Image , Dan. 3. 15. I have scarce heard Papists for shame presse to conclude the equity and lawfulnesse of a Law , from the penaltie of a law , Suffering ( as your Jesuits and Arminians teach you ) falleth not under Free-will , and is not culpably evill , nor is Excommunication except you be Papists , death of the soule , when the cause of Excommunication is not just , and deserveth no censure , but it may be some of you think ( Mr. Sibbald I know doth it ) that Navarrus , and their Gregorie said true , that unjust Excommunication is valid , and to be feared : but if this argument ( as I see not head nor feet in it ) be founded upon the lawfulnesse and expediencie of Ceremonies commanded , then not to practise them at all . So first they be lawfull . 2 Expedient ▪ 3 Commanded by lawfull authority , is sinne , and all sinne is a death of the soule , and then you may put your Argument from grievous punishments of body and soule in your pocket , for it is of no use here ▪ for whether punishment Civill or Ecclesiastick follow upon disobedience to Superiours , it is sinne . 3. That none of us would die or be Excommunicated for eschewing Scandall , is no good argument , though many have suffered as hard as death , banishment , and proscription of all , and Excommunication also . But the truth is , you might have said ; Shall we incurre for scandall the losse of our st●pends , and ( one faire before the wind , qualification ) for a Bishoprick ? Duplyers 6. arg . pag. 64. n. 41. Sixtly , The denying of obedien●e to the lawfull commandements of our Superiours is forbidden in the ●i●● commandement , and consequently it is sinne ▪ shall we then for a scandall causlesly taken , deny obedience to our Superiours , and so incurre the guiltiness of sinne ? Ye commonly answer to this , that the negative part of the fift Commandement , w●●ch forbiddeth the resisting of the power , Rom. 13 ▪ 2. is to be understood with the exception of the case of any scandall taken by others . For ●● we say ( say ●● ) that any may , or will take offence , at the ●●ing of that which is commanded by our Superiours , we are not holden to oby them 42. But first , we a●ke , what ●arr and ye have ●o say , that the negative part of the fift Commandement ●● to be understood w●●● the exception of the case of Scandall ▪ more then other negative precepts in the second Table ? Answer ● . To fill the field , an Argument already answered , is brought again to make the figure of fi● up ▪ The refusall of the Ceremonies till they be tryed in lawfull Assembly , is not forbidden in the fift Commandement , prove that ▪ and take it with you . 2. You bring an Answer as commonly given ●● us , that is neither ours , commonly , nor rarely ▪ but it is good , build a straw●astle , and you may soone cost a fire-ball at it , and blow it up ▪ We never taught that the negative part of the fif● Commandement is to be understood with the exception of the case of any scandall taken by others . For this includeth all scandalls , both passive and active . Who of ours ever dreamed such a thing , if Superiours command , what God commandeth before them , doe we teach that , because others take scandall at that Command , therefore we are not holden to obey ? that is scandall taken , not given . We teach no such thing ▪ Rulers command to honour father and mother , if any take offence at this commandement and obedience to either the affirmative or negative part of it , we are not to esteeme that scandall the weight of a feather , the Commandement obliedgeth . But this we teach , if when the matter of the Commandement of Rulers is indifferent , as you plead Ceremonies to be , if from obeying of these any weake or wicked be scandalized , then the Rulers doe command spirituall murther , and then their commandement is no commandement , no● is it the fift Commandement . It is just like this , You shall not refuse obedience to your Rulers , commanding you to rubbe your beards when you come to the Church , or to draw a crosse line with your thumbe in the aire above a baptized infants forehead , though many soules , by obedience to these Commandements ▪ be induced to love Poperie ; many be made sad thinking zealous Rulers , love popish toyes better then the simplicitie of the Gospell . Now such is the Commandements of Pearth-articles , and these suffer no exceptions , for we judge them no Commandements at all , and if any such be injoyned upon pretence of any other of the nine Commandements , we hold them to be impious commandements , and no obedience to be given to them at all . So if according to the sixt Commandement , and the seven and eight , Rulers command to run Carts amongst a multitude of young Children , whence killing of some might fall out ; If they should command a young man , and a faire virgine to chamber together , and command Paul in the case he was at Corinth to take stipend , though it should hinder the progresse of the Gospell , as 1 Cor. 9. 23. all these were to command culpable scandalls , and were unlawfull , as the Canons of Pearth faction . 3. You say , the negative part of the fift Commandement forbidding the resisting of the power , Rom. 13. 2. by us , is to be understood , with exception of the case of scandall taken , whereby you insinuate , that not to obey the acts of Pearth Assembly , is a resisting of the power of Rulers , Rom. 13. 2. It is ignorantly spoken , to resist every law of the Rulers , is not to resist his power , when the lawes are such as commandeth scandall : yea , by your own doctrine it is lawfull to flie when a Ruler unjusty , commandeth & persueth his subjects ▪ pag. 3. n. 19. And to ●●ie I am sure , is to refuse subjection to the Lawes of the Ruler , from whose tribunall we ●li● , ye● , and to flie so , is to resist his lawes , but I hope it is not to resist the power , for to resist the power , bringeth damnation , and guiltinesss before God , Rom. 13. 2. But to flie from his legall Citations , is to resist his lawes , but doth not , I hope , bring damnation before God , and sinne upon the conscience , as you grant . Duplyers n. 43. Men are ready to stumble , and to be scandalized at our refusing obedience to the lawfull Commandements of our Superiours : for they will take occasion by our cariage , to doe that , unto which by nature they be most inclined , to wit , to vilipend Lawes and Authoritie . Answer . If any stumble at our non-obedience to Pearth Articles , and thence be induced to vilipend Lawes and Authoritie , it is a scandall meerely taken , no wayes given , as is cleare , because they stumble at our obedience to God , in that we refuse to kill one for whom Christ died . 2. It is no wayes true , that men are naturally inclined to vilipend Laws in a matter indifferent , ( as you hold Ceremonies to be ) from whence ariseth Scandall , yea , we are by nature much bent to extoll and love-lawes commanding soul-murther , and all lawes inductive to Poperie , which is but a masse of carnall propositions of heterodox Divinitie , every way sutable to our flesh . The third exception is answered already , the fourth is to be discussed in the following Chapter . Quest . IIII. Whether the Precept of obedience to Superiours , or the precept of eschewing scandall be more obligatorie ? Dupliers pag. 65. n. 43. LAst of all , when a man is perempt●rily urged by his Superiours , to obey their lawfull Commandements , and in the meane time feareth ▪ that if he doe the thing commanded by them ▪ some , through weaknesse , shall be scandalized ▪ by his carriage ; in this case he is not onely in difficultie and strait , betwixt the Commandement of men , and the Commandement of God , who forbiddeth us to doe that whereby our weake brother may be offended . But also he seemeth to be in a strait betwixt two Commandements of God , to wit , the precept that forbiddeth us to doe that , whereby our weake brother may be scandalized and the other , which forbiddeth , the resisting of Authoritie . Answer . 1. The question of purpose is perversly set do ●ne , for they should say , whether the precept of obedience to Superiours , in a straw lifting , in things indifferent , and meerely positive , and not necessarie to salvation , be more obligatorie , then the precept of God , in the law of nature , in a matter necessarie to salvation , as a Commandement of God forbidding soul-murther , and scandalizing him for whom Christ died ? Or thus ; Whether am I obliedged rather to obey God , forbidding me to murther my brother , or to obey man , commanding me to kneele towards Bread and Wine , and to crosse the aire with my thumbe upon the face of a baptized infant . 2. The question seemeth to make a collision of Commandements , as if God could command things contradictorie , and certainly , if the not obeying of Pearth Articles be a scandall given , as you say , it is ▪ I shall undertake to prove , that the practice of these Ceremonies is a Scandall given , and so it is not a seeming strait as you say , but a reall strait by your doctrine . There be cases wherein , whether Rulers command things , or command the contrary , a passive scandall doth arise , but because a passive Scandall , is the sinne of the scandall taker , and not of Rulers giving , the Church is not to regard it , as Matth ▪ 11. 18 ▪ 19. The Jewes are scandalized , at Christs eating and drinking , and are scandalized at John the Baptists not eating and drinking . But neither Christ , nor John doe culpably give scandall . But there can be no such exigence of providence wherein non-practising of your commanded Ceremonies , is a given scandall , and the practising of them is also a given scandall . Because ( as a Bannes , and our owne b Am●sius saith ▪ There is not such a perplexiti● . 1. God should have brought a man then in some cases under an absolute necessitie , by way of contradiction to sinne , and murther his brother , whether he doe such a thing or not doe it . 2. Twentie Jewes are scandalized , Rom. 14. Because Paul eateth such and such meats , which they conceive are forbidden by Gods law . And twentie Christians are scandalized , because Paul eateth not such and such meats , then we suppose , and it s very casuall , for seeing , to be scandalized ariseth from the knowledge or ignorance of the minde , and divers men may have contrary opinions about one thing . Some thinke it unlawfull for Paul to eat , some thinke it unlawfull not to eat . Hence upon the use of a thing indifferent , twentie are scandalized , and upon the non-using of that same indifferent thing , twentie are also scandalized . What shall Paul doe in this strait . I answer , he taketh Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. the negative . I will not eat flesh , if meat offend my brother . Then the twentie that are scandalized by the non-practice of the thing indifferent , doe take scandall onely , whereas Paul giveth no scandall actively . Also , the othet twentie who are scandalized by Paul his practice of the thing indifferent , are justly scandalized , & it is both a scandall taken , and active , and a scandall given and passive . Some object , but if either of the sides be indifferent , to wit , either to use a thing indifferent , or not to use it . If ten take offence at the use of it , and ten take offence at the non-use of it , there is a necessitie of scandalizing either of the sides , for the twentie weake Christians are scandalized at Pauls abstinence from such meats , conceiving that he Judaizeth , whereas the Profession of his Christian libertie in eating would edifie them , and not scandalize them . Answer . The use of a thing indifferent is not Gods lawfull mean of edification , God hath appointed his Word , Workes , the holy and blamelesse profession of his children to edifie , and not the using of actions indifferent , yea , actions indifferent as they are such , and separated from necessitie , and morall reason , are not lawfull , and so the cessation from that action is lawfull and necessarie , and if the use scandalize , non-using of things indifferent , is not indifferent , but necessarie , as non-scandalizing , and negative precepts alwayes binding , abstinence , with Paul is necessarie . It is vaine that Paybodie saith , that Peter was Gal. 2. in danger of a double scandall , for ( saith he ) he was in danger to scandalize the Gentiles , in refusing their companie , as if they had been no brethren , which was the greater scandall , and in danger to scandalize the Jewes in eating with the Gentiles , which was a lesse sinne , and lesse scandall . But I answer , Paul did not then justly rebuke his Judaizing , Galat. 2. which doth gratifie Barronius , Bellarmine , and Papists , who will have Peter , an Apostle who could not erre . 2. It should follow that Paul rebuked Peter , because that of two evills of sinne , he choosed to commit the lesser sinne . Whereas of two evills of sinne , neither is to be chosen . One might then lawfully commit fornication to be free of adulterie . and so fornication should be lawfull , which is absurd . And Paul should call Gal. 2. 14. it upright walking according to the truth of the Gospell to choose a lesse sin . 3. Peter by eating with the Gentiles , should not have scandalized the Jewes , but edified them , in showing the Christian libertie they had in Christ , as is cleare , v. 5. To whom we gave no subjection , no not for an houre ( by practising Jewish Ceremonies ) that the truth of the Gospell might continue with you . Duplyers pag. 66. It is certaine we are freed from one of these precepts , for Gods precepts are not repugnan● one to another . Ye commonly say , the precept of obedience to humane authoritie , must give place to the precept of eschewing Scandall , though it be causlesly taken , because the command of a Superiour cannot make that fact to be free of scandall , which otherwise would be scandalous . But it is certaine , that ( laying aside the case of scandall ) to denie obedience to the ordinance of our Superiours , injoyning and peremptorily requiring of us ▪ things lawfull and expedient , is really the sinne of disobedience . Ye will say , that the scandall of weake brethren , may make that fact or omission ▪ not to be disobedience , which otherwise would be disobedience ; because we ought not for the Commandement of man. doe that whereby our weake brother may be offended : and so the precept of obedience bindeth not , when offence of a weake brother may be feared . On the contrary we say ▪ that the lawfull commandement of Superiours , may make that scandall of our weake brethren , not to be imputed unto us , which otherwise would bee imputed unto us , as a matter of our guiltinesse . No scandall ●f weake brethren causlesly taken , can make that fact , not to be the sinne of disobedience , which otherwayes , that i● extra casum scandali , if it were not in the case of scandall , would bee the sinne of disobedience . Answer . 1. This is right downe worke . But 1. I Answer , Both the precepts are not obligatorie , you say true . We commonly say ( saith the Doctors ) that the precept of obedience to humane authoritie , must give place to the precept of eschewing scandall , although it be causlesly taken . We say not that Commonly , nor at all , if by Scandall causlesly taken , you mean scandall passive , onely taken , and not given , for we are not to regard such scandalls . But here the scandall is given in that , we must practise base Ceremonies , indifferent knots of straws for mens pleasure , though from thence many soules for whom Christ died , be destroyed . 2. It is good reason that the precept of obedience to humane authoritie in things which you call indifferent , and might well be sent away to Rome ( were it not the Lord Prelates pleasure to command them , for their owne carnall ▪ ends ) should yeild and be gone , and lose all obligatorie power , because it is but a positive precept , and 2. affirmative , that obliedgeth not ad semper , as Cross● , kneele , weare Surplice . And 3. In a thing indifferent , and that this Divine Commandement of God , ( scandalize not ) ( kill not one redeemed by Christ ) should stand in force . 1. Because it is a naturall precept . 2. It is negative , and obliedgeth eternally . 3. It is of a necessarie matter , because no man-slayer hath life eternall , 1 Jh. 3. 15. But our Doctors will have the Commandements positive of men to stand , and the Commandements of God , which are expresly of the law of nature to fall before their Dagon , and to lose all obligatorie power , whereas Gods owne positive law yeildeth , and loseth obligatorie power , when Gods naturall Commandement of mercy commeth in competition with it , as is cleare as the noon-day , in David famishing , who eat the Shew-bread , which by a positive law , was not lawfull to any save the Priests onely , to eat , yet must mans law stand , and Gods law of nature fall , at the pleasure of these Doctors . 3. Wee say justly , you erre in saying it is reall disobedience to deny obedience to the ordinance of Superiours , when the matter of their law is indifferent , and when it is scandalous , and obedience cannot be given to it , but by s●aying him for whom Christ died , yea , to give obedience to Superiours in that case , is reall murthering of soules , and reall disobedience to God. Yea , and if there be murthering of a weake brother in the fact , it cannot come under the compasse of the matter of an humane law , and the Scandall maketh it no obedience to men , but disobedience to God. 4. You retort bravely , but Popishly , the argument back upon us ; But we bring our argument from the law of Nature ( Thou shalt not murther , nor scandalize ) and we bring it not so much against the obedience to the Commandement of Superiours , as against the law and Commandement of Superiours , and this Argument is against the Ceremonies , as if they had not been commanded , and as they were before the Assembly of Pearth , and therefore the consideration of a lawfull Commandement to take away the scandall , is not to any purpose . And so 5. I may invite Papists , Jesuites , and all the Patrons of the Pope , to thanke you , and kisse your pen , for these words we say that the lawfull Commandement of Superiours ( of Prelates commanding things indifferent ) may make that scandall of our weake brethren not to be imputed unto us , which otherwise would be imputed unto us , as a matter of our guiltiness . What ever ( my brethren ) may be imputed to you otherwise , & before the law of Pearth Assemblie was made , as the matter of your guiltiness , was your sinne , for nothing can be imputed to Men or Angels , as guiltiness , but fin . But if the Commandements of Prelates may make that not to be imputed to you , which otherwise and before , or without that law of Superiours , would have been imputed as the matter of your guiltinesse , then the law of Superiours and Prelates may make that , which without that law , would have been sinne , to be no sinne at all . I know no more said by c Bellarmine of the Universall Prelate of the world , but that he can make sin to be no sinne , and no sinne to be sinne . And d that the Pope cannot command vertue as vice , and vice as vertue , for if he should doe so , the Church should be obliged to believe vertue to be vice , and vice to be vertue . But much good doe it you , Masters of Arts. Yet Bellarmine in his recognitions , saith not so much of his great Pope-Prelate , as you say of your little Prelates , for e he will not give the foresaid power to the Pope , but in doubtsome acts , and in acts of positive lawes about fasting , you give to Prelates more , to wit , that their commanding will , may make sinnes forbidden in the law of nature , to be not imputed , as the matter of our guiltinesse , and to be no sinnes ; We cannot want dispensations and indulgences at home , ere it be long , if happily we pay well for them . Yet f Bernard will not have the Popes commandement to make that which is simply evill to be lawfull . g The Popes pleasure make not things good ( saith Tolet ) yea , a subject ( saith h Alphonsus d●●●astro ) may without sinne contemne the law of his Superiour , judging it to be evill , and contrary to reason . But I reason thus ; It is the incommunicable power of the Supreame Law ▪ giver to make the killing of Isaac , which otherwayes would have been imputed to Abraham as a matter of guiltinesse , and crueltie , to be no sinne . Ergo , Prelates have not power to make an act of soul ▪ murther , to be no sinne , to scandalize a weake brother is to destroy him , for whom Christ died , Rom. 14. v. 15. 1 Cor. 8. v. 11. yea , and by the same law Rulers may make an act of Adulterie , an act of Chastitie , an act of lying , an act of truth speaking . 2. If Rulers , even the Apostle Paul , be tyed by the law of Nature , to Charitie to their brethren , as Rom. 14. 15. Not to stay him for whom Christ died , not to se●ke their owne things , but the good of their brethren , 1 Cor. 10. 24. Not to eat things sacrificed to idols , before the weake , v. 29. To doe all for the glory of God , v. 32. Then is it sinne in the Ruler himselfe to scandalize the weake . Ergo , Rulers cannot command to others that as obedience , which they cannot doe themselves without prodigious disobedience to God. What Paul forbiddeth in Canonical Scripture as murther , that he cannot command in Church Canons as obedience Canonicall to Superiours . 3. Prelates shall have immediate Dominion over our consciences to bind us to obedience by doing acts that otherwise should be imputed to ●s as the matter of our guiltinesse ; and because the same power that bindeth the conscience , may also loose , so they may dispense with all the ten Commandements , and coyne to us a new Decalogue , and a new Gospell . They may legitimate murthers , paricides , and illegitimate Godlinesse ▪ and right●●●snesse and sobri●ti● , by this Divinitie . 4. That must be false ( It is better to obey God nor man , Act. 5. ) but to abstaine from scandalizing a weake brother , is an act of obedience to the sixt Commandement . Ergo , the contrary cannot be done at the command of Prelates . 6. Gods positive lawes yeildeth ( Thou shalt not kill ) to wit to the law of nature . David may eat shew bread , when he is famishing . Ergo , the Prelates law farre more must yeild to the sixt Commandement ( thou shalt not scandaliz● , nor kill the soule of him for whom Christ died . ) 7. Rulers must all be infallible law-makers . 8. Rulers might command bodilie murther , and it should not be murther , they may command to digge pitts in the way of Travellers , To marry with Infidel● , to send abroad a goaring Ox , to give knives to little children . They object . A Master a father , may command a servant and a son to do that , which if the servant or son refuse to do , their disobedience scandalizeth . And again , a Master , a Father , may command the contrary , and if they disobey , they scandaliz● culpably . Erg. The commanding will of a Master and a Father , and farre more of publick Rulers , may make that to be active scandall , which is no active scandall . A Carpenter may command his servant to remove a tree from the East end of his house , to the West end , and againe , he may for his sole will , to try his servants obedience , command him to remove it againe to the East end of his house . Answer . 1. The Master , Father , Carpenter , command either these things as artificiall agents , from reason of art , and then the question is not touched , for in scandalls men are considered , as morall agents , or they command them as morall agents , and that either for their sole will and pleasure , and so they be idle and unreasonable actions , and cannot be lawfull commandements , and so are they scandalous both to Commanders and obeyers , but they may well command upon just reasons , that which if servants and sonnes obey not , they give Scandall , and they may command the contrary of that same , at another time , when now contrary reasons maketh it lawfull and expedient , and if servants and sonnes obey not the contrary , they also give Scandall , but here the change is not from the will and authoritie of the Commanders , but from the things themselves , which are changed , so that which is an active scandall at some time , the contrary of it may be an active scandall at another time , as in the ease , Rom. 14. To eat meats before the weake , which they conceive to be forbidden , by Gods law , is to slay him for whom Christ died , and an active scandall , because then the Ceremonies were mortall and indifferent , nothing essentially constituteth an active and a given scandall , but these two ; 1. That it may be left undone , as the author of the course of conformitie , a saith well out of Hieronimus , Without hurting of the truth of a sound life , and a sound faith and righteousnesse . 2. If upon the practice of a thing indifferent , and not necessarie , any of the foresaid three wayes , we see some shall be scandalized , though they take scandall upon an unjust ground , it is an active scandall , as to eat such meats before the weake , Rom. 14. is in another time and case , as Galat. 2. when the Ceremonies are now deadly , and upon just reasons not necessarie , the practising ( I say ) of the same , is an active scandall and so if any be scandalized at the eating , Rom. 14. it is scandall both taken , and also culpably given , and if any be scandalized at the not eating , as the case is , Galat. 2. That is only a passive scandall , and so not given , because the times of the expyring of the dutie of Ceremonies , and the full promulgation of the Gospell , varieth the case now , and the sole will of Rulers maketh not the change ; So if any offer Incence to the Brazen Serpent , so long as it hath vertue , as Gods ordinance to cure the stinged persons , he is scandalized by a passive scandall onely , for Gods institution maketh it now the necessary ordinance of God , And the Magistrates suffering of the Brazen Serpent to remaine now , is no active scandall , and the passive scandall is onely taken away , by information , and the sound exponing of the right use of a necessary ordinance of God. But after that the Brazen Serpent loseth its vertue , and is not now an ordinance of God necessarie , if any burne Incense to it , these who are by authoritie obliedged to remove it , and doth not remove it , they doe morally and culpably scandalize . Hence we see it is foolish and vaine , that some say , such as c Hooker . d D. Forbes . e D. Sanderson , and f Lyndesay , pretended Bishop of Edinburge , and Mr. Paybodie . That as Rome and Corinth the Church had not past her determination upon eating , and not eating , nor made any Church lawes upon these things indifferent , and therefore to eat , or not to eat , were matters of every private mans choise ; But it is not the like case with our Ceremonies , for they remaine no longer indifferent , but are necessarie to us , after that the Church hath now made a commanding law upon them , and so the scandall that ariseth from our dutie of obedience , to lawfull authoritie , is taken , and not given . I answer , it is most false , that eating and not eating , in case of scandall was under no law in the Church of Rome and Co ▪ rinth . For these most indifferent acts in their use , and cloathed with their Circumstances , when , where , and before what persons , were under the unalterable law of nature , as ( destroy not him , with thy meat for whom Christ died ) a law which as the g course of conformitie saith well , cannot be dispenced with by no power but Gods. And Paul proveth by stronger arguments , to eat in the case of Scandall , was not indifferent , but simply evill , Then all the Prelates Canons on earth can afford , as Rom. 14. by eight Arguments , as we have seen , that it fighteth against Charitie , v. 15. Now walkest thou not charitably . 2. It is a destroying of him for whom Christ died , and so murther . 3. Contrary to Christs love , who died for that weake brother . 4. It maketh Religion and Christian Libertie to be evill spoken of . v. 6. &c. It is a sham then to say , that eating , or not eating , was indifferent , because free from any ty of a Church Canon , seeing eating before a weake brother is under the ty of unanswerable Arguments taken from the law of nature , and Gods Canons written in the heart , forbidding under the pain of Goa's anathema , and curse , ( heavier then the Church anathema , ) that we should , for meat , destroy him for whom Christ died , and so are the Canon-makers , and Lords of Ceremonies under a curse , if they for crossing , kneeling , surplice , destroy him for whom Christ died , or command him to be destroyed , by the practice of Ceremonies . 3. If this be a good reason the Church of Rome , and Corinth might have made such Ceremonies as these . Notwithstanding the eating of meates , which some suppose to be forbidden by Gods law , be a killing of him for whom Christ died , and against Charity ▪ and a reproaching of our Christian liber●ie , yet it seemed good to the holy Ghost , and to us , the Prelates of Rome and Corinth , to command eating of such meats , before weake ones , for whom Christ died . But certainly Paul would never have command●d , in a Canon , that which he writeth in Canonicall Scripture , to be a murthering of him for whom Christ died , and that which he would not practise himself , to the worlds end , so long as it standeth in the case of indifferencie , as he saith of eating of fleshes , conceived by some weake ones to be against Gods law , 1 Cor. 8. v. last , The Pope himselfe would , nor dare in conscience , to practise any of his owne Canons , even though they were yet not Canonically commanded or forbidden . Paul would not dare to put a law upon the Romans or Corinthians , to eat , or not to eat meats , before the weake , but commandeth not eating in the case of scandall . 4. Idolatrie is ever idolatrie , ( saith a the course of conformitie ) and so scandall being sinne it cannot cease to be sinne , because superiours commandeth it . 5. Though Apostolick authoritie being meerly divine , should command that which is in it self murther , and was ●urther , before it be Canonically commanded , ( which I think also is a false hypothesis ) yet it shall never follow that humane authoritie , or Ecclesiastick authoritie can command scandall , which is spirituall murther ; For if Ecclesiastick authoritie may command murther , they may command idolatrie , for active scandalizing is as essentially murthering of one for whom ▪ Christ died , as to worship an idoll , is essentially idolatrie . Therefore Master Sydserfe pretended Bishop of Gall●way being straited with this argument , sayd , Though humane authoritie cannot invert the nature of things , or make spirituall murther , to be no murther , yet they can by a Church Canon put the mindes of people in such a change , as now they are not in the hazard to be justly scandalized ▪ for a scandall ( sayd the Prelate ) ▪ is ens rationis , no reall thing but a fiction of reason , the nature of it being in the apprehension of the ignorant and blind , who are scandalized , and a law may remove this ignorance , when it giveth light , and sheweth the expediencie of things indifferent . To which I answered , you may , call idolatrie , if you please , and all sinnes , fictions of reason , but not only doth scandall given proceed from ignorance and blindnesse of the apprehension of the partie scandalized , but also from the unseasonable practising of a thing , which is no wayes necessarie in the worship of God. The course of b confirmitie saith well , He that denieth that there is any scandall , is like one who could not see the wood , for the trees — the walking of Diogenes is meetest for a Zeno , who against all reason denyeth that there is any motion . We may hence judge what to say of c D. Forbes his Answer to the place , 1 Cor. 9. Who saith that Paul was under no Ecclesiasticall law , not to take wages , and therefore in not taking wages , he was not a contemner of Ecclesiasticall authoritie , but we are under a Church law to practise the Ceremonies , and yet we refuse them . I answer ; If then the Church of Corinth had commanded Paul in their Canons to take stipend , for preaching , he was obliedged to take stipend , yet he proveth that it was not lawfull for him , as the case of scandall then stood , to take wages , v. 18. he should abuse his power in the Gospell , and v. 19. 20 , 21. he should not have becommed all things to all men to save some , and these things had been sinfully scandalous , if ( as the case was then ) Paul for a penny of wages , which he might have wanted , having no familie to provide for , should have layd a stumling block before many . And the Doctor d ●aith No humane power can compell a man , to doe that , which he cannot doe , except inevitably he give scandall . The Doctor addeth ; The Apostle teacheth not that to take stipend was unlawfull , or of it selfe scandalous , yea he taught it was lawfull , and that they should not be scandalized thereat , because Christ hath ordained , that he who serveth at the altar , should live upon the Altar , but you teach that the Ceremonies are unlawfull . I Answer 1. In this argument of Scandall , we give , but doe not grant , that they are not unlawfull , but indifferent . 2. Though to take wages be lawfull , yet it followeth not , that it is not in Pauls ca●e at Corinth of it selfe scandalous ; for to eat all meates is lawfull , Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 10. 23. All things are lawfull , v. 26. The earth is the Lords , yet to eat before the weake , was in it selfe scandalous , Rom. 14. 15. 16. 17. 1 Cor. 10. 28. 29. 3. It is a most weake reason to prove that to take wages was not scandalous , because for●ooth the Corinthians should not have been scandalized : for to be scandalized is to sinne , and there is no reason in sinning , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . If this be good , adulterie and murther in David , is not of it selfe scandalous , for as no man hath reason to sinne , so no man hath reason to be scandalized , at Davids sinne . Pauls taking wages at Corinth should have been a sinfull hindering of the Gospels progresse , and therefore of it self sinfull ; and so of it selfe scandalous . But I return to the Doctors . Duplyers pag 67. 68. n. 46 47. As for that which yee say , that when Scandall may be taken at the doing of the thing commanded , then the thing commanded becommeth inexpedient , and so ought not to be obeyed ; that yee be not more deceived with this errour , we pray you marke , that a thing commanded , by our Superiours , in Church or Policie , m●y be two wayes inexpedient , to wit , either in respect of some particular Persons , who th●ough weaknesse , or mali●e , doe stumble at it , or else in respect of the body in generall , because it is contrary to Order , Decencie and Edification . If the thing commanded be inexpedient , the former way , we may indeed , in such a case , for eschewing the Scandall of the weake , forbeare the practice of the thing commanded , Hic , & nunc , in some particular places , and times : provyding alwayes we doe this without offence of our Superiours , and without the scandall of others , but we cannot totally forbeare practice , for we are to looke more to the utilitie , which the body of the Church may receive , by the thing commanded , and by our obedience to our Superiours , then to some particular persons . 47. But if the thing commanded be in our private judgement inexpedient , the other way , we ought not for that , to deny Obedience to the lawes of the Church ; for when the inexpediencie of a thing is questionable , and probable arguments may be brought , pro and contra , concerning the expediencie of it , wee have sufficient warrant to practise it , if the Church inact it as expedient . Otherwayes your way is so dangerous , that there shall never be peace , nor unitie in the Church , for men ordinarily are divided in judgement , concerneing the expediencie of things . Suppose a Synode consisting of one hundred Pastours , threescore shall think this particular Ceremonie expedient , for the good of the Church , and in respect of pluralitie of voyces ▪ make an act to be concluded for the establishing of it , shall the remnant fourty , who are of the contrary judgement , deny obedience to the acts of the Synode ? Answer . 1. This distinction of inexpedient in the matter of indifferent Ceremonies is Popish and vaine , for if the Ceremonie be indifferent , and may be wanted in the worship of God ( as these Ceremonies be ) if one soule , for whom Christ died , shall be murthered thereby , it is hoc ipso , to be judged inexpedient and scandalous in it selfe , and so cannot fall under the object of a Church Canon , as 1 Cor. 8. 13. If meat make my brother to stumb'le ( he saith not the whole Church ) I will not eat . Ergo , he cannot command others to eat . 1 Cor. 10. 28. But if any man , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , say to you , this is offered in sacrifice to Idols , eat not , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for his sake that shewed it . Ergo , if it seem expedient , and so be scandalous to one , let alone to a whole Church , we are totally to forbeare it , and Paul would , while the world standeth , 1 Cor. 8. 13. forbeare it . 2. You will not have us to forbeare a thing indifferent , that actively ( for the passive scandall , I hope , you regard not as a scandall ) doth scandalize , but with a provision that we doe it without offence of Superiours , and without the scandall of others . But I aske , Doctors , what you meane by Offence of Superiours , if you meane without displeasing and inciting our Superiours to anger . 1. You ignorantly confound displeasing and Scandalizing , When a Pastor rebuketh Superiours , as Jeremiah , Elias , and John Baptist , in the good old world did , they did displease Superiours , but not scandalize them ; yea , they did edifie their Superiours , while as they did offend them . It is wicked Divinitie , to mean , that we are not to eschew the murthering of a weake brother for whom Christ died providing we offend not , that is , displease not our Superiours . Will you to please men displease the God of heaven , and commit spiritual homicide ? This is worse then Poperie . But if you meane , that wee are to forbeare the thing commanded for eschewing the scandall of the weake , providing we doe it without the offence of Superiours , that is without the active scandalizing of Superiours , then 1. your distinction is vaine , for if we scandalize culpably our superiours by our forbearance , though it be inexpedient to all private persons , we are not to forbeare , because in no case can we breake the sixt Commandement , and scandalize our Superiours . 2. You shall be forced to give● case , wherein we are necessitated by Gods providence , and that by way of contradiction , whether we forbeare , or forbeare not , to murther either the soules of some weake ones , or the soules of Superiours , by our forbearance of the practice of things judged expedient by Superiours , you make us to murther the soules of Superiours by the non-forbearance , or you will have us to murther the soules of weake breathren , if we practise . This is a wronging of Providence , and a Ma●ichean tenent , that we can be under such a necessitie of sinning . Yea , there must be two centra●y revealed wills in God , commanding , by forbearing the Ceremonies , not to murther Superiours , and commanding by not forbearing , not to murther weak brethren ; and so God commandeth both to forbeare , and also not to forbeare . If you say , the weake may be informed , and then it is a passive scandall onely , and practising is lawfull at the commandement of Superiours . I answer , 1. Then your distinction hath no use here . 2. I answer . Let the Superiours , who have more knowledge , be informed , that to abstaine from a practice , that may murther any one redeemed by Christ , is Christs commandement ( Thou shalt doe no murther ) then it is but a passive scandall , and not an active , or culpably given scandall . Ergo , we are to forbeare the thing commanded for eschewing of the scandall ▪ ( hic & nunc ) of the weake , even though with the offence , that is the passive scandall of Superiours and others , which is contradictorie to the Doctours . 3. If we may forbeare obedience to Gods positive Commandements , hic & nunc , for esehewing of Scandall , farre more may we , hic & nunc , not crosse , not kneele , hic & nunc , when crossing and kneeling murthereth one for whom Christ died , even though it offend our Superiours . Ergo , this provision of the Doctors is vaine ; and Superiours are unjustly offended , if our non-murthering of weake brethren offend them , nor are we to care for the Doctors provision here . 4. No utilitie can truly redound to the whole Church by practising of an indifferent thing which culpably occasioneth the murthering of a weake brother , Except our Doctors meane , that sinne may edifie the whole Church . 5. They say , if the things in our private judgement be inexpedient the second way , that is to the Church , the Church cannot Command them , except the Church command against her conscience . 6. If matters in their expediencie be questionable and probable on both sides , the Churches determination should end the controversie ( saith the Doctors ) this is the Doctrine of the Jesuites , a Suarez . b Thomas Sanches , and c Gregor de valent . as I shew before d when a thing is probable , and I be resolved in conscience against neither of the sides , and feare the one side be murthering him , for whom Christ died , which is against Gods commandement , and know that humane authoritie commandeth the contrary and am perswaded it is indifferent , and a positive commandement of men , if the Churches determination be here to sway my conscience ; to practise , is to me blind obedience , for humane authoritie as it is such , giveth no light . Ergo , it cannot remove my doubting , and beget faith ; and also the conscience is so much the bolder to venture on a sinne , against God , for feare of eschewing a sinne against men , which is questionable , and in a matter indifferent , this is also the stout conscience of Bonaventura 2 sent . dist . 39. plus est standum praecepto Praelati quam conscientiae . 7. Our Doctors say , our way is against the peace of the Church : But I answer , their way is Popish , and against the truth of God , in commanding our consciences to rest upon the wicked will of men . And their instance of a Synod of a hundred Pastors may be brought aswell to prove the Synode of Trent is to be obeyed , as for the present purpose , Duplyers , pag. 69. Yee will say this argument is Popish , and leadeth men to acquiesce . without tryall , upon the determination of the Church . But we answer in matters of faith the truth , whereof may be infallibly concluded out of the word of God ▪ we ought not , without tryall to acquiesce unto the Doctors of the Church , and in this respect we dissent from Papists , who ascribe too much to the authoritie of Councells , as if their decrees were infallible . But in matters of Policie , if we be certaine , that in their owne nature , they are indifferent , and if the expediencie of them onely be called in question , seeing no certaine conclusion , concerning their expediencie , can be infallibly drawn out of Gods word — we are to acquiesce to the decrees of the Church . 1. Because otherwise it is impossible to agree in one conclusion , in matters of this kind . 2. Disobedience shall prove more hurtfull then obedience . Answer 1. This is a wide step , to make all things in Scripture , either matters of faith , or matters indifferent . That there were eight persons in Noahs Arke , and that Sampson s●ew a thousand with the jaw bone of an asse , are not matters of faith , as matters of faith are contradistinguished , from things indifferent , many are saved , who neither know nor believe many things of this historicall veritie in Scripture , yet are they not matters indifferent . But the Doctors are reconcilers with the Belgik Arminians , who deny all the things contraverted betwixt Papists and us , and betwixt us and Arminians , and Anabaptists , at least the most part of them to be fundamentall ▪ and that either side may be believed , and holden , without hazard of salvation , and therefore we are to leane to the Churches determination in these without farther inquirie . 2 They mean , that in matters contraverted , and in all things indifferent ; as whether in this , or that fact , we doe murther him for whom Christ died ; Wee are to give our faith and conscience over to the Church without further tryall . 3. What if wee be ▪ not perswaded of the indifferencie of the things commanded but doubt whether they bee commanded or forbidden in the Word , as is now the present case of Ceremonies to us , for we cannot be perswaded of their indifferencie , and the Doctors saith they are not matters of faith . Ergo , by their own doctrine their distinction is defective . 4. Scripture is also perfect in resolving us , what is scandall and murthering of our brother , as what is Idolatrie and Blasphemie , and therefore we are not to hang our faith here upon the Churches Canons without farther tryall , as you say . 5. That the Scripture is perfect in matters of faith , but imperfect in matters of Policie , that is in matters wherein we may kill him for whom Christ died , is no better then the Papists distinction , who teach us that the Scripture is perfect in the articles of faith , not in traditions , so Scotus a saith . True Theologie according to Divine revelation is onely of things in Scripture , or which may be deduced out of Scripture . And Suarez b saith , Things that belong to accidentarie rites are left to the Churches determination , but the Scripture implicitly containeth all articles of feare faith . And so saith c Bannes , and d Duvallius . 6. Your feare is vain , that we shall have no order nor peace , if Scripture be judge , and not the authoritie of the Church , in matters which you call indifferent , for the Church giveth out Canons concerning things strangled , & blood , which were matters indifferent , and that from the word of God , Act. 15. and that in great unitie and peace . Gods word maketh unitie , and not mens authoritie . 7. Disobedience to Church Canons in case of given Scandall , is neither disobedience , nor hurteth at all ; It possibly offendeth men who will tyrannize over the Conscience , and if any be induced thereby to sin , it is a scandall taken , not given . Abstinence from murthering a weak brother , is obedience to God , and so no active Scandall . In the 48 Section ▪ The Duplyers doe but redouble over again the arguments already brought and answered by me divers times to D ▪ Robert Barron in private , while he was silenced , and ( as I conceived ) satisfied . Especially , they say our disobedience to superiours in things lawfull and expedient , is most scandalous to others , and that because we , by nature , are most unwilling to be curbed , and to have our libertie restrained . Therefore Calvin saith , God , that he may allure us to obedience to ●●●●riours , called , superiours , Parents . I answer . 1. The Doctors are too hastie to call that obedience to Superiours which is in question , We say it is disobedience to the ●ixt Commandement , because it is a scandalizing of our brother . Ergo , it is not obedience to the fift Commandement to practise indifferent Ceremonies , when they doe scandalize . 2. Our argument is made against the practise of Ceremonies , before they be enacted in a lawfull Assemblie , if they be murthering of the weak , before Pearth-Assemblie , the will of Prelates , yea , and all the authoritie of men or Angels , cannot make the practise of them , to be no murther , for mens will cannot make that which is sinne and guiltinesse before God , to be no sinne , but due obedience to the fift Commandement , though the Doctors expresly say this . Duplyers , pag. 71. Sect. 44. But we with good warrant ●oe averre , that the precept which fobiddeth the resisting of the civill power , and in generall the denying of obedience to the lawfull commandements of our Superiors , is of greater obligation then the precept of not scandalizing . Their first reason I put in forme to them thus . That is of greater obligation which commandeth acts edificative to all , then that which commandeth acts edificative to some only , for the good of all is to be preferred to the good of some particular persons , and we are to have a greater care of the salvation of all , then of some . But the precept of obedience to Superiours is universall , and commandeth the act of edifying all to wit , obedience to Superiours , and an act to eschew the scandall of all to wit , disobedience . But the precept of eschewing the scandall of some , doth but edifie some only , and not all Ergo &c. Ans . 1. It is soon proved by your learning , for the precept of Gods law to eschew scandall , to you is no precept , and so of no obligation , when Superiours command to scandalize , so you may prove that snow is whiter then the raven , when as the raven is not white at all . I answer . 2. That precept is of greater obligation that commandeth acts edificative to all , then that which commandeth acts edificative to some . It is true , 1. if it be a lawfull command of God , but the ●ssumption applyed to your purpose is most false , the command to obey Prelates , when they command things indifferent , the obedience whereof doth culpably occasion the murthering of him , for whom Christ died , is not a commandement edificative to all , yea , it is a Commandement of acts destructive to the soules of all . This Argument would have some colour , if it were not a vaine begging of the question , for they lay downe as , confessed , that the practise of Ceremonies , from whence many soules are ruined , is obedience , and obedience to the fift Commandement . This is to be proven , and constantly denyed by us , because disobedience to the sixth Commandement , and murthering of our brother , cannot be obedience to the fift Commandement . Duplyers pag. 72. n. 50. The fift Commandement commeth neerer to the nature of pietie and religion contained in the first Table , and the honouring of parents ( as your owne A●●●sius saith ) by prophane authours , is called by the name of religion and pietie . 2. It is the ground of obedience ( sayeth Pareus ) to be given to all the rest of the precepts of the second Table . 1. Because all societies Oeconomicke , civill , and Ecclesiasticke doe consist , and are conserved by the subjection of ●nferiours to superiours . 2. Our superiours are set over us , to the end , we may doe our dutie to all others . Hence saith your owne Amesius ; Crymes which directly procure the perturbation , confusion , and eversion of societies , are more grievous then the violation of the singular precepts : and Dyonisius Bishop of Alexandria , writing to Novatus saith , Martyrdome suffered for eschewing of schisme , is more glorious , then Martyrdome for eschewing Idolatrie . Ans . You said before matters of Policie are not matters of faith . Amesius is a Protestant writer in matters of faith , by grant of all , it is like then you terme ●mesius our owne , not yours , because he wrote against Arminians and Papists , and so that Arminians and Papists are yours , and Protestant Divines ours . 2. We grant the precedencie and dignitie to the fift Commandement above the rest , but your Ceremonies that break the sixth Commandement , shall find no roome in the fift Commandement . Cause the fift Commandement speak thus , if you can ; Notwithstanding , that crossing , kneeling , surplice , humane holy dayes occasion the soule murther of him for whom Christ died , yet we the Prelates command the practise of the foresaid Ceremonies as good and expedient for edification , for our Commandement maketh the murthering of our brethren , to be obedience to the fift Commandement . But if Prelates may command that which would be otherwise , without , or before the Commandement , spirituall murthering and scandalizing of our brother , they may command also , that which would be otherwise without , or before their command , adulterie against the seventh , and theft against the eighth , and perjurie and lying against the ninth Commandement , and concupiscence against the tenth ; for the fift Commandement hath the precedencie before the seventh , eighth , ninth and tenth Commandements , no lesse then before the sixth , which forbiddeth the killing of our brothers soule . 3. What Amesius and Parens saith , doe well prove the dignitie of the fift Commandement , above all the Commandements of the second Table ; but this is not to our purpose , but every commandement of the fifth Commandement ; yea , every commandement of the first Table , is not above every commandement of the second Table . The love of God , is more then the love of our neighbour , and the love of God should , and doth , command obedience to all the ten Commandements , Deut. 30. 6. 7 , 8. & Deut. 10. 12. Yet every duty and commandement that the love of God requireth of us , as to offer sacrifice , is not for that a greater commandement then every commandement of the second Table , yea , the taking of a sheepe out of a ditch on the Lords day , commanded in the sixth Commandement , is more then sacrifices commanded in the second Commandement , as our Saviour saith , Math. 12. v. 11 , 12. and though the fift Commandement be laid upon us as the fountaine and cause , yea to this end , that we should keepe all the rest , as Divines say well . Yet it followeth not that every commandement of the fift Commandement , as when my father commandeth me to preach in a linnen Ephod , and to cast a Character with my thumbe in the aire , as crossing is , shall be of more obligation then this commandement of God ( Thou shalt not destroy his soule for whom Christ died ) 4. It is false , that denying of obedience to Pearth-Assemblie , commanding indifferent straws and feathers as ( kneele to consecrated Bread , the Image of Christ crucified ) doth directly procure the perturbation and confusion of humane societies , as the Doctors saith . There is great difference betwixt subjection to superiours , and obedience to superiours ; When private men , as the three Children will not bow to Nebuchadnezzars Image , there is no confusion brought in for that , if they had risen against the King in armes , as Papists doe in Ireland against our King , that is confusion , and subverteth directly humane scocieties , but to suffer punishment by Superiours , is subjection to superiours , as is cleare , 1 Pet. 2. 17. Honour the King. 18. Servan●s be subject to your Masters with all feare , not only to the good and gentle but also to the froward . 19. For this is thanke-worthy ( this subjection ) if a man , for conscience reward God ▪ enaure griefe , suffering wrongfully . 5. What Dionysius said of the ill of schisme is for us , for schisme is against love to our brethren , and a renting Christs body . 1 Cor. 1. 13. and a greater evill then non-obedience to Prelates , when they command indifferent Ceremonies , occasioning the r●●ne of him for whom Christ died . To say nothing that the Doctors of Aberdeen are the Schismaticks who have now separated from the Church of Scotland , and our Nationall covenant with God. Duplyers pag. 37. n. 51. Thirdly , these offices or duties , which we owe to others by way of Justice , are more strictly obligatorie , then these which we owe to them , only by way of charitie . But we owe the dutie of obedience to our Superiours , by way of justice , and therefore it is more obligatorie , then the duty of eschewing scandall causlesly taken , which is a duty only of charity . 1. The major is a maxime not only of Scholasticks ▪ and of Popish casuists , but also of our Divines . So Amesius , The major is cleare for the duty of obedience which wee owe to the publicke Lawes of the Church and Kingdome is ▪ Justitia legalis , a generall legall Justice , and as it is in subjects , it is a vertue inclining them to the obedience of all lawes made for the benefit of the Common-wealth , as Aristotle saith . 2. It is debitum obedientiae , the debt of obedience which we owe to our Superiours , grounded upon the proper right which our Superiours have to exact this right of us , so that they may accuse us of injurie , and censure us , if we performe it not . Debitum justitiae fundatur in proprio jure alterius ; and also it is debitum morale , a debt of dutie unto which we are tyed by morall honestie in Gods commandement . There is a great difference betwixt these two debts ; As for example , a man oweth moneys to the poore by a morall debt , but to his creditours he oweth them by a legall debt , or debt of justice : and therefore he is more strictly obleiged to pay his creditour then to give almes . Such like by morall honestie , and Gods precept also ; a man oweth to his neighbour , a pious carefulnesse , to imped sinne in him , by admonition , instruction , good example , and by omission even of things lawfull , when he seeth that his neighbour in respect of his weaknesse , will be scandalized by them . But his neighbour hath not such a right to exact these duties of him , neither can he have action against him , for not performing of them , as our lawfull Superiours have for our due obedience ? Ans . 1. Here be the white shifts of Mr. Sanderson , Paybodie , Downham , who place Loyaltie above Charitie . We owe to our brother love , but to the Ruler ( say they ) love and justice . 1. Why doe they not extend Loyaltie to its utmost , even loyaltie to the King of kings ? whose royall law saith ▪ ( Thou shale not scandalize ( Thou shalt not murther ) they draw in loyaltie to Rulers who shall die as men , and to their commandement of things indifferent , which God hath not commanded . 2. It is true , these duties which we owe to others by way of justice , are more obligatorie then these which we owe only by way of charitie , caeteris paribus , When duties of the law of Nature , and morall Law , are compared together , then indeed the duties which we owe , both by the tye of Justice and Charitie , are more obligatorie , then the duties that we owe only by the tye of Charitie . As for example ; My father is in danger , before my eyes , to be drowned , in one deepe water ; and before my eyes also , my neighbour and friend is in danger of the like kind ; the two tyes and bands of Justice and Charitie , both by the fifth and sixth Commandements are more obligatorie , hic & nunc , and doe more strictly obliege , that I run to succour , and preserve the life of my father , then the life of my neighbour , for the obligation to my neighbour , is only charitie , by the obligation of the sixth Commandement , which obligation ceaseth , hic & nunc , at this time , when my fathers life is in hazard ; and thus farre the Doctors argument goeth for strong , as Schoolemen , Casuists , and Divines teach . But it is not to a purpose for the Doctors ; For all offices and duties generally , and universally , of what ever kind , which we owe by way of Justice , are not more obligatorie , then duties which we owe , only by way of Charitie , as when duties of a positive commandement of God , enjoyned by our Superiours , and duties which we owe by charitie only , are compared together , then the Doctors major Proposition is not cleare of it selfe , as they dreame , nor doe Casuists or Amesius , or Divines say with them , but truth , and all our Divines say against them . Let us suppose that the King , and Convocation , and Assembly of Priests and Prophets of Israel make a Canon according to Gods Word . That no manner of man presume to eat shew-bread , save the Priests only . All men owe obedience to this , both because it is Gods expresse Law , and by the band of Justice , the Elders and Assembly of the Ancients have forbidden it . But if our Doctors argument stand strong , David at the point and hazard of famishing for hunger , sinned in eating shew-bread , yet Christ acquiteth him of all sinne , and saith Math. 12. 5. he and his followers are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , blamelesse . Now Davia was under a dutie by mercy , and love to his owne life , and he lives of his followers , to eat shew-bread , and he was under the band of Justice , by the law of the Ancients of Israel , and Gods law , not to eat . Therefore in some cases , when our Superiours commandements are only positive Lawes , they are not more obligatorie , then duties of Charitie , only commanded in the law of nature . I cleare it further thus , I see my neighbour in danger before my eyes of drowning , and my father commandeth me to goe and labour , or sowe his farme in that time , while I am to preserve the life of my neighbour in present danger , to lose his life , in a great water . By the Doctors maxime I am under the higher obligatorie tye of Justice , to obey my father , who commandeth a thing both lawfull and necessarie by vertue of the higher Commandement , to wit , the first of the second Table , then I am obliged by the sixth Commandement , and of charitie only , to give present succour and help to my dying neighbour , so I must let my neighbour die in the waters , to give a dutie of justice to my father , of farre lesse necessitie . I would not commit my conscience to such Casuists , as are the Doctors of Aberdeen . But if the Doctors would see with some new light of reason ; it is cleare , that not only the tye of Justice maketh the precept more obligatorie , but also the weightinesse of the thing commanded ; Yea , and if the positive Commandements of the Lord our God , who of Justice and kingly soveraigntie ▪ hath right to aske obedience of us above all earthly Superiours doe yeeld and cede as lesse obligatorie , then commandements of love only , that are commanded in the law of nature . What doe our Doctors clatter and fable to us of a right of Justice , that mortall Rulers have to command in things indifferent , from which the destruction of soules doth arise ? for these commandements of Rulers , ( kneele religiously before bread , the vicegerent image of Christ crucified ) ( keepe humane holy-dayes ) Crosse the aire with your thumb above a baptized infants face ) at best , are but positive Commandements , not warranted by Gods word . But shall they be more obligatorie by a supposed band of Justice that Prelates have over us to command , such toy's then this divine law of God and Nature , Rom. 14. For indifferent dayes , meats , surplice , destroy not him for whom Christ died ? All the Casuistes , and Schoolemen , Navarra , Sylvester , Sanchez , Raphael de la Torre , Meratius , Duvallius , Thomas , Scotus , Bonaventura , Suarez . Vasquez , Grego . de Valentia , Albertus , Richardus , Biel , Corduba , Angelus , Adrianus , Alphonsus , Becanus , yea , and all the hoast of our Divines cry with Scripture , that Mercie and the precepts of Love , and of the Law of nature , are more obligatorie then Sacrifice , burnt offerings , and Gods owne positive lawes , yea , and that positive lawes lose their obligatorie power , and cease to be lawes , when the lawes of nature and necessarie duties of mercie and love ( as not to murther our brother ) ( not to scandalize ) standeth in their way . I might wearie the reader here with citations , and bewilder my selfe also , but it is a point of Divinitie denyed by none at all . 3. What we owe of Justice to our Superiours , is indeed both a morall debt of obedience , and a debt of justice , and law which Rulers may seeke by their place , and ex jure , as Aristotle saith , but this right is limited , Rulers have no right to seeke absolute obedience , but only in the Lord , not against charitie . And though the place of Rulers be authoritative , yet their commanding power , as touching the matter of what they injoyne is only Ministeriall , and they cannot but in Gods place exact , that which is Gods due , and seeing God himselfe , if he should immediatly in his owne person command , he would not urge a positive commandement , farre lesse the commandement of light and vaine Ceremonies , against and beyond the precept of love , not to destroy a soule for whom Christ died . Ergo , Superiours under God , who borrow all their right from God , cannot have a higher right then God hath . 4. The comparison of a man who oweth moneys to a Creditor , and oweth moneys to the poore , is close off the way , for he is obliged to pay the Creditour first , but the case here is farre otherwise ; The debt of practising indifferent feathers and straws , such as kneeling , crossing , wearing Surplice , is neither like the debt owine to the poore , nor to the creditour ; For natures law , and Gods word , 1 Cor. 10. 18 , 19. maketh the non-practise , non-murthering obedience to God , when the practise of indifferent things , is a soule-stumbling to the weake , and the practising is but at its best obedience to a positive Law , and ought to stoope , and goe off the way , and disappeare when natures Law ( Murther not ) doth come in its way . When the Doctors put Loyaltie above Charitie , they suppose obedience to commandements commanding scandalizing of soules to be loyaltie to Superiours , which is questioned , it being treason to the Soveraigne of heaven and earth , to destroy his Image , it is taken as loyalty by our Doctors , but not proven to be loyaltie , and so a vaine question here , whether Loyaltie be above Charitie or not . But I dismisse the Doctors till another occasion . Other things as Popish tenents , in their booke are a thousand times answered by us . Quest . V. Whether or not in every indifferent thing are we to eschew the scandall of all , even of the malicious ? IT is knowne that many take offence at tolling of Bells , at a Ministers gowne while hee preacheth , at the naming of the dayes of the weeke , after the Heathen style from the seven Planets , as Sunday , the day of the Sunne ; Moonday , the day of the Moon , &c. It is true , Bells are abused by Papists , while as they be consecrated , baptized , used to chase away devils . But these be scandals taken , and not given , for we read not of scandals culpable in Gods word , but there be some apparent morall reason in them . 2. The object scandalizing hath no necessitie , why it should be . Now there is a necessitte of Bells to give warning to convocate the people to Gods worship , and they are of meere civill use , and have no morall influence in the worship , for the same tolling of bells is , and may be used to convocate the people to a Ba●oncourt , to heare a declamation , to convocate Souldiers ; there is no apparent morall reason why the tolling of a Bell should scandalize , and the toller of the Bell for warning of the bodily and personall convocation of the people , is not a morall agent properly ; the action of tolling remaineth within the sphere of an acti●n physical● ▪ in lineà Physicâ , non in lineâ morali aut religi●sâ aut Theologi●â , for so here I must contradistinguish a Physica●l action from a Religious action . 2. The tolling of bels have a necessitie of expediencie , I mean necessity in specie , in the kind , though not in in lividuo , in the particular , and no particular can be more fit and convenient : people must have some publ que signe for the dyat of meeting ▪ else the worship would be wearisome to those who met long before the time , and it would be scandalous and inconvenient , to others to meet after the publick worship is begun . If any say , tolling of Bells is not necessarie , sounding of Trumpets , beating of Drummes may be civill signes of convocating people ; touling of bells being so fouly abused by Papists to superstition , and so being not necessarie ought to be removed . But I answer , beating of Drummes wanteth the necessitie of conveniencie , as in raynie weather it could not be , nor can they give warning so conveniently : blowing of Trumpets might seeme as Jewish , Joel cap. 2. v. 15. as tolling of Bells seemeth Popish , and the degrees of necessitie of conveniencie should sway the Chu●ches determination in these cases , and this exsuperancie of necessitie of conveniencie is in all things , though we cannot see it alwayes ; 2. The instamped civill gravitie in a Gowne , maketh it necessary with the necessitie of expediencie , being in it selfe a grave habit fit for an Oratour who is to perswade . 3. The names of dayes to signifie civill times and things , out of a religious state is necessary now : and the Holy Ghost doth use for civill signification such termes , as Mars-street to signifie civill and meerely historically such a place . And the Ship whose signe is Castor & Pollux , yet these were heathen names , and most superstitious , and cannot be used in a religious state . I grant , we may not term our Jehovah , Jupiter or Baal ; nor Christ , Mercurius , though he be the word of Gods mind to us , for God teacheth us other words and language in his Word . The truth is , that a learned noble Lord said well and judiciously , all the indifferencie ( in the world ) lyeth in our understandings , and the darkenesse thereof — but there is none in the things themselves , or actions , which are still either unlawfull or necessarie . And this is most true in actions morall and humane . The Church putteth indifferencie on nothing , there a necessitie in respect of our darknesse , many be scandalized at things which seeme not necessarie to them , yet are they in re , in themselves necessarie . But conformists object , That the very will of the Church , Act. 15. made things indifferent before the act now to become necessarie , if then the Church may take away indifferencie , she may give also . But I answer , The antecedent is most false , Junius , Calvin , Beza , Bullinger , Brentius , Pomeranus , Marloret , and the text clearly saith , by the law of Nature these were scandalous . So b Origen thinketh to eat bl●oà was scandalous . And c Strabo saith , the heathen in their sacrifice dranke blood ; Yea , d saith Tertullian , the heathen dranke mens blood , and e Augustine saith , they forbade these for a time in the case of scandall ▪ that the ancient Synogogue might be buried with honour ; Yea , f Ireneus , g Tertullian , and h Cyprian will have these drawne to a spirituall sense , that they should abstaine from Idolatrie , shedding of blood and fornication ; And i the Jesuit Lorinus saith this was a positive Law , which without the case of scandall , doeth not strictly abolish . k Cajetanus , Fornication by Gods law was forbidden , the other things in the Canon were forbidden to gratifie the Jews . l Philippus Gamethaeus a Sorbenist saith , they were forbidden to nourish concord betwixt Jew and Gentile , for the infirmitie of the Jewes . 2. That the will of the Councell made them not necessarie , whereas before the act they were indifferent , is cleare . 1. It had then been needlesse to discusse the matter by Scripture . 2. To alledge the holy Ghost as author of the Synod ; It seemed good to the Holy Ghost , &c. if the bare will of men had made them necess●rie . But saith m Paybodie , Any good thing may become an occasion of evill by accident , and through our fault , the Word condemneth not occasions of ill by accident , but such only as are occasions of evill , and in themselves evill things , indifferent are not in themselves evill . Ans . All occasions whether ill in themselves or indifferent , are occasions of sinne by accident , and through our fault who abuse them , but all occasions because occasions , and not because evill are forbidden , when as they are not necessarie , and this is Gods argument to prove that the Jewes are not to marry with the Canaanites for ( saith the law ) they will turne away your heart , after their Gods , to send abroad a goaring oxe , to seeke his food , hath no sinne in it , save only it may occasion the killing of men ; and the building of houses without battlements , and the going by the doore of the whoore , or comming neere her house , are not of themselves ill , but only forbidden under this reduplication , because they are occasions of ill : sinnes , as sinnes are forbidden , and as occasions of sinnes , they are also new sinnes , having a distinct illegalitie and guiltinesse in them , from this that they occasion sinne : and Gods law ( as all Divines reach ) forbiddeth sinne , and all occasions of sinne . Drunkennesse is both forbidden as intemperancie , and also as an occasion of lust , and of speaking perverse things , as is evident , Pro. 23. 33. For then the spirit of Gods argument were null to disswade from drunkennesse , as he doth in these wo●ds , Thine eye shall behold strange women , and thine heart shall utter perverse things . Now we can shew that many wayes Ceremonies occasion sinne , as 1. they trimme and decore a Church for harlot lovers , from Rome , forbidden , Jer. 2. 33. Suarez , Franciscus de sancta clara , Gretserus , and other Papists , for these , werein love with the Church of England . 2. They occasion dissention in Gods house , and are contrary to peace , Ps . 34. 14. Heb. 12. 19. Rom. 12. 18. and so to be rejected . 3. They beare false witnesse of Poperie , which we disclaime . 4. They are against the spirituall worshiping of God , and lead us backe to the carnall commandements , and beggerly rudiments of the law , from the Gospell , against the word of God , Joh 4. 24. Gal. 4 9 , 10. Heb. 7. 16. Heb. 9. 8. 9. Gal. 3. 25. 26. Gal. 4. 1. 2. Coll. 2. 20. They are torches in day light , and vaine and uselesse . 5. They bring us under bondage to men , contrary to the Apostle , Col. 2. 20. and to the ordinances of men , and under the power of things , 1 Cor. 6. 12. 6. They are against our Christian libertie . They answer , especially a Paybodie , and b D. Forbes , that Christian libertie is not restrained by doing , or not doing a thing indifferent , for so there should be no lawes made at all by the Church , concerning things indifferent , but Christian libertie not hurt , if 1. the Ceremonies be free to the conscience , and not made necessarie . 2. If they be not made necessarie to salvation . 3. If they be holden alterable by mans authoritie . Ans . The question is perverted ▪ for we question not if the use of things indifferent lay a bond on Christian libertie , but if the will of authoritie can make a law of things indifferent ; when there is no intrinsecall necessitie in the things themselves , when necessitie of edification layeth on a tye , Christian libertie is not indeed restrained , for God then layeth on a bond . 2. Externall eating of meats , and observing of dayes , is a part of the libertie , wherewith Christ hath made us free , Coll. 2. 21. Eat not , touch not , taste not , men eat not meat with their minde or conscience , but with the teeth of their body , and to such externall eating , men are dead with Christ , as touching externall observation thereof , and Paul , Gal. 2. 19. as dead to the Law , living to God , and crucified with Christ , is freed from such Judaizing , as Peter fell into , but that Judaizing did not bind Peters conscience , neither was it repute of him , as necessarie to salvation , as he had taught , Act. 10. And the false Apostles pressed Circumcision , not , as tying the conscience , or as necessarie for salvation , but Gal. 6. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. only , that they may not suffer affliction for the crosse of Christ , and yet to be circumcised externally without necessitie of conscience before God , crossed directly the libertie wherewith Christ had made them free , Gal. 5. 1. and 1 Cor. 9. Have we not power to lead about a wife , and sister aswell as others ? Yet if the Prelates at Corinth should have made an act , forbidding Church-men to marry , though they had esteemed not marrying , both free to the conscience , and also not necessarie to salvation , they had laid bands upon Pauls libertie . 3. We see not how the Ceremonies are left free to the conscience , because they are alterable by the Church , for the reason of kneeling to bread , of humane dayes , of Surplice , is morall , not Nationall ; there is no reason why prophaning of the Lords Supper , should not be eschewed , in all the world , and at all times , as in Britaine , and at this time ; and Crossing and Surplice doth signifie dedication to Christs service , and Pastorall holinesse in all the world , as in Britaine , and therefore they cannot be nationall rites and alterable , but must be universall , and at all times , and in all places doctrinall . 4. The very externall Washings , Feasts , New-Moones , Offerings , though they should be thought free toward the conscience , are externall burdens against Christian libertie , as our Divines , a Calvin , b Chemnitius , c Polanus teacheth , and d Bellarmine answereth , the places alledged speaketh of Jewish servitude . But our Divines especially e Junius and f Whittakerus answer Bellarmine , that Paul , Coll. 2. speaketh against all Commandements of men , yea , hee speaketh against Angel ▪ worship , which is not a Jewish shadow , whereof Christ is the bodie . But they say it is a wide rule , that all things that may be wanting in Gods worship , are to be omitted in the case of scandall . I answer , there be three sort of things here considerable . 1. Things not commanded of God , as all religious observances , these are utterly unlawfull , when the using of them scandalizeth . 2. Things that fall under an affirmative precept , and these cannot be totally omitted , for eschewing scandall : for what ever God hath commanded is some way necessarie . Ergo , it some wayes , and in some cases , may be done , though offence be taken at it , but branches , or parts of affirmative precepts may be omitted , for eschewing of scandall , as such a particular kneeling in prayer , in such a place : but Gods affirmatiue precepts leave not off to be alwayes scandalous actively though information be given , for where the use hurteth , the abuse and scandall is not taken away by teaching , to teach how Images should not be abused , make not Images to leave off to be scandalous objects . 3. There bee some things of meere civill use , as Bells , Gownes , Pulpits , preaching on Tuesday or Thursday . These be considered two wayes . 1 As necessarie with necessitie of conveniencie simply . 2. With necessitie of conveniencie . secundum prevalentiam graduum , as convenient in the highest degree of necessitie , or that morall , maximum quod sit , in the first degree , what scandalizeth ▪ is to be rejected ; in the last respect they oblige , and if any be scandalized thereat , it is taken and not given . It may be the Church sees not alwayes the highest and superlative conveniencie , in these Physicall circumstances , but they oblige not because of the Churches authoritie , no more then the word of God borroweth authority from the Church , but they have an intrinsecall necessitie in themselves , though right reason in the Church see not alwayes this necessitie , therefore that a signe be given for convening the people that the Preacher officiate in the most grave and convenient habite is necessarie , Jure divino , by Gods law , and that tolling of Bells , and a Gowne , a Pulpit bee as particulars most convenient for these ends , the Church Ministerially doth judge , so as the obligatorie power is from the things themselves , not from the will of humane Superiours . No necessitie of peace which is posterior to truth , no necessitie of obedience to authoritie , no necessitie of uniformitie in these externals , simply , and as they are such , are necessities obliging us to obedience : for things must first in themselves be necessarie , before they can oblige to obedience . I must obey Superiours in these things of convenient necessitie , because they are convenient , and most convenient in themselves , and so intrinsecally most necessarie , but they are not necessarily to be done in themselves , because I must obey Superiours , and because I must keep uniformitie with the Church . The will of Superiours doe find in things necessitie , and good of uniformitie , but they doe not make necessitie , nor the good of uniformitie : We should be servants of men , if our obedience were ultimatè resolved , in the meere will of Superiours , in any the least circumstance of worship : and what I say of actions , holdeth in matters of meere custome also . But Master Sanderson , D. Forbes , M. Paybodie , teach that we are not to regard the scandall of the malitious , as of Pharisees . To which I answer , We are to have alike regard , in case of scandall , to wicked and malitious , as to weake and infirme . For we are not to regard the passive scandall of the weake more nor of the wicked , for who ever stumble at the necessarie ordinances of God , they take a scandall , which is not culpably given . But that we are to regard the active scandall of all , even the most malitious , I demonstrate thus , 1 Rom. 14. 15. Paul proveth that we are not to scandalize our brother , 1. because it is against charitie . 2. Because we are not to destroy him , for whom Christ died : but we owe love to the malitious , even to our enemies , and must not walke uncharitably toward him , as the law of God requireth . 3. A malitious man is one for whom Christ died , very often , as is cleare in Paul before his conversion . 2. 1 Cor. 10. 32. Wherefore give no scandall , neither to the Jewes , nor to the Gentiles , nor to the Church of God. 33. Even as I please all men in all things , not seeking mine owne profit , but the profit of many , that they may be saved . Here be many arguments for our purpose , All men ; whether weake or wilfull , are either Jewes or Gentiles , and none more malitious against Paul , and the Gospell , then the Jewes , yet must we take heed that we give them no scandall . 3. If we must please all men , in all things indifferent , Ergo , also malitious men . 4. If we must seeke the profit not of our selves , but of all men , and seeke to save them , and so seeke the salvation even of the malitious , as Christ prayed for his malitious enemies , so must we not scandalize them . 5. I argue from the nature of scandall , scandall is spirituall murther , but the sixt Commandement for biddeth murthering of any man , either weake or wilfull , for no murtherer can have life eternall , 1 Joh. 3. 15. Now weaknesse or malice in the scandalized is accidentall to the nature of scandall active , for active scandalizing is to doe inordinately and unseasonably , that which hic & nunc may be omitted , from which any is scandalized , either weake or wilfull , to lay a snare to kill a wicked man ( except it be , by the authoritie of him , who beareth the sword under God ) is murther , no lesse then to kill an innocent man. 6. To scandalize actively , is to be accessarie to the sinne of the partie scandalized , but we may not be accessarie to the sinne of either wilfull , wicked , or weake , for it is against the petitions , that we are taught to pray , Hallowed be thy name , Thy kingdome come , Thy will be done , in earth , as it is in heaven . They love not the comming and enlargement of Christs kingdome , who doe not , what they can to hinder sinne , farre lesse is Gods honour their care , who doe that unnecessarily , by which any may fall in sin . 7. It is against the gentlenesse required in Preachers , and by proportion required in all , who are with patience to wait upon these who oppose the truth , if God peradventure will give them repentance , to the acknowledgement of the truth . 2 Tim. 2. 24. 25. 8. It is contrary to the example of Christ , and his Apostles , who as the learned a Parker saith , eschewed the active scandalizing of the malitious , Christ payed tribute , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , lest we should scandalize the malitious Pharisees , for it could not but of malice be taken by Pharisees , who sought nothing more then to bring Christ within the compasse of disl●yaltie to Caesar . Quest . VI. A further consideration of things not necessary , and how they be scandalous objects . 1. Dist . SOme things are necessarie physically , as to eat flesh , and some things are necessarie morally , either because of a law of nature , or a positive or divine command . 2. Dist . The same way , Some things are not necessarie physically , and that either simply , as wee may live simply without some rare meats , that our Land and soyle doth not afford , or in some respect only , as without such and such flesh forbidden by the law of God. Or things are not necessary Morally or Theologically , as to eat forbidden-meats befor a weake Jew . 3. Dist . Some things Physically necessarie , as to eat fleshes being apt to nourish my body , may be Morally or Theologically not necessarie , being stambling blocks to my weak brother . 4. Dist . Some things may be necessarie , in specie , and that morally , as to heare the Word , to Pray . But , in individuo , clothed with such and such circumstances may be not necessarie , as to goe to heare the Word , when my brothers house is on fire , that hearing is not necessarie , but may be scandalous , and the like we may say of praying in the streets . 5. Dist . Some things may be necessarie Physically in private ▪ as to eat for health some fleshes , which publickly before weake Jews , as the case was Rom. 14. is Morally not necessarie , but scandalous . 6. Distinct . Some things are not necessarie , because of the mere positive will of God. As the temple of Baal , and therefore was to be ●estroyed , not for the abuse of it for a house has alwayes some necessary use to man now in the state of sin . And of this kind were the cattell of the Amalakites , which were as necessarie of themselves for food , and sacrifice , as other cattell ▪ and the Babylonish garment , and wedge of Gold , to which Achan's slimie hands did cleave , and therefore ehey were not necessarie , but to be abstained from by Saul and the Israelites . because of the sole positive command of God , Other things are not necessarie , both because God forbiddeth them and because of the scandal and sinfull consequences , that are possible to fall out , as for Gods people to marry with ●he idola●rou● Canaanites , was not necessarie ▪ both because Gods forbidden will made it not necessarie morally , and also because they might draw away Gods people to serve their Gods , which was a fea●able , and a very possible snare , thought some idolatresses being married to the Jews , might have been drawne from their idolatrie , and gained to the faith of the God of Israel . 1. Concl. Monuments , or instruments of idolatrie , are of two sorts , either such things as have no other use at all , but to contribute sorne subservient influence in , or unto idolatrous worship , and because these have all their warrant from a meere commandement of man , they are simply not necessarie , as the graven image , the idols themselves , all positive observances in Gods worship destitute of any command of God , and the use of these in any case must be scandalous , and so unlawfull , because , if the Brazen Serpent now losing its primitive divine effect , which was to cure the stinged people , if it be but the passive object of robbing God of his glorie , in that Incense is burnt to it , have no use at all ▪ but to be , as it were , a robbers Den to receive the stolne-away glory of God , it must be abolished . It is true things necessary abused in regard of our corruption , are to be purged , and restored to their own use , but if they be uselesse , and of themselves have no fruite , but only , that they are fit to be abused , as useless pittes by the way side , and the Brazen Serpent , and a Razor put in the hand of a childe , and images , they are to be removed , both subject and accident , for that they be uncapable of purgation , therefore they are capable only of abolition . It is not enough to say that wee may devise a good use for them , as we may use Images to put us in remembrance of God , for we may never devise the use of a thing not necessarie in Religion , when as we cannot devise the thing it selfe . But here we cannot devise the thing it selfe . Yea , if the thing it selfe be good , and lawfully usefull . As the eating of flesh , yet if it be lesse necessary , for the life , then the edification of my brother . The Apostles excellent rule , Rom. 14. v. 15. must stand as a law discharging my eating ▪ No man for this or this m●at , which is lesse necessarie , ought to hinder the salvation of his brother , which is more necessarie , by destroying his brother for meat . For cleare it is , this or that meat , without which I may live , is of fa●re lesse necessitie comparatively , then the salvation of one for whom Christ died . True it is also , if my brother be scandalized , and so his soule in hazard , if I eat any at all , in that case , the scandall is meerly passive , for though my brothers salvation be of greater consequent and necessitie then my temporal life , yet my totall abstinence from meat is a killing of my selfe and heynous murther , and so forbidden in the sixt Commandement , and so a destroying of my own soule . And eating for conscience sake is necessarie , though eating of this or this meat be not necessary . But there be other things that are instruments of idolatrie and subservient thereunto , in a Common and Physicall influence , as a Temple builded to the honour of a Saint , and for the adoring of Images , and for the reading and opening the word of God in the New and old Testament , though in a corrupt way , these are not properly monuments of Idolatrie . Now the house or Church , as such is no monument , nor uselesse instrument in worship , such as is a Surplice , a humane holy day , for it hath , as such , being a thing of walls and timber , no other , then that very same physicall influence in worshipping either the true God , or a Saint , that it hath in civill use , in our ordinarie dwelling , to wit , to fence our bodies , in religious , in naturall , in civill actions , from injuries of heaven , clouds , and sin . The adjuncts of the Church , as Crucifixes , Images , Altars , Ravels , Masse-clothes , and the like , are properly Monuments , and instruments of Idolatrie , because these are not necessary , as is the materiall house , nor have they any common and physicall influence in the worship , as the Temple hath , yea all the necessitie or influence that they have in the worship , is only religious and humane flowing from the will of men , without either necessitie from our naturall Constitution of body , or any word of Scripture , and therefore they are to be removed upon this ground , because they are unnecessarie snares to Idolatrie . Object . This particular Temple or house builded for Saint Peter , S. Paul , S. Cutbert is not necessarie for the worship of God , because other houses of as convenient use , and necessitie may be had , for the worship of God , and this particular house ought to be demolished as Jehu 2 King. 10. 27. destroyed the house of Baal , and made it a draught-house , as the law saith expresly , Deut. 7. 25. The graven Images of their Gods , shall yee burne with fire , thou shalt not desire the silver or gold that ( is on ) them ▪ nor take it unto thee , lest thou be snared therein : for it is an abomination unto the Lord thy God. v. 26. Neither shalt thou bring an abomination unto thy house , lest thou be a cursed thing like it , but thou shalt utterly detest it , and thou shalt utterly abhorre it , for it is a cursed thing . Or at least these Churches may be imployed for some other use , then for the worship of God , where they may bee snares . Ans 1. We are carefully to distinguish betweene a law of Nature , or a perpetuall binding Morall law , which standeth for an eternall rule to us , except the Law-giver himselfe by a superven●ent positive law , which serveth but for a time , doe loose us from an obligation thereunto , and a positive temporarie law . God saith in an exoresse law , of nature ▪ that obligeth us perpetually ( The sunne shall not be put to death for the sins of the father ) no Magistrate on earth can lawfully take away the life of the son , for the sin of the father , for this eternally obligeth . Yet Saul was to destroy the sucking children of the Amalekites for the sinnes of their fathers , but he had a positive temporarie command of God to warrant his fact , 1 Sam. 15. 2. 3. none can inferre that we are from this law , which was a particular exception , from a Catholick perpetually obliging morall law , that Magistrates are now to take away the lives of the sucking infants of Papists . So this is perpetuall and morall , and warranteth us for ever to use all the creatures of God for our use . 1. Tim. 4. 4. Gen. 1. 27. 28. then we may lawfully use Gold , Silver , Houses , all creatures for meats , except some particular positive law , or some providentiall emergent necessitie forbid us , as the Ceremoniall lawes of the Jewes forbidding the eating of swines flesh , and some other meats , were no other thing , but Divine positive exceptions from the law of nature and creation , in the which God had created swines flesh , and all these other forbidden meats for the use of Man , and so by the same reason , God hath ordained Church and houses to fence off us the injuries of Sunne and Aire , in all our actions civill and religious , except that by a peculiar Precept , he forbid the use of the house of Baal , to the Jewes , to be a typicall teaching to us of Gods hating of Idols and Idolatrie , but not of our demolishing and making uselesse all houses builded to the honour of Idols and Saints under the New Testament , except wee had the like Commandement that the Jewes had . These who oppose us , in this , can no more inhibite us by any law of God , of the ●se of a creature granted to us by the law of the creation , then they can interdyte us of the use of another creature , nor are we more warranted to demolish Temples and materiall houses which have only a physicall and common use alike in all our actions , Naturall , civill , and Ecclesiasticall or Religious , then of eating swines flesh , or of other meats forbidden in the Cerem●nial Law , and to answer to the Argument , this or that materiall house builded to the honour of Paul and Peter is every way as necessarie in the worship of God ▪ as a Temple builded of purpose for the worship of God , though another house may conduce as much for the worshipping of God ▪ as this , yea it hath the same very necessarie Use , and Physicall conveniencie , for the serving of God , that any other house hath , which was never builded for the honour of a Saint , which I prove , 1. because no creature of God ▪ that is usefull to us , by the law of creation , is capable of any morall contagion to make● it unlawfull to us , but from the mee● will of God as the Gold and Silver , and Idol houses of the false Gods , and Images of Canaan are in●●●secally , and by the Law of creation , as pure , and morally clean , as the Gold and Silver and Synagogues of the Jewes , and had their Physicall and civill necessitie , the one , as the other had . But from whence was it that the Jewes might make use of their owne Silver and Gold , and houses , and not of the houses , or silver and gold of the heathen Gods and Idols ? Certainly this was from Gods meer positive will and command , fobidding the Gold and houses of the Idols of Cannan , and not forbidding the other , the Adversaries can give no other reason : therefore they must give us the same positive Commandement , for not making use of the Gold and Silver , and Temples of the Popish Idols , and Saints under the New Testament , that the Iewes had for refusing the Gold and Silver , and demolishing the Temples of the heathenish Idols of Canaan . And if they say , Th●● the very command that warranted the Iewes to abstaine , from the use of the heathe●s Gold and Idol-temples , doth warrant us to abstain● from the use of the Gold and Idol-temples of Papists . It is answered , we have no warrant from the Word , but it shall warrant us as well to abstaine from swines flesh ; if it be replyed , every creature of God eatable i● Good , and may be received lawfully ▪ 1 Tim ▪ 4 6 Rom 14 ▪ 14 ▪ I answer , so all gold , all silver all houses serving to ●●nc● off the injuries of heaven , and aire , are good , and fit for Mans use , and now blessed in Christ under the New Testament , except you say , that it is not lawfull to make use of the Gold and Silver of a Papis●● Image , no● of crees of the Papists fields that b●aret●●● fruit , for these also were discharged to the Iewes , Deut 20. v. 19 ▪ 20 ▪ and the reason why they ●ight not cut downe the t●●●● ▪ th●● be●●●● fruit , because these trees were mans life , Deuter. 20 19 whereas t●●●● that beare no fruit were to be cut down , as not so necessarie for mans life . Now this reason is morall and perpetuall , and so are houses to sence off the injuries of the clouds a Manslife ; except they bee forbidden by a positive law of God , and so necessarie as without the ●se of houses no worshipping of God can be ordinarily ; And therefore in the second place , as we use Gold Silver , Tamples ▪ and materiall houses ( though abused to Idolatrie ) because the Lord hath created them for our use , his law of Creation warranting us to use them , so can we not refraine from the use of them , though abused by Papists , except wee have a speciall positive law to warrant us to refraine from the use of these necessarie creatures of God , so usefull for the life of man ; For according to the grounds of these against whom we now dispute , the Garments of silke or cloth of Gold , that hath covered Popish Images , the Gold and Silver of the Popish Images , though melted and dissolved into innocent mettall , the Materiall Temples builded to the honour of Saints , are to be cast away and utterly abolished , as unlawfull to be used in any sort , for the Jewes according to the Law , Deut. 7. 19. 20. might make no use of the gold or silver of the Heathen-Image , and Achan brought a curse on himselfe , for the simple taking for his use , the wedge of Gold , and the Babilon●sh Garment . Now we have no law in the New Testament to abandon the use of the creatures , for as Cornelius was not to count that meat uncleane , which God ●ad cl●nsed , Act. 10. 15. So neither are we to count Silver and Gold , and houses uselesse , which God in the Creation made Good , and usefull for our life , and therefore no morall contagion can adhere so to these creatures , as we are utterly to disuse them , as creatures cursed , because they were abused , except it can be proved that the abuse of them hath deprived us of the necessarie use , that they have by the law of Creation ; for certaine it is , as the killing of the sucking infants of the Amalakites was typicall , and tyeth not us to kill the young children of Papists so was the disusing , or not using of Gold , Silver and Houses , abused to Idolatrie , typicall . And before I come to the second Conclusion , An house for the worship of God is amongst the things that are necessarie , by way of dis-junction in speciè , not in individuo ; that is , a house is necessarie , in its Physicall use , to fence off our bodies , the injuries of Sunne , Aire , and heaven , but not this house , for another house may serve the turne as conveniently . But some object Then this , or this house Dedicated superstitiously to the religious honour of a Saint ought to be removed out of the worship of God , 1 because by your owne confession . Th●● individual house so abused is not necessarie . God may will be worshipped , without this house , though it never had been , in rerum naturâ . 2. From the worshipping of God in so Superstitious a place , many truly godly are so scandalized , that for worshipping God in such Superstitious and Idolatrous places , they have Separated from your Church , conceiving that in so doing you heale the wounds of the Beast ; It is true , it may be their weaknesse , yea but be it so , that it were their wickedness , that they are scandalized , yet by your doctrine , in things not necessarie you are not to doe any thing by which either the weake , or the wicked may be scandalized ; as is cleare in the eating of meats , Rom. 14. Ans . This argument may 1. be retorted against these who hold with us the same doctrine of Scandal , for , without eating of Swines flesh , my life may be preserved , and a malitious Iew may be , and necessarily is highly scandalized , that I , who possibly am a Iew converted to the Christian faith , doe eat Swines flesh before him , for he conceiveth me to be an Apostate from Moses his law , therefore I should abstaine from eating Swines flesh before a Iew , who out of Malice is scandalized , by my doing a thing not necessarie , hic & nunc . But the conclusion is absurd : nor doe I think that many truly godly of the Strictest Separation doe stumble at our Churches out of wickednesse . Many truly Godly and Sincere refuse to come to our Churches , whereas many scandalous , well lustered hypocrites , who knoweth nothing of the power of godlinesse , but are sitten downe in the Scorners Chaire are admitted to the Lords Supper , and as the former cannot be excused , so I pray God , that the latter draw not downe the wrath of God upon both Kingdomes . 2. Things not necessarie which actively produce scandall must not be only indifferent Physically in their naturall use , as This or this house , but they must be indifferent both Physically and Morally , for the Meats spoken of , Rom. 14. at that time , were both wayes indifferent . 1. They were not necessary but indifferent Physically in an ordinarie providence , both then and now , for ordinarily my life may be preserved , and suffer little losse by not eating Swines flesh , or such meats , in case of extreame necessitie of sterving , if any could have no other meat , they might eat then , as the case was , Rom. 14. because Mercie is better then Sacri●●● at alltimes . 2. These things Rom. 14. were indifferent Theologically or Morally in their owne nature , 1. v. 3. Let not him that eateth , despise him that eateth not : and let not him which eateth not , judge him that eateth , for God hath received him . 2. Because v. 17. The kingdome of God is not meat and drink . Sure , in Moses his time , to abstaine from such meats , and eat such , as the Lambe of the Passeover , the Manna , to drinke of the water of the Rock , was worship , and so some part of the kingdome of heaven , but it is not so now , saith Paul. 3 Paul clearly maketh them Morally indifferent . 1 Cor. 8. 8 But meat commendeth us not to God , for neither if we eat , are wee better ( morally and before God ) neither if we eat not , a e we ( Morally ) theworse . Now this Temple or House Physically is indifferent , and not necessarie for the worship of God , for men may be defended from the injuries of Sunne and aire , Though this house had never been in rerum naturâ . But this Temple or house though dedicated to a Saint is not Morally indifferent , but Morally necessarie , so as if you remove it from the worship , because abused to Idolatrie , and give it in no use in the defending of our bodies from the injuries of the Wind , Raine and Sunne , you Iudaize , and doe actively scandalize the Iewes , and harden them in their Apostasie , and so this house though abused to Idolatrie , is not indifferent Morally , as the meats Rom. 14. But the using of it is necessarie and an asserting of our Christian libertie , as to eat blood , and things strangled , and Swines flesh even before a Iew , so to use all houses for a physicall end to defend our bodies from heat and cold , is a part of the libertie wherewith Christ hath made us free . But Ceremonies have no naturall and physicall use . The crossing of the aire with the Thumbe , the keeping of a day religiously without warrant of the Word , are not taught in the Schoole of Nature , and so are naturally not necessarie as This or this house , though abused to Superstition is , and the Adversaries that say they are Morally indifferent , as good , and as Spirituall Ceremonies in kind and nature , may be devised in their place . But in all this dispute of Scandall , we give , but doe never grant that the Ceremonies are indifferent , wee dispute here that they are scandalous , and so unlawfull in their use , upon the principles of Formalists ; whereas we judge them in their nature , because they have not God , but the will of men to be their father and author , to be unlawfull , and repugnant to Scripture , because not warranted by either command , practice , or promise in Scripture . Conclus . 2. As some things Physically necessarie must be abstained from , when the unseasonable using of them is a stumbling block to our weak brother , in the case of the morall indifferencie of the thing , as it was in the eating , or not eating of meats once forbidden by Gods law , but then indifferent . Rom. 14. 14. 1 Cor. 8. 8. for then it was true , ( But meat commendeth us not to God ▪ for neither if we eat are we the better , neither if we eat not , are we the worse ▪ ) So in the case of physicall indifferencie , but of Moral and Theologicall necessitie , when an Evangelike law of Christian libertie has passed a determination upon eating , or not eating ; Then to abstaine from eating upon a pretended feare of not offending a weak Iew , is actively to ●ay a sinfull stumbling block before a weak Iew , and to harden him in Iudaisme , and here using of such meats , and the affirmative , to wit , to eat is lawfull and necessarie , the things being now morally necessarie , not morally indifferent , where as before ▪ the negative , to wit , not to eat was lawfull and necessarie . Hence to eat ▪ Rom 14. 1 Cor. 8. before a weak Iew , was unlawfull and an active scandall , the eating or not eating then of the owne nature being morally indifferent , and to abstaine from eating before a weak Jew , Col. 2. 16. 17. Gal. 2. v. 5. 11. 12. Gal. 5. 1. 2. 3. is unlawfull and an active scandall , because now eating is morally necessarie , and a standing in , and an asserting of the libertie wherewith Christ has made us free . And upon the same ground , for the Iewes , when the Ceremoniall law stood in vigor , to make use of Baals Temple , for a Synagogue to the worship of the true God , was unlawfull and against a Ceremonial Command of God , as was the sacrificing of the Amalakites cattell to the Lord , and the using of the Silver and Gold of the Ca●●●●ites Idols , Deut. 7. 25 , 26. ●6 . 1 Sam. 15. 1 , 2 , 3 ▪ But when these things forbidden were in the case of morall indifferenc●● , as were certaine meats , Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. and c. 10. they were not unlawfull ▪ by reason of any ▪ such Ceremoniall positive Commandement ▪ only by the unseasonable using of them ▪ before weak Iewes , they were scandalous ; But these same Idols houses , Silver and Gold now , when we are f●lly possessed in that libertie ▪ wherewith Christ has made us free , Are so to be used as the good creatures of God given to both Iew and Gentile now under the Gospell , by the ancient Law of creation , that now to abstaine from the use of houses , Gold and Silver abused to idolatrie and worshipping of either Popish Saints or Idols , and the Idols of Pagans , upon any pretence of a Ceremonial Command , were to Iudaize , and to betray our Christian libertie , and the highest scandalizing and hardening of the Iewes . For that is a mere Ceremonial Commandement which depriveth us of the use of things or creatures , that are naturally usefull to us , such as are houses , cattell , silver , and Gold , upon the meere will of the supreame law-give● ; And upon this ground to disuse Churches builded to Saints by Papists , is Iudaizing , for the thing is not morally indifferent , as meats were in the case Rom. 14. 1 Cor. c. 8. c. 10. but the use is morally necessarie for the asserting of Christian libertie ; Christ having made every creature of God good in its native use , for man , both Houses , and Gold and Silver , as all meats are 1 Tim. 4. 4. 5. Genes . 1. 28. 29. and having made all things new , Revel . 21. 5. and given us a new spirituall right to them , 1 Cor. 3. v. 21. 22. 23. and therefore to take them from us , by any Ceremoniall law , is to put us againe under the old yoake , from which we are freed through Iesus Christ , Acts 15. v. 10. 11. And the houses , and Gold and Silver , though abused to Idolatrie , doe now returne to their physicall uses ▪ of which the Iewes , by a temporarie positive law , were interdyted , for the time of their in●an●i● , yea ▪ if we were interdyted of any creature of God , by such a law we might not eat of oxen and sheepe , that had belonged to Papists , who are Idolaters , for Saul was never to use the Cattell of the Amalakites for common use , nor for food , nor for sacrifices to the Lord : And it should bee unlawfull to melt the Silver-Images of Papists , and convert them into money ▪ for the poore , or cups them into silver bowls or cups , for the lawfull use of the Lords Supper . I grant to sell Images of Gold or Silver to these who use them , as formall Idols is unlawfull ; as to sell a whore for money to these that should prosesse the buying of her for 〈…〉 lo●●i● , were to be accessarie to that harlotrie , especially seeing Idols formally remaining so are , ex naturâre● , for no other end but for Idolatris ; they have no necessarie physicall use for the life of man , sarre more , if they be the portraictures of the Father , Sonne , or holy Spirit ▪ if they be of stone , or of any thing , that cannot be usefull for mans life , then must they be defaced and broken , le●● we lay the stumbling block of our iniquitie before others . Now , if from any law of the Iewes , or practise of Moses , and Ezechiah , houses builded to the honour of Saints , Silver and Gold of Idols , were to be made uselesse , in their physicall use , in the worship of God , or for our civill use , then were we , upon that ground , to dissolve the stones and timber of such a house , and to bray and stampe the Silver and Gold into powder , as these holy Rulers did . People here fleeing from Antichrist fall evidently in Iu●ais●e , and make themselves , with the Galath●ans , debtors to Circumcision , and all the Ceremonies of Moses , which thing we condemne in the Anti-Christ . Object . If we must abstaine from the use of no creature granted to us , by the law of creation , except we have the warrant of a positive Ceremoniall law for it , then the Romans were not to for , beare eating of such and such meats , before a weake Iew , for feare to scandalize him for whom Christ died , But this later is untrue : for by the law of nature , and a perpetuall law , Paul would never , for meat , offend his brother : the law of naturall Charitie will dictate this to us , without any positive mandate , we are not for a m●●thfull of meat ▪ the losse whereof is so small , to put the soule of our brother to so incomparable a hazard , as to be losed . Ans . These meats ▪ Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 8. 10. were then indifferent , but they are not so now , when the Gospell is fully promulgate , for we may not now to abstaine from Meats forbidden in the Ceremonial law , for feare to offend a weake Iew , for our abstinence should harden them in their ●●beliefe , that Christ is not yet come in the flesh . To make Temples and houses dedicated to Saint● , as indifferent now as meats were then ▪ and the argument were concludent ▪ But to demolish Churches and remove their physicall use now were as Iudaicall , as to forbeare to eat Swines flesh . We are not to deprive our selves of the physicall use of 〈…〉 of this ▪ or this meat as thinking we are bound by any law of God to forbeare the use thereof , and especially we are not to doe it , as conceiving we are under the tye of a law given to the Iewes , whereas we are under no such tye , or law , at all . But the disusing of Temples dedicated to Saints , that the Adversaries plead for , Deut. 7. is a totall renouncing of all use of them , & the places they alledge from the Ceremoniall law doth conclude it : for the Temples , silver and gold of the Idols of Can●an were altogether uselesse to Israel . It was Achan's sinne , that he tooke the Babilonish garment , and the wedge of Gold ; for any use civill or religious , though he should have bestowed these for any religious use , or the reliefe of the poore and indigent : yea , though it was scandalous to none , he having taken these privately and by theft , yet the very taking of them was a curse to him , and the whole Camp of Israel , for the totall abandoning of all use whatsoever of these houses , Gold and Silver , which in themselves , and by the law of Creation were physicall , and in regard of that naturall use they had from their Creator to supply our necessitie , can have its rise from no other totall and compleat cause , but from the sole positive will of God , discharging his people of the whole use of these creatures at all , as if they had never been created for the use of man , whether their use should be scandalous to others , or not scandalous . But by the law of nature , which , I grant , saith ( Thou shalt not scandalize nor murther the soule of him , for whom Christ hath died . ) The Romans , Rom. 14. and the Corinthians , 1 Cor. 8 were forbidden the eating of fleshes forbidden in Moses law ▪ But with these two restrictions 1. they were forbidden not all eating of these meats in private , but only in the presence of a weak Iew , and for the conscience of others , in the case of scandal , 1 Cor 10 28 , 29. ( 2 ) They were not by the law of nature that inhibites scandall , forbidden the totall use of these meats , in any case , so as they should make these meats utterly uselesse to themselves , or to any others . As the Iewes were forbidden to make use of the Canaanitish Idols , Gold and money : And of the Cattell of the Amalekites , either secretly or openly , either in the case of scandall given to others , or not given . And Achan payed deare for his Babilonish garment , and his wedge of Gold , though he tooke it by theft . Ob. 2. But the reason of the law , is the soule of the law . Now the reason of the Law , Deut. 7. 25. why God forbade his people to take the Gold or Silver of the graven image , is l●st thou be ensnared therein . But this reason holdeth under the Now Testament , and is moral and perpetuall . The very mat●riall house dedicated to Saints and Idol● , by Papists , is a snare to our soules ; if we shall worship God in them , or if we shall name the Church from Cutbert , Giles , or the like , except we would say , as Papists doe , that we are not now , under the New Testament , so much ●●clined to Idolatrie , as the people of the Iewes were of old . Ans . The halfe-reason or incompleat morall ground of the law is not the soule of the law : But you must take in all the reasons , the words of the text are these . Thou shalt not desire the silver and gold that is on them , nor take it to thee , lest thou be insnared therein : for it is an abomination unto the Lord thy God. v. 26. Neither shalt thou bring an abomination into thine house , lest thou be a cursed thing like it . Now what made that Gold an abomination to the Lord , more then all the gold of the earth ? it is of it selfe the good and usefull creature of God , no lesse then all the gold of the earth : nothing made it an abomination to God , but , if we look to the originall cause , there was a positive , free command of God forbidding Israel to covet , or use that Gold. The Canaanites themselves , by the law of nature might lawfully have melted that same very Gold , and made use of it , without sinne . 2. It is not a good reason , Such a law had a mor●ll and perpetuall reason . Ergo , the law it selfe is perpetuall and morall . It followeth only : Ergo , the moralitie of that law is perpetuall . For all the Ceremoniall laws had a morall and perpetuall reason : As the shadows had a moral substantiall ground in Christ the bodie of all shadowes : but it doth not follow therefore the shadows and Ceremoniall law in the letter must bee perpetuall : Very often in the booke of Leviticus , there is no reason given of the Ceremoniall laws . But , be ye holy , I am the Lord , that sanctifies you . This is a morall and perpetuall reason , that endureth to the end of the world , yet it is no due consequence : therefore all these shadowes and Ceremonies shall indure to the end of the world , The reason is , because it is the sole positive will of God that maketh a temporarie concatenation between not eating blood , and not being cruell , and between sacrificing and being holy , and yet not being cruel is perpetuall , not eating blood temporarie . ( 3 ) If things indifferent , as the eating of flesh , before a weak Jew , Rom. 14. be a snare to my owne soule and to the soules of others : I am to abstaine from these and the like . But that I must abstaine from the totall use of any creature that God has made usefull for the life of man , by the law of creation , as Israel was to abstaine from the cattell of the Amalakites , and to stamp in powder , and make altogether uselesse the Gold and Silver of the heathen Idol-Gods , is altogether unlawfull , and a very Judaizing , and it s to make , as Paul saith , Jesus Christ of no effect . Object . 3. But at least we are to abstaine , for scandalls sake , from worshipping the true God , in these Temples , and houses abused to idolatrie lest we lay a stumbling ▪ block before others , even as the Romans and Corinthians were to abstaine from meats , before such weake Jews , as conceived these meats to be unlawfull ; seeing the losse of such meats and abst●nence , for a time ▪ was nothing comparable to the losse of one soule for whom Christ died , so the losing of the use of a materiall house in a religious use ▪ so it be imployed to some civill use , and be not totally lost , is nothing comparable to the scan●alizing and i●sn●ring of the soules ▪ both of Jewes and weake Christians , which will certainly follow ▪ if we use Temples dedicated to Saints in Gods worship . Ans . It is true , the losse of the use of a materiall Temple , is nothing comparable to active scandall , which is the destroying of any soule . But the refusing to worship God in these materiall Temples because abused to Idolatrie , were not only a disusing of the creature , without any warrant from God , but an open Judaizing and an active scandall both to Jewes and Christians , though we should imploy the houses to civill use , for any externall conformitie with the Iewes , when the thing is not indifferent , in religious acts , such as is the disusing of the Churches , is Iudaising : for should we now use Circumcision and the Passeover ▪ with an open , printed and professed intention to signifie Christ already come in the flesh , and should make an open declaration against the Iewish intention in these ordinances ; we should no lesse Iudaize , then Peter , who Gal. 2. did only practise an externall conformitie with the Iewes , with no Iewish intention , sure he was perswaded that Christ was already come in the flesh : yet was he justly rebuked , by Paul , for Iudaizing . For the losse of an house in a materiall or physicall use of it , I grant it is not comparable to the losse of a Son. But the losing of it on a religious ground , is another thing . When the religious losse of the house is not indifferent , as was the Abstinence from some meats indifferent then , but sinfully scandalous before a weak brother . Ob. 4. But if the worshipping of the true God in these materiall temples , be no lesse an ensnaring of us in popish Idolatrie , then the using of the Gold and Silver of the Canaanites Idols , then we are to disuse all worshipping of God in these houses , as well as they were : But the former is true , for we may be no lesse insnared with materiall houses , then they . Ans . I deny the major Proposition ▪ for the eating of blood , the taking of both the young bird ▪ and the damme in the nest , was an insnaring of the Iewes to crueltie , through their abuse of the creatures , the use whereof God ▪ had made both lawfull and necessarie to them in the Creation . The blood was the life of the beast , and the Lord requireth in us mercie ▪ to our beasts life , whereas the tender mercies of the wicked are cruell ▪ Prov. 12. 10. yet is it not lawfull for us to devise any way , we please , to keepe us from being snared in crueltie , for then upon the same ground , it were unlawfull for us to eat blood , contrary to the expresse word of God , Rom. 14 14. 1 Cor. 10. 25. 26. 1 Tim. 4 ▪ 3. 4. God by a positive and Ceremoniall Command hedged in the people of the Iewes , from being insnared in Idolatrie , and , by some Ceremonies , taught them to detest all Idolatrie : but it doth not follow , that we Christians are to inure our hearts , from being insnared with Idols , and to a detestation of Idolatrie , by these same Ceremonies that they were commanded , for then we were obliged to stampe the Golden and Silver idols , to dustand powder : and to cast the powder into the river as Moses did the Golden Calse , Deut. 9. 21. and behoved to drinke of that water , Exod. 32. 20. 1 Chro. 15. 16. 2 King. 18. 4. so it followeth no wayes , though the physicall use of a materiall Temple , should insnare us to Idolatrie , that we are therefore to disuse that house ; except we had the same Ceremoniall command to warrant us , that the Jewes had , and by this argument , you may bring us backe to observe all the Ceremonies of Moses his law , Because all these Ceremonies were appointed in the wisdome of God , either to keepe us from being insnared in some sinne , and to raise , in our heart , a detestation thereof , or to teach us somewhat of Christ , of whom we be naturally ignorant and forgetfull . Ob. 5. But at your first reformation of the Church of Scotland , your Reformers , such as M. Knox , and others ▪ demolished most of the fairest Churches in that Land , and for no other reason , but because they had been nests of popish idolatrie . Ans . That Churches in so farre as their use extendeth , farther then to the commodious propulsation of injuries of Sunne and Ai●e , be demolished , we can well allow , for these that were demolished by our Reformers of blessed memorie ; nor so spacious and inconvenient for hearing the word of God and celebration of the Sacraments , being ordained for Masses , Idols , for blind superstition , that the very length , breadth , height , beauty , and glory of them might redound to the glory of Saints and Idols , that it was reason they should be demolished in so farre as they conduced nothing for the physicall and necessarie end , for which Churches are ordained under the New Testament ; And thus farre we allow of the breaking of Images , Crosses , Crucifixes , and all Monuments of Idolat●ie , so as the matter of all these , whether Timber , Marble stones , Mettall of Gold , Silver , Brasse , or the like to be imployed , for the necessarie use of mans life , but that all their superstitious forme and religious use be utterly abolished . As for the abolishing of Bels abused in time of Poperie ; because they have a necessarie and Physicall use to give warning for the seasonable conveneing of the people of God , to the publick worship , I see no ground , for it , from Deut. 7. or other places , but we must be necessitate to stampe to powder the very Mettall of Bels , and to render them not only uselesse in Churches , but any other way tending to the good of mans l●●e . Object . But Num. 31. 21 , 22. rayment and skins ▪ and vessels of wood taken from Midian , though taken as spoyle were purified , and the Gold and silver , brasse , yron , &c. were purified by fire , and not made uselesse , so the Churches dedicated to Mary , Peter , and to Angels , and Sains , are not to be made uselesse , they may be imployed for the poore to dwell in ▪ but they can have no religious use in the worship of God , except we would heale the wounds of the daughter of Babel . Ans . I deny not but Churches dedicated to Saints , and in regard of their vaine and ostentive spaciousnesse unprofitable for hearing the Word , may be imployed to civill uses for ordinarie dwelling ; But I see no ground how this can be according to the places cited by our godly Brethren of the contrary minde except the Churches were first purified , in some Ceremonial way , as God prescribeth that the spoyle of Midian be purified , which our Brethren cannot say , except we would make our selves debtors to the whole Law , for so the law was , Num. 31. and so Paul doth reject Circumcision , Gal 5. 3. and if it be said the necessitie of the poore requireth that these Temples be not loosed , but imployed for the poore , as David in point of necessitie eat the Shew-bread . I answer 1. The poore , as the case was , Rom. 14. might eat Swines flesh , and so ruine him , for whom Christ died , which is absurd for their necessitie might require it . But certaine it is , Davids necessitie was layd on him by the sixt Commandement as an act of mercie in the point of starving , and if any poore Iew were in the like case , I conceive it should have been scandalizing to that Jew to eat Swines-flesh , before another weake Iew. Providentiall necessitie may make that which is a sinfull scandalizing to bee obedience to the sixt Commandement , but the will of Superiours can make no such providentiall change as the D ▪ of Aberdeene doe dreame ▪ But if the necessitie bee lesse then the Necessitie in point of sterving , it could justifie the poore Iewes eating of meats conceived to be against the law of God , as the case was , Rom. 14. But that the Church or house dedicated to a Saint , should have no physicall use in the worship of God , to defend us from the injuries of Sunne and Heaven , and yet have the same use ▪ in common , for the poore to dwell in , wanteth all shadow of reason , for how can it be proven that the same physicall use in the worship is unlawfull , and yet out of worship is lawfull ▪ except there intervene some Ceremoniall and religious purging of the house , by fire or some other way , which were Iudaical under the New Testament , for the necessity of the poor , is not like the necessity of Davids eating of Shew-bread : It s certain , that the necessity of disusing the creature in a Physical usage , in the worship , must have a warrant in Scripture , as well as the using of the same , in the same usage , must have the like warrant . Object . 5. But Bels are more hurtful to the souls of Gods people , who are scandalized by them , then they are useful for the tymous and seasonable convening of the people , and therefore they may well be abolished , being lesse necessary , and necessary onely ad melius esse , for the better ordering of the Worship of God , and not simply necessary for the being of the Worship . Now as the Lord our God will have a lesser necessity to yeeld to any greater , a bodily necessity to give place to a soul-necessity ( the soul being more excellent then the body ) as is clear in that God would have his people to dispence with the lesser losse of the spoyl of the Amalakites of their Idols , gold and silver , that the greater necessity may stand , to wit , their not being allured , nor their teeth put a watering , and their heart to a lusting after the Idols of Canaan ; so would he have us to abolish the Saints Temples , the gold of Popish Images , the Bels that are lesse necessary ( seeing the Sun may teach as well as the Bell ) for eschewing soul-dangers in laying stumbling blocks , both before our own souls , and others . Answ . 1. It is denyed , that Bells which have a necessary use , though onely for the better ordering of the worship of God , are any active objects of scandal , and the meer passive scandal taken at any thing not indifferent , but physically necessary , and so necessary , that without it sinful inconvenients of either wearying in the service of God , or sinful neglect should follow , is no sinful scandal given , but meerly taken . 2. There be two necessities of things , one natural , and first in that regard , another religious , and in that regard secondary ; the former necessity doth alwayes stand , except God remove it by some posteriour commandment . It s necessary , that Adam and Evah eat of all things that God created for eating . God ( I grant ) may remove this necessity in some , and command either Adam to fast for a time , or not to eat of the tree of Knowledge : So say I , warning by Bells hath a physical necessity , the use of the Temples in worshipping hath the like necessity , so have Gold and Silver a necessity . god onely , either by a Commandment , or by an exigence of providence that standeth to us ( as in the case of a scandal ) for a command can remove the physical necessity , and inhibite Israel to use such and such Gold , as have been in use in the Heathen Idols , and may forbid to perform an act of obedience to an affirmative command in the case of scandal ▪ as he may forbid Paul to take wages for Preaching the Gospel , though Paul have some natural necessity of taking wages . But the Church without a higher warrant from God , hath no power to restrain us in the necessary use that God hath given us . Make Bells and Temples as indifferent and unnecessary as some meats were , Rom. 14. and I shall yeeld the Argument . 3. That the Lord our God will have a bodily necessity as the smaller , to yeeld to a soul-necessity as the greater , is a ground not so sure , but it ought to have been proved , except by a soul-necessity , you mean a necessity of saving the soul , and not sinning against God , and oppose it to a mee● bodily necessity , including no sin in it ▪ then I shall grant the Assertion , That the one necessity i● greater then the other . But otherwise , Cateris paribus , other things being alike , I conceive it is contradicted by Iesus Christs saying , Matth. 12. cited out of Hosea , Chap. 6. I will have me●●● , and not sacrifice : And here we must determine the case of scandal to the soul from the exsuperance of necessity to the body and life . The case falleth out , David and his followers are at the point of starving for hunger ( it may be a question if the presen● necessity be so great ) there being no bread for them , but the Shew-bread , which by a Ceremonial Law of God , onely the Priests should eat : If any of the followers of David out of a groundlesse scrupulosity of conscience should have taken Pauls Argument , Rom. 14. and said to David ▪ I will starve rather ere I eat this bread ; for a divine law forbid● me ; and if ▪ thou eat of it , it shall be a scandal to ●● , and wilt thou for bread destroy him for whom Christ died ? The Apostle Paul would not , for so smal a thing , as to eat swines flesh before a weak Jew , in the case , Rom. 14. destroy the soul of one for whom Christ died , by laying before him a stumbling block , by his unseasonable and scandalous eating . I think ( if Scripture cannot possibly be contrary to Scripture ) this doubt might easily be removed , by answering the case was not alike with David in his hunger , and so in a Physicall and naturall necessitie to save his owne temporall life , that by all probabilitie was in great danger , and these who being in no such necessitie , did eat such meats scandalous , and so distructive to the soules of weake ones , and having varietie of other meats to keep them from sterving , and so a meere necessitie of preserving the bodily life , if we compare one affirmative command of God , with another , may remove that which may be supposed a soule necessitie . And the reason is , because in the doctrine of scandall , which is more intricate and obscure then every Divine conceives , God placeth acts of providentiall necessitie as emergent significations of his approving will , which are so to us , in place of a divine Commandement of Gods revealed will , and these providentiall acts of necessitie doe no lesse oblige us to morall obedience , then any of the expresse written Commandements of God. I cleare it thus . There is an expresse law . It is s●● and unlawfull for David , or any man , who is not one of the Lords Priests , to eat shew-bread . But God commeth in , and putteth David in such a posture of divine providence , that if he eat not shew-bread , he shall be sinfully guiltie of violating a higher morall law of God , who saith , I will have mercie and not sacrifice . Then David shall be cruell to his owne life , and sinne against the sixt Commandement . Thou shalt doe no murther . If he eat not , for not to eat , when you are in a providentiall condition of sterving , if you may have it , is to kill your selfe , and this providentiall condition doth no lesse oblige you to the Morall obedience of the sixt Command , then if God in the letter of the Law should command you to eat . This fact of David was not done by any extraordinarie impulsion of the Spirit , but by a constant chanell that Providence ordinarily runneth in , according to which I , or any Professor must be obliged to preferre a worke of Mercie to Sacrifice , that is , by which we are to give obedience to the sixt Command , which is not to kill , even as without extraordinarie impulsion , I may absent my selfe from hearing the Word , when I find going to Church may indanger my life , for non-obedience to affirmatives , in a greater necessitie ▪ is ordinarie . And therefore Christian prudence , with which the Wisdome of God keeps house , Prov. 8. 12. doth determine many things of scandall : And prudence is a vertue commanded in the word of God , for a wise man observes times , and so will he observe all other circumstances , yet there be rules here which standeth alwayes , and they be these . 1. Comparing a physicall and meerely naturall necessitie with a morall necessitie ▪ if we yeeld to the physicall necessitie , and neglect the moral , we sinne against God , and may lay a stumbling blocke before others ; as to eat such meats , where the losse is small , and the necessitie of eating meerely physicall , and the eating be a scandall to the weake , we sinne and give scandall , the case is cleare , Rom. 14. for eating , ( the case being indifferent , as it was , Rom. 14. ) is a meere physicall necessitie , and not scandalizing a weake brother , is a morall necessitie . 2. Rule , if we compare a greater morall necessitie with a lesse morall necessitie , the lesse necessitie must yeeld to the greater , a necessitie of mercie must yeeld to a necessitie of sacrificeing ; if David then should not have eaten the shew-bread , in his providentiall necessitie of samine , he should have been guiltie both of active scandalizing the soules of others in killing himselfe , and should have killed himselfe , and the lesse morall necessitie ceaseth , and is no necessitie , when a greater moral necessitie interveneth . 3. Rule ▪ Where there is a physicall necessitie of the thing , yet not extreame , and a morall necessitie of abstinence , we are to abstaine ; The Jewes had a physicall necessitie of the Babylonish Garments , but not so extreame , in point of perishing , through cold , as David had of Shew-bread ▪ in point of sterving for famine , therefore Achan should have obeyed the morall necessitie of not touching the accursed thing ▪ and neglected the physicall necessitie , which if it had amounted to the degrees of necessitie of mercie , rather then obeying a Ceremoniall Command , such as was ( Touch n●t the accursed spoyle ) Ach●● might , without sinne or scandall , to himselfe or others , have medled with the spoyle . 4. Rule . That which is necessarie , in speciè , in the kind , as to goe to Church and heare the Word , to come to the house of God and Worship , may be , in individuo , in a particular exigence of providence , not morally necessarie , but the contradicent thereof morally lawfull . David doth lawfully forbeare to come to the Lords house , if he knew Saul may kill him , by the way . ● ▪ The things which we are to forbeare only for necessitie of scandall , and upon no other ground , these I may doe in private , if I know they cannot come to the notice of these who shall be scandalized , upon the ground of lesse physicall necessitie ; as Rom. 14. beleevers , for their necessitie ordinarie , and for nourishment , might eat fleshes in private , though before a weak Jew they could n●● ▪ because the sinne is not in the act of eating , but wholly in the scandall , and in the manner of the unseasonable doing of it . But these things which are morally not necessarie , because t●●●●bstance of the fact is against a law we are to forbeare , both in private , because they are against a law , and in publick before others , for the scandall . as Achan sinned in taking the Babilonish Garment , though in private , and his sinne should have been more scandalous , if he had done it publickly ; Now these we are upon no ordinarie necessitie to doe , but such as may incroach upon the hazard of the losse of life , in which case an exigence of providence , does stand for a Command of non-murthering , had Saul and his Army been reduced to a danger of starving in a wildernesse , and could have no food , except they should kill , and eat the Cattell of the Am●l●kites , ● conceive , The Lords preferring of Mercie before Sacrifice , should warrant them to eat of the Amalakites Cattell , yet would this providentiall necessitie be so limited , as it may fall out , that it stand not for a divine Command ; for it holdeth in affirmative commands only , and 2. so positives as there must be , yea there can be no sin eligible by such and such a case , as Lot sinned in exposing his daughters to the lust of men , to redeeme abstinence from Sodomie . Hence it is cleare ; we may not doe a lesse , nor counsell another to commit a lesse sinne , to eschew a greater ; as the Jesuites wickedly teach . So Tannerus , so Turrianus and others who make a scandalum permissum , a scandall that a Christian may hinder another to fall in , and yet he permitteth him to fall in it . But God hath a prerogative to permit sinfull scandals , men have no such power , when they are obliged to hinder it . The divinite of others seemeth better to me , who deny that the least veniall should be committed to eschew a greater sinne . 6. Rule . There is a principle obligation , a lesse principle , a least principle . Hence these three degrees issue from love , 1. God ▪ 2. Our selves , 3. Our Neighbour : The love of God is most principle , and is the measure of the love of our selves : the love of our selfe is lesse principall , then the love of God , and so the obligation lesse . I am to make away , life and all things , yea eternall glory as devided from holinesse , and as it includeth only happinesse , rather ere I sinne against God ▪ The obligation to care for my owne salvation , is more principall , then my obligation to care for the salvation of my Brother : for the love of my selfe is the measure and rule of the love of my Neighbour . Now because the obligation of caring for the soule of my brother is only secondarie , in compare of the obligation of caring for my owne salvation , I am not to sinne my selfe , or sinfully to omit any thing that is commanded me in a positive precept , to prevent the sinne of my brother ▪ Yet hence it doth not follow , that a positive Precept is more excellent , then the law of Nature , which is ( Thou shalt not murther , nor scandalize him for whom Christ died . ) Because though to care for the soule of my brother be of the law of nature simpliciter , yet is a secondarie obligation ▪ and may cease and yeeld , to a stronger obligation that tyeth me more principally to care , for my owne soule ▪ for though the Command be positive , yet knowingly to sinne , by a sinfull omission , is no lesse a destroying of my owne soule , and so of the law of nature , in a higher obligation , then the other is . 7. The Jesuits , and Popish Doctors , as they are of a large conscience in many things : so in the doctrine of scandall , to extoll obedience to men so high ; as we may doe things in themselves not necessarie , yea that hath no necessitie , but from the will of Commanders ; And Formalists in this conspire ▪ with them , even though from this doe flow the ruine of many soules : and though the sinfull scandalizing and ruine of these soules , flow from sinfull corruption of either ignorance or frailtie , or wilfulnesse or malice , yet the scandall ceaseth not to flow kindly ▪ from the pretended obedience to an unlawfull command , for the thing commanded having no Necessitie ▪ but the will of man is unlawfull , and it is no good reason to say , Men are scandalized through their owne ignorance and Malice . Ergo the scandall is taken , and not given , for these who were enemies to the Truth , and were so scandalized at Davids murthering of Uriah , and Adulterie , 2 Sam. 12. 14. as they were by him occasioned to blaspheme . Certaine their actuall scandall was from their owne corruption . But what ? Ergo , it was not also from Davids murther and adulterie ? and ergo it was a scandall only taken by the enemies , not given by David ? Surely it solloweth not . You may hence judge of the Rule of Lodo Caspensis , a Capucean . These ( saith he ) that doe a worke of it selfe indifferent , for a weightie cause , and use their owne right , ●tuta●tur suo jure , are excused from mortall sinne , as these who lett a house to Whores , and publick Usurers , that are not strangers , though they may commodiously lett it to others , they doe not cooperate with sinne , because the house it but a place , and extrinsecall and remote to the sinne . So Christians taken by Turkes for danger of their life , ( which is a weighty necessitie ) may furnish instruments necessarie for warre against Christians because they doe a worke indifferent of it selfe , for a just cause : so may a servant convey his Master to a Whore , yea and make the Bed for a Concubine ▪ and open the doore , and if his Master be to climbe in at a window to a whore he may lift up his foot , or reach him a ladder . Why ? the servant ( saith he ) useth his owne right in doing a worke of it selfe indifferent , U●itur suo jure faciens opus exse indifferens , modo non placeat ei peccatum . A. But sure , all out jus and right that men have over their houses , and that Captives and servants have to their Masters and Lords , is jus limitatum , a right ruled , limited ▪ bounded by the word of God , nor is the worke they performe morally indifferent , ( physically it is ) and Captive Christians , if for danger of their life , they may prepare necessary instruments of warre against Christians , they may kill Christians also : for what power the conquering Lords have over Captives to command them to prepare fire and sword , against the innocent witnesses of Jesus Christ , because they are such , the same jus right have they to command to kill the innocent . But for no cause the most weighty , can we choose either to shed innocent blood , or to co-operate with the shedding of it , nor to co-operate with the works of darknes , for it is shamefull that a servant may lawfully co-operate with , and thrust his master in at a window , to goe ▪ to a whore , the jus or dominion of Masters to command , and the right of servants to obey is only in the Lord. Yea to kill a man is Physically indifferent , for that is physically , yea morally without relation to any law indifferent , which is capable of lawfulnesse , or unlawfulnesse , according as it shall bee commanded of , or forbidden by God. But for a man to kill his son , is of it selfe such , certaine , if God command a Judge to kill his son , it is lawfull for the father to kill his son , if the Lord forbid Abraham to kill his son , it is unlawfull for Abraham to kill his son . And therefore Caspensis hath no more reason to use the Instance of captives preparing warre against innocent Christians and of a servant thrusting his Master in at doore or window to a whore , then of captives killing the innocent , or of servants breaking a house , and taking away the goods of a man in the night ▪ or of servants committing whoredome at the command of their Conquerors or Lords , the one kinde of action in it selfe is as indifferent and susceptible of morall lawfulnesse , and unlawfulnesse , as the other . And if the Master doe co-operate to commit harlotrie in climbing in at a window to a whore , and to robbing , in digging thorow an innocent mans house in the night , to kill the Master of the house , and to steale his goods , then the servant that co-operateth in these same physicall actions , and also diggeth thorow the innocent mans house and kills himselfe , is the harlot , and the robber , by cooperation and participation , no lesse then the Master . The naked relation of a captive , and of a servant , cannot make the captive and servant innocent and guiltlesse co-operators , for then to sinne at the command of any Conqueror and Master , because I am in the condition of a captive and servant , were lawfull , though God forbid and inhibite me to doe , what I doe , by the command of my Master and Conqueror , for in so doing , Utor meo jure , I use my right as a servant . For God forbiddeth me in what relation I be in , servant , or Captive , to sinne , at the command of any , or for declining any ill of punishment ▪ Though as weightie as the torment of hell separated from sinfull dispairing and blaspheming of God. Now to co-operate with that which I know to be a sinne , is to partake in other mens sinnes , which is forbidden , as a sinne , 1 Tim. 5. 22. Eph. 5. 11. But to runne with the theefe , and to helpe an Arch-robber , Prov. 1. 13. 14. is a consenting to his robberie and bloodshed . And to help any to digge thorow a house , or to climbe in at a window to Incest , Sodomie , Buggerie , to fetch a beast to the Master who rageth in the sinne of Beastialitie , or to setch a young man to the Master or Conqueror to the sinne of abominable Sodomie , knowing the Master and conquerors minde is to co-operate to Beastialitie and Sodomie , is as high a measure of sinfull cooperating in these abominations , as for the servant to helpe up , or life up his Master , to goe in , at a window to an harlot , for this is a consent to these sinnes , and a consent in the highest degree ; so to give a knife to a Master , who seeketh it from his servant , to kill his Father , Mother , Prince , Pastor , is to consent formally to such horrible paricides , and therefore Caspensis should have brought instances in Bugrie , Sodomie , Parricide , when as he used softer Names of fornication and harlotrie . 8. The non-necessaries , or such things as need not be in the worship of God , which do bring scandall , Must 1. be such as are neither necessarie in speciè , nor in individuo , in kind , or in spece or nature , or in their individuals and particulars , as the whole Categorie of Mens devises , as 1. Unwritten traditions — not necessary , not written . 2. Humane mysticall , symbolical signes and Ceremonies — not necessarie , not written . 3. Humane holy dayes , crossing , kneeling to Elements , Altars , Crossing , Surplice , Rochets , &c , — not necessary , not written . 4. This and this humane holy day , this crossing — not necessarie , not written . 2. These things are judged not necessarie , that are not necessarie by way of dis-junction , as Surplice is not necessarie by way of dis-junction , for neither is Surplice necessarie , nor any other white or red habit , that hath some mysticall religious signification , like unto Surplice ; So kneeling to the Elements is neither Necessarie , nor any the like religious honouring of them , by prostration before them , o● kissing them . But , the things of the Directorie for the publick worship , as many of them are necessarie , and have expresse warrant in the Word , as Praying , Preaching , Sacraments , Praising , &c. So 2. some things that are non-necessaries in the individual or particular words , or things , yet are they not to be removed in their alternative necessitie , either this or the like though some be therby scandalized . Because though they be not necessarie simply , yet are they necessarie by way of dis-junction , as that the Minister say , either these , or the like words , for words to that sense are necessarie . So the order that the Directorie prescribes in citing such and such acts of Divine worship is necessarie either this way , or a way as convenient not different from this , for some order of necessity there must be . So the Liturgie or Service Booke , what ever Jos . Hall say on the contrary ( as it is little that he doth , or can say ) though it should containe many things necessarie in speciè , in the kind , sit for the externall publick worshipping of God , yet because these words in Individuo , in their particulars are not necessarie , is to be re●oved , because though all the matter were good ( as much of it is Popish ) yet that booke in its structure , frame , style , Grammer , methode , and forme is popish , and framed after the model of the Roman Missale , especially performed with the cursed Authoritie of the Councell of Trent , under Pius the fift , in all the Masses , Rubricks , Epistles , Gospels , &c. is scandalous , and a Directorie in Scripture words is better , and is therefore justly layd aside by the Revevent Assemblie , and honourable Court of parliament , because there is scandall in words , in style and language , in divine worship . And these who will abstaine from practising of some things in the Directorie , for feare of scandalizing others , must give reasons from the Word that these things they forbeare , are neither necessarie simply , nor by way of dis-junction . Because as I conceive , Things neither necessarie in the same individuals , nor by way of dis-junction , are such Non-necessaries as are to be removed out of the worship of God , for feare of scandall . And that any such non-necessaries can be found in the Directorie , I doe not see as yet . Ob. The people had the more opinion of Dietie in the thing they adored the baser it was . None hath any such opinion of the crosse . Ergo , it is no scandalous object . Ans . All our Divines hold , that Heathens of old , and Papists of late , worship Images , as religious memorative signes of God , Hooker with one dash of his Pen , against the Prophets and Scriptures , acquiteth them of Idolatrie , therefore the Crosse may be adored , without any opinion of Dietie in it . Obj. Be it true , that crosses were purposely appointed to ●●● adored , yet not so now . The Jewes would not admit of the Image of Caesar in the Church , yet they abolished it not , but admitted it in their coyne . The adored cross differeth as farre from this , as the Brazen Serpent that Salomon made to beare up the Cisterne of the Temple , and that which Israel adored in the wilderness , And the Altars that Josiah destroyid , as being meere Instruments of Idolatrie , and that which the Tribe of Reuben ●rected beyond Jordan . Salomon distroyed not the Temple and Idols framed only of purpose for the worship of forrains Gods , because they stood now as forlorne , and did no harme . Josiah afterward razed them for some inconvenients , yet God saith both these Kings , in religion walked straightly . Ans . 1. Though the Cross were first framed for no adoration ; yet we plead against the Images and Crosses of Lutherans as not necessarie , in divine worship , and therefore to be removed , though never adored . 2. The people thinke Baptisme incompleat without the Crosse , Ergo , to them it has the like necessitie , as water . 3. How will Hooker prove never any burnt Incense to the Brazen Serpent , but beleeved it really to be God ? that is his dreame , beside the Text. 4. By this Luther ●●● have their desire ; for actuall intention that Images be lawfull remembrancers of Christ , without intention of adoration , shall make Images as lawfull teaching Ceremonies , as Hooker will have the sigue of the Crosse . 5. We remove not crosses from coyne , no more then the Jewes did the image of C●s●r . But wee agree with them . Hooker being judge , in Banishing them from the worship . 6. Ezechiah then might have broken the old , and made a new Brazen Serpent , for a memoriall of the miraculous cure , so they had not burnt Incen●e to it ; The remembrance of the old mercie should have been as good in the new , as in the old . But certainly the Brazen Serpent was not destroyed as Brasse , but in all its religious use . It was not purged , but abolished . 7. If we may make Images and Orasses alike in shape , but dislike in use , in Gods worship , we may bring in Golden Calves to the Temples , and the Image of Dagon , and the Sidonian Gods , and Altars such as Josiah destroyed , so at their first moulding we imprint on them , chaste and innocent religious intencions and signification , and make them alike in shape , but dislike in use to heathen worship . But sure the Calfe of Egypt , and the Calfe that Aaron made , though like in shape , yet were dislike in use . 8. We read of no new Inconvenients that the Images and Temples that Salomon erected to strange Gods , did in Josiahs time , which they did not in ●●●ekiahs time , but that they were Monuments of Idolatrie in both ; It seemes that Nooker would commend Ezechiah , for not demolishing the Images of Salomons outlandish Gods ; But then it was Josiahs zeale without knowledge , that he demolished them . 2. We then might well suffer the Images of Jupiter , Dagon , Ashtarosh to stand before the people publickly , so they doe no harm● : and Papists and Lutherans say the Images of Christ and the Saints do● no harme , when the Pastors carefully teach the people , that there is no Dietie● nor God-h●ad dwelling in them . 3. Wee say the signe of the Crosse is a meere instrument of Idolatrie and Superstition , and what ever good intention , or pious signification was stamped on it , at the first , by mens carnall wisdome and will zeale , it no more made it good , then if upon the Image of Dagon , you would found the like good intention and pious signification . 9. Though Ezechiah was commended by God , it no more followeth his omission in not demolishing Salomons outlandish Idols must belawfull , and a part of his upright walking in ●● matters of religion , then because David is commended , as walking uprightly in all things , save in the matter of Uriah , that his numbering of the people , his revengefull attempt to destroy Nabal and all his , must also be a part of Davids walking uprightly before God. 10. Salomon had a warrant for the Brazen Image in the Temple , not to abolish it . But Ezechiah had no warrant not to Abolish the Brazen Serpent , after the people burnt Incense to it , even suppose the People should , upon the exhortation of the Priests , have desisted from burning Incense to it . I see not , if Images may be lawfull Remembrancers to us , so we adore them not ; But the Golden Calves , the Images that Salomon made to outlandish Gods , the Image of Diana , and all the heathen Images that the Word speaketh against should be brought into the Christian Churches , to teach us to flee , and eschew the adoring of these abominations , for we have as great need of Ceremoniall and Historicall remembrancers to teach us to eschew evill , as to admonish us to follow good . But the truth is , except we will be wiser then God , we need neither . Obj. Some things are of their owne nature scandalous , and cannot choose but breed offence as those sinkes of execrable filth which Josiah did turne out : Some things though not by nature generally , and of themselves , are generally turned to evill through a corrupt habit growne , and uncurably settled in the mindes of men , without the removall of the thing , as was the worshipping of the Brazen Serpent . But some , as the Crosse though subject either almost , or altogether to as much corruption , are yet curable with more facilitie and ease . Ans . Objects sinfull and so intrinsecally scandalous are to be removed , as the Image of Jupiter , Molech , both because sins , and and so not necessarie . 2. Because scandalous , for the truth is , even sins ( if we speake accurately ) are not scandalous actum secundo , in regard of our corruption , our sinnes may sad the Angels , but they are not properly scandalous to Angels , and therefore every thing actively scandalous , as scandalous is to be removed . 2. How doth Hooker prove that the Vessels made for Baal , are in their own nature more incurable then the signe of the Crosse ? You may remove the superstitious intention and Idolatrous use of any vessell , and turne it to a good use ; Yet Josiah burnt them to ashes . The like may be said of the Groves which he stamped to powder , and cast in the brook Kidron , And of the Chariots five of the Sunne , which he burnt with fire , and of the bones of dead men , not any of these , being of their owne nature more indifferent , and innocent creatures of God , were of their owne nature more scandalous , and more uncurable then the signe of the Crosse . The like may be said of Altars , and I pray are reasonable men , the Priests of the high places of their own nature uncurable ? are they not capable of repentance , and curable by doctrine ? yet 2 King. 23. 20. Josiah slew all the Priests of the high places . 3. Teaching may remove evil customes , otherwise how should the Gospell convert sinners , that are accustomed from the wombe to doe evill ? Jer. 13. 23. Jer. 22. 21. Ephes . 2. 1. 2. 3. 4. Tit. 3. 3. 4 5. therefore scandalous objects of the second kinde , are no more to be removed , then the Signe of the Crosse . 4. It is false , that scandalous objects of the third sort are more easily cured , except they be removed , for no humane prudence , when the signe of the Crosse , and the Brasen serpent , are sure , not necessarie in Gods worship . And when men have , and so still may abuse them to Superstition and Idolatrie , can make these being now actively scandalous , to be not actively scandalous , as no ar● can make a pite to be no pite . Indeed Gods ordinances , because necessarie , may bee cured , from scandall by teaching . But it is Gods only prerogative , by his commanding will to make a thing , not necessarie in his worship , to be necessarie , and to alter the nature of things , so as his command could have made the Brazen Serpent , to remaine a lawfull teaching Signe , and no scandalous object , and only he might have forbidden the burning of Incense to it . The Ancient Ignatius , or any had no warrant to make confession of Christ before enemies and mockers , by gestures or crossing , Paul did it not , Peter commandeth confession to be verball , 1 Pet. 3. 14. 15 , There be many ancient lawes , yea Divine and Apostolike constitutions acknowledged to be good , that the Church hath layd aside . Some things cannot be removed without danger of greater evils to succeed in their place . Wisedome must give place to necessitie . Seneca , Necessitas , quicquid coegit , defendit . Ans . 2. We know no necessitie to have , nor any danger to want such wares , as Surplice , Crossing , bowing to Altars , to elements , which sure the Apostolike Church wanted , both in speciè , and in individuo . The like Papists say for adoring of Images , that Hooker here saith , for Surplice , and the like Scandals . So doth the Jesuit Tannerus say , in . 22. to . 3 , dis . 5. de religione . q. ● . dub . 3. Quando dicitur Adorationem imaginum non esse licitam , qui non est scripta . Respo . ( inquit ) apostol● familiari Spiritus instinctu quadam Ecclesiis tradider●nt Servanda que non reliquerunt in scriptis — inter hujusmodi Traditiones est Imaginum Christi adoratio . Quest . VII . Whether or no to use the indifferent Customes of heathen and Papists , in the worship of God , be scandalous , WE are altogether of this mind , that a materiall Similitude between the truee Church and the false , is not scandalous . Because Rome holdeth that there is one God , it followeth not , therefore it is unlawfull for us to hold there is one God. 2. There is a formall Similitude , as because the heathen kill their children to Molech , ergo , the Children of Israel should not doe so to the Lord their God. M. Hooker granteth there should be a dis-similitude betweene the true Church and Heathens in this , and the Similitude ( say they ) is unlawfull . But 3. the Adversaries draw us to a third dis-similitude betweene the true Church , and the Popish , and heathenish Church , and this is a mixt Similitude , that we should use indifferent R●tes and Customes in Gods worship , as Crossing , new devised dayes , Surplice &c. which are used by Papists , and Heathens . This say our Adversaries , is not an unlawfull Similitude , yea with edification and profit ( say they ) we may thus farre conforme with them . 2. This conformitie doth gaine them , not Scandalize them ▪ say they . But we hold that this conformitie is unlawfull and a dissimilitude commanded . 1. It is expresly said Levit. 18. 3. I am the Lord your God , after the doings of the Land of Egypt , wherein ●e● dwelt , shall yee not doe : And after the doings of the Land of Canaan , whither I bring you , shall ye not doe ; Neither shall yee walks in their ordinances . 4. Ye shall doe my judgements , and keep min● ordinances , to walke therein , I am the Lord your God. Hence if God bee a God , in a peculiar manner , in covenant with his Church , then may not his Church take a rule of worship , and walking from other prophane Churches and people , such as Egypt , Canaan , and whorish Rome . There is an Instance given in things of their owne nature indifferent , Levit. 19. with the same Argument . 27. Ye shall not round the corners of your heads , ▪ neither shalt tho● marre the corners of thy Beard . 28. Yee shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead , I am the Lord. Certaine a greater scandall cannot be , then that those who are in Covenant with God , should borrow significant Ceremonies of sorrowing for the dead , Levit. 19. 19. Yee shall keepe my Statutes ? Thou shalt not let thy cattell gender with divers kinde : Thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed : Neither shall a garment mingled of linnen and wooll come upon thee . Hence there is a cleare opposition made betweene Gods statutes . Yee shall heepe my statutes , and the statutes of Canaan . The Can●●●●tes might weare Garments of linnen and wooll , and and ●owe mingled seed . But Deut. 2● . 9. Thou ( the Israel of God ) shall not sowe thy Vineyard with divers seeds : Why ? le●t the fruit of the seed which thou hast sowen , and the fruit of thy vi●●yard be defiled . The seed of the Nations was not defiled , though they did sowe mingled seed , Ergo , the Lord putteth some peculiar Character on his people , by this , to distinguish them from other Nations by giving these lawes to them , which did not oblige other Natio●● . 3. Wee make the Papists and the Heathen that have used white Garments , in the worship of God ▪ and crossing in the Sacraments , and the like to be our fathers ▪ where as wee are to disclaime them , and not to harden them so , as Israel did Egypt ▪ who said , Yee cannot serve your God , except in our golden Calves , by Gods argument Levit. 19 , Israel , and Canaan , Protestants , and Idolatrous Papists have one God , they have the same externall statutes , 4. What ●ve● is a professed way of being infected and sna●ed with the false religion of those who are at our doores , as Egypt and Canaan was to Israel ; and Papists to us , must be scandalous conformitie with them , and this argument is cleare , Levit. 18. 3. Yee shall not doe after the doings of the Land of Egypt ▪ wherein ye● dwell , nor after the doings of the Land of Canaan , whither I bring you ; Ergo , the danger is the greater , that we dwell beside Idolaters , and the publick practising of their rites , the more scandalous . 5. Wee sadden the spirits of the Godly , and lay a stumbling-block before the blind and weak , in that wee build Jeriche again , and with our tongue we lick , and heale the wound of the daughter of Babel , where as with our teeth we should byte it . 6. Learned and godly Cartwright , the Author of the booke of Discipline ; Amesius and others have cited Councels , as Concil . Braca . 73. decreed , That Christians should not deck their houses with Bay leaves , and greene boughs , that they should not keepe the first day of the moneth , because the Pagans did so . And another Councell , Concil . African . c. 27. forbade Christians to Celebrate Feast● , on the Birth day of the Martyrs , because Pagans did so ▪ Tertullian would not have Christians to sit after they had prayed ▪ because Pagans did so . 7. The mark and Character of the Beast is an externall discriminating note , of its owne nature , indifferent . Yet to receive it , is a matter of Plague● and wrath from God , Rev. 13. 15 1● . To these they reply . 1. Those same Ceremon●es ▪ because the sa●●● , which the heathen used , were not forbidden the Jewes . But , th●se things ( saith M. Hooker ) are not indifferent being used as signes of immederate and hopelesse lamentation , for the dead , and in effect , it is that which Paul saith , 1 Thess . 4. ●3 . Sorrow not as they doe , which have no hope . as Deut. 14. 1. Yee are the children of the Lord your God , ye● shall not cut your selves , nor make you baldnesse between● your eyes for the dead , nor i●●● hence proven ( saith Hooker ) That God did frame his people of set purpose , unto any utter dis-si●●ilitude with either Egyptians , or other Nations . Ans . 1. Ceremonies may be either the same . 1. in number . or 2. materially . or 3. formally and Theologically . The first identitie and samenes is most proper . And whereas Morton , and M. Burges , would insinuate that God forbade these same Ceremonies in number , it needeth no refutation . God never forbade things , physically , and by way of contradiction , unpossible . The same murthering of our brother forbidden to Cain , the same in number , is forbidden in number , and individually to no mortall man , except the Jewes had had the same heads , haire , beards , browes , that the Canaanites had , the same ( I meane ) in number , this were to make the lawes of God a matter of laughter to men . 2. Where as Hooker would have God to forbid , not the same Ceremonies Materially , or an utter dis-similitude , but the same Ceremonies of the Heathen , with the signification which the Heathen did put on them , contrary to Scripture , as upon the cutting of their flesh , they did impose this signification , that they should sorrow for the dead , as those that have no hope . 1 Thess . 3. we see then 1. all the Ceremonies of the Heathen , as the cutting of the flesh , the killing of their Children to Molech . So they be formallized , and charactered with a signification according to the word of God , shall be lawfull . Put then Scripturall and lawfull significations , either of faith in Christ already incarnate , or of Christian conversation , as of moderate mourning for the dead , such as was in Abraham , who mourned for Sarahs death , and in our Lord Jesus , who wept for the death of Lazarus ; And so the Sacrificing of Bullocks , Sheep , Rams , yea , Circ●●cising and Sacrificing of children to Molech , shall not be condemned as a complyance , and Symbolizing with the Jewes and Idolaters . Nor can any say that shedding of blood to God , and killing of men must be now forbidden , I answered before shedding of blood , with this Scripturall and lawfull signification , and as an indifferent means of the worshiping of God , is no other way forbidden in the first 7. bl● , then because it is not commanded in Scripture . But this is no forbiding at all of worship , or of new positive meanes of worship ; So you 1. make it not a part of the word of God , and necessarie worship . 2. So it be materially indifferent , and be instamped with a lawfull and Scripturall signification , as we suppose it to be . 3. Nor doth the Word any where condemne killing of men as a worship , except that i● commandeth it not as a worship , which we say , as it is a breach of the sixt Commandement , it is forbidden as man-flaughter , but not as unlawfull worship . But then how will Morton and Burges justifie . Circumcision which they say is lawfull , yet , so it have not a Jewish intention , nor any necessitie or efficacie imposed on it ? it is a degree of murther , and why may not , upon the same ground cutting the flesh for the dead , launcing of the body with knives , the Popish selfescourging be lawfull ? Now the text signifieth no allowance at all of the rounding of the corners of the head , and the cutting of the body ▪ and how shall Hooker prove that only heathenish and Pagan-rounding of the haire , and cutting of the flesh , as they betoken mourning in a hopelesse manner for the dead were forbidden , 1 Thess . 3. divers of the Pagans , amongst whom is Phocillides and many others taught the resurrection of the dead , They might then sow their land with divers seeds , cut their flesh for the dead , yea , and observe times , be dismayed at the signes of the heaven , as the heathen . And what ever the Pagans did in their worship , they might doe so to the Lord their God , and doe all the judgements , ordinances , and lawes of Egypt . Canaan , Turkie , of Rome materially , even to the falling downe before Bread , sacrisicing of Beasts , cutting of the haire , &c. 3. What Hooker meaneth by a dis-similitude , with the heathen of set purpose , is easily knowne . Only in things wicked and unlawfull ( saith he ) or Idolatrous , or against the law of God , we are to be dislike to the heathen , because it is said , Yee shall doe my judgements , for he expresly denyeth that there was any danger of infection by reason of nearnesse to the Egyptians , and Canaanites , in these indifferent things , or that they were forbidden , because the Pagans used them , they were unlawfull , though the Pagans bad ever used them . Ans . Tannerus the Jesuite saith , tom . 3. in 22. disp 9. de fide , spe . q. 6. dub . 9. abstinendum est ab omni speciè male pr●pter scandalum , ratio , quia scandalum tali cas● oritur ex vi actionis ipsius , non aliter f●r● quam si mala esset , then though the Nations heathenish rites were not ill , yet being not necessarie to the Jewes , and having appearance of ill , in that they are Characters of the worship of strange Gods , scandall must ref●●e from the using heathenish Ceremonies , vi actionis , from the nature of the using of them , as if they were intrin●ecally ill . 2. If it were no more but this , they were so much the worse , and more scandalous ▪ that beside that they are intrins●cally evill , yet they are the Statutes of Egypt and Can●a● , and not the Statutes of the Lord. So either these words must bee idly set downe , amongst whom yee dwels , and to which the Lord bringeth you . Or they must adde a degree of wickednesse to the sinnes that they were the sinnes of Egypt , and of Canaan , and so they are forbidden , both as sinnes , and also for the bare Similitude , as the words imply , for God will not only have them to walke in right judgements , but also in his righteous judgements , because ●aith hee , ( I am the Lord ) and ye shall not doe after such and such a way , because such are the doings and wayes of Egypt , and Canaan . Ergo , Though all were intrinsecally evill , that are forbidden of this kinde , they partake also of a farther degree of morall evill , in that Egypt , Canaan , and Idolatro●s Papi●●● doe these same things to their Idols . Hooker addeth . Wee must be unlike to Rome , not only in Doctrine , but in Ceremonies and Govern●●●● , and especially Government not commanded in the Word , for all is Papish ▪ though lawfull and agreeable to the word of God , whatsoever Rome h●● received without commandement of Gods word . Ans . The●e is not required properly a conformitie in us with Rome in doctrinals , as if Rome were our Rule , nor is the word of God properly conforme to the Protestant religion , but the Protestant religion must be conforme to the Word . Wh●●nesse is not properly like to Snow or Milke , but Milke or Snow are like to whitenesse . Nor have we properly a 〈…〉 with Papists in doctrine , they are not our patterne , nor wee theirs . 2. We do not plead for a Government in all things to be commanded in the Word , but to be warranted by the Word , either according to command or promise , or morall practise , fo● the Scripture is our Rule , but 1. not in miraculous things . 2. Not in things temporarie , as Communitie of Goods . 3. Not in things Literally exponed , as to cut off our hands and feet . 4. Not in things of Art and Science , as to speake Latine , to demonstrate conclusions of Astronomie . 5. It is not properly our Rule in Circumstances , which are but naturall conveniences of time , place , and person , and such like . But it is our Rule 1. in fundamentalls of salvation . 2. In all morals of both first and second table . 3. In all institutions , and wee conceive the Government of the Church to be a proper institution , to wit , it is a supernaturall ordinance , or helpe above nature to guide the Church to a supernaturall happinesse , nor can the Church be governed by the light of nature , or by the rules of morall Philosophie , or civill prudence or humane lawes , as Cities , Common-wealths , and Kingdomes , are . 4. It is a rule in Circumstantials of worship : because some time some thing , as the Lord , day is both worship , and a Circumstantiall of worship ; but not properly a Circumstance , in all these the Church , as the Church must ●●ir by the Word of God. 3. What ever is in Rome in physicall or natural circumstances is not by us judged Popis●● . But what ever religious observance Symbolicall signe , new worship , such as ●renging to Bread , Altars , humane Festivals , Surplice , and the like , that are neither things of nature , nor 2. things of prudence and civill policie , nor 3. Miraculous things , nor 4. Things of art and science , nor 5. meere Circumstances , and yet are added to the worship of God ▪ not necessarie in themselves , not warranted by Precept , practice , or promise in the word of God , we take to be devised by the wil of men , and if by Papists , so much the more unlawfull , and may well be tearmed Popish , as Popish is contradistinguished from that which is ●ound and warranted by the Word , and that which is not thus agreeable to the Word , is repugnant thereunto , and either Popish , or worse , or heathenish . Hooker . The question is , whether wee may follow Rome in orders , Rites and Ceremonies , wherein we doe not thinke them blamable , or else ought to devise others , and to have no conformitie with Rome , no not so much as in these . Ans . We never dreamed of such a Question , it is as if one should have formed such a question to debate with Moses , Whither may we follow Egypt and Canaan in rounding the corners of our head , and cutting our flesh for the dea● , in sowing o●r land with mingled seeds , &c. or ought we to devise others the like , and have no Conformitie with them , no not so much as in these ? Now Moses gave never leave to Israel to devise either these , or any other the like . The Question supposeth two things for granted , which are plainly false . 1. That if we may refuse Popish Ceremonies as scandalous , because Papists devised them , that therefore the worship of God hath need of other Symbolical and religious signes of the like nature , which we ought to devise . But the worship of God neither needeth these nor any Phylactaries of that kind . 2. It supposeth , we doe not thinke the Rites of Rome blamable , this is a begging of the question , for both we blame them as positive religious Rites beside , and so contrary to the Word , and because Romish , and so in a high degree scandalous . Hooker . When Reason evicteth that all such Ceremonies are not to be abolished they answer , they doe only condemne Ceremonies unprofitable , or Ceremonies in stead whereof as good , or better may be devised , so they cannot get out of the Bryars . Ans . 1. Who answereth so ? Hooker should have knowne , that if the Testament of Christ warrant not Ceremonies , they and all their kind are unprofitable , and to be abolished , whither they lay in the wombe of the mother of ●ornications , or be bastards of any other Mother . 2. Yea , we condemne all such Ceremonies , because unnecessarie , as devised by the will or lust of men , for all necessatie and usefulnesse of positive , religious , and teaching observances is from the will of God. And when he saith , we condemne only all unprofitable Ceremonies , wee are not in the briars , for he saith , his owne Ceremonies are unprofitable briars , for we condemne them as unprofitable . Chartwright , that godly and learned witnesse of Jesus Christ . from whom Hooker would bring this answer , saith , Popish Ceremonies are not to be used to adorne the worship , when as good or better may be established . But he meaned never that as good positive Symbolicall rites , without the word of God , can be lawfully devised at all , this should have been proven from Cartwrights words . But ( saith he ) we retaine these , because we judge them profitable yea so good , that if we had either simply taken them cleane away or else removed them , so as to place others in their stead , wee had done worse . But who authorized them to sit judges ? the burden of proving them inconvenient lyeth on them . Ans . 1. It is a proud Reply . Wee retaine popish Ceremonies , because we judge them profitable , where as the question is not what the Prelates ( who must bee called the Church ) judge them to be , but what they are , for it is a farre other question , who should sit Judges ( though we can prove Christ never made Prelates at all , and so he never made them judges ) and whether the Ceremonies be profitable or not ? When Prelates say , we retaine Popish Ceremonies , because we judge them profitable , it is to say , We judge Popish Ceremonies to be profitable , because we judge them profitable . For we say to retaine them , is to passe a law and a judgement that they are profitable . But our ▪ argument is against their judgeing them to be profitable and against their retaining them . Might not Pharisees say as much ? Wee retaine the precepts and traditions of men used by our fathers , because , we judge them profitable : and who authorized Christ and his Disciples to judge the Church ? the burden of proving them inconvenient , lyeth on the Disciples . Christ said their Ceremonies were the doctrines of men , and so unlawfull : and the like argument bring wee against the Ceremonies , and so they must be unprofitable . 2. If the Church make , or retaine lawes beside , and without the Word , they are under the burden of proving them to be profitable , for they affirme , and ▪ affirmanti incumbit probatio , for they ought to give another reason , of their lawes , then we judge ; We affirme , it is Gods prerogative to say that . 3. If Prelates should doe worse to have cleane removed these , or brought others in their place ▪ Then must the Prelaticall Church be better then the Apostolike Church , for they neither had these , nor any in their stead , except they make us see that Peter and Paul dispensed the Word and Sacraments clothed either with lineing Rochets , and crossing the aire with the Thumbe , or then they adorned Word and Sacraments , with other the like mysticall Rochets , or some merry toyes like crossing the aire with the Thumbe , and if not , they did worse then our Prelats , who raise bloody warr●s in three Kingdomes , for such fooleries , and for an office , which of old , for shame , had no kinred nor house , but mans law , jus humanum , by their owne grant . But that ( saith Hooker ) wherein the Israelit●● might not be like to the Egyptians and Canaanites , was such as peradventure as had beene no whitlesse unlawfull , although those Nations had never been , I would know what one thing was in these nations , and is here forbidden , being indifferent in it selfe , yet forbidden only because they used it . Ans . This is not our argument , I am not to say , the only reason , why the Lord forbade these rites , was because the Egyptians and Canaanites used them . But it is enough for our purpose , that God useth this reason , Ye● shall not doe so to the Lord your God. Yee shall not doe after the doings of the Land of Egypt , or of the Canaanites , Deut. 12. 30. 31. See that then inquire not after their Gods , saying how did these Nations serve their God ? even so will I doe likewise , Levit. 18. 3. 4. This is enough to prove that it is a strong argument , and Gods argument to prove that a worship , that Heathen useth to their Gods , though in it owne nature indifferent , can not lawfully be given to the Lord , it wanting all warrant in Gods word , because heathens doe so to their Gods and it is cleare to me , Deut. 12. 2. Yee shall utterly d●stroy all the places wherein the Nations , which ye possesse , served their Gods , upon the high Mountaines , and under every greene tree . 3. And you shall breake downe their Altars , and breake their Pillars , and burne their Groves with fire , and you shall hew downe the Graven Images of their Gods , and destroy the Names of them out of this place . 4. Yee shall not doe so to the Lord your God. 5. But unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose out of all your Tribes , to put his name there , even unto his habitation shall yee seeke , and thither shall you come . There is nothing more indifferent , then the place of worship ▪ yet doth the Lord in these words Yee shall not doe so to the Lord your God , forbid to worship God in the place , where the Canaanites worshipped their Idols . And this proveth our point that Rites used by heathen indifferent in their owne nature , as , place , stone-altars , hils , are not to be used , as positives with a new signification ( as our Ceremonies have ) to the Lord our God , because Heathens have done so to their Idol-Gods . Wee know the Lord may have , and hath other reasons in the depth of his unsearchable wisdome , why he forbiddeth some things of their owne nature indifferent , then because heathen and wicked men doe so , as he forbade the eating of the tree of knowledge , a thing in it selfe indifferent , not for any such conformitie with wicked men . And Hooker yeeldeth our argument to be concludent , when he saith , Notwithstanding some fault undoubtedly thire is in the very resemblance with idolaters . Then notwithstanding all that Hooker saith on the contrarie , our argument is good . The rest of this subject is more fully and learnedly discussed by others , and therefore no more of this . Peace bee on the Israel of God , and to the most high Dominion and Glorie . Amen . FINIS . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A92138-e330 Isa . 9. 6. Isa . 35 1 , 2. Psal . 97. 1. Vel lubentes , vel vi attracti decreta Dei se quamur necesse est . Ille crucem sceleris pretium tulit , hic diadema . Iuven. Saty. 10. Ier. 51. 35. Rev 17. 3. 5. Isa . 62. 1 , 2 ▪ Notes for div A92138-e1120 Iob 37. 23. Iob 33. 13. Mal. 1. 8. Notes for div A92138-e20880 Christ hath not instituted a mutable Church Government . Some things Morall , some things naturall in Gods worship . Circumstances either meerly morall , or 2 meerly Physicall , or 3. mixt . Our Physic ●● Circumstances are all easily known and numbred . Circumstances , and such and such circumstances The Scripture teacheth not meer circumstances , but supposeth them . Time and place of Ceremonies need not be proved . 1. Argum. to prove that the Platform of Church-Government , is not mutable at mens will. Act. 15. The Scriptures way of teaching that indifferent things are alterable , is it self unalterable . 2 , Argum. The Scripture shall not teach when we sin in Church Policie , when not , if the Platform be alterable at mens wi●● . There is no reason why some things Positive of Church-Policie are alterable , some not . 3. Argum. 3. Book , Eccles . Polic , pag. 117 , 118. The place , 1 Tim , 6. 13. discussed . Pauls cloak of lesse consequence , then Positives of policie . Bilson of perpetuall Gover. c. 3. Hooker of Eccles . Polic . l. 3. 4. Arg. Christ the Head of hi● Church i● the externall poli●y thereof . A promise of Pardoning of sin made to the right use of the keys proveth discipline to be a part of the Gospel . The will of Christ as King , is the Rule of the Government of his house . Hooker , Eccles . Policie , l. 3. 123 , 124. Things of Policie , because lesse weighty then the greater things of the Law , are not therefore mutable at the pleasure of men . Basil . l. de Fide. Order requireth not a Monarchical Prelate . How the care and wisdom of Christ proveth , that Christ hath left an unalterable platforme in his testament , Mr. Prynne Truth triumphing over falsehood , p , 113. 114. Collat. Roinal . cum , Io. Hartio . Sect. 2. p 40 Christ the only immediate King and head , and Law-giver of his Church without any deputy heads or Vicars , D. Roinald . 16. d. 41. 5. Arg. As Moses and David were not to follow their own spirit , far lesse is the will of the Church a rule to shape an unalterable Government . Da. Dicksonus , Expos . Analyti . in Epist , a● heb . c. ● . v. 5. Pag●i , Ari●●ont . Vatablus in notis , Tostatus in 1 Chron 18. 19. 2. 7. Ista Scriptura tam poterat fieri per Angelos quam per deum . Tostatus , Q. 1. ibid. Cornel , a Lapide , com . 1. Paralip , 29. 19. D●us ergo in tabula descripsittotam ideam , Templi alioqui delincatio ● Davide vix intelligi potuisset . Degrees de Templ . Ded. p. 73. Lavater , Ex ●o quod , ●dificium et vasa secundum formam sibi ostensam facere debuit , significatur in ●ultu dei non secundum hum●nam ratio●●m , sed verbum dei agendum esse , quo patefecit quomodo coliv●lit . Si Salomon suas imaginationes fuisset sequitus Templum aliâ form â construxisset , vasa aliter fecisset et plura quam deus prescripserat . Ceremonials of Moses his Law , are of lesse weight then Morals , but not of lesse divine authority . Two notes of Divinity ought to be in the New Testament Ceremonials , which were in Divine Ceremonies . Eccles . Policy , book 3. pag. 122. How Moses doing all according to the pattern proveth an immutable platforme . Gods care for us leadeth us to think he hath given us a better guide then naturall reason , in all Positive Morals of Church-Policie . Theologia , Atramentaria . Book of Eccles . Polici● , 3. pag. 113 , 114. The occasionall writing of things in Scripture , no reason why they are alterable . Papists pretend that things are not written in the word , because of the various occurrences of Providence . Horantius Loc. Com. lib. 2. c. 11. fol. 129. Quaecunque audi●t , loqu●tur , & que futura sunt , annunciabit vobis , quasi dicer●● , Quoti●s r●i occasio fuerit , revelabit vobis . Quae ● re vestra esse viderit , suggerit , ac quoties revelare exped●e●it . l. 2. c. 12. fol. 132. Sed quis non vide●● multa verbo esse tradita , quae Ecclesiae solum memoriae , & mulius ●●mirum Scriptis sunt mandata ? Hooker , 3. Book , pag. 114. 115. Horantius , loc . Catho . Lib. 2. c. 12 f●l . 131. Turrian . to . de fide , spe . et Charit . disp , 20. duo . 2. Bell●rm . de Verb dei non script . l. 4. c. 3. That there was no Vnif●rm Platform of Government in the time of Moses and the Apostles , is no Argument that there is none now . Horantius , in loe . Catholic ▪ l ▪ 2. c. 12. fol. 1 ●1 . Sanderus , de visib . Monarch . l. 1. c. 5. ● . 13. Malderus ▪ in 22. de virtu . Theolog . q. 1. de Object . fidei tract . de trad . q. unic . dub . 1. Fundamentals were by succession delivered to the church , yet are they not alterable . The church of Ierusalem as perfected in Doctrine , and Discipline , is our patern . Acts 1. 4. Mr. Prynne , Truth Triumphing , &c. p. 128. Mr. Prynne , Truth Triumphing , p. 128. The indifferency of some things in the Apostolick Church , cannot infer that the Government is alterable . Ibid. Ib. p. 129. Mr. Prynne , Truth triuphing , p. 130 , 131 , 132 , 133. The Argument of Moses his doing all to the least pin , in the Tabernacle by speciall direction , considered . The Ark of Noah proveth the same . Calvin , Com. in Gen. 6. 22. Quare discamus per omnegenus impedimenta perrump●re , nec locum dare pravis cogitationibus quae s● Dei verbo opponunt , hunc enim honorem haberi sibi , flagitat Deus , ut ●um si●am●●s pronobis seper● . P. Martyr in loc . Nihil negligit fides , omnia pro viribus exoquitur , quaecunque scit deum v●lle : Musculus Moses fidem & obedientiam Noah comprehendit , qua secundum verbum dei arcam construxit , Vatablus Hebraismus pro , quo fecit Noah prorsus , ut ci preceperat deus . Horantius in loc . Catholic . l. 2. c. 12. so . 13● Constatcom plura Dei spiritum post Christi ascensionem ecclesiam do euisse , quorum , etsi a Christo universal●m quandam , & in genere cognitionem habuissent fideles : non tamen in specie aut certè in numero , & singulariter unde universa fidei nostrae mysteria , & que ad religionem spectarent ( intelligit Ceremonias Ecclesiae ) omnia literis conscripta esse non sine igno ratione affirmare potest ( Calvinus . ) Mr. Prynne , Truth Triumphing p. 134. Hooker , 3. book Eccle. pol. p 93. Usher in his Answer to the Jesuits challenge of Traditions pag. 3● , 36. Formalists acknowledge additions to the word of God , contra●y to Deut 4. 2. & 12. 32. The same way that Papists do . Moses and Canonick writers , are not Law-givers under God , but organs of God in writing , & meer reporters of the Law of God. Papists say , that the Chrch is limited in making Ceremonies , both in matter and number , and so do Forma lists . Four wayes positives are alterable by God only . All things though never so smal , are a like unalterable , if they be stamped with Gods authority ▪ speaking in the Scripture . By what authority Canonicall additions of the Prophets and Apostles were added to the Books of Moses . Canonick writers how immediatly led by God. The Characters of Formalists , Ceremonies , & Papists Traditions one and the same . 1 Book , eccles . Pol. p. 42. Pag. 44. What is it to be contained in Scripture , and how far it maketh any thing unlawfull according to Hooker . The Fathers teach that all things in Worship , are to be rejected that are no● in scripture Basil . in Ethicis , Reg 26. Cyril Alex. Glaphyro in G●●t . l. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Chrys . hom . 10. in Ioan. 59. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Concilen ▪ Tridenti . c. 1. Sess . 4. Synodus traditiones ●ine scripto , atque scripturam paripictat is affectu , ac reverentia suscipit ac veneratur . Ibib. p. 46. It derogateth nothing from the honour of God in Scripture . that he be consulted in the meanest things . Hooker l. 2. p. 60. How things are in Scripture . Pag. 56. Some actions super naturally morall , some morall naturally or civilly , others are mixt . Some habituall reference to Scripture is required in all our Morall actions . Book ● . Eccl. pol. p. 54. 2. Book . p. 78. Works of Superogation holden by Hooker . Tanner . in 22. to 3. disp . 5. de Relig. q. 2. Dub. 3. Aquinas 22. q. 25. Art. 3. Quando dicitur adorationem imaginum , non esse Scriptam adeoque non esse licitam in cultu dei respondetur . Apostoli familiari spiritus instinctu quaedam ecclesiis tradiderunt servanda , quae non reliquerunt in scriptis ; sed in observatione fidelium per successionem : Colloquio Helv●tiorum ita . Eckius , Collat. 44. concl . 4. Audet ▪ Hen. Linick disserit enim . Cont. Luther , Zwinglium ) dicere deum in nostris imaginibus Christianis nullam habere Complacentiam : Quis ●oe ei retulit , sacrae literae non contradicunt . Whither our obedience in Church-policy , be ultimately resolved in this saith the Lord , or in this saith the church . Two things in the externall worship . 1. Substantials . 2. Accidentals . The question who should be judge of things necessary or indifferent is nothing to the present controversie . 1. Honour . 2. Praise . 3. Glory . 4. Reverence . 5. Veneration . 6. Devotion . 7. Religion 8. Service . 9. Worship 10. Love. 11. Adoration , what they are . Two acts of Religion , imperated , or commanded , and elicite ▪ Raphael . to . ● . in 22. q. 81. Art. 4. disp . vnica . Honoring of Holy men is not worship . Obedience . Adoration . The Religious object , with the act of reverencing , maketh adoration to be Religious ; but a civill object , except the intention concur maketh not Religious adoration of a civill object . Martyr , comment . in 1 King. c. 1. v. 16. What worship is ? Worship is an immediate honoring of God , but some worship hon●reth him more immediately , some lesse . A twofold intention in worship . De la Tor. tom . 2. in 22. q. 94. Art. 2. Si quis inter●ellarit idolum dicens expressis verbis , Jupiter , deus meus adjuva me , quamvis conarctur fingere istam invocationem , de●estans interius Jovem , et omnes falsos d●os , vere idolatra esset , quia ab illis verbis in separabilis est significatio ex hibendi cultum Divinum idolo . Vncovering of the head , is Veneration , not Adoration . Corduba , l. 1. q. 5. dub . 6. Consecration of Churches taken two wayes . Consecration of Churches condemned Durand ▪ Rati . l. 1. c. 6. Eusebius , l. 8. c. 8. 9 , l. 10. c. 2 , 3. Hooker . ecl . pol. 5. book p , 208. Mr. Hookers fancied Morall grounds of the holinesse of Churches under the New Testament answered . The place 1 Cor 11. Have ye not houses , &c. Makethnothing for hallowing of Churches . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nor the place , Psal . 74. 8. The Synague not Gods house as the Temple was . Arg. 1. The negative Argument from Scripture valid . a Morton defense of Cere . gener . q ▪ 1. Sect. 12. b Burges , rejoynder , p. 41. c Gregor . de Valent. to . 3 dis 6. q. 2. re● . ad . 2. obj . Constat quandoquo dici non preceptum id quod adeo non est preceptum , ut sit etiam contra preceptum . Not to command , is to forbid d Morton gener . defe , c. 1. Sect. 6 , 7. e Burges , rejoynder , c. 1. Sect. 7. p. 34. Of Davids purpose to build the Temple , how far it was lawfull . Arg. 2. Of Additions . a Basil . in morall . b Hieron . in Matth. 23. d Cyprian epist . 68. e Chrys . in 2 Tim. 1. f Procopius , in Deut. 12. g Turtullian , de prescript adver . heret . h Morton , Burges , supra . c. 2 , 3. p. 136. i Duvallius , 2. delegibus , q. 5. art . 1. res . ad . 3. Hoc tantum facito , id est , non offer as alia victimarum genera filios aut fili●s d●o , ut Gentiles . k Valent. tom . 3. disp . 6. q. 2. resp . ad . 2 ▪ l Vasquez , tom ▪ 2. in 12. desp . 152. c. 14. Qui addit novum , non dicitur declinare . m Bellarm. de pont . l. 4. c. 17. Moses non alloquitur Principes , quorum est leges condere ( et sic addere ) sed populum e●ius est obedire . n Suarez de trip . virit . disp . 5. Sect. 4. Additiones non ▪ corrumpentes sed perficientes , non sunt additiones , dat● enim sunt a Spiritu sancto . o Ita Cajeta . p Bannes , in 22. q. 1. Art. 10. Non adduntur ▪ verbis dei ipsa dei verba . All additions , even these which perfecteth the word are unlawfull . p Didocl . in alt . Damasc . p. 504 , 505. q Vasqu . to . 2. in 12. disp . 154. cap. 3. Respondetu● pontificem quidem nec extra generale concilium nec inill● posse Statuere aliquid de fide quod non contineatur in principiis & articulis revelatis aut certissime ex iis colligatur . r Vasq . ib. Every Morall Act is to be warranted by the word . Arg. 3. What is mans in worship is not Lawfull . a Zanchius , Com. in Hos . Colligimus bin● omnes cultus qui non sunt ex Deo , ex voluntate Dei , ex cius verbo legeque desumpti , sed ex nobis aliisqite hominibus exeogitati sine Dei verbo damnari . b Pareus , Humanum inventum . What is ours in Gods worship , is unlawfull . Scripture teacheth us us every practicall way . c Rich. Hooker , discip . book 2. p. 55 , 56. 58 , 59. 8. Not all actions in man , but Morall actions onely are regulated by the word . d Eccles . 3 , 4. 2. 4. Luk. 21. 24 1 Thess . 5 , 6 , 7. Helps of faith , and the formall object of faith are different . e Sanderson in his Sermon . f Hooker 2 book , Eccles . Pol. p. 60 , 61. Naturall reason is a part of Scripture . Iackson on the Creed , 1. Part. Sanderson . What certitude of Faith is required in all our actions of our daily conversation . Tit. 2. 11. 12. The Scripture a warrant for the morality of our acts of the second table , as for the acts of worship . Many actions of the 2. table are mixt , and not purely Morall , all the actions of the first table are purely morall . The contr●ry is the clear judgement of Papists , as S●●rc● teacheth us , tom . de virt . et statu Relig. l. 2. de superst . Cap. 1. Scriptura ipsa praecipit ●bscr●are vot● que qua tamen voluntarie non ex precepto promittuntur , et ratio naturalis dictat , non solum esse facienda bona praecepta , sed etiam esse utile , plura bona et honesta facere , quam prec●pta sunt . — Und● etiam H●r●tici ipsi suos pe●uliares modos et ritus introducunt in modo colendi Deum , qui non sunt in Evangelio vel Divina lege praecepti , imo nec ipsi inter se in bujusmodi ritibus comveniunt , &c. The Iesuit speaketh of the Ceremonies of Lutherans ▪ and the Prelaticall faction in England . What is beside the Word of God in Morals , is contrary to the Word of God. a Sanderson Sermo . b Morton Burges Supra . c Paybod . par . 2. S. 14. p. 45. d D. Iackson on the Creed , l. 3. c ▪ 7. p. 275. The vanity of the perfection of Scripture in essentials , not in accidentals . e Giles Widows , in his lawlesse kneelles Puritan ( g ) Bannes to . 3. 22. q. 1. art . 1. Omne quod non est ex fide , idest , quod fit contra propriam conscienti●● est peccatum . f Vasquez to . 1. 12. dis . 59. q. 19. Art 6. c. 2. h Vasquez to . 1. disp . 65. c. 1. i Angelus verbo Dubium c. 1. k Corduba l. 3. q. 4. l Navir . in cap. de Penitentia dub . 7. n. 8. m Vasquez to . 1. disp . 66. cap. 9. Nec subditus dubius de justitia belli potest parere , quamdiu dubius manet . n Adrianus in quod libet , punct . 2. ad art . 2. Milites dubii cligerent sic partem dubiam & expo●erent se periculo injuste occidendi et praedandi non eundo tantum pecearent non obediendo . o Suarez de Tripl . virt . Theol. Tract . 3. disp . 14. Sect. 6. p Silvester verbo belli . 3. q. 1 , c. 4. q Gratian. d. 23. quest . 1. Quod culpatur . r Sanches jesuita Cordubensis in decal . Tom. 2. lib. 6. cap. 3. Num. 3. Whatsoever is not of faith , &c. how true . Doubting condemneth . Papists say the Srcipture in generall is perfect , but not in particulars of worship , and so say Formalists . w Scotus , Prolog . in senten . q. 3. ad art . 3. Terminus praefixus [ Theologiae ] quantum ad revelationem ▪ Divinam est ●orum qu●●u●● in●sadra Scriptura , sicut habetur ult . Apocalyps . Si quis ●pposucrit ad ista , apponet ei Deus plagas quae contine●●ur in Scriptura , & que possunt clici de ipsis x Suarez de tripl . virt . Theolog. Tract . 1. disp . 5. Sect. 4. Ad perfectionem non est , quod omnia credenda contineat explicite , satis est enim quod contineat mysteria nostrae redemptionis , & substantialia fundamenta Ecclesiae , cum mediis necessarijs ad salutem . y Bellar. de Effec . Sacrament . cap ▪ 32. respons . ad Arg. 2. Christus ad plenum nos instruxit ( in Scriptura ) de vcro Dei cultu . Bellar. Respondet , id verum est de instructione generali , non autem de particulari . z Vasquez Tom. 2. in 1 ▪ 2. disp . 151. cap. 3. Nihil novi ( propositi ) Statuere possunt , quod non pertineat ad pristi●um statum cujusque conservandum — pro libito ferre legem certe non licet . a Bannes To. 3. in 22. q. 1. Art. 10. ad . arg . 3. Scriptura indicat nobis Divini ●uminis sensum , non tamen in individuo , & in specie sed in communi & generali quadam ratione . b And Duvallius in 2. Thomae . tract . de legib . q. 5. Art. 1. ad Arg. 2. Scriptura est sufficiens , quia ipsa omnia , tam ered●●da quam agenda impli●ite contineat , & propterea expresse ad Ecclesiam tanquam ad Columnam veritatis , tam in fide , quam in preceptis bene vivendi nos remittit . What is only negative in Gods worship , cannot be commanded . Opinion of sanctity & Divine necessity , not essentiall to false worship . a Morton , Innocency of ceremonies generall defense c. 1. S. 15. b Suarcz , to . de trip . vi●t . theol . tract . 1. dis . 5. S. 4. Haec vero & similia ( traditionalia non scripta ) non adduntur scripturis ut fiant qua●i partes ●jus ( quod potest etiam censeri prohibitum ) sed adduntur ut cr●denda & servanda . The distinction of worship essentiall and accidentall of Gods generall and particular will is to be rejected . a Morton gener . def . cap. 1. S. 22. b Burges Treatise of kneeling . cap. 2. p. 2. a Driedo de Libert Christ . l. 3. c. 3. ad arg . 3. Non est in potestate legislatoris prout voluerit obligare ad mortale & veniale sed hoe provient ex materiaegravitate . b Vasquez Tom. 2. in 12. disput . 154. c. 3. Neque enim in voluntate legislator is est obligare vel non obligare . a Burges rejoynd c. 2. S. 7. p. 179. a Suarez de relig . to . 2. de houest v●ti lib. 1. c. 1. n. 8. 9. b Bellar. de esfic . Sacram. l. 2 c. 32. ad arg . 2. c Suarez de tripl . virtut . tract . 1. dis . 5. Sect. 4. d Cajetan opusc . to . 1. tract . 27. e Sotus de justific . l. 7 c. 6. ar . 1 f Bellar. de verbo non Scripto . g Douna . l. 3. c. 36. h 3 Book p. 153. i Sutluvius , de Presbyt . c. 11. p. 67. k Cyprian epist . 74. Vnde ista traditio ? &c. si in Evangelio praecipitur , aut in Apostolorum Epistolis , aut actibus continetur , & observetur Divina et sanctahaes traditio . The distinction of divine and of Apostolick Traditions rejected . l Beza an in loc . a Burges rejoynder , cap. 1. Sect. 16. p. 90. Circumstances not positive religious observances as Ceremonies are . a Hogo Grotius de jure belli , l. c. 20. n. 48. Arg. 4. Against humane Ceremonies , because they usurp the essential properties of Divine ordinances . b Levit. 20. 8. Exod. 20. 11. 16 , 17. Exod. 29. 29. 33. 36 , 37. Exod. 40. 9. cap. 2. 10. cap. 26. 1 , 2 , 3. cap. 27. 1 , 2. a Hooker , Book 3. p. 129. a Estius , 1 , 3. dist . 37. S. 14. b Palud . m. 3. d. 9. q. 1. art . 2. c Cajet . in 3. q. 25. art . 3. d Vasquez to . 3. de Ado. disp . 103. c. 4. e Ainsworth , commu . of Saints . b Burges Rejoinder c. 3. Sect. 9. p. 279. And in a Treatise of kneeling , c. 18. q. 4. p. 57. c Vasquez 3. p. To. 1. de ador . 103. c. 4. Cum nos eas form as quibus Deus apparuit d●pingimus , nolumus aliud quam bistoriam illam , & effectum ob oculos pon●re . d Aquin. 12. q. 102. art . 6. ad . 7. Et idco per aspectum hujus signi induccbantur in memoriam suae legis . a Just . Martyre Dialog . cum Tryph. ante medium . b Irenaeus l. 4. c. 30. c Epiphanius heres . d Chrys . hom . 27. in Gen. e Ambros lib. 1. de Abraham cap. 4. We owe subjection of Conscience , collaterall only to the word . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The spirit worketh not with Ceremonies . Burges , rejoynder , c. 1. S. 15. p. 57 , 58. ( b ) Ammes , his fresh suit against Ceremonies , ib. c Suarez , tom . de legib . lib. 4. cap. 1. n. 10. Praecepta Ecclesiastica feruntur quatenus convenienti● sunt ad bonos more 's , ut res sacrae cum debito honore fiant ; consequenter vero interdum habent significationem moralem , quae homines excitat ad virtutem & spem gloriae . The place , Matth. 15. touching Traditions of the Elders discussed . d Janse●ius , Concord . Evange . p. 120. Becanus the Iesuit , in opusc . to . 2. de . Analog . vet . et New Test . cap. 1. q. 7. n. 13 , 14 , 15. reckoneth out three causes , why Christ reproved all the Traditions of the Pharisees ▪ 1. Because they sought vain glory in some of them , Matth. 23. v. 5. 2. They sought gain of others of their Traditions , Matth. 23. 14. ●3 . They preferred some of them to weightier matters of Gods Law. Ans . None of these toucheth the point in this text , because the Tradition of washing hands , is reproved by Christ for want of a lawfull Author , and so the matter of it also was unlawfull ; for Christ calleth it a Doctrine of men . IV. Arg. Estius l. 3. ● . 37. p. 139 b Gregor ▪ de valent , to . 3. dis 6. q 13. pun . 1. S● effectus intentus superet vimmedii , erit superstitio . Ceremonies Magicall ▪ If the third Commādment , command Decency in its generality , as they say , then it must command decency in this , or this Rite , as in Surplice , Crossing , &c. V. Arg. Iewish and Popish Ceremonies are professions of a false Religion . Arg. 6. D. Ammes fresh suit . Arg. 7. Of Religious kneeling . a Rathael de la Torres , or ▪ din. praedicat . tom . 1. in 22. Tho. q. 84. tra . 2. disp . 5. b Abulensis in Levit . cap. 13. q. 10. c Virgil. An. 3. Et capiteante aras phrygio velatus amictu . d Lod. vives com . in August . de civit . dei lib. 15. c. 2. e Suarez . Tom. 1. in 3. Thom. q. 25 art . 5. Sect. 4. Four things in Adoration . f Joannes de Lugo , de myster . incarna● , dis . 23. Sect. 2. n. 23. Intention of worship not essentiall to worship . Also to intend worship is essentiall to worship , as sincere and hearty ; Ergo , ●● is not essentiall to worship in generall , as what is essentiall to the spece as such , is not essentiall to the general that com prehendeth that sp●ce . g Field of the Church , 4. book cap. 31. Religious bowing of its nature , not by mans free and Arbitrary intention signifieth divine Adoration . a Ioannes de Lugo , de mystei incarnat , disp . 13. S. 2. n. 14. b Suarez to . 1. in 3. q. 25. art . 5. S. 4. Objection of Suarez contending that intention of adoring is essentiall to Adoration , removed . Of the Idolatrous worship of the Iews and Papists . The relative expression of God in the creature , no ground of Adoring the creature . The Iews believed not the golden Calf to be really God. a Bellar. contr . tom . 2. l. 2 c. 13. b Gregor . de Valent. to . 3. dis . 6. q. 11. de Idolat . punct . 6. c Aquinas , par . 3. q. 25. art . 3. ad . 2. Adorabant Gentiles ipsas imagines ut res quasdans , credcutes iis in esse al● ▪ quid numi nis propter responsa quae daemones in ipsis dabant , & alios mirabilcs effectus . d Vasquez , in 3. tom . 1. q. 25. disp . 91. art . 3. Ver●ssimum est quod tradit Augustinus Gentiles pro dijs habuisse ipsamet simulachra , putantes in ipsis numen aliquod latere , cum illis responsa darent . e Bellar. ibid. f Abulensis , in Exodus 23. g Cajetan , in Exodus 23. The Adoring of Images not forbidden by the Ceremoniall , but by the Morall Law. a Suarez tom . 3. q. 25. dis . 1. in 54. art . 3 Sect. 2. b Bellar. to . 2. de relig . sanct . lib. 2. c. 8. The evasions of Bellarmine and Suarez answered . ( c ) Joannes Rotnaldus de idolatri● Ecclesiae Roman , lib. 2. cap. 9. ( d ) Valent. ibid. ( c ) Lindsey pretended Bishop of Edinbrough parth . Assembly , pag. 29. a Concil . triden . Sess . 25. Statuimus imagines in templis habendas & retinendas ijsquedebitum honorem & vencrationem impertiendam ; non quod credatur esse aliqua in his di vinitas , vel virtus propter quam sint colendae : sed quoniam honos qui iis exhibetur , refectur ad Prototypa , quae illa repraesentant , ut per imagines quas osculamur , et coram qui bus caput aperimus & procumbimus , Christum adorcmus & sanctos , quorum illasimilitudinem gerunt . Papists did of old adore before , or at the presence of the Image as a memorative signe , and yet were Idolaters . Two sort of signes . b Vasquez tom . 1. in 3. art . 3. dis . 108. cap. 8. In imagine praeter ipsius prototypi excellentiam non potest esse aliqua virtus , cui cultus debeaturest enim in imagine solum irrationale & inanimatum excellenciae & sanctitatis exemplar , cui homo nequit digne sese submittere Adoratione . c 7. Synodus , Quo scilicet per banc imaginum pictarum inspectionem , omnes qui contemplantur , ad prototyporum memoriam & desiderium veniant , illisque Adorationem honorariam exhibeant , non secundum fidem nostram , veram latreiam . d Arnobius lib. 6. Gentes Adorabans statuas , non quod as , aurum , argentum & similes statuarum materi● dij sint , sed quod corum , quae alias invisibiles sunt , praesentia per simulachra exhibeatur . e Lactantius , de institut . ad Constantium . lib. 2. cap. 2. Non ipsa ( inquiunt Gentes ) simulachra tim●nus , sed ea ad quorum imaginem facta , & quorum nominibus consecrata sunt . Resp. Lactantius nempe ●deo t●metis quod cos in caelis esse Arbitramini , cur igitur o●ul●s in caelum non tollitis ? Cur ad parictes lig●a & lapides potius , quam e● spectatis , ubi eos esse creditis . f Act , 17. 29. g Deut. 4. 15. Isa . 40. 18. & 46. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. h Concilium Nicen . 2. Qu●d si in recordationem atquc memoriam , ita quod salutari quâdam affectione in ipsa prototypa ferebantur ( Catholici ) salutaverint & honorificè A●oraverint imaggines , non tamen ob id ill is latreiam exhibuera●t , aut Divinam Venerationem adscripserunt , absit haec calumnia . i Concilium S●●●nense Cap. 14. Definit imagines debere adorari non quia in illis aliquid numinis creditur inesse , sed ob recordationem exemplaris . k Concilium Mogunt . Cap. 41. Pastores nostri populum accurate moncant imagnes non ad id proponi , ut adoremus aut colamus cas , sed ut quod adorare & col●re aut quarum rerum utiliter , — meminisse debemus , per imagines recordemur . l Concil . Mogunt . ib. Sect. 2. Codi●●m oculis perlustrans , cum ad venerabile & tremendum nomen , Iesu devenerit , caput aperit , inclinatur , & suspirans in caelum oculos attolit , & ob id omni reprehensione & Idolatriae suspicione caret ; siquidem non literas qu● vili atramento pinguntur , honorat , sed cogitatione & veneratione mentis suae ad eum honorandum & venerandum rapitur , cujus memoriam hae literae ei suggerunt . m Alphons . de Castro heraes . 1. denique adoratio ipsa , et si coram cruce fi● , meus tamen nostra ad id solum refertur quod crux ipsa repr●sentat . n Thom. Waldens ▪ de sacram . tom . 3. cap. 156. nu . 6. o Grego . lib. 7. Epist . ad Secund. q. 53. p Adrianus , de imaginibus , cap. 12. q Concilium Romanum sub Stephano 3. Et nos quidem non quasi ante Divinitatem , ante illam ( imaginem aut elementa sacramentalia ) prosternimur , sed illam adoramus , quem per imaginem natum , passum , aut in throno seden●em recordamur . r Suarez ; Tom 3. in 1. disp . 54. Sect. 4. ſ Henriquez sum . Theolog. Moral . lib. 8. cap. 32. Male quidam negant praedican ▪ dum populo , quod image Christi si● adoranda . Latreia . t Cabrera , in 3. pag. Thom. q. 25. Art. 3. disp . 3. w Azorius instit . Moral . to . 1. l. 9. c. 60. x Archangel . Rubeo in 3. sent . d. 9. y Jacob de Graphijs , Decisio . aur . p. i. l. 2. cap. 2. num . 15. Vnamquanque imaginem , eodem cultu , quo illum cujus est image , verereremur . a Raphael de la Torres , sum . Theolog. de relig . to . 1. in 22. q. 84. art . 2. disp . 5. q. 94. dub . 5. Respondetur modus iste dicendi ( per accidens adorantur ) ●ic debet intelligi , idest per aliud , vel ( quod idem est ) ratione alterius ; hoc autem non arguit improprietatem adorationis , sed nega● adorationem excellentiae proprie & residentis in re adorata ; sic adoratur humanitas Christi . See also Bellarm. de imag c. 21. c. 25. Neque dicendum eas impropre venerandas esse , quia quod non dicitur nisi improprie , simpliciter negari potest . Diversevasions of Papists touching the worshipping of images . b Gabriel Bi●l in can ▪ missae . lect . 49. fol. 92. c Duran . lib. 3. dist . 9. q. 2. ● . 10. Sed quia loqendum est ut plures , ideo commune dictum sic exponendum est , quod protanto dicitur imago sub ratione imaginis adorari eadem adoratione cum re , cujus est imago , quia ad praesentiā imaginis seu signifit rem●moratio rei , quam rememoratam adoramus , eadem adoratione ac si presens esset in se ▪ ●t ideo concedi potest quod signa et imagines adorantur . d Greg. ●9 . de Val●● . to . 3. dis . 6. q. 11. de idol pun . 6. e Sept. Syn. ar . 14. f L●●n . lib. 5. Apol. Syn. 7. ar . 14. g Vasq . in 3. q. 25. ar . 3. dis . 106. c. 1. h G. Bi●● in can . mis . lect . 49. fol. 94. i Suarez tom . 1. in 3. quest . 25 art . 3. disp . 53. Sect. 3. Qui visa pulchrae creaturae specie animo insurgit ad considerationem creatoris , & illum laudat acdiligit , non potest vere dic● landere ac diligore creaturam , etiam si presentia creaturae excitaverit a●●-rem creatoris ; ideoque tantum ( ●ic ) propter memoriam retinendae imagines . Suarez is not content at the hungry and unproper expressione of Durandus , Mir●ndula , H●lcot . k Gregor . de Valent. to . 3. disp . 6. q. 11. de idolat . punct . 6. Cum autem per idem officium & motum animi veré etiam dicimus honorem exhiberi imagini , verbo , illi exhiberi , hoc sub est , nos Prototypon ex imagine cogitantes , coram ipsâ actionem honorificam proinde ac si prototypon similiter esset praesens , exercentes , velle prototypi excellentia protestari , adcoque de ipso excitare opinionem excellentem , ut est quodammodo , nimirum relative in imagine suâ . What need we dispute ? to give that externall knee-worship to bread , which we would give to Christ substantially and personally present , is to adore bread . l Bernar. Puiol . de ador . disp . 3. Sect. 7. Quarto colligitur contra Durandum ipsas imagines proprie adorari . m Azor. instit . moral . tom . 1. lib. 9. c. 6. 4. Distin . n Vasquez ut supr . dis . 108. Per totum . o Joannes de Lugo , de myst . incar . disp . 34. Sect. 2. n. 29. p Ibid. disp . 35. Sect. 1. n. 6. Joannes de Lugo , ibid. q Suarez , part . 3. to . 1. disp . 54. Sect. 3. Actus [ Adorandi ] respectu prototypi est proprie Latreia &c. Respectu vero imaginis est inferior Veneratio . 5. Distin . r Burges , Lawfulnes of kneeling cap. 8. p. 14 , 15. s p. 34 , 35. t p. 84 , 85. w Edward , 6. book of Engl. serv . rubr . 5. x Joan. Giseniue in ●uo Patisi●o , disp . 25 , n. 40. y Didocl . in Altari damasc . Hospinianus de originc festorum Christian . contra . Gretser . Profeste corporis Christi , fol : 94. 7. Arca non est bab●●a pro d●● vivente , — nec propterea adorata . So answereth Molinaus in his buckler of faith of Images , Sect. 118. and Fran. Whites way to the Church , Cap. 9. pag. 3. z Weames 3. Volumn of the Ceremon . Law , Cap. 3. pag. 12. The place ( worship at his footstool ) discussed . a Arias Montanus . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . b Musculus . c Calvine comment . in Psal . 99. 5. d Junius , Annotation ibid. Lyranus a dorandam Deum aute arcam , non ipsam arcam . Tylenus in syntag nat . de preca . disp . 49. th . 2. nu . 29. particula . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Notat idem quod versus . Vatablus adorate ad scabellum , i. e. in templo ante arcam . e Gratian de conser . dist . 1. cap. 68. Prayer may as lawfully be given to the Creature as Adoration . There is a Prayer made to the image of the face of Jesus written in linnen , Salve Sancta facies nostri redemptoris salve vultus domini imago beata , — nos deduc ad propria ● felix figura , ad videndum faciem qua est Christi pura . f Concilium Tridentinum Sessione , 25. g Raphael de la Torres in 22. q. 95 art 2. disp . 6. dub . 5. Eusebius , lib. 3. De praeparat . Evang. teacheth us , that Rudiores tantum ad ligna & lapides respiciunt , sapientes autem ( Gentiles ) voluerunt Deum & dci virtutes sensibus nostris per imagines nobis familiariter deferri . They made Images books of God. Athanasius in orat . contr . idolat . Dieunt Philosophi statuas quidem non essedcos , sed simulacbra deorum , ideo baberi ut dys sub istis imaginibus respondeant . h Suarez , in 3. Tho. q. 25. art . 3. disp . 54. Sect. 4. * O crux ave . We may pray to Images and the elements in the Supper , as well as we may kneel to them . i Suarez de tripli . virt . & supr . dis ▪ 51. Sect. 1. pag. 757. k Antonius Capellus , adversusprimatum Regis , Angliae contrav . 2. Cap. 30. l Vasquez to . 1 part . 3. q 25. art . 23. disp . 109. cap. 4. m Suarez tom . 1. in 3. q. 25. art . 3. disp . 54. Sect. 5. Si tantum coram imaginibus Adoratur deus , hoc multum derogat imaginum venerationi , nam ●x eo non tantum sequitur imagines [ clementa Sacramentalia ] minus coli , quam exemplaria , sed etiam sequitur illas non coli omnius , — sed exemplaria tantum . n Vasquez , tom . 1. part . 3. q. 25. disp . 108. cap. 14. Nam iconomachi qui ad solam recordationem imaginibus utuntur , ante illas genu● a non flectunt nec se prostemunt ; sic enim ipsas not● exteriore adorarent , sed erecti absque ullo corporis gestu , qui reverentiam indicet , ●oram imagine exemplaris recordantur , & ipsum spiritu solum adorant . o Gregorius Mag. l. 7. Epist . 53. if these be his Epistles . p Vasquez ibid. Hee who adoreth a saint ( saith Ioan. d● lugo de myster . inincarnat disp . 36. sect . 3. n. 29. ) for friendship and grace which hee hath arguitivè , by consequence hee worshipeth God of whom the man hath grace , yet it is not needfull that he formally adore God , and in recto in so doing for he may honour the saint and not formally honour God , for the saint and God are two divers objects . Answ . This proveth our point , that when I adore an Image , intending to adore God , some ●oule-adoration adhereth to the Image , and that is a taste of Gods proper glory given to a stocke , or a stone . q Ioan. de lugo . de myst . incar . disp . 36. sect . 3. n. 25 , 26 , 27. & seq . Respectus imaginis est quasi materialis & inanimatus , quia sic ap●rimus caput imagini , ut per illam actionem nihil velimus imagini dicere aut significare , sed soli exemplari , ad quod dirigitur ille actus pro ut significativus & prout civilis communicatio ; & ideo respectu illius solum videtur esse actio animata . De Lugo ibid. Hoc enim esset stultum mendacium , quia absoluté loquend● meliores sumus nos quam Imago sancti Petri. And conforme to this the seventh pretended and bastard Councell calleth them halfe holy , and halfe true , halfe false worshipers of God , Antonius Capellus citeth it , Advers . prim . regis Anglia , c. 30. Who will have Images to stand onely for memorialls , but not to be worshipped . Concil . seventh art . 1. p. 458. Qui vero dicunt su●●icere usum imaginum ad memoriam solum , non vero ad salutationem ●as habentes illud quidem recipientes , hoc vero re●icien●es , s●miprobi quadantenus , & falso v●ti [ ut ita dicam ] deprehenduntur . Answ . r De Lugo ibid. 39. imagi●s vere cedo exterius , daudo illi meliorē & superiorem lo●um honorifice eam tracta●do . s Orat. 5. d● imagin . t 7. Synod act . 4. x Iuo 4. part . sui decret . c. 38. y Nicephorus hist . lib. 2. c. 17. z Nicephorus hist . li. 2. c. 43. lib. 6. c. ●6 . a Lib. 7. c. 33. b Canisius lib. 5. De Beata virgine , c. 22. Divers Fables touching Images . c S●p . 14. d De idolo vanit . e Euseb . lib. 7. c. 8. f August . contra Adamant c. 13. g Gregor . mag . Epist , ad Serenum Massilien sem lib. 7. Ep. 109. h Voetius in desper . caus . papat . lib. 3. c. 6. sect . 2. i Sympson 6. Century of the worshipping of Images , p. 38. k Pet. Molin●us Buckler of Faith of Images , Sect. 118. pag. 308. l Bellarm de scrip . in Chron. m Genebrard ●hron . an . 794. p. 308. n Barronius An. 726. Observe that Aeneas Sylvius epist . 301. saith , ante ▪ Nicenam Synodum unusquisque sibi vivebat , quemadmodum sibi visum est , & paro●s respectus ad Romanam ecclesiam ●abe●atur , a Metropolitan Bishop , a step to the Popedome , was first created here in Romes Car●bage , Constantin●ple , Antiochia . o Pontific . p Paulus diaconus lib. 13. q Bergomensis lib. 10. r Synod Franckford . s Aventinus lib. 4. t Hincmarus cap. 20. contra Iandu●●ns●m . w Vrspergens . in Histor . x Hincmarin . Archiepiscopus Remorum c. 10. cont . Hincmarin . ●andunensem Episcop . y Eccius in E●chirid . z Hospin . d● orig . imag . p 197. a Calvin . justit . lib. 1. cap. 11. Sect. 13. b Iosephus antiq lib. 18. cap. 11. c Euse● . bistor . lib. 2. cap. 6. d Epist . Plinii . 2 ad Imporat Trajan . e Euseb . Histor . lib. 3. cap. 33. f Bucol● . in Alexand. severo . g Symson 1. Century cap. 1. h Justin . Martyr . in Dialog . cum . Trypho . & apolog . 2. i Tertullian . apo . cap. 30. k Magdeburgens . cent . 3. cap. 10. l Apol. 1. 9. 11. m Clemens Alexand. in Paraenetico . n in s. Stromat . o Catolog . testium veritat . lib. 2. pag. 87. p Hospinian . d● origine imag . cap. 10. pag. 155 ▪ q Iren●us , l. 1. cap. 24. a Cyprian cont . de ▪ metrianum . 1. b Origen . cont . cel . sum . l. 8. c Athanas . advers . gentes . d Jewell against Harding 14. art . of adora● . pag. 506 , 507. e Epiphanius lib. 3. cont . Collyridianos . [ f ] Idem ibid. ( g ) Lactantius , institut . l. 2. cap. 2. Etenim hominis imago necessaria tum videtur , cum procul abest , supervacua futura cum presto est , dei autem cujus spiritus ac numen ubique diffusum , abesse nunquam potest , semper utique imago supervacua est . The Arguments of the ancients against Images . h Lactantius lib. 2. cap. 19. i Ib. Cur ad parietes & signa , & lapides potissimum quam illo spectatis , ubi cos esse credatis . ib. instit . div . l. 2. c. 1. k instit . l. 2. c. 2. l Ibid. m Instit . l 2. c. 3. n Instit . l. 2. c. 4. o Instit . l. 2. c. 18. p Ibid. q Instit . l. 6. c. 11. r Ambros . officior l. 2. cap. 21. u Chrys . l. 2. epist . 246. x Tertullian apol et c●nt . valent . y Eusebius hist . ec . l. 9. c 10. z Origen cont . cles . l. 9. c. 4. a Sozomen l. 1. c. 8. b Euseb . in vita constan . l. ● . c Joan Armitants in explan●●io can 5. concilii gangren d Tertull. lib. de Idol . Plutarch in vitae Numae non dum ingenia Grecorum atque Tuscorum fingendis simulachris urbem inundaverunt , ita Tertullian , Apol. c. 25. ( f ) Euseb . Hist . eccles . l. 8. c. 1. f Nicephorus l. 7. c. 2. g Euseb . l. 8. c. 2. h Sozomen tripart . histor . l. 1. c. 9. i Otto Phrisingensis l. 4. c. 3. k Nicephorus l. 8. c. 27. l Hospinian d● Orig . Templo cap. 6. pag. 34. m Arnob. cont . gent. lib. 2. n Ib. lib. 6. & lib. 7. a Euseb . Caesariens . Epist . ad Constantiam Augustam . b Hycron . cont . Vigilantium , ad Riparum Presbiter . c Ruffius hist . eccl . l. 1. c. 8. d Ambro. in cap. 1. epist . ad Rom. e Ambros . offices l. 1. c. 26. f Ibid. g Ibid. h Aug. Epist . 49. i Aug. de doct . Christi . lib. 3. c. 7 k De Civit. dei l. 4. c. 9. l De civi● . dei lib. 22. c. 10. m August . in Ps . 96. a August . in Psal . 96. b Chrysost . hom . 49. in Math. c Idem homil . 51. in Math. d Idem hom . 33. in Mat. e Hom. 1. ad pop . an . f In 3. c. Is . g Damascen de Imagin . orat . 2. h Gregor . lin . 9. ep . 9. Perlatum est ad nos , quod inconsider●to zelo succensus sanctorum magines sub bac , quasi excusatione , ne adorari debuissent , confregeris , & quidem , quia cas adorari , vet●isses omnino laudamus , fregisse vero reprehendimus . k Fran. Whites way to the Church , ch . 9 , sect . 2. p. 114. l Hospinian de Origen Imag. p. 174. m Catol . test . veritat l. 6. p. 562. n Greg. mag . lib. 9. ep . 9. o Greg mag . lib. 3. dialo . p Beda l. 2. c. 21. ad peragenda nostrae salutis mysteria nullum penitus officium habere n●scuntur . q Beda l. 1. c. 9. adorare , salutare , colare , inhibemur pene in cunctis scripturae locis . r Idem . l. 1. c. 21. ſ Idem l. 1. c. 24. Idem l. 6. c. 21. t Ibid. w Cod. l. 8. tit . 12. leg . 20. Theodos . Valentinian u Lib. 2. cap. 2● . x Ephrem . secunde . y Damascen de fid . Orthod . l. 4. c. 17. z Gretser . lib. 1. de ●ru● . c. 44. a Ioseph lib. 18. c. 6. b Hulcot in lib. sup . lect . 148. Ioan. Pic. Mirandula conclus . 3. c Peresius Ajala de trad . pag. 3. De Imagineque scripturam neque traditionem , neque communem sensum sanctorum , neque concilium generalis determinationem , neque etiam rationem adducunt . d Gabriel Biel in Can. lec . 49. c D●cret . 3. dist . 3. c. 27. Grego . d Doway men , Annot . 2 Sam. 5. 8. The blinde and the lame shall not enter in the Temple . e Alexand. Alens . 3. p. q. 30. art . ult . f Durand . l. 3. dist . 9. q. 2. g Cassand . In Consultatione ad ferdinandum & maximilianum art . An. 1170. h Concil . Constantin●polit . An. 755. of 338. Bishops . Yea , this same second councel of Nice , and the seventh Epistle to the Synod , condemneth Nestorius of Idolatry , and condemneth the Arians as Idolaters , who Worshipped Christ whom they believed to be a man onely : And Athanasius , contr . Arian . Orati . 1. And Nyssenus in Laud. Bas . And Nazianzen , Orati . 40. say . To Adore a Creature , though in the Name of Christ or God , is Idolatry . a Platina in vita Marci . Papae . b Hospin . de orig . perogimatio . pag. 381. c Symson , Treatise of Images , p. 47. d Genebrad . in Chron. l. 2. Anno 1794. e Bellarm. de Imag. l. 2 c. 14. f Suarez in 3. part . Thom. q. 25. art . 3. dis . 54. Sect. 3. g Sanderus l. 2. de Imag . c. 5. h Alanus Dial 4. c. 18. i Naucl● . in Chron. Vol. 2. gener . 27. k Sabellicus l. 8. Enead , ad . 8. l Blandus decad . 2. l. 1. m Annonius in Annalib . Francorum . 794. Anno. n Abbot Vspergens . in Chron. Anno 793. o Charles the Great of Images . p Aventinus , lib. 4. annal . a Vspergens . in Chron. Anno 793. b Eginradus in vita Caroli Magni . c Cassander in Consul . ad ferdinand . & Maxmilian imp . d Simson , Treatise of Images , pag. 48. e Lorinus in Art. 17. ver . 25. Serpentem . Conflari●jusfit non quod adorari vellet , nam postea confregit . f Catol . Test. Verit. lib. 8. pag. 882 , 883 , 884. g Caroli . lib. 1. cap. 2. h Carlo . lib. 1. c. 21. i Caro. lib. 2. cap. 24. Caro. lib. 3. cap. 16. a White against Fisher , p. 224. b Matth. 10. 14 , 42. 2 Cor. 8. 4. Gal. 4. 14. Act. 10. 34. Ps . 119. 97. 159. 147. 82. 103. 111. 113. 114. 120. 127. 128. 140. 143. 167. 174. c Ambros . epist . 26. d Gregor . in reg . l. 5. cap. 1. e Augustine on these words , he that receiveth you receiveth me . f Chrysos . on these same words a Athanas . cont . Arria . orat . 4. b Basilus de spir . sanct . cap. 18. c Peresius Aiala in Trad. 3. de imag . d August de ●era relig . cap. 55. e Idem epist . 85. f Conc. Trident. Sess . 25. g Damasceu . l. 4. c. 12. h Nicephor . in dial . constant . de imaginibus i Suarez in 3. part Thom. to . 1. q. 25. art . 3. disp . 54. Sect. 3. k Vasquez in 3. part ●om . 1. disp . ●10 . cap. 2. God not in the Image as in a place . Vasquez will have all things to be adored . Joan. de Lugo proveth the same by four reasons . a Cajetan . 22. q. ●03 . art . 3. ad . 4. b Leontius in Dialog . 5. cont . Judaeos . Vt r●fertur in 7. Synod . falsa act . 4. c Joan. de Lugo de myster . incarnat . disp . 37. Sect. 1. n. 1. 2 , 3. d Leo. 1. Serm. 7. De nativita abstinendum ab ipsa specic offi●ij . e Salmeron in 1 Tim. 2. disp . 8. f Alex. al●n . 3. p. q. 30. memb . 3. art . 3. sect . ● . g Albertus dist . 9. art . 4. h Bonavent . art . 1. q. 2. ad 1. in contrarium . i Martuinus de ajala tract . de trad . 3. par . k Abulens . Deut. 4. q. 4 & 5. l Carol. lib. 2. cap. 25. m Ibid. n Carol. l. 4. cap. 27. a Carol. l. 4. cap. 27. b Carol. l. 1. cap. 2● . c L. 4. c. 10. l. 3. c. 21. d L. 3. c. 2● . e Symson treats of the worshipping of Images , pag. 50 , 51. f Concilium Eleherio , cap. 36. Placuit in Ecclesiis picturas , non esse debere , ne quod colitur , aut adoratur , in parictibus pingatur . g Ca●us line 5. cap. 4. h Surjus 1 Tom. of concell . an in can . 36. cont . Eliber . i Sozomen l. 5. c. 20. b Nicephor hist . l. 11. cap. 43. c Prov. 2. ●0 . Eph. 5. 1. ● Thes . 1. 16. 2 Thess . 3. 6 , 7. ● Cor. ●● . Phil. 3. 17. 2. Tim. 3. 4. Sitting the only convenient gesture . What is occasionall in the first supper . 2. Arg. Christ sate at the first Supper . Of kneeling , part . 2. pag. ●● ▪ Part. 2. Page 62. Sitting a signe of our co-heireship . Part 2. pag. 187. Paybodie p. 268. 269. Disputer against kneeling , Arg. 1. c. 6. A signe of our coheirship may well consist with our inferiority in worshipping Christ 4. Arg. Arg. 8. Ceremonies fail against the authority of Rulers . a Pareus Com. in Rom. 13. dub . v. 5. How civill positive laws binde not the conscience . b Pareus Com. in Rom. c. 13. Dub. 7. c Richard Field on the Church 4. book c. 33. d Gerson de vita spir . part . 3. lect . 4. e Greg. de val . to . 1. disp . 7. punct . 6. Sect. ● . f Suarez tom . de legibus lib. 3. cap. 22. h Aquin. 22 q. art . 1. ad . 3. i Suar. Deoper . 6. dierum Tract . 3. disp . 5. Sect. 1. num . 2. k Ferra. c●●● . Gente● cap. 21. l Conrad . 12. q. 20. art 1. A twofold goodnesse in things . The will of authority cannot treate goodnesse in things . m ● . F. de con●●i● . Prineip . Qu●d Principi placuit , legis babet vigorem , est verum de placito justo . n Carduba in sum quest . 18. part 1. o Thom. 22. q. 104. art . 6. p Soto de inst . leg . 1. 4. 6. art . 4. q Medin● ▪ C. de paenitentia tract . 4. de jujun . c. 7. r Adrian quod . 6. art . 2. ſ Navar. in sum . cap. 23. num . 55. t Driedo l. 3. De liber Christ . c. 3. ad . 5. u Castro lib. 1. de lege pena ▪ c. 4. x August . De Baptis . l. c. 6. y Cajet . verbo pracepti transgressio . z Silvest . verbo praecept . q. 9. a Angelus verb. lex . 11. 3. b Corduba q. 189. part . 2. rat . 1. 2. c Gers . de vit . spir . lect . 4. c. 7. Nulla lex s●reuda est tanquam necessaria ad salutem , qu● non est de jure Divino . d Durand . l. 2. d. 44. q. 5. numb . 6. Si Papa praeciperet Monacho ea quae sum contra suam professionem , non motus aliqua necessitate vel utilitate Ecclesiae , sed sola voluntate , & de hoc constaret , & Abbas praeciperet , contrarium , obediendum esset Abbati , & non Papae . e Suarez Tom. de leg . lib. 3. c. 24. f Greg. de valent . tom . 2. disp . 7. q. 5. punct . 6. Sect. 1. Humane lawes oblige onely in so farre as they agree with the Law of God. g Medina tract . De jejunio cap. 7. h Almain . Moral . c. 12. i Gers . uti supra . k Vasquez 12. disp . 158 c. 4. num . 32. Praecipient is intentio non facit praeceptum habere majorem vel minorem obligandi , efficaciam , sed necesfi●as , diguitas , vel utilitas corum quae praecipiuntur . l Dried● de lib. Christ . l. 3. c. 3. ad 5. m Pareus com . in Rom. 13. v. 5. Dub. 7. Conclus . 5. n Calvin inst . l. 3. c. 19. Sect. 15. 16. o Beza in Notis in Rom. 13. A twofold consideration of humane laws . p Iason . q Baldus in rubrica ▪ F●de acquirendis b●reditatibus nu . 23. & seq . r Bellarm. tom . 1. cont . 5. l. 3. c. 11. s Vasquez tom . 2 in 12. disp . 152. cap. 2. t Valent. tom . 2. disp . 7. q. 5. punct . 6. v Doctor Iackson on the Creed , lib. 2. cap. 4 How inferiour rulers are subordinate to God in commanding . x Bellar cont . Barclai . cap. 3. Bon● sensu Christus dedit Petro potestatem faciend● de ▪ peccato non peccatum , & de non peccato peccatum . Humane authority is not the nearest or instrumentall cause of Lawes . y Stapleton de statu Eccles . cont . 5. q. 7 art . 2. z Field on the Church , booke . 4. c. 33. a Gerson b Almain oper . moral . cap. 12. c Decius namco●●upiscen . lect . 1. d Mencha questionum illustrium l. 1. c. 19. num . 1. e Iunius animadv . f Doctor Iackson 16. g Sutluvius de Presbyter c. 11. 66. Sic non magis Ecclesiae & Synodo log●s scribere & promulga●e liceres , quam popul● & subditis sibil●ge● co●de●● pr●ter sui principis ▪ & Magistratus voluntatem , si nimirum Christus esset extern● politiae legislator . h Bellar. de interp ▪ verbi lib ▪ 3. cap. 4. A double obedience due to Rulers , objective and subjective . ( i ) 1 ▪ Thes . 2. 13. Esa . 1. 2. ●er . 1. 2. Ezek. 2. 7. Objective obedience no more due to Rulers then to equalls . Ibid. p. 259 ▪ 260. False rules of obedience to Rulers proposed by Doctor Jackson refuted . 3. Rule . a Hooker Churchpolicy 5. book p. 197. 198. b Suarez de Relig. tom 4. lib. 4. tract . 9. cap. 15. Considerare , ●rg● aporte● a● secluso precepto res sit , utraque ex parte probabilis , & tunc universaliter verum erit , adjuncto praecepto , obediendum esse . c Thomas Sanches Jesuita Cordubensis in Decalog . tom . 2. l. 6. c. 3. n. 3. Quado subditus dubius est an res precepta , sitlicita nec ne tenetur obedire & exeusatur abpreceptun superioris . d Ignat. loyola . cat . Jesuit lib. 2. cap. 17. & 18. Prudentia non obedicntis , sed imperantis est Item non est dignus nomine obedientis , qui legittimo superiori , non cum voluntate judicum suum submittit . e Greg. d● Valentia ▪ to . 3. dis . 7. q. 3. punct . 2. Subditus non suo judicio atque authoritati nititur superioris . f Vasquez 12. q. 19 ▪ disp . 66. c. 9. num . ●1 . g Salas 12. q ▪ 21. tract . 8. disp . unic . sect ▪ 17. num . 152. The good nesse of obedience to Rulers cannot countervalue the evil in the manner of doing with a doubting conscience and so sinfully . i Vasquez in 12. ●om . 1. disp . 68. cap. 2. k C●ssian . collat . 17. cap. 17 ▪ l Chrys●●● ▪ oper . imperf . fi ejus ●it opus , homil . 9. cap. 7. m Ambr. lib. i●de offic . cap. 30. n Aquin. 12. q. 19. art . 7. o Bellar. de Pont if . Rom l. 4. cap. 16. Quiounque potest precipere , polest etiam actum indifferentem suo precepto facere necessarium , & per se bonum . p Silvest . in voce abrogat . q Tartar. in moral . cap. 5. & 7. r River . catho . orth . tom . 1. q. 9. tract . 2. q. 2 ſ Field l. 4. cap. 33. t Pareus . u Soto l. 1. de just . q. 6. art . 3. x Sylvest . Verb● in obedientia in ●i●c . y Jo : Eselius , in ezpos . Decall . praecept . 4. cap. 36. z Cap. 2. De constit . Rem , quae culpa caret , in damnum vocari non convenit . Other Arguments for the obligation of humane Laws Answered . a Ambros . b Anselm . c Theodoretus in loc . Rom 13. d Chrysos . in Rom. 13. hom . 23. e Navar. in sum . cap. 23. numb . 54. f Felinus , cap. 1. de sponsalib . n. 18. g Taraqu . Prefat de utroque retractu . n. 74. What it is to resist the Ruler . h Lodovi Merat . par . 1. tract . de leg disp . 1. Sect. 13. i Merat . ib. Sect. 2. Why men cannot make laws that layeth a tye on the Conscience . That Christ hath a spirituall kingdom , not only in the power of preaching the word , but also in the power of the keys , by discipline . That there is such a divine ordinance as Excommunication . Objections against excommunication removed . Praelee . in Math. 18. ver . 15. page 144. We mayrebuke our brother in a prudent way . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Erastus . Mat. 18. Object . 4. The church Mat. 18. is not the Civill Sanedrim . How Publicans were excluded from the Temple . a D●u● . 23. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. I'sa . 79. 1. Lam. 1. 10. b Lev. 25 44. Lev. 26. 45 2 Kin. 16. 3. 2 Kin. 17. 8. 11. ● Chro. 16. 35. 2 Chro. 33. 2 , 9. Neh. 5. 8 , 9 Psa . 9. 19. Psal . 10. 16. Psal . 33. 10. Psal . 44. 2. Psa . 80. 9. Ier. 10. 2. Ezech. 23. 30. Eze. 25. 7. Ioel 2. 7. Obad. v. 15 Mi● . 5. 15. Hag. 2. 22. Zach. 1. 15. Theophylact in Math. 18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Object . 8. Beza de de Presbyterio & excom . p. 60. Joseph de bello Iudai● l. 1. c. 4. Pharisaei omnia pro arbitrio administrabant , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lucian . dialo . 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So doth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Num. 11. 28. signifie . Binding and loosing acts judiciall . a Camero prelect . in Mat. 16. b Vatablus on Esay 22. c Calvin prelect . in Esay 22 , d Muscu . com , ibid , e Gualther Homil. in loc . f Piscator shol . in Esa . g Beza on Mat. 16. h Pareus comment . in Mat. 16. ( i ) Cotton Keyes of the Kingdome p. 2. Beza de Pres byter , pag. 63 , 64. That Excommunication is a divine Ordinance is proved by 1 Cor. 5. To deliver to Satan is not miraculous killing . The essentials of excommunication , 1 Cor , 5. Cutting off not alwaies killing . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ab interi●re popul●rum sacrum ▪ Morall guiltinesse excluded men from holy things amongst the Iews . The place Ezekiel 44. v. 11. 12. 13. 14. to be fulfilled under the New Testament . Object . Ceremoniall exclusion from holy things under the old , did tipifie exclusion for morall uncleannesse under the New Testament . Levit. 5. 2● . The Churches exclusion from the Seales declarative , not coactive by violence . Remonstrant in Apollo . Censures applied to some by name . Arg. 2. Eschewing the society of scandalous church members must be a church censure . The hindering of Jezabel by preaching onely not sufficient . Debarring of the scandalous from the seals pro●ed . It belongeth not to the Magistrate to ● debar from the seals . Thomas Erastus lib. 3. confirmat . Thesium lib. 3. ● . 3. pag. 207. Nam et sacramenta sub sub 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nomine comprehendi concedo . Erastus , Confi . thes . l. 3. c. 3. pag. 207. Qui membra externae volunt ecclesiae videri , illi non calcabunt Sacramenta nec offere●tem laniare tentabunt , & fiquis talis reperiatur hune ego minime admittendum cense● . Confirmati● Thosium Erast . Cons●● . thes . l. 1. c. 1. p. 72. Erast . will have no man excluded from the Sacraments pag. 86. Si per subductionem pabuli intelligis verbi aut sacramentorum negationem , de tu● hoc dicis , non l●queris cum scripturis , quae nusquam jubent pabula haec subducere . According to Erastus his way we cannot deny the seals to a Turk . P. 75 , 76. Toexclude men from the Kingdom of Heaven not one with Excommunication Pag. 78. Excommunication is no reall separation of one from Christs invisible body . Pag. 79. P. 81 , 82. Pag. 83. Pag. 86. Pag. 88. 8● Though Excommunication be onely declarative , yet it is not empty . Cap. 2. l. 1. p. 93. Putting out 1 Cor. 5. Excommunicating . Lib. ● . c. 2. pag. 103. Whether Erastus doth prove that none were excluded amongst the Iewes from the Sacraments for Morall uncleannesse . A twofold forgivenesse . Pag. 117. All are invited to the Sacramēts , but not that they come any way they please . The question whether all should be admitted to the Lords Supper perverted by Erastus . Cap. 3. l. 1. p. 117. Lib. 3. c. 3. pag. 207. Et si quis talis ( qui caleabit sacramenta ) reperiatur hunc ego numinè admittendum censeo . Pag. 118. Two sorts of signes , some purely holy some partly holy , partly necessary for the bodily life . Pag. 120. P. 120 , 121. All are commanded to hear the Word , but not to come to the Supper . Arg. 16. Page 124. Page 124. Confirm . Thes . l. 2. c. 1. p. 130. 131. 133. 134. 136. 137. Ceremoniall uncleannes typified Exclusion out of the visible Church for Scandals , not out of the Kingdome of Heaven . Page 140. Page 142 , 143 , 144 , 145. Page 146. Page 140. At nemo propter ingenitam naturae corruptionem p●nitur . Page 147. Legall uncleannesse was sin . Page 150. Lib. ● . c. 2. p. 154. 155. The scope and sense of Mat. 18. perverted by Erastus . Our Saviour speaks of all , not of private and lesser scandals onely . Page 26. in Thes . 41. By the word brother is not meant a Iew onely . Erast . conf . Thes . l. 2. ● . 1. p. 133. Sive facinorosos facinoris paeniteret , sive non paeniteret , paena non minuebatur . L. 2. cap. 2. page 155. Thes . 41. p. 46. Pag. 156. Christs speaking in the second person , argueth not the privacy of the scandall . Page 158. Page 156. 157. A twofold forgiving . Thes . 42. page 27. Page 16. Christ speaketh not of such sins as private men may forgive as Erastus dreameth . Christs scope spiritual , Erast . his way is carnall . Thes . 42. pag. 28. Lib. 3. c. p. 181. Pag. 186. 187. Pag. 188. A Publican most odious to the Iews . Lib. 3. c. 3. p. 190 , 191. Page 191. P. 192. 193. Pag. 195. 196. A publican most odious to the Iewes . No private forgivenesse , Mat. 18. pag. 198 . ●ed si docendo ( pri●atus ) aliquem ad duxcrit , ut peccata sua agnoscat , et ex certa side ●● Dei be ●●gnitate propter meritum Christi acquiescat , an non solutus erit ? Si frustrā moneat ac doceat , an non qui●sic perti●aciter salutem re pudiat , ●●gatus . Binding and loosing proper to Stewards . Page 199. Page 199. To Excommunicate is not formally to debarre from the Seales . Page 201. Page 203. Pag. 203. 204. Thes . 44. 29. Thes . 46. pag. 32. Christ might well give directions for a Church not yet erected . Lib. 3. cap. 3. p. 196. Vestra igitur excommunicatio nihil aliud est , quam inan● sigmentum hominum imperare , aliis cupie●tium . Thes . 48. 34 , 35. The 1 Cor. 5. vindicated from Erastus his glosse . Lib. 3. c. 4. pag. 211 , 212. Pag. 214. The prayers of the Church interveen not for this particular miracle . Faith of miracles to pray for this miracle not in all the faithfull at ▪ Corinth . Delivering to Satan not miraculous . Lib. 3. c. 4. p. 213. Page 215. Thes . 58. p. 44. p. 225. Page 45. Num. 34. 31. 32. 2 Cor. 7. 45. Page 45. Page 45. 46. The Church , not Paul alone had hand in delivering the man to Satan . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ●st intersiccre . p. 47. In Thes . 48. To be delivered to Satan . Pag. 218. The destruction of the flesh . Chrysostom . Homil. 15. in 1 Cor. Pet. Molineus In suo vate opuscule eruditissimo . lib. 2. cap. 11. pag. 108. Hyeronymus in cap. 5. ad Galat. Walens do . discr . Magist . pol. to . 2. Arg. 6. fol. 10. In vate . l. 2. cap. 11. p. 111 , 112. Ambrosius lib. 1. de penitentia . Hyeronymus in c. 5. ad Galar . Augusti . l. 6. de serm . domi in Mont. cap. 38. Chrysostom hom . 15. in 1 Cor. Molineus loc cit . Piscator 1 Cor. 5. Zanchius com . in 2 Thess . 3. citeth these words , 1 Cor. 5. 3. 4 , 5. for Excommunication . Thes . 59. pag. 49. Thes . 59. 49. Thes . 60. Page 50. Page 221. Hymeneus and Alexander not killed by Satan . Page 223. Page 223. Page 224. Page 207. Page 223. 124. Page 227. 228. 229. Delivering to Satan not miraculous . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to put away not always to kill . Leigh in Critica Sacra , pag. 245. Lib. 3. cap. 5. p. 233. To eschew the scandalous a mean to save them . Lib. 3. c. 5. pag. 234. The simi litude of a cut off member to hold forth Excommucation vindicated . Page 235. No warrant that the Apostles killed any by the ministery of Satan . Pag. 236. 237. No miraculous faith required in the Corinthians for the killing of the man. Page 237 , 238. Page 240. 241. Of the leaven . 1 Cor. 5. Beza contr . Erastum de Presbyterie , Pag. 88. Buxtorfius in Lexico , Rabinco . pag. 2303 in voc . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Buxtorfius in Lex . Rabbi pag. 1413. What it is to purge out the leaven . None killed for eating leavened bread . Pag. 241. To eat the Passeover with unleavened bread a violation of that Sacrament . Putting away of leaven . Page 244. Page 245. De Presbyt . page 92. What is meant by the whole lumpe ; and what by leaven . Hymeneus and Alexander not miraculously killed by Satan . Erastus his expositions all without ground of Scripture . L. 3. c ▪ 8. p. 247. 248 ▪ Pag 248. How eschewing intimate fellowship with a scandalous brother , is a Church-censure . Sacraments though helps of piety , yet not to be given to all . Erastus p. 248 . ●●●erum sacrament● esse adminicula pi●tatis & salutis , nullus ●●gat , proi●de non sunt h●● , ●●ganda petentibus , &c. Pag. 249. Erastus his contradiction , in excluding both some and none at all from the Sacraments . Pag. 249. Nam de illis solis ( an arcendi sint a Sacramentis ) disputamus qui peccatum suum agnoscunt , & ●eliora promittunt . Pag. 249. Pag. 249. 250. How withdrawing from scandalous brethren , may inferre excommunication . Pag. 250. 251. Page 252. Pag. 252. Pag. 252. 253. Pag 253. The scandalous are forbidden to come to the Sacraments . De rect● institutis ego me sem per disputa re protestatus fui . An evident contradiction in Erastus through his whole book . Lib. 3. c. 3. p. 206. 207. Lib. 1. c. 4. pag. 112. Whom Erastus excludeth from the Sacraments Pag. 114. 115. Page 117. Page 116. Page 207. Some on earth must try who are to be admitted to , or debarred from the Sacrament , who not . Pag. 254. Pendet haec opinia ●ua , ex opinione & judicio hominum . Page 254. Erastus li. 3. ca. 9. pag. 254. Beza de pre●byt . pag 97. Pag. 255. The place Gal. 5. 12. vindicated . Pag 255. 256. Pag. 97. de Presbyterio , Paul did not judicially condemne the incestuous man. Pag. 256. 257. To eschew the scandalous is materially to Excommunicatethem . Tit. 3. 10. Ioh 2. 10. Erastusl . 4. c. 1. c. 2. p. 258. 259. What Presbyteries Erastus yeildeth . Pag. 259. A Presbytery at Corinth . Pag. 261. Erastus granteth an examination of such as are to be admitted to the Sacraments , but denieth all exclusion . Pag. 261. Pag. 207. Page 262. lib. 4. The places Deut. 17. and 2 Chron. ●9 do prove two different judicatures . Page 262. How the Kingly and priestly office are different . Lib. 3. c. 1. page 175. Erastus denieth the Ministery to be a peculiar ordinance to some onely , but common to all under the New Testament . Page 263. 264. Two distinct Iudicatures , 2 Chron. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 265. Pag. 265. Magistrates are not to dispense the word and Sacraments as Erastus saith . The Magistrate is not to judge who are to be admitted to the Sacraments , who not . L. 3. c. 1. ex equo n●s omnes esse sacerdotes . Erastus ib. 171. Answer to the l. 4. c. 3. of Erastus . p. 266. 267 how Erastus confuteth a Presbytery . Page 27● . Page 269. 270. A Church judicature in the Iewish Church Deut. 17. Page 267. Page 268. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Priests put no man to death . Page 269. Page 270. Page 270. 271. Page 272. Teaching and judgeing not one . The civill Iudge as a Iudge cannot teach . Page 272. Page 272. 273. Erastus maketh the Magistrate and the Priest or Pastor formally one . Clar. Vir. Antonius Wale●●s , Tom. 2. pag. 27. Wtenbogardus . Auraonem subijci Mosi . Magistratus esse instauratores , & directores cultus Dci , secundum verebum Dci , sc● Doctores esse tantum religion is Ministros , & Magistratum populum docere per ●●cl●s●● Ministrum ; Ministros autem hec facere à et sub Magistrate . Page 274. Pag. 274. What are the matters of the Lord and of the King , 2 Chron. 19. Pag. 274 , 375. Page 275. Levites sometime imployed in Civill businesse . Erastus l. 3. c. 1. Page 160. The power of the civill Magistrate . Men have need of two sorts of Governours . Magistracie and Ministery , both supream in their on we kinde . Pag. 160. 161. 162. Erastus alloweth no Government , but Popedome and Monarchy . p. 162. 163. Pag. 164. 165. 167. Page 171. Page 173. Christs Kingdome how not of this World. Cap. 2. l. 3. 176 , 177 , 179. Pag. 179. Moses , David , Solomon , appointed to the Priests nothing in Gods worship as Kings . Erastus l. 4. cap. 4. pag. 275 , 276. De Presb. p. 106. The Priests in matters of death , judged only De questione iuris , of the question of Law. Pag. 276 , 277. The Priests and Levites had no Law-power by Gods Law or from Cesar , to put Christ to death . pag. 279. The Sanedrim had no Law-power against Steven . The like is true of Paul. Pag. 280. Pag. 280. 281. How the Christian Magistrate is to be acquainted with excommunication . Page 281. Erastus l. 4. c. 5. c. 6. Beza de presbyter . p. 110. A colledge of church-rulers in the N. T. pa. 284. Page 285. Pag. 286. pa. 287. Beza de presbyt . p. 112. 113. Page 288. Beza de Presbyt . p. 112. 113. Page 289. page 290. 291. Due right of Presbyteries , qu. 7. c. 7. sect . 7. page 141 , 142 , 143. seque page 293. page 294. Erastus l. 4. c. 7. p. 295. 296. page 296. No miraculous killing 1 Cor. 5. or tormenting of the mans body . Page 296. pa. 297. Lib. 5. c. 1. Erast . 298. page 299. page 29● . Erastus yieldeth there is a Presbytery . The Magistrate under Church discipline . Annot. on the Bible , An. 1645. in Zach. 3. 7. A judicature proper to the priests as priests . Page 300. Page 301. Page 300. Erastus , Quis unquam dubitavit , an Ministris liceat improbe age●tes , Magistratus , ex verb● Dei , objurgare , arguere , reprehendere , increpare , adeoque solvere & ligare ? Page 302. 303. How the Magistrates consent is requisite in Excommunication . Page 302. The Magistrats sword no kindly mean to gain souls , as Erastus dreameth . Rom. 1. 16. L. 5. c. 1. p. 302. 303. Page 303. 304. page 305. The Morally unclean debarred out of the temple . Page 305. No price of a whore to be offered to God ; what it meant . Annot. an . 1645. an . ou Deut. 23. 18. Vata . in loc . que injustè parta sunt , nullo modo offerri debent Deo. Page 307. Our chiefe argument for excommunication not answered . Page 308. 309. The place Matth 5. When thou bringest thy gift , &c. discussed . Page 309. 310. How men doe judge of inward actions . Page 310. Solus deus ut sine errore cogitationes judicat , ita easdem quoque pu . nit . Ib. in rectione e●terna eccles●e infinite falli omnes possumu● , quamobr●n s●ccr● bio nihil debemus , quam mandatum expresse nobi● l●gimus . Page 309. Lib. 3. c. 3. A contradiction in Erastus frequent . Page 311. Page 311. 312. 313. What it was to be cast out of the synagogue . Page 313. 314. page 31● . The Apostles not cast out of thy Synagogue , that we can read . Navar. in Ench●rid . c. 27. 11. n. 13. Greg. q. 3. c. 1. Page 315. Page 316. Annot. an . 1645. on Ezra 10. 8. Annot. an . 1645. on Deut. 23. 1. Erastus ib. 315. Non igitur noluit Deus hosc● circumcidi , & in Templum atque ad Sacramenta admitti , sed noluit proveris Judaeis ●os haberi . Erastus . l. 6 c. 1. p. 317. Page 318. Ministers subject to the Magistrate . P. 318. 319. Page 318. P. 319 , 320. Page 321. Page 321. Page 321. Page 322. Though there were no framed Christian Church , yet Christ might say , Tell the Church . P. 323. 324 Pagninu● , Merc. in Thesaur . p. 994. Page 324. 325. Page 326. There was no more a right constituted Sanedrim in Christs time , then a Christian Church . Page 327. Page 328. page 329. Iunius ●nim●● . in Bellar . d●●o●ci● . l. 1. c. 12. Not. 18. de●●●iente conjunctione Magistratus , potest a liquid Ecclesia extra ordi●em ●ace●e , quod ordinario non potest , & contra deficiente Ecclesià à suo officio , potest Magistratus extra ordinem procurar● ut Ecclesia ad officium r●de●● , id ●nim juris communis est , extraordinariis ma●is remedia etiam extra ordinem adhiberi posse . Page 329 , 330. Page 330. Rebuking of Princes argue no lesse jurisdiction , then all that the Presbytery doth . Erastus l. 6. c. 2. p. 331. 332. Magistrates if scandalous are to be debarred from the Sacrament . P. 331. 332 Page 332. Page 334. Page 335. Every profession maketh not men capable of the holy things of God. Page 335. 336. Page 336. Page 336. 337. ●● 340. Page 341. Erast . l. 6. c. 2. p. 341. Page 341. Erastus 341 sequitur ( si faci●orosi sint arcendi ● Sacrament is ) eligendos esse qui malis interdieant oratione , lectione , Elcemosynarum distributione , &c. The Magistrate cannot admit , to , and debar from the Sacrament . Page 346. The sword no intrinsecall mean of gaining souls . Page 347. Page 348. 349. The Church as the Church not subordinate to the Magistrate . Arg. 1. Ezek. 44 ▪ 15. Governement peculiar to the Officers now , as to the Priests and Levites of old . The Epistles to Timothy and Titus must chiefly be written to the Emperour and Magistrate , if Pastors be but Servants of the Magistrate . Argum. 4. Trigland . de civi . & Eceles . potest . disser . Theolo . c. 4. p. 80. Arg. 3. Civill and Ecclesiasticall powers immediatly from God. The Magistrate not subordinate to Christ as Mediator . Argum. 2. The patern Church of the Apostles not ruled by the Magistrate . Erast . and Mr. Pryn grant , that there is such an ordinance as excommunication . Confirm . Thes . l. 6. c. 2. p. 349. Sane ut ●dololatram & apostatam nega●●us membram esse Ecclesiae Christi sie etiam nequit●am s●am defendentem , inter membra Ecclesiae censendum esse . Et quemadmodum illes ex Christiano caetu judicamus exterminandos , sic hos quoque putamus in eo catu non esse ferendos . Erastus confirm . Thes . l. 3. c. 3. p. 207. Mr. Pryn in his vindication of four serious questions , p. 30. 31. Vindication of four serious questions page 52. The Gospel preached to those to whom the Sacraments cannot be dispensed . The Sacrament a confirming ordinance . Vindication p. 35. We partake of the sins of many in dispensing to them the Sacrament , and not in preaching to them the Word ▪ Vi●d . p. 36 Vindication p. 40. 41. We know no extraordinary conversion by Miracles without the Word . Andrad . defens . fidei , Trid. l. 2. p. 239. falsa sunt haec plerunque , plerunque infirma etiam Ec●lcsiae verae judicia . Maldonat . in ▪ Mat. 7. v. 22. Greg. de Val●n . t●m . 3. dis . 1. p. 4. sect . 3. Bellarm. de lib. arb . lib. 6. cap. 1. Durandus quest . 1. in Prolegom . Sent. Sect. 46. The Sacrament of the Supper not a first converting ordinance ; ye● a confirming one it is . The Lord● Supper presupposeth faith and conversion in the worthy receiver in Church-profession . Vindicat. pag 2. 3. Vindicat. page 41. Arg. 5. The Magistrate subject to the Church . Argum. 6. Arg. ● . The church a perfect society without the Magistrate . Vtenbogard . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Eusebius , de vita constant . l. 4. c. 24 ▪ Hyeronimu● in chron . an . 366. Genebrard . in liberio . Niceph. l. 4. c. 24. Socr ▪ l. 3. c. 21. Hyeronim . chron . an . 367. Barron . an . 366. Arg. 9. Differences between the Magistrate and Ministers of the Gospel and Church . The Magistrate cannot limit the pastor in the exercise of his calling . See Henr. Salcobrig . in Becano . Bac. p. 140. Ait regem esse primatam Ecclesia Anglicanae , and rege● s●cro olc● uncti capaces sunt spiritualis jurisdictionis , Rex propri● autorite creat . Episcopus . See Cald. ●u altar . Dam. p. 14 , 15 , 16. seq . That Magistrates are more hot against punishing of sin by the Church , then against sinfull omissions , which argueth that they are unpatient of Christs yoak , rather then that they desire to vindicate the liberty of the subject in this point . Not any power or office subject to any , but to God immediately , subjection is properly of persons . A Magistrate and a Christian different . Two things in a Christian Magistrate , jus authoritie , aptitudo , habilitie . Pare●● Com. in Rom. 13. dub . Iac. Triglandius de potest civ . & Ecclesiastica c. 10. 207 , 208. Vbi nam inju●xit Christus Magistratui Christiano ut oves Christi quae ●ales Regat . Christianity maketh no new power of , or to Magistrates . Jac. Trig. land . di●●er . Theo. de potest . civ . c. 8. p. 174. A fourfold consideration of the exercise of Ministerial power most necessary , upon which & the former Distinctions , followeth ten very considerable Assertions . 1. Assert . The Magistrate as the Magistrate commandeth the exercise of Ministeriall power , but not the spirituall and sincere manner of the exercise . Magistrates as godly men , not as Magistrates command sincerity and zeal in the manner of the exercise of ministeriall power . Augustin . contr . literas petilian . l. 2. c. 92. & contr . Cresconi . l. 8. c. 5. reges serviunt D●o in quantum sunt homines , & in quantum sunt reges . Exo. 18. 21 Deu. 1. 16. 17. D●u . 17. 19 20. A two fold good in a Christian Magistrate , essentiall , accidentall . Asser . 3. The Magistrate as such commandeth only in order to temporary reward , and punisheth , and layeth no commands on the constience . Nota. Nota. Magistrates as Magistrates forbid not sin as sin under the paine of eternall wrath . Two sorts of subordinations Civill , Ecclesiastick . Ministers not the Ambassadors of an earthly King , but of the King of Kings . Church Officers as such not subordinate to the Magistrate . See the Arminian Remonstrance in Apol. c. 25. fol. 299 , 300. What power Erastiaus give to Magistrates in Church matters ▪ The minde of Arminians touching the Magistrates power in Church matters . Remonstrant Arminian c. 25. p. 304 ●●c . Trig. de potest . 〈…〉 . & Eccelesiastica diss●●tatio , Th●●l . p. 123 T●m●lorum usus & s●ipe●●iorum publ●●orum ●●● in re nihil potest . ille enimextrins●●us accedit ad res Ecclesiasticas , eorumque naturam atque indolem nihil immutat . A threefold consideration of the magistrate in relation to the Church Course of conformity , part 3. pag. 146. Reciprocation of subordina●●●ns between Church and Magistrate . A●t . Walens , p. 2. de quatenus pastor subjiciatur magist . pag. 15 , 16. Iac. Trig. disser . Thel . de potest . civ . & Ecclesi . c. 5. pag. 124. profess . Leyden in Syno . purioris . Theol. dis . de disc . Ecclesi . & de magistrati . Zipperus de p●lit●a Ecclesiast . l. 3. c. 13. Calvinus Insti . l. 4. c. 11. Pet. Cabel Iavins in apol●g●tico Rescript pro libert . Ecelesi . c. 6. p. 79. M. Cot. in a Model of Church and civill power . P. Matyr . loc . Communi . l. 4. c. 13. D. Pareus in prefat . ad h●seam . Epist . ad langravi . August . confess . Artic. de pot●st . Ecclesi . Helv. confess . Anno 1566. Art. 18. Suevica confess . Art. 13. Saxonica Art. 12. Anglic. fol. 132. Scotic ▪ confess . The Ministers as Ministers neither Magistrates nor subjects . The Magistrate as such neither manageth his office under Christ as mediator , nor under Satan , but under God as creator . A Prince as a gifted Christian may preach and spread the Gospell to a land where the Gospell hath not bin heard before , but not as a Magistrate . Ità videlius Ep. Const . quest . 11. Vtenbogard cont . Pontific . primat . p. 71 , 72 , 73 Anto. Wal. p. 2. p. 30 , 31. Cabcl Iavius apol . disser . de l. Eccles . c. 6. p. 82. Iac. Trig. Des . Thho . The King and the Priest kept the book of the Law , but in a farre different way . Bloody Tenent , Cap. 82. page 119. C. 65. ●a . 123. C. 85. pa. 124. The Pastors and the Iudges do reciprocally judge and censure one another . God hath not given a power to the magistrate and Church and to judge contrary wayes , justly and unjustly in one and the same cause . Bloody Te. c. 84. p. ●22 . Bellarmine de laicis c. 17. c. 18. Slatius i● aperta declaratione . p. 53. Magistratus non valet sub pena●terne condemnation is gladio uti , aut dominatum petere , quisquus id facit , Christianus non est . Welsing . lib. de offici● homi . Christiani . p. 1. Sim. Epis . dis . 13. c. 18. 19. Divers opinions of the Magistrates power in causes Eccle●iasticall . It is one thing to complain to the Magistrate , another thing to appeal . What an appeal is . Refuge to the Magistrate , is not an appeal . A twofold appeal . De Lib. Eceles . c. 9. p. 134 , 135. Iac. Trig. de civili & Ecclesiastic . potest . ● . 20. p. 420. 421. Mr. Pryn his Truth Triumphing sect . 2. and 3. p. 7 , 8 , &c. 16. Sect. 13 ▪ 14 , 15 , 16. Prinne . Truth Triump . p. 31. The Magistrates punishing , or his interest of faith proveth him not be a judge in Synods . Truth triumphing , sect . 2. 31 , 32. Page 31. Of Pauls appeal to Cesar , that it proveth not that in Ecclesiasticall controversies we may appeal to Heathen or Christian Magistrates as to Iudges of matters Ecclesiastick , from the Church . Paul appealed from an inferiour civill judge to a superiour civill and heathen judge , in a matter of his life , not in a matter of Religion . What power a conquerour hath to set up a religion in a conquered nation . Videlius de Episcopat . Constant . p. 77. Vtenbogard . p. 33. Camero . prel●ct . in Mat. 16. v. 18. 19. Tu es p●trus . p. 17. Due right of Presbyteries . p. 435 436. 437 438. &c. Camero , 16 , 17. 18. There were no appeals made to the godly Emperors of old . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . To lay bands on the conscience of the Prince to tye him to blind obedience , Popish , not our Doctrine . Platina . in Bonifac. 3. Baronius an . 602. n. 18. Baronius . an . 606. n. 3. Baroni . an . 1085. Onuphorius an , 1527. 1540. Mr. Prinne Truth triumphing . Remonstr . in apolog . p. 299. esse papatus corculum , esse id ipsum in quo ●i●a est f●rma papatus , five papalis hierar ●bi●s . Remonstr . in apolog . So Stapleton , Bellarmine and other Papists argue . The Magistrate as a Magistrate cannot forbid sin as sin . The Magistrate as the Magistrate promoteth Christs mediatory Kingdom materially , not directly and formally . The Magistrate as such not the Vicar of the Mediator Christ . The adversaries in the doctrine of the Magistrate Popish , not we at all . Andreas Rivetus Iesuit . Vapul . in Castigati Notarum in Epist . ad Balsacum Edit . 1644. c. ●1 . page 40. Christus neque Reges neque principes instituit in Ecclesia , sed neque successores habet , neque vicarios quibus competat jus dominatus , ministros tantum instituit , nomine principis unius legatione , legati● autem neque legatos , neque reges , neque principes , constituit legatos , sed ministros qui serviunt , non regnant . In regno Christi solus ille spiritualiter regnat ; servi summi Regis , regnum sui principis promovent , nec unquam sibi usurpa●t regalia jura . Cardinall Bertrandus tract . de Orig . jurisd . q. 4. n. 5. Non videretur diseretus dominus ( ut cum reverentiâ ejus loquar ) nisi unieum post se talem vicarium reliquisset ▪ qui haec omnia posset , Armacan , l. 4. quest . Armen . c. 16. Becan . tom . 2. opuscul . Suarez tom . de incarnat . Christi diso . 48. sect . 2. Aegid . Conninck . de incarnat . disp . 23. dub . 5. ● . 43 p. 697. Communior itaque doctorum sententia , Christum etiam q●â hominem habere veram potestatem regiam , ac directum dominium in omnia regna mundi , &c. August . de Ancona , de potest Papae , q. 1. art . 1 quia est eadem jurisdictio delegantis & delegati , Coninck . tom . de incarn . disp . 23 ▪ dub . 5. Vasquez tom . de incarnat : disp . 87. c. 2. &c. 6. Pet. Wald. de incar . dis . 11. de adop . & dominio Christi , dub . 5. n. 50 , 51. Pastors are made inferiour Magistrates by the adversaries in their whole Ministery . The Magistrate as such not the vicar of the mediatory kingdome . Brotherly re-examination , pag. 20. Christian Magistracy no Ecclesiasticall administration . Mr. Coleman re-examination , pag. 1● . Heathen Magistrates as such are not obliged to promote Christs mediatory kingdom . Magistracy from the Law of nations . Suarez to . 1. de legi l. 5. c. 3. qui dat formam , dat consequenti● ad formam . l. 2. in prinf●de instit . & jure cod . tit . c. jus ●at . 1. dispitemdominium est jus quoddam l. fin . ad med . c. de long . temp . prestit . l. qui usum fert . F●rd . Vasq . illust . quest . l. 1. c. 41. ● . 28 , 29. D. cl . Salmasius de primatu Papae par . 1. cap. 14. page 60. eam ( jurisdictionem Patriarchalem ) omnem haud mi●●● quam ipsi Metropolitani , aut rescriptis principium , aut sanctionibus patrum Synodalibus , acceptam refer ant oportet , non ulli institutioni divinae . The Adversaries must teach universall Redemption . Cl. Salmasius de primatri pape , 1. Part. in apparatu , p. 148. 149. nullum jus in corpora ●abuernat ut Magistratus civiles , sad animarum curam gerebant ut veri pastores docere , pascere munera fuere spiritualia longè diversa ab imperio , potestate & jurisdictione Magistrat●um . Magistrates as such not members of the Church . Christ Mediator , not a temporary King. So the Belgick Arminians , apol . fol. 302. Grotius in picta● ordi . Hol. p. 113. Vte●b . p. 28. The Magistrate not the servant of the Church . The adequate and compleat cause why the Magistrate is subject to the Church That the Magistrate is subject to the rebukes and censures of the Church proved from the Word . Erast . l. 5. c. 1 p 299 , 300. Erast . l 6. c. 3. p 349. Sanè ut Idololatram et Apostatatam negamus membrum esse Ecclesiae Christi sic etiam nequitiem suam defendentem negamus inter membra Ecclesiae censendum esse et quem admodum illos ex Christiano caetu juaicamus exterminandos , sic hoc putamus in ●o caetu non esse ferendos . Arminiani in apolog . The supream and principall power of Church affairs not in either Magistrate or Church . Blood Ten. c. 84. p. 122 , 12 ▪ And. Riv. in decal . in Mand. 5. pag. 206. Though the Magistrate pupunish Ecclesiasticall scandals , yet his power to judge and punish is not Ecclesiasticall and spirituall ▪ as the Church rebuketh and censureth civil breaches of the second table , and yet their power is not civill . Blood Tenent . c. 93. pag. 137 , 138. People as people may give power to a Magistrate to adde his auxiliary power to defend the Church , judge and punish offenders in the Church A governor of , or over the Church , a governor in the Church , a governor for the Church , are differen● . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag● dijs non malcdices . Mr. Colemans reexamination . p. 15. The distinction of an doctrinal or declarative , and of a punitive part of Church-government , of which the former is given to Pastors , the latter to the Magistrate , a heedlesse and senselesse notion . That the Magistrates punishing with the sword , seandalous persons should be a part of Church-government , a reasonlesse conceit . There is neither coaction , nor properly so called punishment in the Church . Trigland . dis . The●lo . de potest . civil et Ecclefiast . c. 13. p. 257. Hyeronymus in Epitaphio N●potiani , Rex ●olentibus preest , episcopus volentibus . Cl. Salm. in apparatu ad libr●s de primati . part . 1. p. 154. 155. adeo autem vole●tibus p●nitentia dab●tur ut negata pro paena esset , et pro beneficio peteretur atque acciperetur , a delinquentibus , ut ex multis Canonibus concili●rum constat , Epistolis Canonicis , et scriptis aliis patrum . That Bullinger is not of the mind of Erastus . Bulling . Epis . privat . ad Erastum . Bul. Epis . ad Erast . Epist . ad Erastum . Petr. Dathenus . The error of Gualther to please the usurping Magistrate . Bullinger Gualther and others differ much from Erastus . Gual . in Ep. ad Theod. Bezam an caena á. inservire debeat excommunicationi , atque adeo in alium usum converti , quam qui nobis a Christo monstratus , & ab apostolis traditus est . The Christian Magistrate cannot supply the place of Excommunication . C. 18. C. 30. Cl. Salmasi . de primatu papae , Part , 1. in apparatu , pag. 288. 289. Hyeronicus Monstra mihi quisnam imperatorum celebrari id concilium iusserit . Salmasius in apparatu , pag. 292. In ap●●●atu pag. 293. 294. In appar . p. 298. p. 303. Notes for div A92138-e180050 Course of conformity pag. 115. Indifferent things as such not the matter of a Churrh constitution . Doct. For● . in Ireni . l. 1. c. 12. num . 13. Actions are not indifferent , because their circumstances are indifferent . D. Forbesius in Irenic . l. 1. cap. 1. 3. fig. 15. Marrying not indifferent , as the Doctor supposeth . Indifference Metaphysical and Theological . Doctor Forb . 16. num . 17. Necessity of obeying the Church , in things onely necessary for the Churches Commandment , is neither a lawful , nor an obliging necessity . Doctor Ferbes . Actions individual meerly indifferent , cannot be done in Faith. Doct. Forbes . Iren ▪ ● . ● c. 13. hg . 11. Doct. Forbes . Forbes . ib. n. 13. The unlawfulness even inseparably adhering toactions that are indifferent , maketh them unlawful . * Suarez , tom . de legib . l. 3. c. 18 : Formaliter autem cōmittitur hoc vitiū ( contemptus ) quando ex ▪ directâ intentione ad hoc aliquidfit , ut alter despiciatur , aut despici ostendatur . Vasquez , tom . 2. disp . 158. cap. 4. Contemptus est in solà directâ intentione non parendi , in qua est speciale mandatum inobedientiae , qua quis directo animo non obedit superiori , ut ei directe opponatur ex dedignatione quadam , quam habet , quod ei subditus sit . Aquinas 22. q. 168. art . 9. 3. Contemnere est nolle subjici legi ex superbia . How exsuperancy of necessity of goodness is to sway the will of Rulers and people . 1 Thes . 5. 21. 1 Ioh. 4. 1. The will of Rulers not a law to us in things indifferent . Arg. 10. a Gretser in sum . cos . conscient . q. 23. pag. 173 Calvinistae Catholicorum Sim●● . b Sanches in Decal t●m . 1. lib. 1. c. 6. n. 1. c Sanches , ib. d Aquinas 22 q 23 art 3. Quod de sui ratione habet , quod sit inductivum ad peccandum , vel habet similitudinem peccati . e Spalatens . de rep . Ecclesiae , lib. 1. c. 11 ▪ n. 18. a Pretended Hen. Lesly , B●sho● o● Doun authoritie of the Church , pag. 144. An object scandalous two wayes . Something 's may be scandalous objects . a Becauus p. 2. de Charit . c. 21. quaest . 5. nu . 5. b Paybodie of kneeling , par . 3 pag. 410. Silvius in 22. g. 43. 4. Facere coram aliis id quod habet speciem mali , tune solum est peccatum scandali , quando non subest causa legittima presentibus manefestata . - Satis notum erat quod Namaam non se flecteret pro cultu idoli , sed pro obsequio regis . Rules touching scandal . a August . Epist ▪ 199 Non est cessandum ab operibus bonis , pro quocunque scandalo . b Tertul. Res bona neminem offendit , nisi malam mentem . c Aquinas ▪ in 22. q. 43. and d Bannes tom . 3 m 22. q 43 art 8 cap 4 Propter scandalum quod vel ex imbecill●tate , vel ex ignorumi ● nascitur , decl●●●dae omnes quan●●mcunque rectae actione atque utles , & que ad animae salutem non su●t necessariae , praeter mittendae & occultandae , out s●l●em in aliud tempus differendae . e Sanch●z in decal . l. 4 disp 32. Dub 6 n 66 ▪ con 3. Quando ex aliquo opere quantumvis bono , crederetur magna hominum multitudo , ex infirmitate aut ignorantia inducend● in gravià peccata , illud omittendum etiam cum jact●ra vitae & bonorum spiritualium ad s●●tem non necessariorum . f Bannes to 3. 22 q 43 art . 8 conclu . 2. Praecepta affirmativa juris naturalis aliquando propter scandalum sunt dimittenda — quia praecepta affirmativa obligant , quando , & quomodo opo●tct . g Antoninus 2 p. to . 1 cap 9 ▪ sect . ult . tit 3. cap 4 Verereus est pecca●i proximi qui absque ullâ just● causâ non impedit scandalum , quod ex suo opere est f●turum , quia videtur contemnere vitam spiritualem fratris h Navarr . in sum . cap 4. ● 13. k Proverb 7. l Navar● . in sum . cap 4. n. 13 ▪ Mortaliter peccat , qui ita parvi aestimat salutemproximi , ut absque justa necessitate , & utilitate , ex ●ola sua voluntate aliquid facit , unde fra●er est scandalizandus . m Silvester in summa in verbo , obedientia , n 5. Si Papae mandatum sapiat etiam peccatum veniale Item si ex obedientia praesum●retur sta●us Ecclesiae perturbandus , vel aliud malum aut scandalum futurum , etiamsi praeciperetur sub soe●â Excommunicationis — non est ei obediendum . o Vasquez tom . 4. in 3. ● 43. art . 7 Dub 2. p Suarez de tripl . v r. Theolo . disp 10. De Scandalo . sect . 4 Res indifferentes vender● , donare , aut alicui proponere , quando prascitur , alterum ijs male us●rum , est scand ▪ lum committere . q Antoninus 2 p. to ▪ 7. cap. 4. ● 4. r Silvester verbo scandalum q 2. ſ Corduba sum . q. 5. fol. 30. t Metina 12 ▪ cap. 74 ●● ▪ 6. ad ▪ 3. fol. 677. u Sanch z in Decal to 1. lib 1. cap 6. nu . 16. Doctors of Aberdeen . If the scandall arising from Pearth Articles come , ex conditione operis , from the irregularitie of the fact , you say , we should forbeare them forever , yet this you gainsay in the next Chap. nu . 44. pag 67. We say that the lawfull command of our Superiours may make that scandall of our weak brethren , not to beimputed to us , as a matter of our guiltinesse , which otherwayes would be imputed to us as a matter of our guiltinesse . Now ( I say ) no scandall but that which is scandall ex conditione operis , from the enormitie o● the p●actice can be imputed to us as guiltiness or sin , for passive scandall is unjustly impu●ed to us as sin . Duplyers Doct. Aberdeen . Nu. 35. a Aquinas 22. q. 43. b Bannes 16. a● . 8. ca. 4. c Aquinas 16. d Aquinas 22. q. 33. art . 1. e Navar. in sum . cap. 4. n● 13. f Vasquez 22. q. 43 art . 8 dub ▪ 1. n 13. Quoti●scunque scandalum p●ssiv●m futurum e●t ex passione & ignora●tia scandalizatiopus utile temporaliter ●●t spiritualiter , qued n●c est malum , n●c b●b●t spccicm mali , nihil omn us ●st omittendum , aut differendum , d●ncc ●●ssat . scandal●m . g Becanus to . post . part . 2. q. 6. c. 27. Ad vitandum scandalum alterius passiv●m ex infirmi●ate vel ignorantia tenemur omittere ●us utile . h Duvallius to . post . m ▪ 2 ▪ q 43. tract . de Charit . q ▪ 19 a●t 5. Potest aliq●a●do contingere , ut quod exse praeceptum ●st , & cons●quente●●cc●ssarium est ad salutem , des●●at in casum graviss●●●● scandali — Tyrannus ●surpat bena Ecclesi● , constat praeccptum quantum fieri potest repetere , s●d s● minaretur populum abducere à●ide , non obliga● praeceptum repetitionis . And ●n that same place , Opera quae s●nt indiffere●tia , id est ; quae in se , neque bonan●que●●ala sunt , debent omitts quando conciicimus valde probabiliter ea futura ●sse inscand ●lume . ( i ) Bann●s 22. c. 43. art 7. ●essandu● à spiritualibus , quande quis ex ignorantia v●l insirmitate scandelizatur . ( k ) Sua●●z de Tripl . vj●t de Charit . disp . 10. de Scand . sect . 4 n 7. 8 Predicatio veritatis per accidens potest interdum habere rationem scandali activi , unde non●unquam vita●da est , ut vitetur scandalum passivum ( Pharisaeorum ) seu ruina proximi — item praecepta positiva non obligant cum tanto rigore , at praeceptum de procuranda vita spirituali proximi est naturale & divinum — praecepta affirmativa non obligant and semper . ( l ) Gregor ▪ de valent . tom . 3. disp . 3. q. 18. de scandalo hath the same . Adde to these Augustine lib 3. contra Parmenian . cap 2. Gregor . hom . 7. in Ezechiel . And of School-men , Albert 4 distinct . 17. art . 48 Durand 4. 38. q. 3. Angel. in sum . verbo scandalum , n 5. Cajetan tract 3. disp 7 ●e●● 8. Richard 4 d. 38. Adrian . quodlibet 1. art . 3. Pete de Soto lect ▪ 5. de confess . Gabr. 4. d●st 38 q 2. art . 2. Alphons de Castro lib. 1. de justa punit . haeret . par . 20. D. Forbes . Iren. a Ioannes de Lugo de myst . ●●arn . ● i p 36 sect 1. n 3. Hoc periculum facile praecavetur doctrina & cura Proelatorum , qui d●cent frequ●n●er imagines non habere in se , nec prop●●r se aliquam dignitatem , nisi quam accipiant ab exemplari . b Bellarm. 1 2. de rel . sanct . c 4. ad 2 Nec desunt in Eccles●● qui doceant literis , & s●rmonibus , quis cultus reliquiss ( formulist● elementis sacramentalibus ) de . beatur . c Vasquez in 3 part . 10. 1. disp 105. 5. n. 3 Quare nec aliquid periculi in ipsarum ( imaginum ) adora●ione , si populus tudis , ju●ta sinccram fidem & religionean , mediocriter instituatur . d Estius , lib. 3 dist . 36. sect 7. Ecclesia diligenter & doctrina , & opere distinguit inter honorem Deo proprium , & eum qui Divinis ac Dei amicis hominibus tribuitur . e Concil Moguntinum , cap. 41. Pastores nostri populum accuratè moneant , imagines non ad id proponi , ut eas adoremus - Sed ut per imagines recordemur . c Calvin . Iusti ▪ l. 4. c 8. sect . 8. d Luthercom in Gal 1. neque alia doctrina in Ecclesia tradi , aut audiri debet , qu●m purum d●i verbum . e D. Ammes fresh fuit . f Bannas , tom . 3. m 22. q. 43. art 8. Nota posse contingere ut pusilli non sirt capaces rat●onis redditae , & tunc quamvis sit reddita illis ratio tâmen ab hujusmodi spiritualibus cess●●dum , quia tunc non ex malicia , sed ex ignorantia sco●dolizantur , c 4 sect . 1. q 10. Tannern ▪ to 3. in 22. dis . 2. q. 6 dub . 9. concurrentibus d●obus praeceptis quorum utrum . que servari non potest , obligare desinit al●erum quod ●im obligandi minorem habet . Ita Suarez . to . 3. di● . 66. sect . 4. Gregor . de Valenti● in . 22. q. 18. puncto 4. a D. Bannes ●o . 3. in . 22. q. 43. art . 8. con . 3. Talis perplexitas est absurdum quid . b Amesius de Cons . lib. 5. ●●p . 11 thes 18 Nulla datur tali● perplexita● , &c. c Bellarm. contra Barcla . cap. 31. In bono sensu Christus dedit Petro ( Papae ) potestatem faciend● de peccato non peccatum , & de non peccato peccatum . d Bellar. de Romano Pontif. l. 4. cap 5. e Bellarm. in Recognit o●ibus . L●quuti sumus de actibus dubiis viriu●um & vitiorum , nam si perciperet manifestum vitium , aut prohiberet manifestum virtutem dicendum esset cum Petro , Act. 5. Obedire oportet magis Deo , quam h●minibus — dicimus posse jubere ut tali die non jejunetur , — non potest autem jubere ut non colatur Deu● . f Bernardus Epist . 7. Quomodo ergo vel Abbatis jussio vel Papae permissio , licit●●● facere potuit , quod purum malum fuit . g Toletus in ●nstruct . Secerdo● . lib 5. cap ▪ 3. cum causa rationabili aliquid praecipitur — ●os debemus audire , nec Pap● pro suo li●ito excusat . h Alphonsus de potest legis Civil . cap. 5. Conclus . 5. Potest subd●●●● sin● peccato legem aut preceptum superioris ▪ contem●●re , judicando ill●● ma●●● & contra r●●ionem . The essence of an active or given scandall . a Course of conformitie , pag 147. ( b ) Dimittendum est , propter scandalum , ●om●e quod potest praetermitti , salvâ triplice veritate vitae doctrinae & justi●iae , Hierony . Gl●ssord . tom . 9. c Hooker of Eccles● Policie , l. 4 ▪ pag. 157. d D. Forbes in Iren. lib. 2. c. 20. n. 19. e Sandersons Sermon , Rom. 14 pag. 22. 23. f Lyndesay his defence of Pearth Assemb . in Prafat Paybodie . g Course of Conformitie , pag. 146. a Pag. 143. b Course of Conformitie . pag. 143. c Forbes Iren. l. 2. cap. 20. n. 6. d Forbes , lib. 2. cap. 20. n. 19. Non potest humana potestas te cogere ad faciendam illud quod facere non possis absque inevitabilidatione scandali . a Suarez de Rel. to . 4. l 4 ▪ tract ▪ 5. cap 15. Si , sec●us● praecept● , res ex ●tr●que●a●te sit probabilis tunc universaliter verum erit adjuncto praeceptoobedi ●dum esse . b Thom. Sanchez ●n Decalog ▪ to . 2. lib 6. cap. 3. n. 3. c Greg. de Val. ●● 3. disp 7 q 3 punct . 2 d Supra q. 6. of this Treatise . a Scotus prol . in sent . q. 3. ad art . 3. b Suarez 10. ●e leg . cap. 1. & de trip . vi●● . Theologie , Tract . 1. disp . ● . q. ● . c Banne● , tom . in q 1. ●●● 10. dub 2. d Duvallius , 2 tract . de legib q 5. art . 1. ●d ar● 2. Calv. in In●●● . ●u●● . 2 cap. 8. sect . 35. Ames . M●dull . l. 2 c. 17. sect . 13. Melul . Theol. l. 2. c 16. s . 58 59. 60. 61. 62 63. a Robert Lord brooke , in a discourse of nature of Episcopacie , cap. 5. pag. ●6 . b Origen cont . Celsum , l. 8. c Strabo , l. 15. d Tertull. in 2 pol. ca 9. bibebant sanguinem humanum . e August . epist 19. Vt vetus synagoge hoc pacto cum honore sepaliretur . f Ireneus . lib. 2 cap 12. g Tertullian de pudicit , c. 12. h Cyprian ad Quirinum , l 7. i Lorinus com . in act 15. ait esse legem mere positivam , quae r●moto , contemptu scandalo & alio peccato , non videtur arctè obligare . k Cajetan , vitare fornicationem est divini juri● , reliqua ● Canone erant ut mor●m gererent ●● Iudaeis quibus conviverent . l Philip. Gameth . in . 12. q. 104. 105. c● . 2 ad fovendum inter Iude●s & Gen●es mutu●m concordiam propter infirmitatem Iudaeorum . m Paybodie , par . 3 pag. 413. 4●4 . a Paybodie . b D. Forbes in Irenic● . a Calvin Inst●t . l 3. c. 19. sect . 7. t●rtia ( pars libertatis ) ut nu●la rerum ext●●n●r●m quae per s●siunt , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ●●lig●●ne ▪ cor●m D●o tang●remur quin eas nunc usurpare , nunc ind●ff●renter liceal uti . b Ch●mnit . Exam. p●rt . 2. de rit . sacra . p. 33. c Polan . Syntag Th●ol . lib 6. ca. 9. d B●ll , de ●fficac Sacram , 1. 2 ca. 32 e Iu●ius in B●ll co . 3. l 4. ●a 17. ● . 19 20 f Whitt●ker de pontif . R●m . q. 7. c. 3. ad 5. Fran. Silvius Duacens Profes . in 22. q. 43. ●● . 7. concl 3. Charitas dicat ne absque omni causa ●ff●ramus proximo , eti●m ex ▪ malitia peccaturo , occasionem peccati . Ita Tannerus , in 22. to . 3. ais . 1. q 6 duc . 9. asse● . 3 bon● conqued●m ●●bia ●lavandis ad vitandum scandalum malitiosorum . a Parker on the crosse , part 2. sect 8. Math. 17. 2● . Of the necessitie of things which remove scandall . Some things necessary from the only positive will of God , Some things necessarie from some thing in the things themselves . Two sorts of monuments of idolatrie . We cannot devise the use of any thing in worship , when we cannot devise the thing it selfe . The place Deut. 7. 25. The graven image of their God shall ye burne with fire dicleared . How houses and Temples builded to Saints are no● to be demolished . Temples and houses have a like physicall use in Gods worship , as out of Gods worship . Deut. 7. 25 , 26. No Houses , no Temple , no creatures , are now uncleane ●●er the New Testament . Deut. 12. 1 , 2. How things not necessarie are to bee abstained from , or used , in the ●ase of Scandall . 2. Conclus . Things scandalous under the N ▪ Testament are forbidden in a farre : other sense , then m●a● , dayes and other things in the Ceremoniall law . How far a morall and perpetuall reas●n maketh a law perpetuall . Levit. c● . 11. Disusing of houses because abused to idolatrie , a Iudaising . Bells for the convening of the people to publick worship not to be abolished , ●●ough they have been abused to superstition . A most necessarie rule to be observed in the doctrine of scandall , that emergent providences of naturall necessitie are to us in place of divine commands , in some cases . Considerable rules ●ou hing the kindes and degrees of necessitie in eschewing scandall . 1. Rule . 2. Rule . 3. Rule . 4. Rule . 5. Rule . Tannerus , to . 3. in 22 disp . 9. de ●ide sp● , &c. q 6. dub . 9. In magn● casu necessitatis que valdè praeponderat futuro scandalo , non est illictum facere rem haben●em speciem mali , ●● e●● similatio Petri , Gal. 2. Tu rian de virt●● & vitiis , par . 1. c. 39. dubio 16. Quindo quis para us est magnum ●urtum committere , non so●●●m ●citum est minus futurum consulere , sed etiam co-oper●●● ad illud . 6. Rule . 7. Rule . A scandal may flow from ignorance and corruption , and so be taken , when it also kindly issueth from the sinfull or unseasonable fact of another , and so is also kindly given . Caspensis , tom . 3. Curs Theolog. Trac . 27. de Charit . Sect. 2. disp . 8. num . 19. A false rule of Papists , that men may cooperate a sinfull act , and be free of scandall because of s●me necessitie . No relation of servant or captive can render it lawfull to co-operate with sin . 8. Rule . What things non-necessarie are to be removed from the worship of God , as scand lous . Ceremonies n●t so much as necessarie by way of dis-junction , which necessitie agreeth to many circumstances of worship in the Directory . Hooker . Ibid. Religious Monuments of Idolatrie are to be removed . Wolphius , who addeth to P. Mar●yr , Commen● . in 2 King. 23. speaking of Ios●●●● zeale Et h●c illius fides , & industria nos quoque excitabit , ●t in odium & f●stidium earum , quae pugnant , cum D●i verbo , rerum , bomines qu●quo modo inducamus . Hooker Eccle. Policie , ● l. 5. 349 350. 2 King 23. 7. Hooker , 198. What Conformitie with Idolaters is unlawfull . Conformitie with Idolaters in things , in Gods worship , not necessarie , unlawfull . Ecclesiast . Po●● licie , l. 4. p. 138. Pag ▪ 13● . The s●me Ceremonies in Idolaters , and in the true Church may be judged the some three wayes . Formalists grant Conformitie with heathen and Idolators in Ceremonies clothed with a Scripturall signification . Phocyllide● , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Pag. 13● . pag. 132. l. 4. How the Scripture is a Rule . Church Government properly an Institution . 133. l. 4. The worship of God ne●oeth no rel●gious Ceremonies , ●ut what God hath himselfe prescribed . Hooker , pag. 134 ▪ 134. 135. 138. We need not say that conformi●ie with Idolaters was the only cause , why God forbade his people , heath●nish rites . pag 139.